Prior to the selection of Paul Ryan, I expected Portman to be the vice presidential nominee. I thought that because Ohio was so critical to the outcome of the 2012 presidential election, Romney would want to maximize his chances in the state with an Ohio running mate. There were polls in Ohio that indicated that Portman would have helped Romney win the state. At the time, however, I was not aware that Portman had a gay son.
Given Romney's profound homophobia, I would not be the least bit surprised if Portman was rejected as a running mate because of his gay son. While I personally don't think this would have changed the outcome of the election, there is always that possibility. Which means it is conceivable that Romney's (and the Republican Party's) hatred of gays cost them the 2012 election.
It is probable that, despite majority American support for gay rights, half of America's legislators will continue to oppose such legislation aggressively.
The fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives is that liberals support legislation for the common good, while conservatives support legislation for themselves.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with advocating on behalf of oneself. But Republicans seem incapable of seeing any viewpoint beyond their own self-interest, and have insisted (in recent years) that they cannot compromise their own interest for the public good.
It is remarkably selfish.