RSN August 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Intro: "Standing steadfast as the most socially right-wing candidate in the GOP presidential field, Rick Santorum has repeatedly touted his extreme anti-choice position, which dictates that abortion should be uniformly illegal, even in cases of rape or incest."

Rick Santorum has emerged as the Evangelicals' candidate in the GOP primaries. (photo: Eric Gay/AP)
Rick Santorum has emerged as the Evangelicals' candidate in the GOP primaries. (photo: Eric Gay/AP)



Santorum to Rape Victims: 'Make the Best Out of a Bad Situation'

By Tanya Somanader, ThinkProgress

24 January 12

 

tanding steadfast as the most socially right-wing candidate in the GOP presidential field, Rick Santorum has repeatedly touted his extreme anti-choice position, which dictates that abortion should be uniformly illegal, even in cases of rape or incest. He even suggested that physicians who provide abortions to such victims should be criminally charged.

Last Friday, CNN's Piers Morgan asked Santorum to clarify his reasoning behind such a callous position. Insisting that "it's not a matter of religious values," Santorum explained that sexual assault victims should "accept this horribly created" pregnancy because it is "nevertheless a gift in a very broken way" and that, when it comes down to it, a victim just has "to make the best out of a bad situation":

Santorum: Well, you can make the argument that if she doesn't have this baby, if she kills her child, that that, too, could ruin her life. And this is not an easy choice. I understand that. As horrible as the way that that son or daughter and son was created, it still is her child. And whether she has that child or doesn't, it will always be her child. And she will always know that. And so to embrace her and to love her and to support her and get her through this very difficult time, I've always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created - in the sense of rape - but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you. As you know, we have to, in lots of different aspects of our life. We have horrible things happen. I can't think of anything more horrible. But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation.


The problem with Santorum's sense of humanity is that it doesn't seem to extend to the victim. The emotional and physical trauma endured during and after a sexual assault often leaves a woman feeling robbed of any control over her own body and welfare. Robbing a woman of the choice to decide what to do with such "horribly created" consequences only contributes to the victim's trauma.

What's more, Santorum's argument forces a woman in these circumstances to share his religious beliefs and "accept what God has given to [her.]" A woman may very well share his belief and decide to carry the pregnancy to the term, but the fundamental point is that that should be her choice - not the government's, and certainly not Santorum's.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+331 # Trish42 2012-01-24 16:39
Unless God raped her, how is it a gift? And until Santorum is raped and carries her rapist's baby for 9 months, I don't give a damn what he has to say!
 
 
+166 # SpazzMoe 2012-01-24 16:45
Amen to that! What a sanctimonious douchebag he is!
 
 
+48 # NanFan 2012-01-25 05:50
Once again, this "Dick" has come up with a truly fallacious argument, where he flagrantly and clearly does not get the term: law! It is federally LEGAL to get an abortion from a doctor. To say that doctors should be tried as criminals is to not understand that that is not possible, nor does it have anything to do with "government," but rather is purely a religious belief and nothing more.

And because it's purely religious, not grounded in any sensible understanding of the law, this "Dick" calls the fetus "a son or daughter," "a child" that would be killed. Again, look at the law...what a "dick!"

This guy couldn't argue his way out of a paper bag, let alone be president...and what the hell is he doing as a senator?????

I can't waste another breath on this rabid, misogynistic "thing" we call a human. Not!
 
 
+33 # AndreM5 2012-01-25 11:27
He is not a Senator. He was overwhelmingly voted out of office after one term.
 
 
+9 # NanFan 2012-01-26 05:55
Thank you, AndreM5. I did not know that and actually, the way we continue to call Newt "Mr. Speaker," when he hasn't been for many years, and others "Governor" when they haven't been for some time, it's not a wonder that having never even heard of Santimonious... I mean...never mind...when I hear him called "Senator," I should do my homework.

