Republicans Have Zero Reaction To Obama's ENDA Executive Order

The Christofascists and professional Christian/hate group leadership crowd have been going berserk and engaging in spittle flecked rants over Barack Obama's signing of an ENDA executive order barring federal contractors (and their subcontractors) from discriminating against LGBT employees in the workplace.  Meanwhile, the leadership of the Republican Party has been remarkably silent on the issue.  One does have to wonder why given the usual willingness of GOP politicians to shamelessly prostitute themselves to anti-gay Christofascists.  Perhaps it is because survey after survey shows that high majorities of the public support such employment protections.  A piece in the Huffington Post looks at the GOP's strange silence on this issue that has portions of its base having apoplexy.  Here are highlights:

When President Barack Obama signed an executive order Monday making it illegal for federal contractors to fire or harass employees based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, civil rights advocates hailed the move as one of the most important actions ever taken by a president to stem discrimination.

Democratic lawmakers raced to issue statements celebrating the advancement for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. In addition to offering new protections for transgender federal employees, the executive order covers the broad federal contracting community -- some 24,000 companies employing 28 million workers, or about one-fifth of the nation's workforce.

But in Republican quarters on Capitol Hill, it's as if nothing happened. GOP leaders have been silent. Socially conservative members have gone quiet.

The Huffington Post searched the websites of the 18 congressional Republican backers of the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act -- a companion bill to the executive order -- to see if any of them put out a statement. Only one did: Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who said he supports the policy behind the executive order because "employees shouldn’t face unjust discrimination in the workplace simply because of their sexual orientation," though he raised concerns about the rights of religious employers.

Perhaps nobody better illustrated this point than House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). HuffPost asked him Thursday if he had any reaction to Obama's LGBT executive order.  "Nope," Boehner said at his weekly briefing. "The president signs a lot of executive orders."

Asked if he supports the principle of workplace protections being extended to LGBT employees, he punted again.  "Listen, the president is going to make his decisions. He can," Boehner said.

Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.), one of the eight House GOP co-sponsors of ENDA, said Thursday that he didn't know about Obama's executive order. But he emphasized that if it has the same goal as ENDA -- which it does, except that ENDA has far broader implications -- he supports it.

"I co-sponsored ENDA because I think that should be the law for everyone," Grimm said.

The Republican lawmaker shrugged when asked if he thinks it's hurting his party that so many are sitting on the sidelines amid a revolution in LGBT rights. He said he thinks his colleagues are coming around. Slowly.

"Generally, I think our party is in transition," Grimm added. "More people are starting to pay attention."

The Nightmare Scenario for Republicans on Gay Marriage

Most Republican senators slavishly prostitute themselves to the Christofascists and oppose same sex marriage notwithstanding the fact that a majority of Americans now support it.  One exception to this rule of shameless self-prostitution is Senator Bob Portman (pictured above with son Will) who reversed his stance after his son came out to him as gay.  Like many other decent parents, Portman put the love for his child ahead of party politics expediency and bigotry based on the writings of ignorant herders from 2500+ years ago.  Now, there is speculation that Portman might throw his hat in the ring for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination.  Whether or not Portman could survive the nomination process given the GOP base's embrace of ignorance and hate and bigotry is open to question.  His candidacy, however, could be a nightmare for the GOP as pointed out in a column in the Washington Post.  Here are column excerpts:

So Ohio Senator Rob Portman is considering a run for president, and he claims his support for gay marriage would be a plus in a general election, allowing Republicans to make an economic case to key demographics that are culturally resistant to the GOP. “You can’t become a national party unless you do a better job reaching those between 18 and 30,” Portman says.

This raises the possibility of a scenario that Republicans who agree with Portman — and believe the party must evolve on gay marriage to stay in step with the country’s cultural and demographic shifts — might want to start worrying about right about now.

It’s not hard to imagine that Senator Ted Cruz might offer precisely the opposite case from Portman, making the argument that the party must reaffirm its support for “traditional marriage” key to his GOP presidential primary run. This could come after the Supreme Court has declared a Constitutional right to gay marriage — which Cruz would then be vociferously calling on Republicans to help roll back.

