Comments

  1. beef and fur says

    Look, it’s great news that Portman finally came around…but….it would have been better if he had this stance all along, oh I don’t know, because he is a person who has the power to restrict an entire population’s rights because of personal religious beliefs and doing that was bigoted and hateful?

    He only changed his mind when it became personal for him. Well guess what bud? It’s personal for me and many other people. Always has been.

  2. gr8guyca says

    One jaw-dropping comment after the next. From the minister who doesn’t believe in the Golden Rule to the woman who wants everyone back in the closet. But the dark-haired guy at 2:25 wins the Ken Mehlman Award.

  3. Jack says

    @Beef and Fur:

    Hope you have never made a mistake in your life that you only realized after it came back to haunt you… Gotta practice what you preach.

    Also, would you rather have Portman’s support or delay vindication of your rights? If your “personal” beef is more important to you than your rights, then you don’t deserve them. Let us know your name so you can be excluded specifically from any rights the rest of us win back.

  4. beef and fur says

    @Jack Oh, I forgot, this it Towleroad. I have to believe what everybody else thinks. Can’t have an individual opinion. STFU Jack and go back in your closet.

  5. beef and fur says

    I can’t wait until Little Kiwi, Ratbastard, Derek, the Ricks and the other Towleroad Misfits come in here and tell me how to think too. Maybe I’ll go make some popcorn.

    But just in case you are wasting your time carefully crafting your reply, let me make MY opinion clear again.

    Portman only took this stance when it became personal and self serving for him. Until then he was more than happy to keep LGBT folks in the back of the bus. I have no intention of kissing his feet for his “brave” change of heart.

    Welcome to the 21st Century, Mr. Portman. Now, what will he do with his epiphany? I’ll be over here waiting for real changes other than the atmosphere at the Portman family Thanksgiving dinner.

  6. Cali Greg says

    This is why homophobia needs to be acknowledged with a national discussion in our country. Watch this video. It is sickening what is displayed here. No other demographic would have their youth exposed to such hate without major media backlash. Yet this form of bigotry towards gays has become so common place that the media doesn’t even report it.
    That’s the kind of homophobia we deal with in this nation.

  7. 2 Dads says

    These monsters are vile. This just makes me more proud to be a member of our community.

  8. Gio says

    Beef and fur, YOU are hardly qualified to talk about LGBT issues with your comment history. You hardly care about the gay community with your gross past offensive commentary you clown.You are a shark in a gold fish costume and your agenda is clear on here. We’re not dumb, we know the calculating motives of your type.

  9. daeds says

    I’m a product of the 1950’s also and i remember the that old cow she was fat and ugly in high school too.

  10. Duration & Convexity says

    @ beef and fur
    Interesting how you twisted this story about vile homophobes and attempted to adjust the conversation to blaming an ally of ours. You didn’t want to combat the clear expressed homophobia in the video display above (because you have never actually combated homophobia before) but do seem very, very hyped up and angry over a man who has said he is now an ally. Lol could you be more obvious? You’re not even a good troll.

  11. Alex Mendoza says

    Guys, ignore beef & fur. He always makes comments that either target the gay community or anyone who comes out in favor of us. He’s M.O is clear as day, all while he so eagerly pretends to care. People like him like to divide and conquer. They want to question the motives of every LGBT ally as a means to weaken our community. I’ve dealt with his type. They think they are dry coy. You’ll also never see them actually tackle a prominent homophobe. Oh no, they’ll let that go ignored in place of belittling comments against the LGBT community or doubting the integrity of an ally.

    Been there, down that, know the motives.

  12. beef and fur says

    Blah, blah, blah. Just typical Towleroad bullies no better than the thugs in the video. He’s had two years to “evolve”. Call me when something significant changes other than the seating arrangements at the Portman family Thanksgiving dinner.

  13. Scott J. says

    beef and fur; did you see the hate speech in the video? Yeah, we got your extreme anger on a man who supports his gay son, supports gay people and supports gay marriage. But uhm, where’s your response to the lovely folks in this vid?

    Misdirected anger is cute!

  14. Joon says

    The people in this video are the reason why EVERY LGBT owes it to themselves and all other LGBT to get out there and get involved in our rights and our movement. If we don’t these people will keep mandating laws with their votes and ignorance. Change hate, by doing your part and being involved.

  15. beef and fur says

    @Scott J

    The folks in the video are no better than the thugs on Towleroad. Just a different forum.

  16. Leo says

    beef & fur: STFU. This thread is about people who’d penalize and destroy the lives of their gay child. THAT to me is far worse than a man who previously was flawed on our issues but has enough growth in his heart and mind to publically embrace his gay son. I agree with another commentator, people like you have misdirected anger but you already know that, and deep down inside don’t really care about gay rights, your issue with Portman is something else.

  17. beef and fur says

    I guess I should just cut and paste all the comments in the Ari Waldman post that say the same thing, or are all of you busy boys over there attacking them as well?

    People have different opinions. Get over it, get a life and move on.

  18. Micthell says

    Beef & fur, that you compared the hate, prejudice, and discrimination promoted In that video which is in direct correlation with the murders of gay people, suicides of gay youth, to getting your feelings hurt because people responded to your public comments on a public forum is proof positive you are not who you say you are. You are mentally sick, get help.

  19. Trees4Darkness says

    @ beef and fur, you must be a conservative. The way you turned strangers disagreeing with you on a message board to become the victim of bullying is the exact martyrdom adopted by your anti-gay conservative ilk. You all resent the gay community ever challenging your nonsense and when we do, you go into knee jerk reaction mode of play martyr, victim and equating the gay community to the most hateful bigots around. You are not fooling a single poster above. I’m glad the trolls are being exposed for what they are.