But really...how in the WORLD did he ever get to be a senator in the first place, albeit now voted out? Oh, wait...I forgot...REPUBL ICAN...far right...yada yada. And the beat goes on and on and on.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 16:37
NanFan: Why not start a petition and get it on facebook and twitter, etc. & so forth to rally signatures to get this guy out of politics once and for all. The beat does not have to go on. Look at Scott Walker and how the petitions are working against him.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 16:31
NanFan: Santorium is an ill-informed,
non-sensible, cognitively impaired misogynist and has no place in politics as a Senator and POTUS candidate but your protests would be more effective if you would lose obscenities (ie), ]dick}.
It brings you down to a level where your very cogent remarks are less effective than if you spoke with more dignity and less hysteria and animosity. I share your sentiments about his unreflectve chauvinism, his opportunistic playing on the "tea party" idealogue and his use of "religiosity bantering" which has no place in government no matter how much these "tea bag" people want to merge church and state. Santorium is a rabid misogynistict but don't call any human being a "thing" because it is both semantically and spiritually wrong which weakens your argument.
 
 
+98 # Barkingcarpet 2012-01-24 17:10
Screw him!
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 16:39
This is the kind of linguistic response that helps him. Stop the obscenities and start a petition.
 
 
+91 # lincolnimp 2012-01-24 17:39
Goes double for me, Trish!
 
 
+125 # X Dane 2012-01-24 19:22
Trish, that's not all. He also want to outlaw CONTRACEPTION?? . He and the rest of the GOP religious fanatics want to turn back the clock. They are so completely out of touch.
They want TOTAL control over the UPPITY women.

I think they HATE to see that women are now in position of power, take charge of their bodies, and have children when they want, married or not. This drive them crazy. Their puritanical thinking can't stand it.
We MUST be pushed back in a subservient position.

Women are born to SERVE men, in their warped thinking. Boy ARE THEY WRONG.

IN NOVEMBER WE NEED TO THROW ALL THE RELIGIOUS FANATICS OUT OF ANY POSITION OF GOVERNMENT. ( men OR women)

That should be possible, for "they" say that more women, than men, VOTE. So LET'S GO LADIES.
 
 
+31 # AndreM5 2012-01-25 11:28
These creeps are just trying to enforce their own form of Sharia Law, they just don't know it (or much else for that matter).
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 17:23
XDANE: You Rock! Get him OUT OF OUR GOVERNMENT! People in WIS (and others) protested for Labor Unions and Scott Walker is on his way OUT. Women need to come together nationally and use their anger proactively to get Santorium out of politics for good. Simultaneously, we would be sending a message to the world that women have not lost their choice when it comes to being in control of our bodies, our careers and our destinies. Palin, Newt Gingrich, Santorium and the rest think they have a foot in the door with their foolish propaganda where they'll be able to outlaw Roe and Wade
with this hypocritical, religiosity tea party idealogue. They actually want to move women backward in time. Well, it's time for women who value their autonomy to demand that Rick Santorium and his ilk get out of politics if they think they are going to take away our hard-earned right to choose and the law that protects our liberty to be in control of our bodies, minds, and our future!
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 17:30
XDane: We can't wait until November. We need to throw him out now! PETITION!
 
 
+23 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-01-25 05:55
A the young man, marginally mentally retarded, I've been assisting lately getting SSI hates the woman, his natural mother, who carried him in her womb 9 months, then tried to drown him not long after giving him birth.

Santorum, on a totally different road than the Catholic progessives across the country and in CTA, who awarded their annual award to the nun who o.k.ed a necessary abortion and was then kicked out of her job and church, and all other neo-con, phony baloney Christians/evan gelicals, the crowd who consider woman nothing more than breeding machines and pew filler-uppers, are anything but humanitarian.
 
 
+102 # Spleedeladee 2012-01-24 16:45
Santorum's position on pregnancy by rape assumes the false premise that God's "gift" can make rape a good thing. Santorum is a sexist, and further victimizes women through no fault of their own. Would he feel the same way if it were his daughter or wife?
 
 
+48 # Texas Aggie 2012-01-24 19:12
Probably. I doubt that he is any more considerate of her than he is of anyone else.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 17:31
Texas Aggie: Can you imagine being the wife or daughter of Rick Santorium? OMG!
 
