Rick Santorum Has Tense Exchange on Gay Rights and Health Care in Iowa

I’m not sure when I’ve seen a person so absolutely obsessed with homosexuality. (It makes a person wonder, doesn’t it?) Yeah, life would totally suck for Rick if he had to treat gay Americans as equal members of society. Of course, Rick doesn’t know any gay people personally, but that doesn’t stop him from frothing at the mouth about how gays are going to take over every facet of your life if our government doesn’t discriminate against them. I love how he creates all of these horrific slippery-slope arguments to validate his obvious bigotry. Are states with marriage equality required to teach straight teens all about gay sex? Of course not. But that doesn’t stop Rick from lying about it. As for telling kids that gay people really do exist, have families just like their parents, and sometimes marry each other, I seriously doubt that that real-world information is going to traumatize them. Especially when most kids already know someone who is gay: a family member, relative, friend, neighbor, teacher, etc. If you treat sexual orientation like the non-issue that it is, then it actually becomes a non-issue.

I am totally impressed with Santorum now. His answers and arguments are spot on! People are getting tired of having stupid race and gender issues forced down their throats. Christians are the first to admit to their level of hypocrisy!

“And they don’t go to the emergency room or they don’t go to the doctor when they need to,” he said. “And it’s not the fault of the government for not providing some sort of universal benefit.”

So I guess Rick supports free health care for the uninsured and the poor. Because when they don’t have health care coverage and they go to the ER anyway, someone still has to pay the bills. Right now, it’s all of us who ARE insured…….

Santorum is cruel in his crusade to shut gay families out of the protection and dignity of marriage. Millions of children are currently being raised by committed gay couples in this country and by treating their families as second class, people like Santorum do them very real harm. I am pro family and pro child, ALL families and all children, not just those who look like mine. Santorum needs to stop letting his personal prejudice make life more difficult for these families, especially in these trying times.

Searambler, it’s worse than that. In the thinking of people like Santorum, when the uninsured go to the ER for healthcare they can’t pay for, they’re “leaching off society” and when they don’t go, they’re “making poor healthcare decisions and it’s their fault if they die as a result.”

Santorum is obsessed with “man on dog.”

God is CLEAR on the subject matter. Leviticus 18:22, “And you must not lie down with a male the same as you lie down with a woman. It is a detestable thing.”
Posted by: Bonnie | December 6, 2011, 8:52 am.

Leviticus ALSO states adulterers shall be killed. So why hasn’t Santorum killed Newt? Newt is an admitted adulterer. Santorum is a true believer. Why hasn’t Santorum done god’s will?

Seven states and our nation’s capitol have had legal marriage equality for gay families for years and none of what Santorum predicts has happened. He is desperate to justify his bigotry but he is fooling no one, probably not even himself anymore. Freedom and equality are the American way, regardless of certain people’s desire to discriminate against people they judge unworthy of equality. Shame on Santorum.

“Santorum then said that if same sex marriage was legalized then “their sexual activity” would be seen as “equal” to heterosexual relationships and it would be taught in schools.”

LOL! This guy is REALLY hung up on the ‘nuts and bolts’ of gay sex. (No pun intended).

If you want a good laugh, go to google and type in ‘santorum’…..

@Bonnie

Funny how the Christian Reich immediately remembers that one verse, but at the same time seems to forget that in the same book (practically in the same breath) that eating shell fish, pork, and eating meat on Fridays were also detestable and right up there with God’s Rage-O-Meter with gay sex. I do not believe in the Christian god, just for the simple fact that everything in the bible, much like any other religion, was designed to create certain behaviors to ensure survival and explain the mysteries of our world and beyond. Ultimately, men died from gay sex in those days because no one understood that an anus wasn’t as strong as a vagina. Hence, why it is detestable. Same went for eating “unclean” animals such as shell fish and pig.

Regardless of what you think, your god is your god, and has no bearing on anyone else outside of your religious circle. This has to be doubly true of politicians, since Church and State are separate and government shall make no law recognizing (read: giving authority to or enforcing doctrine of) any religion.