  20. beef and fur says

    @Mitchell

    Thank you for worrying about me. My feelings aren’t hurt. But it’s the same vitriol behind the comments in the video that drives the comments here when someone doesn’t agree with the party line.

  21. Gigi says

    @beer and fur

    For someone who likes to present himself as someone who is confident in his opinions you seem to have a major inferiority complex. So what if someone disagrees with you? If you can’t take it, don’t post.

    As far as Mr. Portman goes, I read that it took him more than 2 years for him to accept his son and change his position. It’s not like it was over night and only until if affected him personally. Perhaps if everyone were to come out and more people were confronted with the fact that they too know someone gay, more would be open to changing their position as well.

  22. beef and fur says

    “Senator Portman may not start screaming into megaphones at Freedom to Marry rallies, but he will balk at the hate his Party leadership has shown and still shows toward gays.”

    He will? How do you know this?

    Posted by: Shane | Mar 15, 2013 8:13:55 PM

  23. beef and fur says

    And if his son wasn’t gay? Would he have just stuck with his support for DOMA until it was politically expedient not to? What about all the other people he represents who are LGBT-identifying folks who also want to have access to marriage equality? Were their lives and struggles not good enough?

    I’m sure more privileged folks are going to balk at us for not being overjoyed about this, but I guess I’m just an ungrateful queer who would rather have no allies at all that an ally whose prone to doing the “right” thing only when it personally affects him or his family. You know, in the way privilege works. Was he really that distanced from the whole backlash against queer folks that he didn’t even think about how DOMA really impacted the lives of people way before he knew his son was gay?

    Forgive me if I don’t feel obliged to thank Senator Portman for his support of marriage equality, especially since he didn’t feel obliged to protect the rights of all Americans, naturalized and non-immigrant or otherwise, when he cosponsored DOMA. And don’t tell me I shouldn’t expect more from a Senator. There are a ton of other people who would do his job a thousand times better given the chance.

    Posted by: Jesus | Mar 15, 2013 8:39:37 PM

  24. beef and fur says

    To Rob Portman and his ilk (other Republican’s who have recently come out in support of gay marriage), how many have you hurt over the years with your words and actions? This sudden ‘revelation’ does not and will not give you a free pass. I truly hope that history has recorded all the hate & bigotry that has emerged from these Republicans so they, and their family/ancestors can someday look back and see the hate they professed, and denounce them and their actions, the same as George Wallace’s daughter has.

    Posted by: CB | Mar 15, 2013 8:49:15 PM

  25. beef and fur says

    His being a senator is about all of his constituents, not just his son.

    Yes, it’s great he’s now supporting equality, but it’s a selfish reason none the less. There has to be a deep reflection that has no personal gain to get my “hero” status placed upon someone changing their mind. It was this kind of deep self-reflection and taking into consideration the plight of others WITHOUT any personal gain that brought about the first wave of civil rights. Imagine if this were the case then. How would a bunch of white men have made the decision to vote for civil rights for all? How could it have been a personal reason then that directly affected them or an immediate loved one? From this perspective, it becomes clear that although his stance is a nice change for equality, it is gained only for himself and his immediate family; not the American people or constitution he swore to uphold.

    Posted by: zack | Mar 15, 2013 8:58:39 PM

  26. beef and fur says

    It took him two years after his son came out – but it only took him a few months after he was no longer under consideration for the VP slot on Romney’s ticket.

    Posted by: distinguetraces | Mar 15, 2013 9:16:05 PM

  27. Pageant Polley says

    beef & fur sounds like Andrew. Andrew is a poster who in the past revealed that he wishes gay marriage will never be embraced by the Republican Party because he values the democrat party more than gay marriage, due to that fears with the embracing of gay rights by Republicans, they can’t always be portrayed as the hate miners they often can be. Thus, taking LGBT votes from The Democrat party. You see, for people like Andrew/beef & fur, this argument has nothing to do with their support or care for our rights and everything to do with their campaign against republicans, overlooking the fact that most HEALTHY minded LGBt don’t care about how we get gay marriage support so long as we get it, regardless of party affiliation. It’s a human rights issue. But for folks like beef & fur they want to play mind games and pretend they are so concerned about gay people. Just read his emotional outbursts about gays in previous posts to see how much he actually (doesn’t) care about us.

  28. beef and fur says

    I just don’t agree with this. I found Richard Lawson’s comments more in line with my thinking: “Rob Portman’s sudden conversion perfectly illustrates the flippant, careless cruelty of the positions he once held. Until gayness in all its complexity and simplicity was staring him right in the face, in the shape of a person he helped create, Portman ultimately did not care about any of the country’s gay people. He did not value their love, or the love they might have for their children. He didn’t think them deserving of simple rights because he figured their relationships inferior to his own. Who knows how vehement his beliefs actually were, but really that doesn’t much matter in the end. And really, if his stances on gay issues were for mere political gain rather than bedrock ideology, that makes it all the worse. In that case, gay people did not even deserve passion in the negative; their causes, their lives really, were meaningless to him, easily dismissed for the sake of political expediency. That’s a pretty dark way to behave when you actually stop to think about it.”

    Posted by: Jeff Kurtti | Mar 15, 2013 9:28:21 PM

  29. beef and fur says

    Why I welcome him to the side of the equitable and enlightened, I don’t embrace a man who is so shallow and unempathetic to others that something has to happen to him for him to even consider changing. I applaud his son…that is bravery being raised in the environment he was apparently raised, but Rob Portman’s “evolution” is the product of selfishness and opportunity, not of a change of heart at examining the facts. You can laud a snake for eating the rats in your yard but it is still a snake.