 
+31 # CL38 2012-01-24 22:31
Or, IF HE WAS THE VICTIM???? Would he carry the rapist's issue?
 
 
+53 # CL38 2012-01-24 22:38
What Republicans are doing is advocating a rapist's right to force a rape victim to bear his child.
 
 
+1 # Cambridgemac 2012-01-28 09:24
Remember, "Corporations are People, too, My Friend." And they've been raping us for decades - with enthusiastic support of the Rethugs. So, at least Santorum is consistent. He supports all forms of rape and all rapists. (Although I suspect that women who rape men might prove to be the exception....)
 
 
+26 # CL38 2012-01-24 22:47
What he, and the right are doing is supporting rights for rapists' to force their victims to give birth to their issue!
 
 
+21 # Lolanne 2012-01-25 11:32
Quoting Spleedeladee:
Santorum's position on pregnancy by rape assumes the false premise that God's "gift" can make rape a good thing. Santorum is a sexist, and further victimizes women through no fault of their own. Would he feel the same way if it were his daughter or wife?


The answer is hell no, he would not, and did not. His wife had an abortion some time back. See http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/16/985393/-Rick-Santorum-is-against-abortion-for-any-reason,-with-one-exception-. Of course, it was OK for her, she was an exception to his rule for every other woman.

Santorum is a hypocrite as well as a sanctimonious fool. He needs to crawl back under his rock and stay there.
 
 
+2 # rednancy 2012-01-26 13:28
I read that the Santoriums had a 20-week “partial birth abortion”. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/16/985393/-Rick-Santorum-is-against-abortion-for-any-reason,-with-one-exception-
Delving into the mysteries of the Santorium psyche, I wonder: Does he suffer such turmoil over the loss of that child that he is moved to act that remorse out in the public arena by proclaiming legislation for others? If so, he needs to develop a deeper internal connection to the God of his understanding to be able to hold and accept his personal decision in the light of this deep paradox that occurred in his own life. His acting out suggests his inability to deal with the deep conundrums of Life. Perhaps he thinks along these lines: If he cannot fully forgive/accept himself, how could a “lesser” person without staunch beliefs?
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 17:39
You are assuming that misogynists reflect on such things. If they did, would they be misogynist-wome n haters?
Also, I do not know the reason or circumstances of his wive's abortion and if it was her choice or theirs> Does anyone on the Post know why there was an abortion?
 
 
0 # X Dane 2012-01-29 21:41
Dorian, There WAS NO abortion. Joe Klein, TIME, wrote about it. Karen, Santorum's wife, did not want to abort a dead baby, so she delivered the baby. It nearly killed her. And she realized later that it was not the right choice, for she had 3 minor children at home.
I do not doubt Joe Klein
.
I can't stand Santorum, as you noticed from my earlier comments. But I will not lie. That is for republicans.
 
 
+89 # SFgiuseppe 2012-01-24 16:45
We only want babies conceived in love. The other ones that get through grow up to become Rick Santorums!!!
 
 
+85 # Karlus58 2012-01-24 16:46
How can you even counter such insane ideology?
 
 
+21 # bugbuster 2012-01-24 18:18
By taking care not to be his mirror image on the left as some are. Not you Karlus58. Not from this post. This is a general comment in my own obscure little crusade against ideology per se.

Sooner or later ideologies of *all* kinds will have to be put away so that real practical problem-solving can begin. The sooner the better, I say.
 
 
-72 # Kiwikid 2012-01-24 18:52
So... which is the insane bit? Clearly he has a different viewpoint from yours - I'd like to hear yours articilated a bit more clearly
 
 
+67 # Texas Aggie 2012-01-24 19:16
The part where he doesn't show any consideration for the woman who just went through about the most traumatic event that could occur to her. The part where he demands that for the rest of her life she be constantly reminded what was done to her and that she should sacrifice the rest of her life as an unwed mother in poverty for Santorum's ideology.
 