Plus, it’s hypocritical to clamor for small government but then go out of the way to ensure a subset of the population has no rights.

Bonnie, you aren’t allowed to preach in public or to men by virtue of your female gender. Your ‘God’, in the Bible demands that you be SILENT. Why do you keep violating ‘God’s’ law, as given to us in 1 Tim 2:12? Do you think you’re above doing as ‘God’ demands? Since you’re such a Biblical scholar, I’m sure you know what the required punishment for that crime is. I’m betting you think that’s not okay and that you don’t have to comply with God’s law on this, right?

Response: Galatians 3:27,28, “For all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one (person) in union with Christ Jesus.”

Bonnie, you do realize that our country does not force its citizens to follow any one religion, right? If we start making laws based on religion, Jews will want to outlaw eating pork and Muslims will want to require women to cover their entire bodies when outside. Luckily we have freedom of religion in this country. If you believe gay marriage is a sin, then don’t get married to a woman. However, don’t think you have the right to dictate how other families live their lives based on your personal beliefs.

Bonnie, the issue I have with ‘Christians’ such as yourself, is that you pick and choose what you want out of the Bible. I too have a few passages from the Bible that I would very much like to hear your comments on. For example: Leviticus 25:44, I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. Does that mean I can own a slave from both Mexico and Canada? How about Exodus 21:7, I am able to sell my daughter into slavery. Tell me Bonnie, how much are daughters going for in todays market? Exodus 35:2, Working on the Sabbath is a sin and by doing so you shall be put to death. I have to ask, how should we eliminate all the people who work at malls, restaurants, gas stations, grocery stores, DISNEY WORLD, etc., etc., etc.? Do we gather them all in one place and drop a bomb on them or do we take them out, one by one? Leviticus 11:10, Eating shellfish is an abomination. Now Bonnie, I gather from your comment that you definitely think that homosexuality is an abomination. Tell me, does the Bible have different degrees of abomination? If so, please explain to me what they are. And how about Leviticus 19:19? I am sure you wear two different kinds of thread; meaning you most like wear a cotton/polyester blend. According to the Bible, you are not to do this. How should you be dealt with for going against the Word of God? Should you be smited? Should you be ridiculed every where you go? Should people look down on you and think of you as a lesser person? You see Bonnie, the problem I have with you and yours, is that you only talk about what passages in the Bible seem to please you. You and yours are hipocrites to think that these other passages don’t exist. You see, you are as sinful, if not more so (by casting the first stone), as those people that you think deserve less than what America offers to everyone else. You and Rick Santorum are not preaching the Bible, you are preaching your hate. If you can honestly tell me that you revere the Bible and all it states, then please Bonnie, answer the questions that I have provided.

You have to cut these theocracy supporters off when they start yammering on about “God’s law” and somehow thinking we, as a nation with a Civil Government, should be a nation bound by Biblical law.

The minute someone starts in with me that “God said this or that” against decent and wonderful LGBT people I shut them down by reminding them, we are not a theocracy, and that overused verse from Leviticus has absolutely zero influence on determining the level of rights of our decent and wonderful LGBT citizens. End of story. No more discussion. Over and done. It’s a Civil Law matter, and for that, we as a nation don’t care what Leviticus has to say on the subject.

I reject that number completely, that people die in America because of lack of health insurance,—LOL!! Ha! Yeah, People dont die from being sick. Naaahhh. Never happens.

Is Santorum still running for President? Why?

Bonnie, did you notice that in your last comment, you weren’t quoting the Bible?

That’s because in most Christian traditions “authentic baptism” does not require “absolute obedience to His Father, Almighty God”. Do you know so little about your faith that you don’t even understand that groups which believe this about baptism, such as the Churches of Christ, are very much the minority view within Christianity? Or do you just think that your understanding of Christianity is the only one that counts?

Catholics and mainline Protestants might be interested to know that in your America, their view of God and Christianity isn’t “authentic”.