    Posted by: Bart | Mar 15, 2013 9:40:36 PM

  30. beef and fur says

    Sorry, but Rob Portman isn’t some God now that he said “I’m for gay marriage, because my son is gay.” Let’s get real. It’s an insult to legitimate straight allies who have no skin in the game and simply are pro-equality. And straight allies in general, who are actually DOING something for our rights. A lot of gay folk don’t know what a true supporter is, because there are many people who say they support our rights or say they “don’t care” who is gay, yet when push comes to shove they aren’t doing anything to help our community and are apathetic at best. Someone who says they’re for equality but does nothing to advance it and believes companies should fire LGBTQ employees if they want is not a supporter of the community. People act like Rob Portman has become a LGBTQ advocate. He specifically said he wasn’t going to make an issue of it at all.

    If he would speak out against the gay bashing in his party then I’d give him tons of praise. In this situation, his son Will clearly deserves all the credit. Rob deserves respect for making this statement and doing so publicly. But lets temper things and be realistic.

    Posted by: Francis | Mar 15, 2013 10:53:03 PM

  31. beef and fur says

    Sorry, I think he’s a scumbag. He showed no empathy until he had to, when the issue was within his own home. A better measure of character is how a person treats people he has no connection to other than common humanity. Stop treating this jerk like a hero. He’s not.

    Posted by: Phil | Mar 16, 2013 12:24:19 AM

  32. beef and fur says

    I’m very glad that Senator Portman supports his son. That’s all it is. I’m not going to sing his praises just because he supports his son. The issue wasn’t important enough to him before his son came out. When it didn’t affect him, discrimination didn’t matter. Bullying people from the political pulpit didn’t matter. Hurting people that were trying to take care of each other didn’t matter. Putting down people he hated didn’t matter until he had a personal stake in the issue, then all of a sudden it mattered. Typical Republican attitude. It’s just like they all want to cut off unemployment benefits, until they or someone they know needs it. He has a lot of apologizing to do not to his son, but to all of us for his years of bashing us. Yeah, your damn right I’m bitter. Decades of being treated like a second class citizen gives me the right to be bitter against these self-serving jerks who suddenly have a revelation. Whatever.

    Posted by: Brad | Mar 16, 2013 2:01:48 AM

  33. beef and fur says

    While i wholeheartedly agree that when it comes to Republicans we need to lower our standards, the reality is this: we’re celebrating and cheering because a man is doing what all parents should just simply DO, and what (yeah, i’m going there) most liberal-leaning people already do, without expecting to be lauded for it.

    a man ….supports his son. what a stunning thing.
    well, as i said earlier, it’s a stunning thing for a Republican. liberals? they’ve already been supporting marriage equality, even if they don’t have gay children of their own.

    “But if Portman can turn around on one issue once he realizes how it touches his family personally, shouldn’t he take some time to think about how he might feel about other issues that don’t happen to touch him personally?”

    from Slate. this is the thing – i’m not saying “this is bad news” it’s just such an indicator of all that is wrong with the GOP that we have people celebrating in the streets and in papers all over the country because finally a republican senator is …what? doing what he’ supposed to do as a father?
    well, GREAT. like i said, when your expectations are that low this seems like a great big deal.

    timeline – son comes out two years ago. dad takes two years to realize that maybe it’s wrong to discriminate against his son? again – i understand that for a conservative and anti-gay man this is rather speedy.

    does this mean i’m a miserable liberal who doesn’t want his support? no. anyone who finally makes the great mental leap from the dark ages is a good thing. but this man has work to do, and for him it will be particularly ironic:
    He needs to now set out to achieve what he previously was unable or unwilling to do – care, for the first time, about the lives and plights of those Who Are Not Related To Him.

    and time for he and other republicans to ask themselves now, not just “what if my kid is gay?”, but “what if my child is transgendered?” – or as other journalists have been saying/joking “what if my child was poor or a minimum-wage making employee?”

    if the GOP only changes their stance when something directly happens within their own family, i think folks need to question their ability to, you know, serve constituents and have any ability to put themselves in another’s shoes when talking to Their People. bluntly: waiting for every GOP leader to have a gay kid that comes out will mean another few decades of slow progress.

    so, portman, glad you’ve grown a heart on this issue. now imagine a great big list of other things your son could have Come Out to you as, and start thinking of a way to get your fellow Republicans on board.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 16, 2013 8:32:43 AM

  34. Kyle says

    I don’t really care about the opinions of 4 senior citizens…however, I would like to car bomb that convention.

  35. beef and fur says

    Waldman’s selective analysis is showing again. He says that Portman is “neither heroic nor brave,” considering “how long it took him, the fact that he needed to be personally invested before supporting gay equality, and that he seems to have needed more persuading beyond the mere fact of his son’s sexuality.” Yet Waldman constantly calls Obama brave and heroic and a fierce ally for his current support of Gay marriage, despite the fact that Obama opposed Gay marriage for most of his life and administration, personally enforced discrimination against Gays during most of his administration, still enforces discrimination against Gays and doesn’t use his power to enable or enact Gay equality, and only changed his Gay marriage stance because 1) he stood to gain politically, and 2) he was embarrassed that he was on the wrong side of history, which he was.

    Waldman is as bad as the people he criticizes.