 
-66 # Kiwikid 2012-01-24 21:54
I didn't see or hear him demanding anything. It was clear (to me any way) that he recognises the excrutiating difficulty this puts women in this situation in. Just as clearly his ideology is different from yours - its a matter of opinion as to which is the one which is insane, though I don't doubt that on this post my red score will go throught the roof while those who rail against the 'fanaticism' of the pro-life' brigade pour out their invective. Its clarifying to see that fanaticism isn't the sole prerogative of the right.
 
 
+32 # stonecutter 2012-01-25 09:33
@ Andrew
Your comment above is a defining example of false equivalency, the kind of hard right bone-headedness that has removed the moral/ethical secular canon we used to label "shared values" from any consideration in the public presentation of ideas or opinions, especially in the media as it pertains to public policy, and even the existence of fact.

Bluntly stated, your entitled to your cockamamie, Bible-driven point of view, but it is an affront to long-held concepts of what is right, legal, fair and just in this constitutional society, where separation of church and state, and its court-tested offshoots, are a bedrock principle, notwithstanding the likes of you and Santorum.
 
 
-15 # Kiwikid 2012-01-25 11:53
So many assumptions, Stonecutter, and so little content! Again, rather than attempting to address the real issue we have invective dressed up with pious, fine sounding but empty statements pouring forth and not actuallly saying anything. Read 'ruttaro' below, who though he makes no attempt to explain why Santorum is wrong, at least demonstrates that he understands the issue.
 
 
+8 # stonecutter 2012-01-25 16:19
@ Andrew
I have no patience for your pseudo-academic sophistry. Either you're a right wing troll sent here to break stones, or you're what I previously labeled you...a Bible thumper with a vocabulary. Either way, the future of this country is at stake, and my invective is appropriate for the likes of you. I'm not interested in "understanding" someone like Santorum, I'm interested in sending him back to the fanatical obscurity where he belongs.
 
 
+4 # ruttaro 2012-01-25 17:36
Andrew,
I state below that I unequivocally disagree with Santorum. The premise of his argument is wrong and therefore he is wrong. I simply wanted to show that no matter how wrong he is, his reasoning is flawless. It's those other sanctimonious blowhards who start from the same false premise and then go on to prove that they are wrong. They blow their whole argument to shreds by giving choice to women in those exceptions. If one believes that life begins at conception, is therefore a person deserving of equal protection under the law, then it seems to me no one can allow for exceptions. Furthermore, if, according to these self-righteous people the fetus is God's child or his will, too, (warning to all who want to jump me: I DON"T BELIEVE THIS MALARKEY ONE BIT!) then providing a woman with the choice to end a pregnancy because of rape or incest or her life is threatened by it, if nothing else proves that they believe that there are two classes of fetuses: those who are innocent (whatever that means) persons loved by their God "murdered" by abortionists and those fetuses that are not persons at all and therefore can be aborted. Their idiotic logic distinguishes two different outcomes from the same biological event. That distinction amply demonstrates they are fools spewing nonsense to an audience that fears free thought.
Santorum is wrong from the start because he assumes that what he believes is therefore fact and we all know that beliefs are just beleifs.
 
 
+11 # bugbuster 2012-01-25 11:24
Let's clarify: If a woman gets raped and becomes pregnant from it, she should be able to abort the baby if she wants to. Period. That's the position. We'll have to agree to differ on it, and may the best organized an most powerful faction win.
 
