Rick Santorum

Rick Santorum Vows To Stop 'Promotion' Of Gay Marriage In Public Schools

Delivering the keynote speech to a National Organization for Marriage gala last week, Rick Santorum denounced the Supreme Court’s decision on marriage equality, criticizing the ruling as “a loss for America.”

At the gala, the GOP presidential candidate signed NOM’s candidate pledge, with his campaign boasting that Santorum was “proud to sign and fully support the National Organization for Marriage's presidential pledge.”

As we’ve noted, NOM’s pledge is about much more than simply asking candidates to oppose same-sex marriage.

Santorum also vowed to “prevent the promotion of a redefined version of marriage in public schools and other government entities” and pledged to “direct the Department of Justice to investigate, document and publicize cases of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections, if needed.”

I, _____________ _____________, pledge to the American people that if elected President, I will:

One, support a federal constitutional amendment that protects marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Two, oppose and work to overturn any Supreme Court decision that illegitimately finds a constitutional "right" to the redefinition of marriage. This includes nominating to the U.S. Supreme Court and federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, and appointing an attorney general similarly committed.

Three, conduct a review of regulatory, administrative and executive actions taken by the current Administration that have the effect of undermining marriage and work to restore our policies to be consistent with the proper understanding of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Consistent with this, prevent the promotion of a redefined version of marriage in public schools and other government entities.

Four, support the First Amendment Defense Act and other legislation that recognizes the right of organizations and individuals to act in the public square consistent with their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman without fear of retaliation from the government.

Five, direct the Department of Justice to investigate, document and publicize cases of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections, if needed.

'Satan Dancing With Delight': The Religious Right Reacts To The Legalization Of Gay Marriage

This morning, the Supreme Court ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, effectively legalizing gay marriage in all 50 states.

Needless to say, anti-gay Religious Right activists and Republican politicians who have repeatedly warned that such a ruling would literally destroy America have not reacted well, as exemplified by Bryan Fischer, who fired off a series of tweets declaring that Satan is now dancing in the streets of America:

Other anti-gay activists were equally outraged:

Anti-gay Republican presidential hopefuls were quick to weigh in:

Mike Huckabee

"The Supreme Court has spoken with a very divided voice on something only the Supreme Being can do-redefine marriage. I will not acquiesce to an imperial court any more than our Founders acquiesced to an imperial British monarch. We must resist and reject judicial tyranny, not retreat.

"This ruling is not about marriage equality, it's about marriage redefinition. This irrational, unconstitutional rejection of the expressed will of the people in over 30 states will prove to be one of the court's most disastrous decisions, and they have had many. The only outcome worse than this flawed, failed decision would be for the President and Congress, two co-equal branches of government, to surrender in the face of this out-of-control act of unconstitutional, judicial tyranny."

"The Supreme Court can no more repeal the laws of nature and nature's God on marriage than it can the law of gravity. Under our Constitution, the court cannot write a law, even though some cowardly politicians will wave the white flag and accept it without realizing that they are failing their sworn duty to reject abuses from the court. If accepted by Congress and this President, this decision will be a serious blow to religious liberty, which is the heart of the First Amendment."

Bobby Jindal

Governor Jindal said, “The Supreme Court decision today conveniently and not surprisingly follows public opinion polls, and tramples on states’ rights that were once protected by the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. Marriage between a man and a woman was established by God, and no earthly court can alter that.

This decision will pave the way for an all out assault against the religious freedom rights of Christians who disagree with this decision. This ruling must not be used as pretext by Washington to erode our right to religious liberty.

The government should not force those who have sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage to participate in these ceremonies. That would be a clear violation of America’s long held commitment to religious liberty as protected in the First Amendment.

I will never stop fighting for religious liberty and I hope our leaders in D.C. join me.”

Rick Santorum

Today, five unelected justices decided to redefine the foundational unit that binds together our society without public debate or input. Now is the people’s opportunity respond because the future of the institution of marriage is too important to not have a public debate. The Court is one of three co-equal branches of government and, just as they have in cases from Dred Scott to Plessy, the Court has an imperfect track record. The stakes are too high and the issue too important to simply cede the will of the people to five unaccountable justices.

“But leaders don’t accept bad decisions that they believe harm the country, they have the courage of their convictions and lead the country down the better path. Marriage, the family and our children are too central to a healthy society to not fight for what is best. I realized that fact early on and that is why I lead the charge against some in my own party in 2004 to ensure the Federal Marriage Amendment received a vote and I continue to stand for marriage, for families, for freedom.

“As President, I will be committed to using the bully pulpit of the White House to lead a national discussion on the importance to our economy and our culture of mothers and fathers entering into healthy marriages so that every child is given their birthright- to be raised by their mother and father in a stable, loving home. I will stand for the preservation of religious liberty and conscience, to believe what you are called to believe free from persecution. And I will ensure that the people will have a voice in decisions that impact the rock upon which our civilization is built.”

Scott Walker

I believe this Supreme Court decision is a grave mistake. Five unelected judges have taken it upon themselves to redefine the institution of marriage, an institution that the author of this decision acknowledges “has been with us for millennia.”

In 2006 I, like millions of Americans, voted to amend our state constitution to protect the institution of marriage from exactly this type of judicial activism. The states are the proper place for these decisions to be made, and as we have seen repeatedly over the last few days, we will need a conservative president who will appoint men and women to the Court who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our land without injecting their own political agendas.

As a result of this decision, the only alternative left for the American people is to support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to reaffirm the ability of the states to continue to define marriage.

Anti-gay Religious Right organizations, like the Family Research Council, likewise vowed never to accept this ruling:

"Five justices on the Supreme Court have overturned the votes of 50 million Americans and demanded that the American people walk away from millennia of history and the reality of human nature.

“In reaching a decision so lacking in foundation in the text of the Constitution, in our history, and in our traditions, the Court has done serious damage to its own legitimacy.

“No court can overturn natural law.  Nature and Nature’s God, hailed by the signers of our Declaration of Independence as the very source of law, cannot be usurped by the edict of a court, even the United States Supreme Court.

