Should we disqualify politicians who had to "evolve" on marriage equality?

[Jim Lane]

34. You may be right about the Democrats. I was thinking specifically of Rob Portman.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), once a staunch opponent of gay marriage, says that he now supports same-sex nuptials after his son told him he was gay.

“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 said, according to CNN.

(from "Rob Portman backs gay marriage after son comes out", March 15, 2013)

I don't think Portman was awaiting that change in public opinion. I think he was genuinely and sincerely a bigot who really did evolve, but only when he found out that the issue reached into his own family.

As a result, I rank him ahead of those who are still opposed to marriage equality, but behind those who saw and espoused the fairness in the issue even when they had no personal connection to it.

You're referring to Democrats who saw the justice from the beginning, but who held back from a leadership role until it became politically safe. How to rank Portman vis-a-vis those Democrats is left as an exercise for the reader.