 
-6 # Kiwikid 2012-01-25 16:54
Its the 'Period' that bothers me. I've never suggested that a woman who has been raped shouldn't be able to secure an abortion - I can't imagine many decisions that would be more difficult to have to make. That its apparently a no brainer for many people who think that of course she should just go ahead and do it, that bothers me. What bothers me is the tone of most of the posts that somehow its a self-evident truth that a woman's right to choose always trumps the unborn's right to life. As one who was conceived before my parents married, I'm grateful that the technology and choice were not available to my mother to have me aborted to simply save her a life time of shame and embarrassment (BTW my mum and I have a great relationship). My hunch is that the woman I've been happily married to for 30 years, our sons and their wives, and most of those in the collective circles of our influence are also grateful. There, of course, is the possibilty that many reading my posts will wish it had been otherwise :-)
 
 
+13 # X Dane 2012-01-25 20:38
Andrew, It seems to me that you are a man. As such you have NO IDEA, what a violent act.. which rape is..does to a woman. This has NOTHING to do with ideology, for a woman.
Her body is VIOLENTLY INVADED, and you would have to be beyond Mother Teresa saintly to want to see the result of the attack on you, daily.
A poor innocent child will most certainly suffer too.

Few men can understand what a woman would feel. Most of us are physically weaker than a man.

Life is tough and we try to be strong and competent, so to be reminded daily that you were NOT able to defend your own body must be an awful experience.

Since men have no way of understanding, they should butt out and definitely can the ideology crap. That is right wing religious blather.
and government. STAY THE HELL OUT OF OUR LIVES AND BODIES
 
 
+9 # ruttaro 2012-01-24 23:10
Although I cannot agree at all with Santorum, I'm going to give him credit for consistency, as flaky and sanctimonious as he is. When compared to those other "pro-life" Repugnants and right wing evangelicals (mostly all men) at least his position is logical. If one presumes, as Santorum does, that life begins at conception and therefore deserves all the rights and protection under the law, then his argument makes sense, even if the presumption is questionable. His view is that the fetus/person is innocent regardless of how it was conceived. It is those other disgusting hypocrites whose pro-life argument is hollowed out by the very logic or should I say lack of logic. Guys like Romney, the Newt and most other Republicans who claim to believe that a fetus is a person from the moment of conception and thus claim a woman has no right to terminate a pregnancy unless due to rape, incest or the life of the mother is at risk. Well, those exceptions provoke the question what happened to innocent at the moment of conception? Thus we see the flaw in their whole argument since they give a woman choice under those circumstances and in the process create a form of conditional innocence. It seems to me that while pandering to the "values" voter these "Christian loving, caring" Republicans are saying that they will over rule God in these extreme cases, demoting the fetus from innocent person to a glob of cells. I'll give Santorum an "A" on consistency, "F" for fool.
 
 
+27 # X Dane 2012-01-25 03:32
Ruttaro, I respect your view, and what you think of Santorum versus Romney and Gingrich, but.......I think, .....and so do millions of Americans. That it is none of his business, what a woman does in regard to her own body.

The republicans constantly tell us that government is too big... They will make it BIGGER, by interfering in women's private business,

Get out of our bedrooms, and leave our bodies, and decisions about them to us.
 
 
+14 # AndreM5 2012-01-25 11:34
Republican ALWAYS make government bigger just as they do with debt and deficits, not to mention their wars. They never seem to be around to fix things once they break them.
 
 
+2 # ruttaro 2012-01-25 17:07
X Dane, I could not agree more with you. Choice is precisely why we need to be pro-choice: it expresses the trust and rights that gives women the power over their own bodies and no government should ever trespass into this area. All I'm pointing out is the logical consistency of Santorum's position. I'm not defending it at all nor would I. Just as I'm pointing out that those other bellowing self-rightous Christians who claim to be pro-life are logically inconsistent when they make exceptions. They are pro-choice only in those exceptions but by allowing a woman to choose in cases of rape. incest or life threatening concede that a fetus does not have full personhood and therefore the right to life of a fetus and full protection under the constitution falls completely apart. Say what you will about Santorum, but his reasoning lines up perfectly with his beliefs. Santorum's premise that a fetus is a person and deserves full protection is not something I agree with at all but his position is logically consistent. As to Romney, Newt, Perry and all those other nitwits they haven't a leg to stand on. The only thing about them that is clear is that they will pander to their audience no matter how low or ridiculous their beliefs. They hang themselves on their own petard. I just wish we had a responsible, thoughtful media that would challenge them on their utter nonsense.
 