“Marriage is rooted not only in human history, but also in the biological and social reality that children are created by, and do best when raised by, a mother and a father. No court ruling can alter this truth.

“It is folly for the Court to think that it has resolved a controversial issue of public policy. By disenfranchising 50 million Americans, the Court has instead supercharged this issue.

"Just as with Roe v. Wade in 1973, the courts will not have the final say on this profound social matter.  The American people will stand up for their right to have a voice and a vote, especially as they experience the ways in which redefining marriage fundamentally impairs their freedom to live and work in accordance with their beliefs.

“With this ruling, the Supreme Court has set our government on a collision course with America’s cherished religious freedoms, explicitly guaranteed in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

“Americans will not stop standing for transcendent truth, nor accept the legitimacy of this decision.  Truth is not decided by polls or the passage of time, but by the One who created time and everything that exists therein.

“We will not lapse into silence but will continue to speak uncompromisingly for the truth about what marriage is, always has been, and always will be: the union of one man and one woman,” concluded [Tony] Perkins.

The National Organization for Marriage:

Though expected, today's decision is completely illegitimate. We reject it and so will the American people. It represents nothing but judicial activism, legislating from the bench, with a bare majority of the Justices on the Supreme Court exercising raw political power to impose their own preferences on marriage when they have no constitutional authority to do so. It is a lawless ruling that contravenes the decisions of over 50 million voters and their elected representatives. It is a decision that is reminiscent of other illegitimate Court rulings such as Dred Scott and Roe v Wade and will further plunge the Supreme Court into public disrepute.

Make no mistake about it: The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and countless millions of Americans do not accept this ruling. Instead, we will work at every turn to reverse it.

The US Supreme Court does not have the authority to redefine something it did not create. Marriage was created long before the United States and our constitution came into existence. Our constitution says nothing about marriage. The majority who issued today's ruling have simply made it up out of thin air with no constitutional authority.

In his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," Dr. Martin Luther King discussed the moral importance of disobeying unjust laws, which we submit applies equally to unjust Supreme Court decisions. Dr. King evoked the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas that an unjust law or decision is one that is "a human law that is not rooted in eternal law or natural law."

Today's decision of the Supreme Court lacks both constitutional and moral authority. There is no eternal or natural law that allows for marriage to be redefined.

American Family Association

“This morning’s ruling rejects not only thousands of years of time-honored marriage but also the rule of law in the United States,” said AFA President Tim Wildmon. “In states across the nation, voters acted through the democratic process to protect marriage and the family. Yet, courts around the country chose to disregard the will of the people in favor of political correctness and social experimentation. And we witnessed firsthand the consequences, as individuals were repeatedly targeted by the government for not actively supporting homosexual marriage. Sadly, our nation’s highest Court, which should be a symbol of justice, has chosen instead to be a tool of tyranny, elevating judicial will above the will of the people.

“There is no doubt that this morning’s ruling will imperil religious liberty in America, as individuals of faith who uphold time-honored marriage and choose not to advocate for same-sex unions will now be viewed as extremists. But to the Court, we send this unequivocal message: We will continue to uphold God’s plan for marriage between one man and one woman, and we call on all Christians to continue to pray for the nation, and for those whose religious liberties will be directly impacted by this ruling.”

In the years leading up to the landmark SCOTUS case, voters in 31 states had acted through the democratic process to uphold marriage and the family. Yet, same-sex marriage was legalized in 36 states, due in large part to overreaching judges who chose to disregard the will of the people and cater to those who advocate for homosexuality. 

Concerned Women For America

Today goes down in history as the day nine unelected judges kicked the Constitution to the curb — overturning traditional marriage — and put your religious freedom dangerously at risk.

The decision is in. The justices have ruled. Marriage will be redefined to conform to the pro-LGBT view of marriage.

In one appalling decision, the Supreme Court has effectively opened the door to the criminalization of Christianity when it comes to the marriage issue ... and not just Christianity, but every major religion that supports God’s model for marriage and family.

Catholic League

Once again, five Supreme Court justices have invented a right that is nowhere mentioned or implied in the U.S. Constitution. Instead of allowing the states the right to make decisions about marriage, these judges have elected to impose their will on the nation.

Moreover, their reasoning is sociologically illiterate. The idea that marriage is a matter of individual autonomy—and not a social institution—is the most profound flaw in their ruling. In their mind, society is composed of monads.

For people of faith, this decision is ominous. On p. 27, the majority declares that religious Americans “may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.” It is nice to know they respect our First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

“The First Amendment,” the five justices say, “ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives….” That’s the best they can do? Justice Clarence Thomas, in his dissent, rightly criticizes this genuflection to religious rights. “Religious liberty,” he says, “is about freedom of action in matters of religion generally”—it is not confined to advocacy.

In order to stop the IRS from revoking the tax-exempt status of religious institutions that refuse to marry two men or two women, Congress needs to pass the First Amendment Defense Act that was introduced last week. Nothing less is acceptable.

Right Wing Steamed Over Pope's Climate Change Encyclical

In the past few decades, politically conservative American Catholics and their allies in the Republican Party got used to having the public voice of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops serving as a politically useful one that prioritized opposition to legal abortion and LGBT equality. So, needless to say, some are having a hard time adjusting to Pope Francis, whose critiques of the dehumanizing excesses of modern corporate capitalism have dismayed some right-wing Catholics. Now, the Pope’s new encyclical on climate change and care for the planet, which apparently did not pay much heed to an April appeal from “Biblical worldview”-promoting climate change denialists or warnings from the Koch Brothers, is pushing some right-wing pundits over the edge.

Alan Keyes, a far-right Catholic and perennial political candidate, argued that the facts about human contribution to climate change have not been established and warned that “the whole push for totalitarian government remediation of the allegedly terrible damage we are inflicting on God’s creation is a slander against the human race, a sin against humanity being committed as a pretext for the rape of human life, human conscience and God-endowed human liberty.”

