Pawlenty plays it safe — but smart — on homosexuality

posted at 6:35 pm on July 10, 2011 by Tina Korbe

GOP presidential hopeful and former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty said today he’s not sure whether homosexuality is genetic or behavioral. Political Ticker reports:

“As I understand the science, there’s no current conclusion that it’s genetic,” Pawlenty said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Saying he preferred to “defer to the scientists” about the issue, the former Minnesota governor said it was unclear if being gay or lesbian was a lifestyle choice.

“There’s no scientific conclusion that it’s genetic. We don’t know that. So, we don’t know to what extent it’s behavioral,” Pawlenty said. “That’s something that has been debated by scientists for a long time.”

T-Paw didn’t pass on the chance to reiterate his support for traditional marriage, however. He phrased his views positively, emphasizing that he is a proponent of marriage between one man and one woman and saying simply, “I have not supported the issues of allowing gay couples to have the same benefits in public employment as traditional couples.”

Political Ticker and other news outlets framed Pawlenty’s remarks as a “punt,” but, from where I sit, he answered the question the only way he could have. So far, science has not conclusively established homosexuality as a genetic predisposition. Given that Pawlenty presumably disapproves of gay behavior, what did he have to gain by either absolving gay couples of responsibility for that behavior or blatantly accusing them of poor choices?

Conversely, he did have something to gain by making a statement in support of traditional marriage — an institution his base likewise values and wants to see protected. (Keep in mind just 28 percent of Republicans think same-sex marriage should be legal and just 25 percent of conservatives hold that view.) Perhaps Pawlenty played it safe, but, primarily, he played it smart.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

You identify yourself as someone who gains pleasure from exploring the alimentary canal of others. The natural purpose of which is to dispel waste from the human body. Please explain how that can be anything but dysfunctional and abnormal.

peacenprosperity on July 11, 2011 at 9:25 AM

two things

1) explain lesbians – go for it. id love to hear it.

2) I like how you totally ignore the fact a lot of straight men are turned on by anal sex, too..

triple on July 11, 2011 at 12:45 PM

in fact id say most men are turned on by doing it in the poop chute

triple on July 11, 2011 at 12:47 PM

1) explain lesbians – go for it. id love to hear it.

2) I like how you totally ignore the fact a lot of straight men are turned on by anal sex, too..

triple on July 11, 2011 at 12:45 PM

And women.

Predicted response: “Well, they’re dysfunctional, too.”

Good Lt on July 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Predicted response: “Well, they’re dysfunctional, too.”

Good Lt on July 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Pfft. Every other time a serious gay thread gets going, this place turns from a blog into Dysfunction Junction.

Uncle Sams Nephew on July 11, 2011 at 2:10 PM

No where on this post or any similar post onj HA have I ever read anyone encouraging the rights of homosexuals be taken away or for homosexuals to be persecuted in any way. Those espousing the homosexual agenda here always turn it that way and turn the conversation into something it isn’t. Their tactics and positions are understandable because the debate effects thier self-esteem and identify directly so they will reach for whatever weapon that is available to protect thier psyche. What is very interesting, though, is the self described conservatives or libertarians who come to thier side and aid in those tactics and actually fight against the rights of those with different opinions and facts to state thier case. pbundy equates using the words abnormal and dysfunctional as wanting to take away someones rights.

peacenprosperity on July 11, 2011 at 3:33 PM

pbundy equates using the words abnormal and dysfunctional as wanting to take away someones rights.

peacenprosperity on July 11, 2011 at 3:33 PM

If you offer legal rights, opportunities and protections to heterosexual couples, yet deny these same rights to gay couples, it does seem to me that you are taking away their rights.

I can understand not calling gay partnerships “marriage.” But I cannot understand not allowing gay couples to create the same legal construct with civil unions. Frankly, however, I side with those who believe that marriage should be the purview of religion, and that the government should only be in the “civil union” business.

pbundy on July 11, 2011 at 3:47 PM

HA commenters never fail to disappoint when it comes to the gay threads! Glad we have JetBoy around…

ggoofer on July 12, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Cultural affects can be powerful influences, granted, but that also is how behaviors, even damaging and abnormal ones, can be construed to be acceptable, using various cultural/socio-political propaganda.

Lourdes on July 10, 2011 at 8:37 PM

You give far too much power to nurture over nature. If it is all as you say cultural and socio-political propaganda, why does homosexuality occur in relatively similar proportions in far stricter, more oppressive and potentially lethal societies, such as Iran?

Most attributes more or less follow a bell-curve distribution. There are hyper heterosexuals on one end, and homosexuals on the other.

