Should we celebrate this change of heart or what?

I'm glad he accepts his son; not all parents of gay children do the same. On the face of it, I like that he was willing to examine his long-held beliefs, and change them. But I'll be interested to see if his voting/policy decisions change after this.

If I was just a little more of a curmudgeon I'd write a letter to the editor.

You should totally write a letter to the editor! What better task for when you're bored at work?

Should we celebrate this change of heart or what?

I sort of feel the same way I did about the pope -- I guess that's better than it could have been, but not great. I saw a great comment on tumblr along the lines of, "So now we just need them to have a relative who works hard and is still poor."

I think we should wait and see. I want to be positive and say that it took him a while to re examine his beliefs and to come to support gay marriage and not think he put it off because of political reasons.

Although this could hurt him politically and he could have just kept silent. Or he could have continued to oppose gay marriage.

Should we celebrate this change of heart or what?

As someone I saw on Twitter just said, "Great! Now we just need a Republican legislator to realize that his daughter is a woman."

On a more serious note, I do think it's remarkably petty and parochial to only approve equal treatment when a member of your own family is being oppressed. Better than nothing, but it's not exactly an example of great moral courage on his part.

You should totally write a letter to the editor! What better task for when you're bored at work?

That is true, but I'm afraid that if I do that they'll start delivering their paper to me again, and that's a hassle I don't need.

I do think it's remarkably petty and parochial to only approve equal treatment when a member of your own family is being oppressed.

See, people keep saying this, and then I feel like an asshole for being glad that he's supporting his son. I don't think he's suddenly become an awesome politician, so if the question is about him as a Senator, well, his record is shitty, and I await future decisions to see if this makes any difference.

But I think it's fantastic that he supports his son.

I guess I'm focusing on the wrong thing. Oh well.

It may be great for him as a person to be supportive of his son; however, unless that directly impacts how he votes from this point onward I feel no obligation to extend him professional respect.

Dear co-workers, if you can't figure out what a document refers to because you think the information on it is incomplete, why do you think sending me just one piece of information from the whole document will be enough to let me figure it out?

This kind of reminds me of people who lose their faith in God because a loved one dies unexpectedly. People's loved ones die unexpectedly all the time, so it seems weird to me when it only affects people's faith when it happens to them.

Steph, you're totally correct that he should be supporting his son. But you know, that's like, the baseline. That should be expected. I shouldn't have to give the guy a cookie for supporting his son. He's his son, after all.

Supporting your gay son should not be worthy of comment, you know?

In other news, I read this amazing story about the artifacts that people leave at the Wall in DC: [link]