The never-subtle Keyes said that when he looks “in the mirror of reason at the reflections Pope Francis offers in his encyclical, what I see looks unlike Jesus Christ (who as of now still comes to save and not harshly to penalize humanity).” He added, “Pope Francis’ reflections look more like Marx, Stalin or Mao Zedong – materialistic ideologues who punished not for the sake of God or truth, but on account of resentful, self-idolizing human will and ideology.”

Over at the free-market-adoring Acton Institute, Kishore Jayabalan was more respectful, saying he welcomed the pope’s encyclical, but wrote that he was disappointed that the pope “seems to blame markets, over-consumption and especially finance, rather than human sin, for all our environmental problems.”

Others have had much harsher words for Pope Francis. The reliably bloviating Rush Limbaugh said the encyclical seems to confirm that Francis is a Marxist, a sentiment echoed by Fox News pundit Greg Gutfield. James Delingpole, an editor at Breitbart, said the encyclical includes “hackneyed language and extremely dubious science you might expect from a 16-year-old trotting out the formulaic bilge and accepted faux-wisdom required these days…” At Fox Business, Stuart Varney warned of a sinister alliance between the Pope and President Barack Obama to “reshape the world by taxing the rich, taxing fossil fuels, and redistributing the wealth.” Right-wing radio host Michael Savage, furious at the encyclical, called the Pope “an eco-wolf in pope’s clothing” and “a stealth Marxist in religious garb,” claiming that Francis will put Catholics “in chains” and is reminiscent of “the false prophet in Revelation, an ecumenical spiritual figure directing mankind to worship the Antichrist.”

It’s not just a bunch of pundits.

The Guardian’s Suzanne Goldenberg notes that Sen. James Inhofe, a notorious climate change denier, “bluntly told reporters that Francis was out of line.” Inhofe told attendees at a conference of the right-wing Heartland Institute, “The pope ought to stay with his job.” ThinkProgress notes that back in May, the Koch-funded Heartland Institute warned that “the Left” was working with the Pope on climate change, something akin to the “unholy alliance of international communism with the jihadi Islamists.”

Republican presidential candidates have also been slamming the encyclical. Jeb Bush, who has talked about his conversion to Catholicism on the campaign trail, has also suggested the Pope should butt out of the public conversation on climate change. “I think religion ought to be about making us better as people and less about things that end up getting in the political realm,” he said.

Rick Santorum said the church is not credible when “we get involved with controversial political and scientific theories,” not a concern he seems to have when the topic is, oh, same-sex couples getting married or being parents. He told an interviewer, “The church has gotten it wrong a few times on science, and I think we probably are better off leaving science to the scientists and focusing on what we’re good at, which is theology and morality.”

As many have noted, the pope has studied more science than Rick Santorum. Rev. Thomas Reese, former editor of America Magazine and now a senior analyst for National Catholic Reporter, flipped Santorum’s comments, saying, “It's nice — for once the Catholic Church is on the side of science.” Climate scientists agree.

Right Wing Round-Up - 6/18/15

  • PFAW: PFAW Foundation Mourns the Loss of Rev. Clementa Pinckney, a Member of Our Family.
  • Andrew Kaczynski @ BuzzFeed: Ben Carson Compares Abortion To Slavery.
  • David Edwards @ Raw Story: Rick Santorum thinks white Charleston shooter chose victims at black church ‘indiscriminately’.
  • Jeremy Hooper: The one where Brian Brown attacks @FakeDanSavage's son at an anti-gay church conference.
  • Andrew Kirell @ Mediaite: Fox’s Steve Doocy and Guest Wonder Whether Charleston Shooting Part of ‘War on Christians’.

President Santorum Will Protect Children From Gay Marriage

Earlier this month, Rick Santorum participated in a conference call organized by right-wing pastor E.W. Jackson, during which the 2016 presidential hopeful spent most of his time promoting his economic plans.

But Santorum's agenda to provide economic opportunity to blue collar workers was obviously not what participants on the call were interested in because as soon as Santorum agreed to answer some questions, the very first thing he was asked about was what he would do as president about the fact that "our children are being forced to accept lifestyles that are totally against our values." The caller demanded to know why "is it that our government allows people that hurt children by way of child molestation" to impose their views upon this nation.

Santorum, who is not unfamiliar with having to field questions from unhinged audience members, responded to the question about child molestation by talking about same-sex marriage. "That's one of the reasons why I talk about the importance of focusing on the nuclear family," he said, adding that the next president must take a stand for the rights of children to be raised by a mother and a father.

If the Supreme Court strikes down state bans on gay marriage, he continued, "that doesn't mean we won't fight and try to push back both as the Congress should and as the president should as a co-equal branch of the government."

"Depending on what they rule," Santorum said, "we would certainly make sure that we are protecting children and that we are creating an optimal atmosphere for every child, as I said, that have their birthright, which is to be raised by their mother and father."

Rick Santorum Interviewed By Gordon Klingenschmitt, Colorado's Premier Anti-Gay Demon-Hunting Legislator

Last year, Gordon Klingenschmitt was elected to a seat in the Colorado House of Representatives, despite the fact that he was a long-time Religious Right activist with a well-documented history of making outrageous statements. Unsurprisingly, Klingenschmitt's tenure in office has been racked with controversy precisely because he has continued to make those sorts of statements, but that did not dissuade Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum from agreeing to be interviewed by Klingenschmitt for his daily "Pray In Jesus Name" program.

Klingenschmitt managed to interview Santorum when he was recently campaigning in the state and ask him about Indiana's effort to pass a law that would have granted business owners the right to discriminate against customers, particularly gay ones, in the name of "religious liberty."

Santorum falsely claimed that the original Indiana law was merely designed to protect religious "employees from discrimination at the workplace" and lamented that "those who are defending religious liberty backed down, they're not willing to take the fight and be called all sorts of names and take the blows for standing up for religious liberty in the face of a media onslaught that doesn't care about the truth."