    Posted by: James E. Pietrangelo, II | Mar 16, 2013 12:53:33 PM

  36. beef and fur says

    @Steve Johansen
    In answer to your question: why should ANY person who was formerly and actively against gay marriage ever come out in support of it when you are saying you won’t accept it?
    Answer: Because we ALL deserve respect and civil rights and first-class citizenship just as they enjoy them and it’s the right thing to do, and not because suddenly it’s an issue that affects you or your loved ones.

    Those of you willing to make this man a hero of the gay civil rights movement and calling those who see the truth “bitter” miss the point entirely. When we fall down and kiss the feet of people like this who use our personal civil rights in such a self-serving way without apology for all the hurt they’ve done, we demean ourselves. Demanding an apology from this man is not unreasonable. He didn’t even (and still doesn’t) have the compassion for our community enough to support us without his son. He doesn’t get a pass because he just now only partially supports our civil rights because he’s learned his son is gay. Senator Portman is not an ally until he really and truly supports our movement instead of just supporting it because his son is gay. He only came out in public support 2 YEARS after his son came out as gay and when he was no longer in the political spotlight for VP on the Romney ticket. I’m not impressed with his evolution anymore than I’m impressed with Obama’s less than enthusiastic support.

    Posted by: Brad | Mar 16, 2013 1:40:05 PM

  37. beef and fur says

    He supports the right of his son to beg the public to vote for SSM in public referenda.

    Big whoop.

    AFTER his son came out, Portman continued and CONTINUES to oppose ENDA. Now, you might say that’s a libertarian position, but he DOES SUPPORT increased protections for religious objectors to SSM. That is NOT libertarian.

    Portman opposes all gay rights and just hopes that his son will find happiness in a blue state.

    Welcome him with open arms? Heck, I doubt I’d shake his hand.

    Posted by: BobN | Mar 16, 2013 2:29:57 PM

  38. beef and fur says

    On one hand, I guess we should all be happy about this announcement in that it drives another stake into the anti-gay lobby. On the other hand, it’s dismaying that politicians (of all stripes) seem to require a personal investment into an issue to do what’s right. If our leaders simply put logic and justice over their own selfish politicking, gay marriage wouldn’t be an issue at all.

    Posted by: ace1981 | Mar 15, 2013 12:53:54 PM

  39. beef and fur says

    On one hand, I guess we should all be happy about this announcement in that it drives another stake into the anti-gay lobby. On the other hand, it’s dismaying that politicians (of all stripes) seem to require a personal investment into an issue to do what’s right. If our leaders simply put logic and justice over their own selfish politicking, gay marriage wouldn’t be an issue at all.

    Posted by: ace1981 | Mar 15, 2013 12:53:54 PM

  40. beef and fur says

    Ugh, big deal. The only time Republicans “evolve” on the issue is when they retire or if they have a gay kid. Even the Republicans are willing to give transgressors a pass on the matter if they don’t squawk too much about it while in office.

    But that’s it. The rest end up like the unfortunate head of the Illinois Republican party who nearly lost his job for supporting equality and three state senators run out of office in New York for voting their conscious and not the party line. Trust me, Portman would still be a jackass on the issue if not for his kid.

    Posted by: Ozu | Mar 15, 2013 12:58:11 PM

  41. beef and fur says

    it should be the other way around. Dad should be saying “I’m astounded at the strength of my own son to Come Out to me despite my longstanding oppositing to LGBT people and their rights to equality and fair treatment. I can’t even fathom how hard his life must have been spending more than 20 years knowing his family and his family’s chosen political affiliates consider him a second-class citizen”

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 15, 2013 1:05:08 PM

  42. beef and fur says

    Your dad is a jerk who forgets he has constituents.

    I’m doing a slow burn on this . … and sorry, Will … though I’m glad your dad had this particular revelation and is seemingly cool with your being gay, his selfishness in only coming to this conclusion when it affects him personally makes him an utter failure as a public representative – and doubly so as a U.S. Senator, the second highest elected public office one can hold. He’s pathetic and should retire in shame. That does not mean he’s a bad dad, but he’s disgraceful as a senator.

    Posted by: Zlick | Mar 15, 2013 1:54:10 PM

  43. beef and fur says

    For those of you who don’t understand the negative comments, my straight married sister from Ohio called the revelation this morning “GALLING”. How dare he bring his son into it? As a public servant, you can say you have evolved, fine. But your son came out two years ago. You were being offered the Vice-Presidency candidacy a few months ago. We can do the math, Senator Portman.
    I don’t consider the commenters here bitter, victimized, or negative. They are self-realized, honest, empathic men, speaking the truth. We say thanks to elder Portman for his support, and to his son for coming out. But we don’t ignore the context. Compassionate conservatives need to rethink their positions, or at least their adjectives.

    Posted by: Shane | Mar 15, 2013 7:43:40 PM

  44. beef and fur says

    I suppose I should feel good about his change of heart but maybe he should have been more empathetic, considering he represents a large number of people, without having had his son come out to him, now that it’s personal he’s for gay marriage but before he couldn’t see that he was a homophobe.

    Posted by: lk | Mar 15, 2013 7:15:50 AM

  45. beef and fur says

    So, let me get this straight…if his son had not come out as being gay, he would still be against gays getting married and that families that have gay children would still be fighting him and his party? I am glad he ‘converted’, however, would have been more appreciative and more substantial if he had done this without knowing his son was gay.

    Posted by: CB | Mar 15, 2013 7:39:43 AM

  46. beef and fur says

    Good grief, it’s a bit soon to be fawning over the man as being “a lovely, flexible man capable of change.” HIs votes have been 100% anti-gay, and he STILL thinks employers should be able to fire you for being gay rather than risk being “uncomfortable.” It’s a good thing and more power to his son for affecting the change, but let’s not blow the guy.

