Would Sen. Rob Portman Support Stealing if His Son was a Thief?

Rob Portman an Ohio Senator is the first Republican in the Senate to support homosexual marriage. In 1996, Portman voted for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Three years later he voted to bar homosexual couples in Washington, D.C., from adopting.

Why did he suddenly change his position? Because one of Rob Portman’s sons said that he was a homosexual. His son told him that he’s always “felt” this way. Keep in mind that everybody feels certain ways about lots of things, but their better moral sense stops them from acting on them.

Like clockwork, the media jumped on the story. A hard push is being made to get the Supreme Court to overturn DOMA. President Barack Obama and former President Bill Clinton are calling for its repeal.

MSNBC host Richard Lui asked Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz of Utah the following question:

“And if one of your children were to be gay, you would not change your perspective is what you’re saying?”

Since when are laws written and moral positions taken based on how our children feel and act? One of the reasons our government is in a fiscal crisis is because elected officials vote in terms of what people want and not what they took an oath to uphold. Theft is wrong, yet it’s OK to vote for legislation that takes money from some people so it can be given to other people. Why are we surprised when politicians repeatedly flip-flop all over the place because of how someone “feels”?

Are there no longer any moral standards? If Senator Rob Portman’s son wants to live and love another man, no one’s stopping him. But to overthrow the moral order of the universe by having the State sanction homosexuality is a grave evil.

No one is denied love. I love all kinds of people, but it’s a moral evil to believe that love necessitates sexual relations. Once you go down this road, there’s no way to stop.

Would Senator Rob Portman throw his support behind pedophilia if he had learned that his son was a pedophile? There are young pedophiles out there. Would he support adultery if his son was an adulterer? Would he support slavery if he found out that one of his relatives was a slave owner and argued persuasively that owning slaves was legitimate? Would the Senator Rob Portman support his son if he learned that he was selling drugs to children? Would he support contract killing if he learned that his son was a contract killer for the mob?

Senator Rob Portman’s son has made a bad moral choice. There is no need to compound that bad moral choice by capitulating to it and softening the moral barriers for young men and women who are struggling with their sexuality and helping to pass laws that will affect millions of people.

On a side note, when Bill Clinton engaged sexually with Monica Lewinsky, it was not long before young people took up the new moral standard that oral sex was not really sex.

Senator Rob Portman can change his views personally, but he has no right to impose his new personal morality on the rest of us. Homosexual marriage laws have consequences far beyond what two people want to do.

As parents, we set standards for our children to live by. When our children rebelled against those standards when they were growing up with us, there were supposed to be consequences. It did not matter how our children felt when they did something wrong. Beating up the neighbor kid because “I felt like it” or “I couldn’t help myself” were not proper moral responses.

There are millions of examples of children going astray in millions of different ways. As parents, we don’t justify these moral infractions by now saying that it’s OK to do them because we want our children to be happy.

There are always times when we have to take a moral stand, even if turns out to be against the decisions of members of our family.



From Around the Web

Gary is a graduate of Western Michigan University (1973) and earned his M.Div. at Reformed Theological Seminary in 1979. He is the author of countless essays, news articles, and more than 27 book titles.

Posted in Culture, Homosexuality, Liberalism, Marriage, Morality, Politics Tagged with: , , , , , ,
  • Ruby_Con

    Portman has obviously come out of the closet….as a regressive lib.

  • http://www.facebook.com/ivan.j.butler Ivan J. Butler

    When Jesus took all the sins of man, and died on the cross, Did his father turn his back on him. Are you any better?

    • Northpaw

      That is the best summation of this matter I have read! Of course we know that God the Father did turn his back on His Son when all the sins of mankind were placed upon Him, the message being sin is not to be tolerated even when applied to His Divine Son.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1552600610 Adelle M Blackman

    Right is right. And being a homosexual is wrong…against GOD;s laws. If my child came and said that I could still love them but hate their sin and call it as such.. Rob Portman is not thinking. He is letting emotional get in the way of his brain. That is what anyone who is liberal does.

  • PattyFromTexas

    I have to agree with Portman. It’s time to admit that we have no right to tell folks who they can and can’t marry. As long as it doesn’t hurt anyone, or involve pedophilia, how is it anyone else’s business? I used to believe that homosexuality is a choice, I no longer believe that, and who are we to tell someone else how to live their lives anyway?