President Santorum Won't Enforce Gay Marriage Ruling Since It's A 'Violation Of The First Amendment'

Rick Santorum called into Glenn Beck's radio program this morning, where he warned that if the Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage, it will be an unconstitutional establishment of religion that, when he becomes president, he will not enforce.

Citing the absurd claims made by David Barton on his radio program yesterday, Beck warned that if the Supreme Court strikes down gay marriage bans, the government will strip churches of their tax-exempt status and force them to perform gay marriages, and asked Santorum how he would respond to this if he is elected president.

"This is tantamount to government establishing religion," Santorum said. "When the United States government comes in and says this is what you are going to believe, this is how you're going to practice your faith, this is a new religion. This violates, in my opinion, the Establishment Clause in the Constitution that says that Congress shall make no law with respect to an establishment of religion. If the government goes around and tells churches what they have to believe in and what their doctrine is, that is something that is a violation of the First Amendment."

Santorum said that he holds out hope that the Supreme Court will rule against marriage equality advocates "because there is no way that the left will stop at mere tolerance, they will demand conformity, they will demand it from the church, they will demand it from every institution, they will demand it from businesses and there will be no tolerance to a different point of view on this issue."

But if the Supreme Court does legalize gay marriage, Santorum said that, as president, he will fight it.

"If they get it wrong and the consequences are what I suspect they will be toward people of faith," he said, "then this president will fight back."

Religious Right Angry At Business Support For Marriage Equality

Conservative religious leaders have been delighted to work with parts of corporate America – most notably the Koch brothers’ political networks – to elect candidates who back right-wing social and economic policies. Religious conservatives have championed Citizens United and the demolition of regulations on campaign cash. The Kochs even promote Religious Right leaders who tell their followers that the Bible opposes minimum wage laws, unions, and progressive taxes. But many of America’s biggest companies have also become supporters of equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, and that’s making religious conservatives angry.

When a number of major corporations pushed back hard against an anti-gay “religious freedom” law in Indiana, Gov. Mike Pence asked the legislature to amend the law to state that it would not allow businesses to discriminate. And that made the Religious Right furious. Reliably pro-business Republican presidential candidates like Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, and Bobby Jindal have been attacking big business support for gay rights in a sometimes awkward attempt at right-wing populist rhetoric.

Today’s mail brought a direct mail letter from the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins complaining, “Big Business has joined the anti-Christian bullies!” Perkins warns that “the seduction of Big Business by the homosexual rights movement is the main reason that movement has gained such momentum over our freedom to believe and live according to those beliefs.” Perkins asks for donations to “Stop Big Business’s Assault on Religious Freedom” and to support an FRC initiative to talk to business leaders and bring them around.

Another direct mail piece from Perkins, this time for FRC’s political arm, FRC Action, arrived the same day, in an envelope emblazoned with, “When you can’t make a living because you’re a Christian…THAT’S NOT FREEDOM.” The letter complains that “big corporations are foolishly aligning with the Left’s social agenda” and pledges that FRC Action will help states “create and pass a protective wall of religious freedom laws.” Perkins gripes about business opposition to Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act:

The media published incredible false claims about what the law said and what the law would do. Hollywood celebrities, giant corporations, sports leagues, and even other states became a national lynch mob. They threatened and enacted boycotts of the state.

Tragically the governor ultimately caved in to these pressures. With the corporate community threatening boycotts and economic loss to the state, it appears that many political leaders in the state were more concerned about economic issues than moral truth, religious freedom, and the well-being of the family.

Over at conservative journal First Things, University of Notre Dame Professor Patrick Deneen says it is clear that in Indiana, “Republicans and Christians lost, Democrats and gay activists won.” (Of course this simplistic formulation ignores the Christian leaders who were allied with LGBT activists in opposing the law.) Deneen, a critic of both corporate capitalism and liberal democracy, blames the outcome in Indiana on business involvement:

Had the only appreciable opposition to RFRA come from gay rights activists, RFRA would have been a smashing political success for Republicans. It would have made the right enemies while generating gratitude and energy in the base. They did not expect their usual friends in corporate America to join the opposition, which was an idiotic miscalculation given the fact that establishment outrage scuttled the Arizona RFRA last year.

Deneen wrote last year that “The modern corporation and modern marriage are born of the same philosophical roots: rootless individuals seeking self-gratification in whatever way they see fit, short of ‘harming’ another.” In his First Things article, he portrays corporations standing with LGBT groups as a smart business decision given pro-gay shifts in public attitudes. But he calls the gay-rights collaboration between cultural and economic “elites” a dangerous alignment that is “ready to steamroll anyone in their way.” After Indiana, he says, “religiously based opposition to gay marriage is now more likely than ever to be treated by our society as tantamount to a hate crime,” and warns that the “elite-sanctioned attack on ‘bigotry’” will “reach inevitably into the sanctuaries of the churches themselves.”

Rick Santorum 'Worries' About Anti-Government Rhetoric. Has He Heard His Own Speeches?

Former Pennsylvania senator and GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum said yesterday at a campaign stop in Iowa that he worries “about anti-government rhetoric,” according to a local paper and to Washington Post reporter James Hohmann, who tweeted about the remark:

Really? The Santorum we know has spent the entire Obama presidency stoking mistrust of the federal government. Here are just fifteen examples, in no particular order, of Santorum’s anti-government rhetoric in the past few years.

1. When he claimed that Obama is a ‘tyrant’ hell-bent on destroying America

2. When he said that Obama “intentionally turned his back on evil and let it prosper around the world”

3. When he argued that Obama is establishing a secular theocracy that will carry out the “persecution and prosecution” of Christians

4. When he had this calm reaction to Obamacare:

5. And this reaction to Obamacare

"If we have a system where the government is going to be the principal provider of health care for the country, we're done. Because then, you are dependent on the government for your life and your health...When Thatcher ran for prime minister she said - remember this, this is the Iron Lady - she said, 'The British national health care system is safe in my hands.' She wasn't going to take on health care, because she knew once you have people getting free health care from the government, you can't take it away from them. And the reason is because most people don't get sick, and so free health care is just that, free health care, until you get sick. Then, if you get sick and you don't get health care, you die and you don't vote. It's actually a pretty clever system. Take care of the people who can vote and people who can't vote, get rid of them as quickly as possible by not giving them care so they can't vote against you. That's how it works."