 
0 # X Dane 2012-01-25 21:03
Ruttaro, I fully understand you and agree with what you said. I like that we can have polite discussions.

And Andrew is wrong. I am certainly glad he has a loving relationship with his mother.

I, on the other hand have sometime been ahead of my time. I started out that way.
My parents married. because I was on the way. I think they were in love at the time, but if they'd had more time to develope their relatinship. They might not have married.

They never should have. I loved both my mother and father, and they loved me, but they were wrong together, and divorced after 20 difficult years.
 
 
+22 # Regina 2012-01-25 00:38
The insane bit is his fear and hatred of women, which underlie his creed of penis power. His misogyny comes from the religious noose around his skull -- can't assume there's a brain in there.
 
 
+13 # Rick Levy 2012-01-25 00:48
Would you still agree with Santorum if a relative of yours were raped? Would you give the same "advice" he did?
 
 
+2 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 18:12
Andrew: You mispelled articulated. Are you old enough to be educated in Feminism? A woman is no longer regarded as subservient to or the "property" of a man, which means she has the right to be in control of her body and her mind. In a patriarchal culture, men are the authoritarian fidures and women are subservient and the most effective way to maintain this is by taking away a women's right to be in control of her body and decision-making . Keeping her barefoot and pregnant was VIP because it kept the woman dependent and weary! Feminists fought very hard for "Roe and Wade" which has made it legal for a woman to choose abortion. Much of what Pro-Choice is about is Dignity, Respect and women having the choice to function at a maximal level in and out of the house. However, ANDREW, I may be wrong but I'm not sure Karkuss58 who has made some brilliant comments on this Post was referring "insane ideology" to the rather insidious comment made by SFgluseppe or Santorium's moratorium on a woman's right to choose. Insane might be too strong a term for Sanatorium because the world is full of chauvinists and "misogynists". BUT if he were to call him a woman hating, authoritarian, misinformed, hypocritical, opportunistic weenie who would do the world a favor by getting out of politics, Karluss58 would be hitting the target which is Rick Santorium right on the mark. Santorium's viewpoint isn't just "different" as you suggest. it's politically, academically and intellectually WRONG!
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 17:40
Larlus58: I AGREE WITH YOU!
 
 
+27 # burner 2012-01-24 16:49
Ditto
 
 
+83 # happycamper690 2012-01-24 17:01
All of these right-wing nutjobs profess to want to keep government out of our lives, yet they all want to govern how and when we reproduce. Could there be any greater invasion of government into one's life? A true libertarian (is there one?) would be for freedom of choice.
 
 
+23 # CandH 2012-01-24 17:08
This is a repeated "talking point" from the luny-christo-ri ght (wasn't it the Repub NV Senate contender against Reid who said it in '08 first?)

Yeah, I agree with Trish42. All those men that rape, hey, their "gods" in Santorum/luny-christo-ri ght world. And I'll add, all the womens who get pregnant from said "gods" rapes, are "Marys" I guess. That would explain these luny-christo-ri ghts treating women like barn animals...
 
 
+68 # Barbara K 2012-01-24 17:16
I wonder what kind of good situation he could find if he were raped, if his wife or daughter were raped? There is no good situation to be made out of the bad situation. What a cesspool brain.

NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN !!

our future depends on it
 
 
+33 # bubbiesue 2012-01-24 17:16
Amen to Trish 42 as well as to T. Sonnander. Santorum should try being raped first. That's an invasion into one's personal space. Then add having to look the evidence of the assault in the face all your like. No wonder some women hate their children.
 
 
+87 # lilpat126 2012-01-24 17:32
Mr Santorum can go to Hell and take the rapist with him.He will never know what it is like to have that child. If you are a young woman on her own is he going to pay her bills? Babysit so she can work? Or does he want her to become a "Welfare Queen" so he can dis her some more. He has no right to say aye,yes or no about someone
else's pregnancy. Keep his nose out of other peoples uterus. How many of these kids conceived this way has he adopted?
Why can't people mind their own business. I think that his taking a dead baby home so the other kids could see it is about the cruelest thing he could have done to them. It is something out of a horror movie, and a nightmare maker. He certainly did not have any respect for that child. It was a human not a doll. Remember those kids pick out your nursing home. This is one warped dude and has no place trying to lead a nation.
 