And I’m sure we would all like to know in what other ways you’d like civil law to be shaped by the beliefs of your preferred church.

Why is he worried about what will be taught in schools as far as sex? What school did he go to that was that graphic? What is taught is the reproductive process so obviously legalizing same sex marriages will not affect curriculum unless I have missed the latest science article and some how two people of the same sex can not reproduce?

Frankly Bonnie, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. Which was clearly unwarranted. Steve M. (and others) very aptly explain why. You’re still running your mouth (despite bing a woman).

And this line of conversation really misses the point. The constitution (which is another area where y’all like to cherry pick depending on the debate) says that you can believe whatever you want. But so can I. And in this country, the government doesn’t get to say that either of us is right. So it comes down to a civil rights thing. You can be a bigot all you want, but the basis of your bigotry cannot be the basis for any laws in this country.

And I can still read your Leviticus quote as Christ Jesus embracing everyone (including the gays ;)

“The best thing to give to your enemy is forgiveness; to an opponent, tolerance; to a friend, your heart; to your child, a good example; to a father, deference; to your mother, conduct that will make her proud of you; to yourself, respect; to all men, charity. “………………Ben Franklin

“I provide the word of God strictly for…” ~~~~~~ Yet, according to the bible, YOU, being a FEMALE, are not allowed to be preaching to anybody in public, let alone to males, and you’ve been willfully disobedient of this particular law repeatedly today, like it somehow doesn’t apply to you. Do you think you know better than ‘God’? By your own words, you acknowledge that those who are willfully disobedient are not authentically baptized and that ‘God’ doesn’t allow you to pick and choose what laws to follow but requires instead ‘absolute obedience.’ So, why do you, a mere female, continue to disobey your Almighty God by preaching to men in public?

(In case anyone missed my earlier post, I’m calling Bonnie out on her hypocrisy and don’t believe women are inferior to men or don’t have every right to speak their minds in public. Those ideas are a product of the times they were written. Maybe Bonnie will eventually grasp just how unjust a lot of that kind of Biblical nonsense is.)

If you rely on logic and not just emotions, Santorum is right on with his comments. Those who favor same-sex marriage often don’t follow through on their logic in terms of what the implications will mean for society in the future. If you allow same sex marriage with the same legal rights as heterosexual marriage (because the two individuals say the love each other) what could be the possible argument against allowing three people to be married out of “love” or two or three sibs, or two people and a dog or … There would be no rational reason that couldn’t be considered arbitrary for disallowing these other variations. Ultimately, the logic for heteresexual marriage is based on what is good for society, just like many of our laws. And many of these key laws are based on “natural law” which unfortunately most people no longer learn about in school.

E.G., since you bring up logic, you might want to google the words “Slippery Slope Fallacy” and learn about how you’re doing it wrong.

JP- I agree, if you believe that gay marriage is against god’s will, then don’t get a gay marriage. The problem is that there are two kinds of marriage, religious and secular. If a religion doesn’t believe that gays should be able to get married, that’s fine, there’s nothing that says that that religion has to acknowledge gay marriages. But the state, which is constitutionally required to be neutral about religion, recognizes marriages as well, and attaches benefits to those marriages. The state has no legitimate government interest in creating laws that classify people based on their sexual preference.

At the same time, people who want to have types of marriages that are recognized by their religion (polygamy comes to mind) should be completely acceptable to the state as well. The state just doesn’t have to formally recognize those types of marriage (I’m thinking polygamous marriages) with the benefits that the state provides because that would, in effect, benefit those people above others, once again drawing a distinction based on sexual preference (or whatever you want to call that).

It’s messy, and honestly, the best solution is for the state (meaning ‘states’ and ‘the nation’) should just not recognize marriage at all. There should be no distinction or preference or recognition given by the state to what is inherently and originally a religious institution.

There should be no distinction or preference or recognition given by the state to what is inherently and originally a religious institution.
Posted by: Matt | December 6, 2011, 11:35 am.