6. And this reaction to Obamacare

7. When he claimed that in Obama’s America, religious people are on “the path” to being beheaded like clergy in the French Revolution

8. When he warned that Christians must fight “persecution” in America to stop us from turning into Nazi Germany

9. When he claimed Obama is faking a war with ISIS and allowing the persecution of Christians

10. When he warned of the hidden Obamacare agenda of using pre-natal testing to “cull the ranks of disabled” who are “less able than the elites who want to govern our society”

11. When he said the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities would empower the government to kill his daughter

“In the case of our 4-year-old daughter, Bella, who has Trisomy 18, a condition that the medical literature says is 'incompatible with life,' would her 'best interest' be that she be allowed to die? Some would undoubtedly say so.

So if the state, and not Karen and I, would have the final word on what is in the best interest of a child like Bella, what chance would a parent have to get appropriate care in the days of increasingly government-funded medical care?

Proponents have said that Section 7 would not affect a parent’s right under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, but the education standards of CRPD do not repeat the parental rights rules of past U.N. human-rights treaties. Omission of these rules combined with Section 7 could lead to the elimination of parental rights for the education of children with disabilities.

These issues become real for parents because, despite what the proponents insist, ratifying the treaty will require changes to U.S. laws to comply with the U.N. provisions. Section 4 requires any country that adopts this treaty 'to adopt all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention.'”

12. When he claimed the health care reform’s contraception mandate is “a descendent of the French Revolution”

13. When he told Bryan Fischer that business owners who refuse service to gay customers have been sent to “reeducation camps” and pastors will soon be jailed or martyred

14. When he said the Democrats are worried Obama will go to Indonesia and “bow to more Muslims

15. And, last but not least, when he said that the president “has a deep-seated antipathy toward American values and traditions

“Watching President Obama apologize last week for America's arrogance - before a French audience that owes its freedom to the sacrifices of Americans - helped convince me that he has a deep-seated antipathy toward American values and traditions.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 5/27/15

Rick Santorum's 5 Worst Smears: Attacking Gay Rights, Working Women & Church-State Separation

Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum announced today that he will once again be running for president. And why not, since while he failed to clinch the Republican nomination in 2012, by coming in second place to Mitt Romney he helped resuscitate a political career that had ended with a blowout reelection defeat in 2006.

In the meantime, Santorum has been writing for the conspiracy theory website WorldNetDaily and managing, not very successfully, a Christian film studio.

Santorum hopes to build support from the farthest right base of the GOP, one which adamantly opposes gay equality and any step towards immigration reform and wants to turn back the clock on women’s rights. Santorum’s candidacy, as evidenced by his 2012 victories in Iowa and the Deep South, show that the Republican Party’s polarizing far-right flank has held on to its influential role, even as it jeopardizes the party’s ability to win elections and improve its image with the general public.

Here are five of Santorum’s worst policies, which give just a taste of what the GOP’s far-right base is craving:

1) Gay Equality

Santorum may have won the most publicity, or notoriety, for his fiery attacks on not only gay marriage but gay rights in general, boasting about his support for laws banning consensual gay sex and predicting that gays will “murder” the Boy Scouts.

He has warned that same-sex marriage could possibly lead to sibling marriages“man on child” and “man on dog” marriages, the criminalization of free speech and “the destruction of our republic.” Calling marriage equality a violation of “natural law” and the “death knell” of marriage, Santorum also warned that same-sex marriage could threaten the future of civilization itself.

He has also pushed for bans on adoption by same-sex parents as a “common sense” strategy to help children.

2) Church-State Separation

Insisting that the notion of the separation of church and state is an un-American idea that actually comes from communism, Santorum points to church-state separation as a reason to criticize the Obama administration, gay rights and secular government.

“We have the state establishing a new religion, a secular state religion, a secular orthodoxy that everybody is going to have to comply with,” he said last month. “We don’t have as the threat was at the time of our Founders, the Church of England imposing the English church on America. We have now the secular church that is being imposed on this country and anybody that defects is subject to persecution and prosecution. That is a very serious threat to liberty in America.”

Public schools, according to Santorum, should ban secular teachings from the classroom because secularism has become “a religion.” He also said there will be “agitation” in American society until civil laws “comport” with divine laws.

He also produced a film with the far-right Family Research Council, which he also appears in, warning that gay rights laws violate the “wall of separation.” Santorum criticized laws barring discrimination against gay people as “a violation of the Establishment Clause” and signed a petition vowing to defy any Supreme Court decision striking down gay marriage laws.

3) Women’s Rights

In 2012, Santorum pledged that if he were elected president he would discuss “the dangers of contraception in this country,” claiming that contraception is “not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.” He claimed contraception access is an “important public policy issue” since it negatively impacts society and makes people “deconstruct” sex “to the point where it’s simply about pleasure.”

During his 2012 campaign, Santorum signed a Personhood USA pledge to support personhood laws, which would ban common corms of birth control, and railed against the health care reform law’s contraception mandate by calling it a “descendent of the French Revolution.”

A supporter of criminalizing abortion in all cases, Santorum expressed nostalgia for back-alley abortions and advocated banning abortion even in cases of rape and incest, when the fetus has no chance of survival and when the pregnant woman’s health is at the risk.

Santorum advised survivors of rape who get pregnant that they should “accept what God has given” them and “make the best out of a bad situation.”

He has denounced not only reproductive rights but also women entering the workforce, which he said was the result of a “radical feminists” bent on “undermining the traditional family.”

4) Immigration

Santorum has called on the GOP to amp up its anti-immigrant rhetoric as a way to appeal to working-class voters, falsely claiming that every new job created in the U.S. over the last decade went to immigrants instead of native-born workers. He has also demanded that the U.S. cut legal immigration to levels last seen around 1880.