Gay advocates believe lower court rulings overturning state gay marriage bans on Constitutional equal protection grounds could portend an eventual SCOTUS ruling that enshrines a national right to gay marriage. That could happen in time for the 2016 primary.

That would amount to a powerful declaration that this debate is, or should be, culturally and legally settled. But at that point, unrepentant foes of gay marriage could seize on the ruling to redouble their call for a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Such a measure was introduced by House Republicans as recently as last year. And Senator Cruz supports the idea.

If you don’t think Cruz would love to demagogue such a SCOTUS ruling — and will demagogue the issue whether or not there is any such SCOTUS ruling — then you haven’t been paying close attention to the good Senator from Texas. In a recent speech reported by Jeffrey Toobin, he strongly suggested he would make this cause central to any presidential run, and threw in criticism of SCOTUS on it.

Whether or not there is any SCOTUS ruling, there are already signs gay marriage could divide Republicans in 2016. The RNC autopsy into what went wrong in 2012 explicitly called for evolution on the issue, in part to keep in step with the cultural sensitivities of young Republicans and conservatives. Meanwhile, GOP-aligned gay advocates are actively planning to encourage pro-marriage equality voices within the GOP to speak out.

An intra-GOP primary dispute over it [gay marriage] could help reinforce a dynamic Ron Brownstein has already identified, one in which cultural issues such as gay rights have “reaffirmed the GOP’s identity as the champion of the forces most resistant to the profound demographic and cultural dynamics reshaping American life — and Democrats as the voice of those who most welcome these changes.” One can even imagine a viral moment  in which all the GOP candidates are asked to raise their hands if they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman. If Rob Portman doesn’t run, all the GOP candidates’ hands may promptly shoot heavenward.

What the GOP needs to do is kick the Christofascists to the curb.  They are declining in numbers as older bigots literally die off and if the GOP were to throw social issues off of its agenda, it is possible that sane voters might consider returning to the GOP fold.  That isn't going to happen as long as Tony Perkins and similar hate group leaders are writing the GOP platform.

Elderly CPAC Attendees and Pastors Attack Portman

In a post this morning I looked at the stunning but welcomed reversal of Ohio Senator Robert Portman on the issue of gay marriage.  Another post also looked at the growing strains between the younger conservatives and the Bible thumping older crowd at CPAC on social issues.  Think Progress spoke with some of the latter set and not surprisingly, the spittle was flying and Portman was under attack.  Particular telling were the comments of an 88 year old bitch woman who blamed Portman for his son's sexual orientation:

WASHINGTON, DC — Sen. Rob Portman’s (R-OH) decision to support marriage equality was not warmly received at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Friday.

ThinkProgress spoke with 10 attendees about the Ohio Senator’s announcement this week that he was reversing course and backing marriage equality after his own son came out of the closet. Every person we spoke with opposed same-sex marriage, and many had harsh words for Portman.

“Horrible!” said Tony Mele, an 88-year-old woman from New Jersey, of Portman’s decision. When told he did so because of his gay son, she responded, “That’s his fault! He gets no sympathy from me.” A pastor from Georgia, William Temple, told Portman to “quit being so selfish as to only think about his son,” and if he won’t reverse himself, “to step down and go home.” Another pastor, Rev. Robert Lancia, dismissed Portman’s point that we should treat each other according to the Golden Rule: “That doesn’t cover it.” One man, David Kern, even said Portman’s son’s choice of college turned him gay. “Well what did Sen. Portman expect when he sent his son to Yale?”

These people are horrible and certainly fit the mold of the Pharisees that Christ so roundly condemned in the Gospels. Yet, these old bats and hate merchants wonder why the Christian brand has become toxic with the younger generations.  These people are walking, talking advertisements as to why one should flee screaming from Christianity.

