Recently Santorum did a Godwin equivalent, and compared Obama to Stephen Douglas dismissing the Rights of slaves for his position of Reproductive Choice. The Religious Right has not really been a factor recently and while Tea Party activists overlap with the RR to some degree, conservative religious issues have not been what has fired up the Right’s base.
So why go there now? Is he positioning to get something face saving out of the quixotic attack on the Health Care Reform Act? Or warming up for a Presidential run and trying to undercut Huckabee’s RR love?
I just wanted to add that in the same interview (or at least a recent interview where he discussed the civil rights of fetuses), he again expressed his opposition to gay marriage:
Santorum: …Santorum also argued against gay marriage and gay adoption, saying that it’s “common sense” that marriage between a man and a woman “is nature. And what we’re trying to do is defy nature because a certain group of people want to be affirmed by society. And I just don’t think that’s to the benefit of society or to the child.”
I don’t know what’s so “weird” about it. I suspect at least 1/3 of the country agrees with him. I don’t, but lots of people do. It’s a religious thing.
What I find odd is that the discussion was about civil rights. He talks about how he can’t understand how Obama would be pro-choice, since he’s African American and civil rights should concern him. What about the civil rights of fetuses?
Then, he talks about denying civil rights to another group, in the very same conversation.
I understand that many people hold similar opinions, it’s just jarring (in my view) to see both of those seemingly directly conflicting points of view in the same interview. That’s why I found it weird.
Few people really advocate for universal civil rights. There’s always somewhere they draw the line. And don’t forget that Obama says “boo” civil rights when it comes to SSM, too.
For example: how many liberal-minded Americans who support SSM also support polygamous marriage? Yeah civil rights for gays; boo civil rights for polygamists.
I think Santorum’s speech was a political error. The fact is that the conservatives have to a great extent achieved their aims with regard to abortion. Abortions are much harder to get than they used to be. It is still possible of course but there are many barriers associated with travel. trimesters and expense nowadays that didn’t exist before because the number of health care clinics that will provide abortions has decreased so greatly. As the chart on this page indicates, abortions have decreased from a high of 1.4 million abortions in the US in 1990, to about 875,000, roughly the number in 1975, with a constant downward trend indicating that the number will continue to decrease.
If the middle class Republicans (i.e., the “rabble” as the upper class Repubicans view them) knew how thoroughly they were winning on the abortion issue, they might not be so inclined to get out there and vote for the political party whose economic program is largely to assist the wealthy in robbing the rabble and their children senseless. Which is probably why they are pulling so hard on that “gays might get married” string nowadays.
Actually, most human societies have been polygamous, and all the other great ape species are, too, so it almost certainly is an innate, fixed orientation. But the truth is, we really don’t know. Your assertion is simply shaped by your cultural prejudices. The exact same thing was said about gays until just a few decades ago.
It would be more accurate to say that it was a practice performed by most human societies, just like making bread. But there is no intrinsic nature of polygamists that make them that way. Nobody wakes up and decides he’s suddenly attracted to more than 1 person, and that 1 won’t do.
Sexual orientation, however, does seem to be part of human nature
Quoted for truth, and to hopefully avoid this thread from becoming all about gay marriage. So, back on topic, I agree that he’s stupid and a bigot, but I’m not sure that’s what is leading directly to his bringing up abortion rights at this point. It’s probably also so he can call out Obama for, in Santorum’s mind, enslaving the embryos or something.