While criticizing Obama’s recent executive actions on immigration reform, Santorum denounced Obama as a “tyrant” who “acted against the Constitution” and “back[ed] Americans in a corner.”

He pledged to veto the DREAM Act, saying that young people brought to the U.S. as kids should simply “go back” to “Mexico.” However, he said that the U.S should immediately grant legal status to a German family who refused to go back to Germany because of its country’s laws limiting homeschooling.

5) Conspiracy Theories

While working with a far-right homeschooling group, Santorum was the public face of a successful campaign to block Senate ratification of a disability rights treaty. Santorum warned that the treaty could empower the government to kill his daughter, who has Trisomy 18, and told Glenn Beck that the “radical” treaty was inspired by “Marxist-socialist/progressive” ideas.

Santorum has also suggested that Obama travels the globe to “bow to Muslims,” warned of mass euthanasia in the Netherlands, called climate change science a “hoax” and an “absolute travesty” and insisted that conservative Christians are facing horrendous persecution, including potential jail time and martyrdom, in the U.S.

Satanic Bonus

While Santorum deflects any criticism of his interpretation of Christianity as an attack on religious freedom, he has no problem warning that mainline Protestant churches, along with universities and the government, are under the influence of the Devil:

Rick Santorum: Democrats 'Sold Their Souls' For Immigrant Votes

Several months ago, fact-checkers completely debunked one of Rick Santorum’s talking points, that all of the net new jobs created in the U.S. since 2000 went to immigrants. However, just because the contention has absolutely no factual basis, doesn’t mean the former senator and likely presidential candidate has stopped making the claim.

Santorum trotted out the dishonest talking point once again during his speech today to the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.

Not only did Santorum push the patently false claim, he then blamed Democrats for the mythical problem of immigrants stealing 6 million jobs from U.S. workers.

“The sad part is that the Democratic Party that used to be the party of working people have now sold their souls because they have read the polls and they realize the more people they can bring into this country, the higher percentage of votes they’re going to get,” Santorum said. “So they’re for unlimited immigration. Why? Because they’re going to get a high percentage of those votes, that’s what they care about. They care about workers who see their wages depressed and opportunities scarce? No. No they’ve long abandoned working men and women.”

Rick Santorum: Obama Community College Plan Meant To Create 'Another Layer Of Government Schools'

Rick Santorum, speaking on the Iowa conservative radio show Caffeinated Thoughts in March, argued that President Obama does not want to grant free community college to all in order to raise the number of college graduates and create an educated workforce, but rather wants to “eliminate” private sector programs in order to make way for “another layer of government schools.” 

 “It’s the same old stuff from the president,” he said, “which is, ‘Our schools don’t work, our schools don’t function to educate our children enough so they can get a job, so we’re going to bring in another layer of government schools to try to do this and you’re going to pay for it.’”

During the 2012 presidential campaign, Santorum criticized Obama’s effort to improve access to college as “snobbery” and a threat to “our freedoms.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 5/15/15

  • Brendan James @ TPM: Judith Miller And James O'Keefe Discuss Ethics In Journalism.
  • Media Matters: Limbaugh: The Civil Rights Movement Has Become "An Off-Shoot Of An Effort To Segregate People".
  • Steve Benen @ The Maddow Blog: Boehner would fail his own test of patriotism.
  • Tom Boggioni @ Raw Story: Rick Santorum: Bruce Jenner can call himself a woman — but ‘obviously and biologically’ he’s not.
  • Kyler Geoffroy @ Towleroad: RNC to Approve Resolution Reaffirming Support of Discriminatory 'Religious Freedom' Measures.
  • Alan Colmes: Alex Jones: Jade Helm Purpose Is To Prepare Us For ‘Police State’.

Right Wing Round-Up - 5/14/15

Right Wing Round-Up - 5/13/15

Rick Santorum: Supreme Court Marriage Ruling Could Lead To Christians Being 'Persecuted And Maybe Even Prosecuted'

Rick Santorum’s movie studio, EchoLight Studios, issued a press release yesterday in anticipation of today’s arguments in the marriage cases before the Supreme Court, warning that a decision in favor of marriage equality could lead to the persecution of people who reject “the secularism that is now coming from the government.”

In the press release, Santorum warns that those “who want to live their life consistent with biblical teachings are not being given space to do that."

"It is an increasing view that if you are not with this new orthodoxy, the secularism that is now coming from the government, that these are the values that the government values. If you don't live up to those values, well then you can be persecuted and maybe even prosecuted for doing so," he added.

Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments to determine if same-sex marriage should be nationally recognized in the United States starting April 28. The outcome of these hearings, set for late June, could cause a potentially damaging ripple effect for conservative business owners who, based on their personal religious beliefs, do not want to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies as was explored in the award-winning EchoLight Studios documentary, "One Generation Away."

"One of the biggest changes in this country in the last four or five years is the level of hostility rising toward people of faith taking public viewpoints in their business or in the public square, even in schools and the military," said Former Senator and EchoLight CEO Rick Santorum. "Those who want to live their life consistent with biblical teachings are not being given space to do that. "

The backdrop to the Supreme Court holding this hearing is a number of high-profile cases of Christian business owners being forced by the government to provide services for same-sex weddings. As highlighted in "One Generation Away," which was released last September, there is a growing understanding that the redefinition of marriage cannot be separated from a loss of freedom.

"It is an increasing view that if you are not with this new orthodoxy, the secularism that is now coming from the government, that these are the values that the government values. If you don't live up to those values, well then you can be persecuted and maybe even prosecuted for doing so," concluded Santorum.
 

Santorum & Huckabee Join Anti-Gay Extremists In Vowing To Resist Marriage Equality Ruling

Likely GOP presidential candidates Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee have joined more than 200 anti-gay activists in signing a pledge vowing to resist any Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality.