Originally, marriage was a business transaction, an economic institution. “You want to marry my daughter? Give me ten goats”. Neither love nor religion was at the root of marriage. It was all business. It was also a means of ensuring the propagation of the species at a time in the world when that assurance was needed, because there weren’t very many people on earth. Today, with 7 BILLION humans on the planet, the need to ensure the survival of the species through marriage simply is not there.

“…if we believe that saying gay marriage or sex is acceptable to our society then we have failed in our duties as Christians.” ———- Why should a secular legal system write into law what one particular religious sect out of many feels is their duty to impose on others?

Come on people, give Bonnie a break. She is probably an old grandma who has never met a Gay person, or who have Gay grandchildren still in the closet. Be compassionate. By being harsh, we have stooped to a lower level of thinking. Most anti-Gay people are really quite unmovable to their judgments because of a negative personal experience. I pray, they will meet nice, down to earth, God believing, Gay people soon (Praise God, they are free to be who they are in large numbers, now), who will be able to give them a different perspective of Gays, and end their present judgments.

God created Gays for God’s reasons. Curb the world’s overpopulation, find loving parents for children abandoned by straights. We need to trust in God’s plan.

We could all work together, both Gay and straight to find solutions to homelessness, poverty, and starvation in our nation and the world. These are the concerns Santorum need to focus on.

In regards to Bonnie’s constant quoting of Biblical passages. Sorry, I prefer to live in the 21st century, not the 1st century. You are more than welcome to shut off your electricity, gas, sewer, grow all your own food, herd some sheep, have a life expectancy of 40, and so on, but the vast majority of the rest of the world prefers to live today, rather than live a life centered around some 2,000-year-old etiquette book.

Okay, we’ve already had the debate (if you can call it that) in Canada and it went badly. We never got past the insults and accusations. Here’s the deal: A valid argument against same-sex marriage must begin with the premise that homosexuality is a natural, healthy and moral orientation for some people (many of whom are attractive, articulate and successful). The question then becomes whether homosexual couples are comfortable enough to establish their own independent form of committed relationship or whether they feel compelled to enter a relationship as pretend heterosexuals. To me, the latter is what the existentialist philosophers call “false faith.”

Freedom without responsibility leads to unintended consequences.
Mr. Santorum is expressing his beliefs. You many not agree with them, but at least he has the courage to express how what he believes even when condemned. There are others around that tell you what you want to hear and then go behind your back and say what is in their hearts..and they are the dishonest.
I agree with Mr. Santorum, that if we don’t get our house in order we will continue to pay the price. Our economy is where it is at because people want freedom without responsibility and want to do what they want to do, without consideration of the effects on others. Gay marriage is just one issue, there is a bigger problem with people who take advantage of other in business practices, and people who feel entitled to everything at the expense of others (the working class) and the fact that no one trusts anyone these days and there is no buisiness on a handshake anymore. We want our individual freedoms, but don’t think about the other person and the consequences of actions. Our current president promote blame and negativity, which is now part of the make up of our country. If that is what you want, keep on electing those who tell you what you want to hear. But is you want to see a better country, vote for honesty and integrity.

Our current president promote blame and negativity….
Posted by: Shannon | December 6, 2011, 3:03 pm.

Shannon, spend an hour listening to Rush or Beck or the morning morons on FOX before stating that it’s Obama promoting blame and negativity. The Right Wing has become the Party of Hate………….

I think the commentor who is ‘very impressed’ with rick santorum’s arguements made my day. I haven’t seen a post that funny all year. Thank you

All this back and forth about scripture misses the point. So many of our homegrown zealots wish otherwise, but still, the Bible is not the law of the land. We have a Constitution. It says that all citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law and equal access to legal proceedings. Christians want to pull this over into an argument on their terms, because the arbitrary rules laid down by their (own self-interested interpretation of their) religion are the only terms on which they can try to win an argument; they don’t have much luck convincing people that discrimination is a good thing, so they pretend that the Bible has the force of law instead.