GOP Senator Rob Portman Comes Out for Marriage Equality After His Son Comes Out

One can just imagine the shrieks and convulsions at NOM and FRC over GOP Senator Bob Portman's announcement that he now supports gay marriage.  An equal heresy is that Portman now appears to also believe that being gay is not a choice and is not something one can change regardless of the snake oil peddled by the "ex-gay for pay" crowd.  What brought about Portman's epiphany?  His college age son came out as gay and, wonderfully, Portman and his wife listened to their son and chose to stand by him rather than kick him to the curb as far to many "godly Christian" parents continue to do with their gay children.  Kudos to Portman.  And kudos to his son for his courage as well.  CNN has details.  Here are highlights:

[Sen. Rob Portman}  .  .  .  .  the prominent Ohio conservative will be known for something else: reversing his hardline position against gay marriage.  He invited CNN to his Senate office to reveal the news.

"I'm announcing today a change of heart on an issue that a lot of people feel strongly about that has to do with gay couples' opportunity to marry," Portman told CNN.

It has to do with another revelation, one deeply personal. His 21-year-old son, Will, is gay.

"I've come to the conclusion that for me, personally, I think this is something that we should allow people to do, 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," said Portman.

Will Portman told his father and mother he is gay two years ago, when he was a freshman at Yale University.

"My son came to Jane, my wife, and I, told us that he was gay, and that it was not a choice, and that it's just part of who he is, and that's who he'd been that way for as long as he could remember,

And complete surprise. He told CNN that he never suspected that his son was gay.

What was the Republican senator's reaction?  "Love. Support," responded Portman.  And complete surprise. He told CNN that he never suspected that his son was gay.

Portman says his son, now a junior in college, helped him work through his decision to announce his change in position on gay marriage and blessed the idea of publicly announcing Will Portman's sexuality.

"I think he's happy and, you know, proud that we've come to this point, but he let it be my decision just as you know, it's going to be his decision as to the role he plays going forward in this whole issue," said Portman.

Asked about why he is announcing this change of heart, since his son revealed it to him two years ago, Portman cited two reasons. He just recently became comfortable with his decision to shift his position on gay marriage, and also he said he knew the Supreme Court is considering a pair of gay marriage cases, and reporters would likely ask him for his position.

"I thought it was the right time to let folks know where I stand so there's no confusion, so I would be clear about it," said Portman.

Portman has also authored an op-ed in the Columbus Dispatch entitled "Gay couples also deserve chance to get married."  Here are some excerpts:

I have come to believe that if two people are prepared to make a lifetime commitment to love and care for each other in good times and in bad, the government shouldn’t deny them the opportunity to get married.

That isn’t how I’ve always felt. As a congressman, and more recently as a senator, I opposed marriage for same-sex couples. Then something happened that led me to think through my position in a much deeper way.

Two years ago, my son Will, then a college freshman, told my wife, Jane, and me that he is gay. He said he’d known for some time, and that his sexual orientation wasn’t something he chose; it was simply a part of who he is. Jane and I were proud of him for his honesty and courage. We were surprised to learn he is gay but knew he was still the same person he’d always been. The only difference was that now we had a more complete picture of the son we love.

I wrestled with how to reconcile my Christian faith with my desire for Will to have the same opportunities to pursue happiness and fulfillment as his brother and sister. Ultimately, it came down to the Bible’s overarching themes of love and compassion and my belief that we are all children of God.

British Prime Minister David Cameron has said he supports allowing gay couples to marry because he is a conservative, not in spite of it. I feel the same way. We conservatives believe in personal liberty and minimal government interference in people’s lives. We also consider the family unit to be the fundamental building block of society. We should encourage people to make long-term commitments to each other and build families, so as to foster strong, stable communities and promote personal responsibility.

One way to look at it is that gay couples’ desire to marry doesn't amount to a threat but rather a tribute to marriage, and a potential source of renewed strength for the institution.

Over the past decade, nine states and the District of Columbia have recognized marriage for same-sex couples. It is understandable to feel cautious about making a major change to such an important social institution, but the experience of the past decade shows us that marriage for same-sex couples has not undercut traditional marriage. In fact, over the past 10 years, the national divorce rate has declined.

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.

It is noteworthy to me that Portman focused on God's supposed love for all people.  It's a concept devoid from the mindset of the Christofascists who are best defined by who they hate: virtually everyone but themselves.  Portman still has more evolving to do such as embracing ENDA and protecting LGBT Americans from being fired simply because who they are.  Religious based hate and bigotry have no place in the work place. But at least Portman has begun the journey. 

.