    Posted by: Matthew Rettenmund | Mar 15, 2013 7:50:44 AM

  47. beef and fur says

    Am I supposed to pop a bottle of champagne because this lunkhead finally woke up to the excruciating illness of homophobia? Does EVERYONE have to have a gay child to suddenly realize the complete wrongness and harm caused by such blind hatred? I’m not Black and I’m not a dwarf and I’m not obese, etc., etc. — and somehow I KNOW anyone who happens to be so is my equal in every way. You don’t get medals for simply doing the right thing!

    Posted by: Bill | Mar 15, 2013 8:48:33 AM

  48. beef and fur says

    This is great progress, and we should definitely accept it, and we should definitely accept and support his vote.

    But let’s be honest about what kind of progress it is, and not overstate it.

    It’s huge that a sitting Republican feels he can publicly change his stance on gay rights because of his own son, rather than disown the son publicly or privately and refuse to discuss the issue, or worse, feel the need to double down on the hate to prove his own “virtue.”

    That’s wonderful. It may eventually turn into support. He may actually turn into an ally. At least, he’s stepping out of the way, and anything that shatters the GOP monolithic voting block is good news.

    But at the same time, there’s no indication that he’s suddenly become empathetic, or cares about us, or that he wouldn’t still be a raging homophobe if his son hadn’t come out, and we shouldn’t pretend he is. This is as much self-interest and the same sort of crap we see from Republicans all the the time as it is any sign of a real change of heart or a sign that Republicans are getting the message.

    This is “Oh, my God, I just realized this might actually affect real people.” That’s progress, yes, but let’s not nominate the man for sainthood just yet.

    Posted by: Lymis | Mar 15, 2013 8:51:07 AM

  49. John-505 says

    beef & fur, for someone who doesn’t want to walk in lockstep with everyone you sure can’t formulate your own opinion without copy/paste the opinions of others….how pathetic, and lame, and sad.

  50. beef and fur says

    While I think this is great and agree that coming out is the way to get things done, it’s also another example of a very self-serving congress who govern for the benefit of their family and friends and not their constituents.

    Posted by: kswpar | Mar 15, 2013 1:35:18 PM

  51. Olstien says

    @ beef & fur, yes, we know you use many different handles on here to express the same POV. That isn’t news.

  52. beef and fur says

    I’m sorry, but I get a little tired with folks who will only like or stick up for someone because they’ve had one of their family members come out. I thought it was crappy when Newt Gingrich did it and I’m not much happier with other pols doing it. Don’t get me wrong, I am grateful that he’s “understanding” now, but I don’t like the fact that you have to have it personally affect you before you do the right thing.

    Posted by: Joseph Singer | Mar 15, 2013 3:53:40 PM

  53. beef and fur says

    Why did he wait so long? His son told him he was gay two years ago!

    Posted by: andrew | Mar 15, 2013 2:23:19 PM

  54. beef and fur says

    I have to admit, I just kinda hate this. I know it’s a good thing for the gay community, but basically he’s saying “I don’t care what happens to others, only when it happens to me.” That’s not leadership. Leadership is someone who supports it whose kids aren’t gay. Plus, it seems like he is just jumping on a bandwagon that just backed out of the driveway.

    Posted by: beaugard stevens | Mar 15, 2013 4:17:04 PM

  55. Observer says

    beef & fur =- ANDREW folks

    ANDREW is a poster who goes by beef & fur and he is AGAINST GAY RIGHTS. Andrew is a MILITANT democrat but SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE who is against gay rights but wants to use the democrat platform of gay rights to co opt gay votes. DON’T FALL FOR HIS TACTICS.

    ANDREW IS A LEADING HOMOPHOBE….he is a militant democrat who pretends to eb for gay rights. Is AGAINST gay rights but uses gay rights as a ploy for votes!

    ANDREW is beef & fur.

  56. DaLurker says

    Yeah, I too have noticed Andrew always attacking republicans for not being “gay friendly” enough yet his own postings reveal a very anti gay man. A very old, bitter, anti gay man not at all accepting of the gay community. I wonder where Andrew gets off bashing marriage equality supporters who are republican because he himself holds great bias and prejudice against the LGBT community.

  57. beef and fur says

    As we know, there are many gay children that are rejected by their parents when they come out. Great they accepted their son’s sexual orientation, but why is he different than the millions of other LGBT who have a right to a happy and free choice to marry who they love? Whatever it takes, I guess, but this hardly makes Portman an enlightened hero to marriage equality. Now we know why Romney didn’t choose him! Ha!

    Posted by: Rob Zeleniak | Mar 16, 2013 9:37:13 AM

  58. Johnathan says

    @ beef & fur

    It’s quite obnoxious to be submitting posts from another thread because you can’t argue your own points. It’s actually cryptic.

  59. beef and fur says

    Towelroad
    03/15/2013

    DOES SENATOR ROB PORTMAN STILL BELIEVE BUSINESSES SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIRE HIS SON FOR BEING GAY? – VIDEO

    Senator Rob Portman (R-OH), who last night became the first sitting Republican Senator to come out for marriage equality, a decision he made after his son came out to him as gay, has another question to answer.

    Does he want to support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) and does he believe that businesses should be able to fire his son for being gay?

    In an interview with Think Progress last June, Portman explained why he opposed ENDA, saying he was concerned it would spawn litigation and “make it difficult for employers to feel comfortable.”

