Liberals' reaction to Portman shows they don't understand conservatives -- or empathy

Posted Tuesday, Mar. 19, 2013  comments  Print Reprints
A

Have more to add? News tip? Tell us

WASHINGTON -- Hypocrite. Narcissist. Wingnut. Bigot. Those are some of the epithets -- not counting the expletives -- that have been hurled at Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, since he announced Friday that he now supports same-sex marriage because his son is gay. But these epithets aren't coming from the right. They're coming from the left.

According to liberal columnists and bloggers, Portman's conversion -- the first on this issue by any Republican senator -- is too little, too late, and short on "empathy." But it isn't Portman who has an empathy problem. It's his critics. They don't understand Portman, conservatives, empathy or how people change.

Portman's detractors claim he "didn't take a stand for ... other people's children" and showed "absolutely no genuine empathy ... for the other approximately 11,699,999 LGBT in the United States."

That isn't true. In an op-ed explaining his conversion, Portman wrote that "all of our sons and daughters ought to have the same opportunity to experience the joy and stability of marriage." He said Congress should repeal the part of the Defense of Marriage Act that denies federal marriage benefits, such as joint tax filing, to legally married same-sex couples.

Portman's critics point out that he voted to prohibit adoptions by gay couples in the District of Columbia and to amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. What they don't mention is that these votes were 14 and nine years ago, respectively. In the evolution of this issue, that's an eternity. Until 10 months ago, no major presidential candidate in either party had endorsed gay marriage.

Portman says his longtime opposition to same-sex marriage "was rooted in my faith tradition." His critics, apparently baffled by religion, ignore this explanation. Instead, they depict his position as an emotional void, concluding that he "did not care about any of the country's gay people."

This insensitivity, in the eyes of Portman's hecklers, explains conservative positions generally.

As Slate's Matthew Yglesias puts it: "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."

The possibility that anyone might limit the food-stamp budget or the government's role in healthcare for reasons other than indifference -- say, a belief in fiscal self-restraint -- goes unmentioned.

The bigger this empathy critique gets -- the more it reaches beyond Portman and his son toward a grand theory of the GOP -- the less it's about empathy. At its core, empathy is one person's feeling for another. That's what gets lost in the political indictments.

"Why must empathy among conservatives be tied so directly to their own personal interactions?" asks one writer.

Another objects that Portman: "was only able to realize the error of his ways when his own flesh and blood bravely stood up and said, 'Hey, you're talking about me too.' That's what it took. None of the studies, the rallies, the protests, the legal victories, the testimonials, the documentaries, articles, books, plays, movies, television shows or anything could sway him ... To me that indicates that there's a pretty thick wall separating his political convictions from the rest of the world."

Really? To me it just confirms that flesh-and-blood relationships are more powerful than studies, rallies or documentaries. That isn't a conservative defect. It's human psychology. It's how President Obama explained his conversion on gay marriage last May.

Where were all these critics then?

Rob Portman's journey, and ours, will take time. Be patient. Be welcoming. Be kind.

William Saletan covers science, technology and politics for Slate.

Twitter: @saletan

Looking for comments?

We welcome your comments on this story, but please be civil. Do not use profanity, hate speech, threats, personal abuse, images, internet links or any device to draw undue attention. Our policy requires those wishing to post here to use their real identity.

Our commenting policy | Facebook commenting FAQ | Why Facebook?