  • http://twitter.com/ZivaKS Kathy Skaggs

    I feel for Senator Portman but I have to agree with this article. Our moral decisions can’t be made on the actions of our childern. I understand that he feels like he has to love and support his son but that doesn’t mean that he has to give in to his sons lifestyle. You can love and support your childern without agreeing with everything they do.

  • Patriot

    Why does portman insist on bringing his shame to the public stage?
    He’s entitled to believe what he wishes but he shouldn’t be attempting to change public policy based on it.

    I never cared for him as a person or elected official. Always thought there was something off about the guy and now I know what it is.

  • gwedem5995

    I agree completely with this. I know many people who love their dogs more than humans and do we then say that since they feel this way, can they marry their dogs. People would say this will never happen. But I never thought a cause with only about l0 per cent of the population being that way and forcing it on the rest is wrong. I watched Watters World where he was out talking to St. Paddy’s revelers. They were young kids completely wasted and he asked if they thought doing drugs was ok, the one kid said sure it is because Obama was a doper and look he is president of the United States.
    I would say to Rob Portman or anyone else in his situation, you continue to give your love to that child and don’t turn your back on him, but vote your conscience. If it was wrong a few years ago, it is wrong today. No parent should ever have to give in on everything their children believe in.

  • servant1jkb

    When ONE stands for nothing, ONE shall fall for anything!
    The Good Book tells ALL who can read, to LOVE OUR ENEMIES, All “gays”, are our friends family and neighbors, and yes we should always love them, but not their sins, and pray for them that the Holy Spirit, will rebuild their characters.
    After all sex’s primary function if for reproduction, and and same sex. . .sex this is not possible, thus not inline with the natural.
    The only group that supports this life-style is the ZERO POPULATION CROWD, who want to reduce earth’ s total population to no more a than 3 billion, that means 4 Billion of us must “pull the Plug” on life, and AID’s is helping them do that!


  • Raymond McIntyre

    Homosexuality is not any more sinful than heterosexuality. Insisting that it is and equating it with paedophilia is simply gussying up bigotry in religious garb. It is neither logical nor acceptable.

  • Vazir Mukhtar

    Silly headline. Rob Portman may be sincere in his statement about his son; it looks very much like political expediency.

    Note the change in the word “marriage.” It used to mean a ceremony uniting a man and woman either before a civil authority, a justice of the peace, for example, or before a member of the clergy. “Civil union” was proposed for the ceremony and state of two people of the same sex joining together and therefore gaining entitlement to the benefits married males and females have.

    “Civil union” wasn’t good enough; besides some members of the clergy decided that once they had accepted homosexuality as OK (for whatever reason, but certainly not scripturally based) it would be all right to “marry” homosexuals.

    So what do we have. (1) The civil ceremony of marriage, which we’ve had for generations. (2) The religious sacrament, or rite, depending on one’s affiliation, now perverted because of the change in attitude of many of our fellow citizens.

    What will be interesting are three issues. (1) Will congregants attending a church where marriage of homosexuals is now performed but who disagree with the idea leave that church in hopes of finding another of the same or another denomination where such marriages are not performed? (2) Will they remain in their current church and accept the new practice? (3) If they can “call” their own minister and s/he will perform same-sex marriages, will they discharge that individual and look for another minister, or accept her/his practice?

    If one accepts that “marriage” is one of the sacraments, who has the authority to change its meaning and performance? Some will look to Pope Francis. To whom will others look? Or will they bother to do so?

    How are apostates dealt with in the XXI century?

  • sablegsd

    How about if his son came out as a homosexual, cannibalistic serial killer whose idol is jeffery dahmer?
    Would he be supportive of that?

  • http://www.facebook.com/joycepearson57 Joyce Pearson

    Of course he would! This action he has taken proves he would!

  • mary

    True, true, true, exactly the best point made when he said would Sen. Portman support stealing, murder, ect. just because his son was that and push to make it legal. Thank you thank you thank you. Sen. Rob Portman needs to switch to the democratic party, he seems like a liberal to me. I am sick of our Republicans caving in on evil. I will stand my ground and never ever change my mind that marriage is between a man and a woman, the Bible doesn’t lie. And illegal means illegal….

  • mikeledo

    So being gay is the same as being an armed felon. What a dork article.

    • Northpaw

      Being gay is abnormal but not at all like being an armed
      felon; demanding that the country adapt abnormal marriage is
      akin to being an armed felon, worse the über felony of robbing the sacred union
      of marriage between a man and woman in order to quell the rabid political
      agenda of the left.