    Said Portman:

    What I’m concerned about in Paycheck Fairness and other legislation like that is the fact that it will spawn a lot of litigation the way the legislation is written. So you don’t want it to be a boon to lawyers, you want it to actually help people. But no one should discriminate….A lot of them would create a lot of legal rights of action that would make it more difficult for employers to feel comfortable, to be able to hire, and to keep this economy moving. So you have to be careful how you do it.

    Given what he told Dana Bash, I think it’s safe to assume that Portman’s son had already come out to him at the time of this interview.

  60. beef and fur says

    typical repub

    “nothing matters till it directly affects me”

    Posted by: Moz’s | Mar 15, 2013 10:12:51 AM

  61. beef and fur says

    A lot of politicians don’t understand an issue until it directly affects them. Sorry, but it’s true. A lot of the evolution on issues happens because of a personal event or interaction. You could even say that of Obama.

    Be glad he has enough humanity to change because of his child (not everyone does) and that he won’t actively be a force against marriage equality.

    Posted by: Thomas | Mar 15, 2013 10:23:03 AM

  62. beef and fur says

    Once a slimebucket always a slimebucket.

    He obvious annound that his son was gay — two years after he and the son had “the talk” — because someone in the press was about to go public with it.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Mar 15, 2013 10:05:54 AM

  63. beef and fur says

    it’s like with Cheney – “Sure i’m against gay equality, but i’m a rich man in politics, so my gay offspring will get the perks them regular working-class gays won’t get”

    bugger off.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 15, 2013 9:37:31 AM

  64. KoolWhip says

    beef & fur has in the past supported Chuck Hagel and called chuck hagels homophobia and anti gay voting record as gay hysteria not worth addressing. Why? because hagel was a democrat appointed nominee and for beef & fur, this issue is about garnering support for democrats.It has nothing to do with gay rights. It has everything to do with trying to make sure that democrats have monopoly on gay rights. They will lose.

  65. Gasper says

    @ beef and fur
    You do realize more and more republicans will continue to support gay rights, right? every month, more will come out in support. Why? because the general population is coming out in support of gay rights, gay people, and gay marriage. No longer is it ‘just a democrat thing’ it is now an everybody thing. So be prepared to make the same played out arguments, but to no avail soon.

  66. Junior says

    Thank you Mr. Portman for tanding up for equality and supporting your son. I so appreciate it and have already written you a thank you letter, as have my other gay friends. I love when soeone evolves and welcome them with open arms!

  67. beef and fur says

    @koolwhip

    This is hilarious now. Chuck Hagel? At least I’m not making things up as I go. You’ve got pages of comments from dozens of people here on Towleroad (and even a post from Towelroad that shows that Portman didn’t supprort EDNA when he clearly knew about his son’s revelation), and yet this.

    SMH.

  68. just sayin' says

    beef & fur is posting with an agenda. an anti gay agenda. he does not want to see equality for gay citizens advance. He enjoys seeing a political party he is not affiliated to (republicans) be against our rights. It makes him and his croonies look good. Now that they are slowly inching closer to accepting our rights, beef & fur does not know what to do with himself so he has to change the dialogue and question the integrity of those who support us. It’s a calculating tactic. He is NOT for gay rights. Just gay votes.

  69. Proud Gay Blogger says

    beef & fur, I’ve never in my years of posting on this site seen someoen obnoxiously submit previous posts in droves from a previous thread to make their point. Extremely obnoxious and a sure bet way to alienate many who are on the fence. No wonder so many fine towleroad posters have moved on to sites like joe my god. Such immature behavior.

  70. beef and fur says

    @just sayin

    Did you also go into all these other posts from where these anti-Portman comments came from and respond according? Just sayin…

  71. Scott Johansen says

    beef & fur, you compared the gay community to the monsters in this video, then attempted to make a martyr of yourself. You automatically fail, and are shut down from being heard for that. Rightfully so. No self respecting gay man would see the hate in that video and compare it to people who disagree with you. It’s because your oblivious if not encouraging of homophobia. You remind me of the people who compare the gay community to the westboro church not remembering the years of persecution the gay community has endured and that reactions to hate are not the same as hate. Your anti gay bias is showing and no one has to sit and hear it.

  72. IonMusic says

    beef & fur, that your outrage is reserved for portman as opposed to other known and established existing homophobes, many who are part of the democrat party, tells me you yourself are indeed using this issue as a football with an insincere front about actually caring about the gay rights movement. If you actually did, you’d recognize the significance in portman’s admission, while channeling your anger toward existing homophobes who are doing far worse than portman this very moment. You aren’t, which speaks volumes about your motives, as others noted much better than I could.

  73. Jacob says

    I salute Portman and his son. The open heart it takes to grow and be willing to adjust. Regardless of when it’s done, I appreciate that it’s done. Ari’s piece was very poignant!

    The Nazis in this clip should all be a reminder of the tremendous work we still have to do as a community to achieve full equality.

  74. beef and fur says

    @Scott

    Hate is hate, Scott. Doesn’t matter where it’s from. It’s only more vile from the gays when they attack their own for simply having a different opinion on a message board. And my original opinion wasn’t expressed in the way you described to begin with. Plenty of other people have the same opinion. Are you and the rest of the haters going to go into those Portman posts and respond in kind to all of those people, too?

  75. Martin California says

    So proud to be part of the gay community and proud to work with gay youth, and fellow gay brothers and sisters to be proud of who we are and stand tall, and not let these bigots dictate our lives. I hold my partners hand EVERYWHERE in public, because I love him dearly and it’s time people are exposed to the fact that gay people can be couples,and in my case, deeply in love. And no bigot will shame us in a closet.

    So proud of the incredible gay community for all our success and achievments. Even with many hetero bigots out there, we are a community that thrives.