John the Libertarian on July 12, 2011 at 12:54 AM

Why cant two gay guys or women for that matter go to a lawyer and have a contract drawn up with each other giving each other power of attorney, at the same time make a medical directive and a will giving each other medical power of attorney? And no, I dont have a problem with that.

abcurtis on July 12, 2011 at 10:07 AM

pbundy on July 11, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Yeah,, and when government approves same sex marriage, which it will, YOU’LL be so happy government made the right choice and is now on your side. You only want government out of it now because same sex marriage is illegal in most states.

abcurtis on July 12, 2011 at 10:11 AM

pbundy on July 11, 2011 at 3:47 PM
Yeah,, and when government approves same sex marriage, which it will, YOU’LL be so happy government made the right choice and is now on your side. You only want government out of it now because same sex marriage is illegal in most states.

abcurtis on July 12, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Uh, actually not. I prefer to have the government out of the morality business. Whether or not gay people should be able to marry should be up to religions. The government can decide to give certain benefits to two consenting adults in civil unions, partnerships with children – whatever we judge to be best. But, the moniker of “marriage” should not be up to the government.

If you believe, however, that I think allowing all adults to marry, irrespective of race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. in contrast to our current laws then, yes; you are correct. But what I stated is my real preference.

pbundy on July 12, 2011 at 11:32 AM

But I cannot understand not allowing gay couples to create the same legal construct with civil unions.

What right does marriage give normal people that two homosexuals can’t go to a lawyer and have a binding contract created?

peacenprosperity on July 12, 2011 at 12:06 PM

But what I stated is my real preference.

Your real preference is to be enlightened and compassionate and ultimately politically correct.

peacenprosperity on July 12, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Glad we have JetBoy around…
ggoofer on July 12, 2011 at 12:12 AM

jetboy is usually on the opposite side from true conservative positions. You identify your own ideological bent with that statement.

peacenprosperity on July 12, 2011 at 12:15 PM

jetboy is usually on the opposite side from the homophobic bullcrap I call a ‘position’.

warnpoverty on July 12, 2011 at 12:15 PM

FTFY.

Uncle Sams Nephew on July 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Uncle Sams Nephew on July 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM

The liberal speaks.

peacenprosperity on July 12, 2011 at 4:58 PM

But I cannot understand not allowing gay couples to create the same legal construct with civil unions.
What right does marriage give normal people that two homosexuals can’t go to a lawyer and have a binding contract created?

peacenprosperity on July 12, 2011 at 12:06 PM

And what if someone said to you, peacenprosperity, “You will have to go to a lawyer to get the same rights that others do because you are a: christian/jew/black/asian/senior citizen/fill-in-the-blank”? I assume you’d be outraged. Irrespective of religion or race or age (assuming one is not a minor) we expect to have the same rights as others. Forcing some to go to an attorney and others not is taking away civil rights.

My real preference is to be fair to people. From your many posts, obviously you think that there is something wrong with people who are gay, or follow the “gay lifestyle”, etc. Others of us do not care about the sexual orientation of our friends, neighbors and relatives – like me.

My entire life, I have never been able to figure out why some are so consumed with the sex life of other consenting adults.

pbundy on July 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM

No where on this post or any similar post on HA have I ever read anyone encouraging the rights of homosexuals be taken away or for homosexuals to be persecuted in any way. Those espousing the homosexual agenda here always turn it that way and turn the conversation into something it isn’t.

Exactly. This is not a civil-rights issue, contrary to what the homosexual lobby wants people to think.
Keep in mind, people, that we are not talking about people who are not allowed to vote, are hanged by lynch mobs, or who can’t drink from the same water fountain as straight people. We are talking about people who want to have sex with members of their own gender. Wow, that is sooooo important./s

Their tactics and positions are understandable because the debate effects thier self-esteem and identify directly so they will reach for whatever weapon that is available to protect thier psyche.

Another exactly. The homosexual lobby will stop at nothing to try to normalize their behavior to the general public. Which is why they have infiltrated our public schools to “get” kids indoctrinated while they are still too young to understand what is going on. And if all you homosexual activists or active supporters can be that insidious and still sleep at night, then you are either ignorant of what you are doing, or are more evil than I thought.
But back to the quoted comment. Homosexuals need to force acceptance of their lifestyle(through deception and laws) because if they can normalize(or give the appearance of normalization) their lifestyle to the general public, then it is easier to trick themselves into thinking that how they are living is natural and normal. Of which it is neither. We know it, and they know it. That is why they just can’t “be” homosexual.

Sterling Holobyte on July 13, 2011 at 1:32 AM

pbundy on July 12, 2011 at 5:31 PM

You make absolutely no sense and are only stringing together words that make you feel good. I get very afraid when I think people with your lack of reason, logic and common sense are allowed to have driver licenses.

peacenprosperity on July 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3