The pledge, which was co-written by Mat Staver of the right-wing legal group Liberty Counsel and Deacon Keith Fournier, a Catholic activist who recently argued that marriage equality is quite literally an attack of the Devil, recycles the language of a similar document circulated by right-wing groups when the Supreme Court took up a previous set of marriage cases in 2013. Staver and a number of other activists introduced the current pledge at a press conference this morning.

Along with Huckabee and Santorum, signers include former House GOP leader Tom Delay; big players in the Religious Right including John Hagee, Samuel Rodriguez and Focus on the Family’s James Dobson; and fringe anti-gay activists including Peter LaBarbera, Matt Barber, Cindy JacobsLinda Harvey and Bradlee Dean.

Comparing any sweeping decision in favor of marriage equality to the Dred Scott case, the activists vow that they will not recognize such a decision and indicate that they would try to convince national and state executive branches not to enforce it.

The full text of the pledge:

We stand together in defense of marriage and the family and society founded upon them. While we come from a variety of communities and hold differing faith perspectives, we are united in our common affirmation of marriage.

On the matter of marriage, we stand in solidarity. We affirm that marriage and family have been inscribed by the Divine Architect into the order of Creation. Marriage is ontologically between one man and one woman, ordered toward the union of the spouses, open to children and formative of family. Family is the first vital cell of society, the first government, and the first mediating institution of our social order. The future of a free and healthy society passes through marriage and the family.

Marriage as existing solely between one man and one woman precedes civil government. Though affirmed, fulfilled, and elevated by faith, the truth that marriage can exist only between one man and one woman is not based on religion or revelation alone, but on the Natural Law, written on the human heart and discernible through the exercise of reason. It is part of the natural created order. The Natural Law is what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., referred to as a higher law or a just law in his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail.

Marriage is the preeminent and the most fundamental of all human social institutions. Civil institutions do not create marriage nor can they manufacture a right to marry for those who are incapable of marriage. Society begins with marriage and the family.

We pledge to stand together to defend marriage for what it is, a bond between one man and one woman, intended for life, and open to the gift of children.

The institutions of civil government should defend marriage and not seek to undermine it. Government has long regulated marriage for the true common good. Examples, such as the age of consent, demonstrate such a proper regulation to ensure the free and voluntary basis of the marriage bond. Redefining the very institution of marriage is improper and outside the authority of the State. No civil institution, including the United States Supreme Court or any court, has authority to redefine marriage.

As citizens united together, we will not stand by while the destruction of the institution of marriage unfolds in this nation we love. The effort to redefine marriage threatens the essential foundation of the family.

Experience and history have shown us that if the government redefines marriage to grant a legal equivalency to same-sex couples, that same government will then enforce such an action with the police power of the State. This will bring about an inevitable collision with religious freedom and conscience rights. The precedent established will leave no room for any limitation on what can constitute such a redefined notion of marriage or human sexuality. We cannot and will not allow this to occur on our watch. Religious freedom is the first freedom in the American experiment for good reason.

Conferring a moral and legal equivalency to any relationship other than marriage between a man and a woman, by legislative or judicial fiat, sends the message that children do not need a mother and a father. As a policy matter, such unions convey the message that moms and dads are completely irrelevant to the well-being of children. Such a policy statement is unconscionable and destructive. Authorizing the legal equivalency of marriage to same-sex couples undermines the fundamental rights of children and threatens their security, stability, and future.

Neither the United States Supreme Court nor any court has authority to redefine marriage and thereby weaken both the family and society. Unlike the Legislative Branch that has the power of the purse and the Executive Branch which has the figurative power of the sword, the Judicial Branch has neither. It must depend upon the Executive Branch for the enforcement of its decisions.

As the Supreme Court acknowledged in the 1992 decision of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, its power rests solely upon the legitimacy of its decisions in the eyes of the people. If the decisions of the Court are not based on the Constitution and reason, and especially if they are contrary to the natural created order, then the people will lose confidence in the Court as an objective arbiter of the law. If the people lose respect for the Court, the Court’s authority will be diminished.

The Supreme Court was wrong when it denied Dred Scott his rights and said, “blacks are inferior human beings.” And the Court was wrong when Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote in Buck v. Bell, “three generations of imbeciles are enough,” thus upholding Virginia’s eugenics law that permitted forced sterilization. Shamefully, that decision was cited during the Nuremburg trials to support the Nazi eugenic holocaust.

In these earlier cases, the definition of “human” was at issue. Now the definition of “marriage” is at issue. The Constitution does not grant a right to redefine marriage — which is nonsensical since marriage intrinsically involves a man and a woman. Nor does the Constitution prohibit states from affirming the natural created order of male and female joined together in marriage.

We will view any decision by the Supreme Court or any court the same way history views the Dred Scott and Buck v. Bell decisions. Our highest respect for the rule of law requires that we not respect an unjust law that directly conflicts with higher law. A decision purporting to redefine marriage flies in the face of the Constitution and is contrary to the natural created order. As people of faith we pledge obedience to our Creator when the State directly conflicts with higher law. We respectfully warn the Supreme Court not to cross this line.

We stand united together in defense of marriage. Make no mistake about our resolve. While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross.

h/t RWW reader Erik

Santorum: Not Allowing Christians To Discriminate Is 'A Violation Of The Establishment Clause'

Earlier this week, Rick Santorum warned on the Family Research Council's radio program that not allowing Christian business owners to discriminate against gay customers in the name of "religious liberty" was essentially establishing a new secular theocracy in America.

This has obviously become Santorum's new line of attack, because he used it again when he recently sat down for a short interview with Randy Robison, son of Religious Right televangelist James Robison.

Santorum said that the courts and liberal activists have flipped Thomas Jefferson's famous "separation of church and state" on its head so that now Christians are being prohibited from exercising their faith in the public square.

"The separation now is people of faith can't tell the government what to do," he said. "In other words, we can't bring our faith claims into the public square to live them out fully. And that is an interesting thing because what people say now is 'anywhere the government is, faith can't be.' Well, where isn't the government?"