  76. Alex says

    @ Martin california, between all the other trolls polluting this site, just have to say I really appreciated your comment above. Well said and very true. I often think with all the continued discrimination gay people face, how well adjusted our community is. We’re constant contributors to this society and as a community, have done incredibly well for ourselves.

    Can’t wait to attend the equality marches with my friends end of this month

  77. Alex says

    beef & fur: “the gays”? really? REALLY? the gays? no, we’re not ‘the gays’ anymore than black people are ‘the blacks’ Stop using hipster psuedo homophobia from your hetero friends in vocabulary in an attempt to be cute and cool.
    People are correct. In the same breath that you attempt to fight for gay rights, you keep revealing yourself for exactly who you are, coupled with subtle hints of anti gay prejudice. Go sit at a park bench somewhere.

  78. beef and fur says

    So thankful for whoever referenced the JMG blog in this discourse…guess what? The gays over there are just as leery about Mr. Portman.

    Here’s what JMG himself posted:

    MAIN | FRIDAY, MARCH 15, 2013

    Portman: I Now Support Marriage But SCOTUS Should Stay Out Of It

    “With the overwhelming majority of young people in support of allowing gay couples to marry, in some respects the issue has become more generational than partisan. The process of citizens persuading fellow citizens is how consensus is built and enduring change is forged. That’s why I believe change should come about through the democratic process in the states. Judicial intervention from Washington would circumvent that process as it’s moving in the direction of recognizing marriage for same-sex couples. An expansive court ruling would run the risk of deepening divisions rather than resolving them. I’ve thought a great deal about this issue, and like millions of Americans in recent years, I’ve changed my mind on the question of marriage for same-sex couples. As we strive as a nation to form a more perfect union, I believe all of our sons and daughters ought to have the same opportunity to experience the joy and stability of marriage.” – GOP Sen. Rob Portman, writing for the Columbus Dispatch.
    Labels: GOP, marriage equality, Rob Portman, SCOTUS

    posted by Joe

    http://www.joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/03/sen-rob-portman-i-now-support-marriage.html#disqus_thread

    There’s your boy Portman. On your side.

  79. jjose712 says

    beef and fur; You are a very dedicated troll, congratulations.
    But you don’t fool anyone

  80. beef and fur says

    @jjose

    Yes, what a great response. However, I’m not changing my opinion, nor do I need to.

    Portman’s “new” stance is good only now that his family is affected. As I said in MY ORIGINAL POST, I am happy for the change of mind, but still apprehensive. He’s had this knowledge for two years, yet he didn’t act on it and continued to support his views throughout the campaign and election. Even when the vote on ENDA was concerned, there was no change. Apparently, he now supports marriage equality, but thinks the SCOTUS should just stay out of it. That makes no sense. I guess he’s not done evolving yet?

    It’s just selfish that it was OK of him to discriminate until the balance of self interest was tipped by his son and the campaign and election was over. We’ll see what happens now that he is getting pressure from Boehner and the old biddies and bigots that are his constituents and contemporaries. Yeah, I hope it starts a tidal wave of change that leaves all of the haters exemplified in this video in the dust and he begins to repair the damage he’s contributed to.

    But excuse me fellas, no matter what you say, think or feel about me, this gay isn’t sending up the white smoke for Portman yet. I have stronger morals than that.

  81. Bryan says

    If you believe on principle that being gay is a an immoral and destructive choice, then to accept someone’s gayness merely because he or she is your child is hypocrisy.

    The premises of the argument are false, but for those who accept them, Portman’s decision is equivalent to accepting murder because one’s child has turned out to be a murderer.

    There are (quite easy) ways to counter such bogus arguments, but “you’re hat is stupid” isn’t among them.

  82. says

    Although I acknowledge that Senator Portman has worked against equality in the past, I do want to say that it must be hard for him right now. There are gays and lesbians who will also hate him for what he did in the past, and his conservative colleagues now want nothing to do with him. He is definitely between a rock and a hard place.

  83. beef and fur says

    Huffington Post
    Posted: 03/16/2013 10:18 am

    Kenneth M. Walsh
    Writer and editor

    Sen. Rob Portman Makes ‘Brave’ Decision — Once It Directly Affects His Family

    Republican Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, found himself under fire on Friday from his conservative constituents after announcing that he had had a change of heart on gay marriage.

    The Ohio lawmaker — who was on Mitt Romney’s short list of running mates — said he came around to the decision after his 21-year-old son, Will (in checked shirt), came out to him two years ago.

    “I’ve come to the conclusion that for me, personally, I think this is something that we should allow people to do,” Portman told CNN. “To get married, and to have the joy and stability of marriage that I’ve had for over 26 years. That I want all of my children to have, including our son who is gay.”

    While I would like to say that it makes me happy to have the first Republican senator come out in support of marriage equality, I am having a difficult time getting past the whole “I need this EXACT situation to affect me PERSONALLY before I can do anything” mentality that seems to persist in the halls of Congress.

    Do I need to have a close relative have Parkinson’s disease to think there should be government funding for a cure? Does a member of my family need to be African American for me to think the Voting Rights Act needs to be renewed? Does my house have to be destroyed by a hurricane to vote for emergency relief funding? The utter lack of empathy displayed by so many elected officials sickens me to the point that if and when some of them finally see the light, I almost hate them more… for showing a complete lack of conviction.

    I guess this is just the way it works — social change is always slow going, just as it’s been with other minorities — but don’t look for me to be handing out any awards for acting like a human being. Because while it’s true that Portman has suddenly embraced gay rights, we also know that he still voiced opposition to the Employment Nondiscrimination Act while he was being considered for veep — even though he already knew his son was gay. (Thanks, Dad.)

