Ric Santorum Disses All Married Couples, Straight As Well As Gay

[crabby_lioness]

Ric Santorum, a Republican presidential candidate who is not afraid to admit in front of a national audience that he doesn't understand the difference between a dog, a child, and an adult, or between a parental relationship and a marital relationship, has said some incredibly offensive things about gay married couples.  So offensive, in fact, that

Comments

[eumenidis]

Not a moron, a would-be totalitarian despot; his ideas are pure fundamentalist Catholicism, including the notions that limiting the number of children in a family, let alone choosing to be childless, is "disrespectful" & "hurts" women & children. Those views only makes sense in the context of Catholic doctrine, & the most charitable thing I can say about that is that they're clinging to ideas that were arrived at during the late Roman Empire & reflect the social views & understanding of biology at that time.

[crabby_lioness]

You're being far too charitable. In The Pill: A Biography of the Drug That Changed the World Bernard Asbell devotes a chapter to how The Second Vatican Council was going to give their blessing to birth control until they heard Catholic married couples whose honest opinions they had sought out describe consensual sex as the most profound spiritual experience of their lives, which brought them far closer to God than anything they had ever experienced in church. THAT was when the Catholic Church decided that from the viewpoint of an authoritarian religion birth control was a Completely No Good, Very Bad Thing.

[kiev4am]

Interesting! I did not know that piece of Catholic Church history, but it doesn't surprise me one bit.

[crabby_lioness]

It's a great book, read it if you ever get the chance. Asbell was a English professor who believed historical non-fiction could be just as engrossing as the most outlandish thriller.

[qara_isuke]

Fun things about him

[crabby_lioness]

Yessiree, that plainly demonstrates the kind of clear-eyed thinking and problem-solving abilities that the leader of the world's greatest super-power needs to have -- not.

It also shows a Christian who hasn't spent enough time letting the words of Jesus Christ sink into his heart. "As you treat the least among you, so you treat me."

[qara_isuke]

He really is a typical "Christian". Everything is looking down on others, and judging them, and believing clearly the reason they are sick, or poor, or whatever is because they are BAD PEOPLE. You know, all those things that Christ himself was not, and spoke out against. He was a man who spoke out for the poor, for the downtrodden, who fought against the corruption and greed within the Temple and the Roman government, who kept company with those considered by society to be "bad people". He was, in essence, everything that "Christians" like Santorum hate.

[crabby_lioness]

Yup. I picked up a KJV the other day to read to my children for Literature -- my own KJ was missing and I usually prefer other versions for reference purposes. I may make some rather pointed posts about that fact soon.

[kiev4am]

Oh, man. Every time I think I've heard the absolute batshit outer limit in Republican 'ideology', along comes another gem, even more bizarre and jawdropping than the last.

I *used* to find a sour satisfaction in reading this sort of thing, because I'd welcome any utterance that helped discredit and otherwise make a laughing stock out of that party. I'd think 'good, keep on spouting this medieval illogical crap and that way you'll help yourselves be unelectable.' Now it just frightens me, though; I've seen too many presumed-unelectable wingnuts get elected.

What a thoroughly poisonous, throwback hypocrite he is.

[crabby_lioness]

There's an awful lot of time and effort put out in this country to keep grown people from thinking clearly and to not teach young people how to think in the first place.

[swordznsorcery]

Oh boy. I was reading this earlier. (The link is to another blog that I read, by a British writer who has an interest in American politics, and comments on them sometimes). You add some interesting extra colour to Santorum. What is this peculiar march further and further right that there is in politics at the moment? We're seeing it here in the UK as well, although not nearly to the same degree. A former Conservative Prime Minister here, Edward Heath, commented a few years ago that the present left wing politicians are further to the right on many issues that he was, when he was still leader of the right. It infuriates me, but at least our lot still seem sane. Corrupt, but sane!

Oh Republican Party. What has become of you.

[crabby_lioness]

To a certain extent it's a dialogue problem, an extended case of, "I do not think that means what you think it means."

Side A asks a question, thinking that with the inferences everyone will surely understand what they mean.

Side B hears the question but not the inferences, thinking instead that Side A means a completely different question. They answer that different question.

Side A doesn't understand why their question wasn't answered. They ask it again.

Side B wonders what's wrong with Side A and repeats the answer they've already given only Slow-er and Loud-er.

Side A thinks they're being insulted and starts yelling.

Side B starts yelling back.

Meanwhile the unanswered questions only get less likely to be answered, as everyone descends into name-calling. Both sides feel justified in their belief that one just can't talk to those people, they don't understand anything important.

[eumenidis]

Umm...I think it's more a matter of ideologies being so alien that what makes sense in one is pure madness in the other. It's all but impossible to have any meaningful dialog in those circumstances.

[crabby_lioness]

It's depressing that people aren't even really trying though. The "melting pot" has thoroughly clogged.

I'm about to continue this conversation in another post.