"I think you're also starting to see a violation of the Establishment Clause," Santorum continued, "because what we're seeing now is an establishment not of a traditional church that you and I [know], a Bible-based church, but a liberal orthodoxy that says you have to believe these things or else you're going to run afoul of the federal government":

Rick Santorum: Obama Established A Secular Theocracy

Rick Santorum appeared on Tony Perkins’s “Washington Watch” radio show yesterday to discuss national security threats from ISIS and Iran, but Perkins eventually moved the discussion to the “domestic threats” to the country: namely, gay marriage.

Perkins thanked Santorum for working with the Family Research Council on creating a short film about the dangers of marriage equality, which will be shown in participating churches on the Sunday before the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Obergefell v. Hodges.

Santorum told Perkins that, for the first time ever in U.S. history, religious liberty is under assault from a new secular theocratic system:

For the first time in the history of our country, the government is attacking people, prosecuting people, calling for people to be rehabilitated, constraining in the military with our chaplaincy. We now see chaplain after chaplain being dismissed for not accepting the secular orthodoxy that this administration wants to put forward, criticizing people for holding biblical truth and counseling them in a biblically coherent way. We see businesses being prosecuted. We see all sorts of activity on the legislative front, where they are pushing — as we saw in Indiana — pushing bills that simply protect employees’ rights to be able to practice their faith consistent within an employment situation. And those things which were unanimously passed are now being fought against.

It’s a hostility to religion that we’ve never seen in the history of our country. And I read an interesting article the other day; it’s actually not the free exercise of religion that is being attacked, it’s actually a new religion that is being established. So we have the state establishing a new religion, a secular state religion, a secular orthodoxy that everybody is going to have to comply with. We don’t have as the threat was at the time of our Founders, the Church of England imposing the English church on America. We have now the secular church that is being imposed on this country and anybody that defects is subject to persecution and prosecution. That is a very serious threat to liberty in America.
Syndicate content

Rick Santorum Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Monday 07/06/2015, 1:25pm
Delivering the keynote speech to a National Organization for Marriage gala last week, Rick Santorum denounced the Supreme Court’s decision on marriage equality, criticizing the ruling as “a loss for America.” At the gala, the GOP presidential candidate signed NOM’s candidate pledge, with his campaign boasting that Santorum was “proud to sign and fully support the National Organization for Marriage's presidential pledge.” As we’ve noted, NOM’s pledge is about much more than simply asking candidates to oppose same-sex marriage. Santorum also... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Friday 06/26/2015, 11:36am
This morning, the Supreme Court ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional, effectively legalizing gay marriage in all 50 states. Needless to say, anti-gay Religious Right activists and Republican politicians who have repeatedly warned that such a ruling would literally destroy America have not reacted well, as exemplified by Bryan Fischer, who fired off a series of tweets declaring that Satan is now dancing in the streets of America: June 26, 2015: a date which will live in infamy. — Bryan Fischer (@BryanJFischer) June 26, 2015 From a moral standpoint, 6/26... MORE >
Peter Montgomery, Friday 06/19/2015, 4:49pm
In the past few decades, politically conservative American Catholics and their allies in the Republican Party got used to having the public voice of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops serving as a politically useful one that prioritized opposition to legal abortion and LGBT equality. So, needless to say, some are having a hard time adjusting to Pope Francis, whose critiques of the dehumanizing excesses of modern corporate capitalism have dismayed some right-wing Catholics. Now, the Pope’s new encyclical on climate change and care for the planet, which apparently did not pay... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Thursday 06/18/2015, 5:32pm
PFAW: PFAW Foundation Mourns the Loss of Rev. Clementa Pinckney, a Member of Our Family. Andrew Kaczynski @ BuzzFeed: Ben Carson Compares Abortion To Slavery. David Edwards @ Raw Story: Rick Santorum thinks white Charleston shooter chose victims at black church ‘indiscriminately’. Jeremy Hooper: The one where Brian Brown attacks @FakeDanSavage's son at an anti-gay church conference. Andrew Kirell @ Mediaite: Fox’s Steve Doocy and Guest Wonder Whether Charleston Shooting Part of ‘War on Christians’. MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 06/17/2015, 1:53pm
Earlier this month, Rick Santorum participated in a conference call organized by right-wing pastor E.W. Jackson, during which the 2016 presidential hopeful spent most of his time promoting his economic plans. But Santorum's agenda to provide economic opportunity to blue collar workers was obviously not what participants on the call were interested in because as soon as Santorum agreed to answer some questions, the very first thing he was asked about was what he would do as president about the fact that "our children are being forced to accept lifestyles that are totally against our... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Monday 06/15/2015, 11:10am
Last year, Gordon Klingenschmitt was elected to a seat in the Colorado House of Representatives, despite the fact that he was a long-time Religious Right activist with a well-documented history of making outrageous statements. Unsurprisingly, Klingenschmitt's tenure in office has been racked with controversy precisely because he has continued to make those sorts of statements, but that did not dissuade Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum from agreeing to be interviewed by Klingenschmitt for his daily "Pray In Jesus Name" program. Klingenschmitt managed to interview... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Wednesday 06/10/2015, 4:28pm
Rick Santorum called into Glenn Beck's radio program this morning, where he warned that if the Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage, it will be an unconstitutional establishment of religion that, when he becomes president, he will not enforce. Citing the absurd claims made by David Barton on his radio program yesterday, Beck warned that if the Supreme Court strikes down gay marriage bans, the government will strip churches of their tax-exempt status and force them to perform gay marriages, and asked Santorum how he would respond to this if he is elected president. "This is tantamount... MORE >
Peter Montgomery, Wednesday 06/03/2015, 5:29pm
Conservative religious leaders have been delighted to work with parts of corporate America – most notably the Koch brothers’ political networks – to elect candidates who back right-wing social and economic policies. Religious conservatives have championed Citizens United and the demolition of regulations on campaign cash. The Kochs even promote Religious Right leaders who tell their followers that the Bible opposes minimum wage laws, unions, and progressive taxes. But many of America’s biggest companies have also become supporters of equality for gay, lesbian, bisexual... MORE >