Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who ThinkProgress determined to be the most anti-gay member of the House, wrote an op-ed today in The Washington Times reiterating his opposition to same-sex marriage. In his column, he explains that same-sex marriage will “further the destruction of the family,” because same-sex couples and their children aren’t even families at all:

President Obama and I have very different notions of what a family is. For liberals, the family can apparently be everything from “Heather Has Two Mommies” to “Daddy’s Roommate” to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s “It Takes a Village.” In the opinion of electoral majorities in Kansas and 40 other states, however, that does not a family make. [...]

Redefining marriage to remove parents of both sexes from the equation would further the destruction of the family, the most fundamental building block of society. If that definition is changed by the court, the purpose of marriage devolves to mere recognition of an emotional union. In so doing, the children of America will be shortchanged — and the will of the American people would be once again short-circuited by black robes in Washington.

Huelskamp cites “overwhelming social science evidence” that claims opposite-sex parents are better than same-sex parents, even though the actual consensus among social scientists supports same-sex parenting. To his credit, he honestly admits his belief in antiquated gender norms, suggesting “there are differing parenting styles between men and women and that children deserve both.” Of course, in doing so he relies on claims about “fatherlessness,” an argument that relies on research about single mothers to fraudulently draw conclusions about same-sex parents.

With same-sex couples raising children across the country, including 22 percent of couples in his home state of Kansas, it’s unclear what Huelskamp would call these households if not “families,” assuming he even acknowledges their existence.

NATIONAL HARBOR, Maryland — Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) attacked Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) for supporting marriage equality at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) on Friday.

Speaking in a sideroom, Huelskamp blasted Portman’s announcement this week that he has evolved to favor same-sex marriage two years after learning his own son was gay. “Here’s a senator who couldn’t deliver his own home state in the presidential election,” Huelskamp said dismissively. He continued, “somehow, we’re supposed to believe that if we abandon traditional marriage, that liberals are going to flock to us,” calling Portman’s position a “capitulation.”

ThinkProgress asked Huelskamp whether he would re-examine his own feelings on marriage equality if it turned out he had a gay son like Portman, but the Kansas Republican was unmoved by the prospect. “I support traditional marriage,” Huelskamp simply retorted.

KEYES: Do you have a sense on, if it were your son who came out and told you that he was gay, how you would react to that announcement?

HUELSKAMP: Well, I agree with Sen. Portman when he ran for election. And that’s the principle. The principle is, traditional marriage and family is the foundation of society. It’s been a conservative bedrock principle for many years. And one thing that we have to do as conservatives, I believe, is actually communicate the value of marriage and family for the children. [...] Bill Clinton and myself, Bill Clinton in 1997 had the same position I have today. Actually Barack Obama had the same position two years ago. Isn’t it amazing how you read the tea leaves, you read the polls, and at the end of the day something suddenly changes over night?

KEYES: So, to clarify, you would still oppose same-sex marriage even if your own son came out?

HUELSKAMP: I support traditional marriage.

Watch it:

For the past two years, House Republicans have attempted to use the National Defense Authorization Act to solidify some anti-gay principles into military codes, including a ban on same-sex weddings on military bases, a “license to bully” that encouraged anti-gay harassment, and redundant conscience protections for military chaplains. Some of these conscience protections advanced in the final version of the bill this past fall, and Obama criticized them in a signing statement, calling them “unnecessary” and “ill-advised.” Now, Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) is once again trying to enshrine discrimination into the nation’s military.

His new bill, H.R. 914, the “Military Religious Freedom Protection Act,” contains more redundant protections for military chaplains, ensuring — as is already the case — that they cannot be penalized if their religious beliefs are not pro-gay. What seems evident is that those redundancies are simply a guise for the last little provision in the bill: a ban on same-sex marriages on military bases:

A military installation or other property owned, rented, or otherwise under the jurisdiction or control of the Department of Defense shall not be used to officiate, solemnize, or perform a marriage or marriage-like ceremony involving anything other than the union of one man with one woman.

Furthermore, if there is any concern that chaplains’ consciences are not already protected, it seems that these reiterated provisions could only serve to protect outright anti-LGBT harassment.

In the year after Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was repealed, only two individuals — both chaplains — left the military in protest. Nothing about this bill supports the military or its members.

As momentum for LGBT employment nondiscrimination protections increases, conservatives have begun to retaliate, claiming such policies somehow create special privileges for LGBT people. Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), one of the most anti-gay members of Congress, made just such a claim on Tony Perkins’ radio show on Tuesday. According to Huelskamp, equal protections under the law for gays and lesbians are “radical ideas” that “selectively reward homosexual behavior”:

HUELSKAMP: The response from the general leadership is: gosh, we can’t talk about social issues. But the President can? Someone has to stand up and defend the seventy percent position that most Americans support traditional marriage, most Americans understand the value of family, they understand it’s under attack and they understand that, they see it, they believe it. So we got to stand up. I’ve always been confused by Republicans that refuse to support a seventy percent position and say, ‘gosh we can’t take our stand there.’ But whether it’s Obamacare, whether it’s these radical DoD [Department of Defense] proposals coming out of the White House or changing all the employment rules to specifically and selectively reward homosexual behavior, those are really radical ideas and most Americans do not accept them.

So we’ll have an opportunity to hear from the President but again don’t forget he is a lame duck President, he’s not running for election again and I think this could be the most radical we’ll hear from him in a long time because it is Obama unleashed. We’re going to hear tonight probably exactly what he would like to do and he promised he’s going to change America and he’s still after that agenda and that goal.

Listen to it (via RightWingWatch):

A “reward” implies something special or extra that other people are not entitled to. The only “reward” of employment protections for gay people is getting to keep their jobs. Granting benefits to the same-sex partners of military servicemembers does not create “a new class of beneficiary” as the Family Research Council claimed on Tuesday; the only reason there is a separate class is because some families are still treated different than others.

It’s clear that opponents of equality would prefer that the LGBT community remain second-class citizens. When they object to basic nondiscrimination protections, the special “reward” they’re afraid of is fairness under the law.

Last month, ThinkProgress identified seven U.S. Representatives — all Republicans — who have sponsored or co-sponsored the most anti-LGBT measures in the current Congress.

Reps. Todd Akin (R-MO), Dan Burton (R-IN), Phil Gingrey (R-GA), Vicky Hartzler (R-MO), Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), Doug Lamborn (R-CO), and Donald Manzullo (R-IL) have received a combined $664,894 from ten business PACs — five from otherwise strongly pro-LGBT companies and five from trade associations — since the start of the 2009-2010 campaign cycle.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) publishes an annual Corporate Equality Index, examining how businesses treat gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees. The companies connected to the five business PACs all earned high marks in the 2012 report: Northrop Grumman Corporation earned a 75 score (out of 100), Honeywell International and The Boeing Company each earned 85 scores, and AT&T Inc. and Lockheed Martin Corporation garnered perfect 100 ratings.

While HRC does not evaluate trade associations, the American Bankers Association, American Society of Anesthesiologists, and National Association of Realtors all have non-discrimination policies for LGBT employees. Read more