Of course these are the same people that are up in arms over Halal food or any other public expression of Islamic faith, the same people who would lose their minds if anyone proposed that we enact a law in the name of Satanism, Atheism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism or what-have-you. There are plenty of theocratic countries out there, if that’s what you’re looking for — please stop trying to turn the USA into one of them.

That IS hilarious. I’d like to know when the last time Rick Santorum was in the room with a gay couple having sex to make that judgement (LOL!) Or is he speaking from first hand knowledge?

Many of the comments on here are just hypocritical. Saying that Santorum is a bigot, while insulting Christianity is an example of total ignorance.
the only bigots are the people who are obsessed about gay issues and are transferring the obsession onto Santorum. While you are insulting Mr. Santorum, you should take a look in the mirror and see what kind of person you are.

SCOOBIEDOO, why do you think God destroyed a city?

Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. – Ezekiel 16:49

Many of the comments on here are just hypocritical. Saying that Santorum is a bigot, while insulting Christianity is an example of total ignorance. Posted by: Shannon | December 6, 2011, 7:18 pm.

Clearly you do not know the definition of the word hypocrite.

The Bible says that being gay is wrong. It also says a ton of other things that we see as normal are wrong. Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe it was reasonable to see those things as wrong in the time that they were written? In Biblical times it was wrong to eat pork or shell fish. Why? There were no methods to clean meat that could potentially carry disease. It’s safer to eat under cooked steak than it is to eat ill prepared shell fish because shell fish harbor more bacteria than beef. Today, we know how to properly clean our meats so no meats are forbidden for being “unclean” or an “abomination.” That is the argument Christians use to say why eating shell fish is no longer a son.

In Biblical times people believed that a child existed inside of a man’s sperm. They were unaware that it took a woman’s egg plus a man’s sperm to create a baby. To them, it was perfectly logical to be against any type of sex that wasted sperm because to them, sperm was the baby. That’s also why it was a sin to “pull out.” By not letting the sperm develop into a baby you were committing murder. Homosexuality was an abomination simply because gay sex wasted sperm, thus killing a baby. We know better today. This is the same argument used for a different sin, but no one seems to use it. Why? Too many will cherry pick from the Bible and only believe what they want to.

DOCJ: You are absolutely right, they do already have the right to marry…someone of the opposite sex, just like everyone else. Everyone has the same rights. There is no law saying if you are gay you cannot get married at all.

SHELBY: homosexuality was not an abomination because it wasted sperm, but because it is sinful and goes against God’s created order. God created man and woman to be with each other. Then they sinned and all of creation fell under the curse of sin which caused mankind to have sinful desires (to steal, to murder, to lie, to be selfish, to lust, to have sexual relations with the same sex). Where is your biblical reference to “pulling out”, because there are plenty for sodomy.

If you make any argument citing the bible, then are to never be taken seriously. The bible is not a book of laws, we live by man’s law, not your God’s law. Seriously, get over it.

I am so sick and tired of “religious” people qouting scripture about homosexuality, particularly while completely ignoring other “sins” such as obesity and pronography, which are just as detestable to God and very rampant in christian churches today, I might add. Yet, time and again, it is always those who live a homosexual lifestyle that are used as “religious” examples to “speak for God” and to promote an agenda of hate, dischord and inequality, among other things. Everyone deserves to be happy, to be treated equally and to have the same rights as everyone else, REGARDLESS of their sexual orientation. There should not be a debate on whether or not homosexuality is normal, or whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry, because ones sexual orientation should be of no one else’s concern.

And If we’re going to shed light on the “sins of homosexuals” then let’s be fair folks, and out those who hold religious office who hurt young children, view illicit sexual behavior behind clergy doors, and wear a size 22 pants up at the pulpit (gluttony is a sin, too, remember?) while enlightening the rest of us on “Gods word”. Please! ENOUGH with the hypocrisy, it is nauseating, truly!