Posted on 03/15/2013 2:45:48 PM PDT by nickcarraway
I have used this point, only to be met with the typical liberal “that’s different!”. It’s not.
The widely accepted, traditional relationship in Western civilization has been one man committing to one woman, and trying to have children, to continue our civilization. Now, throughout our history, many people have walked outside of the normal when it comes to their sexual desires. Some men love foot-worship and bondage. Some women love rape-fantasies and spanking. Others engage in more deviant things like incest, homosexuality, bestiality, and polyamory.
Whatever you do behind closed doors, in privacy, is your own business. I not only have no right to tell two consenting adults what they can and can’t do, but I also don’t want to hear about it. It’s private. It’s deeply personal.
I don’t agree with selling these things to children as ‘normal’ or ‘desirable’. The only thing that is normal and desirable is the nuclear family, the core of our society. That is it. Having parades and public university lectures on these things is the same as public nudism. It should be covered under public indecency laws. When you step into the public arena, there is a traditional expectation that you are respectful and decent, regardless of how out-of-the-ordinary you are behind closed doors.
Liberals are all hypocrites. There are no immediate, practical reasons beyond those that apply to regular homosexuality, to oppose incestuous homosexuality. Both are taboo for the same reason. Morality. Biblical-based morality. The foundation of our society. You can’t throw centuries of Judeo-Christian tradition and ethics overboard for one group of sexual misfits, and then haul it back into the boat again for another group. It’s lunacy.
There is something about him that makes my skin crawl.
To me he is just another opportunistic, old-guard republican.
I thought it was a good move for conservatism when the predictions he would be picked as the 2012 VP candidate turned out to be wrong.
It is as the Church teaches, hate the sin, love the sinner.
Rob Portman's son molests children and rapes their dead bodies.
So he's changed his mind, because Lord knows, whatever your child is into, it must be good and supported.
...and homosexual sex fits neatly into this family perspective how exactly?
I assume he loves his child; HOWEVER, he does not choose to have sex with his child. He is wrong to equate love with sex and family with homosexual sex.
If his son shot and killed someone, I guess that would now be acceptable to RINO worms.
Gay groups are quite militant nowadays, as are gays in general. But there are pro-life gay groups online and maybe in the real world as well -- some in places where you might not think there are any gays, and some in places where you might not think there are any pro-lifers.
Single issue groups get a bad rap in politics for being divisive. The gay marriage claque may deserve it, but the pro-life movement has been pretty good about not second-guessing or writing off people.
This may be part of a general move to the left by Portman or it may not be, but the pro-life movement, so far as I can tell, still wants his vote, and they may still get it, however stray individuals may react.
I would note that Jonathan Chait, who wrote this, was also the author of “Why I Hate George W. Bush” back in 2003, a rollicking defense of the kind of emotionality and subjectivism in politics that he deplores here.
If Portman was intellectually and philosophically honest, he would resign his senate seat and request that Kasich appoint his son.
Of course from the sounds of things, his son's seat is already filled.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.