    I sent Senator Portman an e-mail today saying I appreciated his belated support, but that I’d like to think that moving forward, he could begin to show empathy for people even when he doesn’t have a horse in the race.

    As it stand now, it kind of feels like — as a friend so eloquently put it –giving a gold medal to someone for not spitting on homeless people.

  84. beef and fur says

    @jjose

    Obviously, you must care since you came back to monitor your responses. Congratulations on your membership in a lynch mob. Vigilante Justice looks so good on you. Sen. Portman would be so proud.

  85. Daisy Lee says

    Portman just found out? Look at all the pics of that sissy boy with his sissy hair as he was getting older. And Portman didn’t realize? Christ, moron, wake up.

    It’s a DNA passed from the mother than creates a gay son. Nice work, mom. Aren’t you so proud? Gay marriage must be over turned. Where the hell are all these gays coming from? What’s wrong with all these mothers? Is it in their food/water?

    We don’t want to see a gay, let alone a pair of ’em. These gays provide nothing to our society. A gay has his wires crossed and is useless. Maybe he can hang out with the girls and do their hair!

    Most countries in the world dispose of gays and lesbians, including Jersey and Brooklyn.

    Only sissy places love these freaks.

  86. says

    this negative CPAC reaction is no doubt part of the reason Portman released a statement saying that, despite now supporting his own gay son and the idea of “marriage equality” (only state by state, natch) he will not be taking a “leadership” position on the issue, as he “doesn’t want to force his opinion on others.”

    Which I guess means “i accept my son, but wont’ force his gayness onto the rest of you.”

    or something.

    his son came out two years ago. Portman did not make any pro-Equality arguments, or statements, leading up to the last election.

    and here we have, ironically, the very people that were just like Portman – people who have no empathy or compassion for “other people’s families.”

    Portman needs to specifically think about THIS – for years he didn’t care, until it became personal in his immediate family. how, then, does he hope to convince other people, who don’t know that they have a gay kid, to care?

    that’ll be his dilemma – how to get others in his political arena to do what he was unable to do.

  87. DC Arnold says

    Before I’m regulated back into being a slave again according to these batsh*t crazy people, I must remind you that Nobody’s family tree makes them a native of this country unless there is Indian blood somewhere (I have Seminole in my family). The Koch brothers money has done well with these teabaggers who vote against their own interests. I say we get a jump on the midterm elections and figure out a way to undo gerrymandered idiots.

  88. EJC says

    CPAC . . What the hell is the require age restriction there, 85 and up. The woman who is the “product of the 50’s”, give me a break honey! These people are perfect for the Republican Party, too white, too old, and too conservative and without the simple understanding of the world today. You can’t tell the guy with the white hair and cell phone has been seem in a gay bar in whatever city he comes from, nelly really doesn’t describe him well enough, All these jerks are not long for this world, fortunately! Feel sorry forth them they are a dying breed, the bight new world will be laughing at this group well before the 2016 election rolls aground!. The white pastor in the BLACK Church, God help those poor back people!

  89. beef and fur says

    Slate

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/03/15/rob_portman_and_the_politics_of_narcissism.html

    Rob Portman and the Politics of Narcissism
    By Matthew Yglesias | Posted Friday, March 15, 2013, at 12:26 PM

    I’m glad that Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio has reconsidered his view on gay marriage upon realization that his son is gay, but I also find this particular window into moderation—memorably dubbed Miss America conservatism by Mark Schmitt—to be the most annoying form.

    Remember when Sarah Palin was running for vice president on a platform of tax cuts and reduced spending? But there was one form of domestic social spending she liked to champion? Spending on disabled children? Because she had a disabled child personally? Yet somehow her personal experience with disability didn’t lead her to any conclusions about the millions of mothers simply struggling to raise children in conditions of general poorness. Rob Portman doesn’t have a son with a pre-existing medical condition who’s locked out of the health insurance market. Rob Portman doesn’t have a son engaged in peasant agriculture whose livelihood is likely to be wiped out by climate change. Rob Portman doesn’t have a son who’ll be malnourished if SNAP benefits are cut. So Rob Portman doesn’t care.

    It’s a great strength of the movement for gay political equality that lots of important and influential people happen to have gay children. That obviously does change people’s thinking. And good for them.

    But if Portman can turn around on one issue once he realizes how it touches his family personally, shouldn’t he take some time to think about how he might feel about other issues that don’t happen to touch him personally? Obviously the answers to complicated public policy questions don’t just directly fall out of the emotion of compassion. But what Portman is telling us here is that on this one issue, his previous position was driven by a lack of compassion and empathy. Once he looked at the issue through his son’s eyes, he realized he was wrong. Shouldn’t that lead to some broader soul-searching? Is it just a coincidence that his son is gay, and also gay rights is the one issue on which a lack of empathy was leading him astray? That, it seems to me, would be a pretty remarkable coincidence. The great challenge for a senator isn’t to go to Washington and represent the problems of his own family. It’s to try to obtain the intellectual and moral perspective necessary to represent the problems of the people who don’t have direct access to the corridors of power.

    Senators basically never have poor kids. That’s something members of Congress should think about. Especially members of Congress who know personally that realizing an issue affects their own children changes their thinking.

  90. beef and fur says

    Blah, blah blah. Just more self serving dispatches from self enlightened gays who don’t practice what they preach.

  91. mmike1969 says

    It’s quite obvious repukes/t-baggers have no concept of “family” or “values”. Should not surprise anyone with a working brain though.