 
+14 # Texas Aggie 2012-01-24 19:19
I like the reference to the nursing home. With his luck, though, he'll have a bunch of nicely brainwashed kids who will think just like him.
 
 
+1 # kelly 2012-01-25 12:20
Maybe when he passes his kids will bring him home and introduce him to their children or set him up like Lenin in Red Square.
 
 
+94 # jsheats 2012-01-24 17:44
"We have horrible things happen. I can't think of anything more horrible."

I can: seeing Rick Santorum elected to any public office whatsoever, never mind the presidency.
 
 
-10 # howard1912 2012-01-24 18:16
you meant "not" seeing? I hope?
 
 
+144 # Buddha 2012-01-24 17:50
Typical GOP, concern for a "person" begins at conception and ends at birth.
 
 
+22 # John Gill 2012-01-24 18:56
Awesome line! never read it before. good one Buddha
 
 
+112 # MEBrowning 2012-01-24 17:53
I'm going to make the best of a bad situation: I'm voting for Obama in November.
 
 
+40 # Steve5551 2012-01-24 17:54
Is it just me or do any of you find that Santorum sounds a lot like Dan Quayle? What planet is he from? Santorum needs a crash course in reality. I remember when Quayle was asked what he would do if his wife or daughter would happen to be raped. He said, "We will look at our options". He and Santorum are totally divorced from reality. Neither would ever make even a pimple on a president"s ass.
 
 
+46 # MizKatz 2012-01-24 17:57
Mr. Santorum and his wife have two young adult daughters. I wonder if he would hold the same intractable beliefs if (God forbid) one of his own daughters was so assaulted. Mr. Santorum is either lying to those who listen to him, or to himself or to both when he claims that"it's not a matter of religious values." I totally agree with Ms. Somanader -- his defense of his position smacks of his own religious values that he would attempt to impose on every one else, given the opportunity. He and all the other anti-choice people seeking office should focus on the future of our nation, our economy, etc. and stay the hell out of our wombs!!
 
 
+29 # David Starr 2012-01-24 17:59
Once again, Santorum, or more appropriately put, Sanitarium, prioritized stupidity over intelligence. Shades of the "Blah" people. Suggestion to him: Remove head from ass before speaking. Wait! Never mind. Reinsert head back into ass. It doesn't do any good. Interesting how Righties like Sanitarium speak for their god, e.g., re. abortion/procho ice. If they think that God is working in mysterious ways, how do they really know if they're getting his/her/its "messages" correct? Maybe their god left abstact messages in their voicemail & they rack their brains trying to figure them out, playing them over & over; like banging their heads against the wall. Or maybe someone like Sanitarium gets a cheap thrill out of being a "messenger" for his lord; maybe feeling as "supreme" as the "supreme being."
 
 
+7 # kelly 2012-01-25 12:26
Hard to say, hard to say...remember all the candidates that were told by God to run? Either they heard him incorrectly, were listening to the wrong station or some intergalactic meanie was screwing with the message because none of those idiots got it right. Maybe, just maybe, they should think before they speak or at least think before they speak for their god.
 
 
+4 # Cassandra2012 2012-01-25 17:00
Yes,that was my first reaction: is he speaking to God and actually HEARING HER ANSWERS? If so, he is in sore need of psychiatric help...hearing voices.
And if God is also speaking to Bachmann, or Mit , or Newt and saying different (or the same) things , why would anyone believe what he is 'whispering in your ear??'
 
 
+114 # lennylane 2012-01-24 18:01
and Mr Santorum, your party will be there to support her with health care? and the unwanted child with good education, good health care etc? and no, prison doesn't count
 
 
+48 # Art947 2012-01-24 18:02
By that ignoramous's logic, rape cannot be a crime as it provides a "Gift from God." In addition, if someone breaks into your home and steals your property, it is also not a crime, as it must be God's will that the individual did the act. When are we going to be rid of this fool?
 
 
+34 # CCB5er34 2012-01-24 18:10
He is a vile, disgusting disgrace, and that there are people like him that agree with him is horrifying in the extreme. There are no words adequate to describe my contempt for this B*****D!!
 
 
+44 # howard1912 2012-01-24 18:15
Who is he to dictate what women should do in the case of rape or incest? He should not interfere in other people's medical decisions. Let women make up their own minds, we do have them you know, we don't need your control over us.
 
 
+30 # KittatinyHawk 2012-01-24 19:48
We go into other Countries, bad mouth their treatment of women but then these Chauvanists can undo laws concerning our equality.
SWantorum was a pig when a Senator and it hasn't changed. only now he is dragging God and Catholics down with him
 
 
+7 # Cassandra2012 2012-01-25 17:03
Yes, a member of the Christian 'Taliban' (that are so afraid of losing control over women they need to keep them undereducated, and if possible barefoot,depend ent and PREGNANT (by any means).)
 
 
+43 # jwb110 2012-01-24 18:15
It's official, he is a nut job. I would also put money on his own daughters not carrying a full term rape or incest pregnancy.
 
 
+35 # kgolden@wi.rr.com 2012-01-24 18:17
Spoken like one of the good ol' boys who has no concept of the trauma this is for a rape victim. I am no supporter of abortion but I wouldn't pretend to insist a victim of this crime have no choice about her life. To choose abortion is also a very traumatic choice and would leave scars for sure, but it is for the victim to weigh the choices Sanatorum would deny her. Men have no business dictating their values for the world. Maybe Santorum should look to history and the Inquisition to understand how men often get it wrong. There were no women condeming Joan to the fire! kg
 
 
+28 # coati 2012-01-24 19:31
yes and misogyny is a fundamental belief in Santorum's religion of choice. Santorum would probably align with the torturers of the Inquisition; that close to 9 million women were killed in the Inquisition (source Andrea Dworkin ) would probably give him a thrill. There is that strange
and inverse perversion in women-haters.
 
 
+37 # chuckw38 2012-01-24 18:17
My God !!!! This Idiot has absolutely NO respect for the rights of a Woman for her body!! Unbelievable!!! And unbelievably naive of this Dumb Sexist!!!! I can't believe ANY Woman would vote for him, nor would any truly Feminist Male.....
 
 
+12 # KittatinyHawk 2012-01-24 19:49
Non e of them do. this is just a way to keep our minds from the real subjects. they cannot dictate to us, I would love to see them try.
 
 
+49 # Kit 2012-01-24 18:24
You are precisely right, Buddha. The GOP claims to be pro-life, but they are really pro-birth. Once you're born, you are on your own -- that is, until you're old enough to go to war.
 
 
+29 # Caballero69 2012-01-24 18:24
Santorum regularly demonstrates why his name deserved to be defined on the Internet as "the frothy mix ...."

He often sounds like he has a stone for a heart and shite for brains. These remarks are no exception to his ongoing pious idiocy.
 
 
+31 # angelfish 2012-01-24 18:32
I'm with MEBrowning! Let's ALL make the best of a bad situation and keep these Fanatics OUT of the White House!
 
 
+58 # colvictoria 2012-01-24 18:34
These same politicians who would force rape victims to carry a fetus to term are the same ones who want to take away food stamps, cut funding to public education, take away Medicaid, Social Security and any other form of a social safety net for vulnerable moms and kids.
Mr. Santorum if you are PRO LIFE support life from the womb to the tomb!
Watching this circus called the Republican Debates is nauseating and migraine producing.
Scary stuff!!!!
 
 
+22 # suzyskier 2012-01-24 18:38
What can you say to such a monsterous religious zealot? What a jerk. Yes I agree with lennylane, will you and your bretheren on the right help support this child. Of course not.
 
 
+31 # Judi 2012-01-24 18:47
If the victim is to accept what God gives her , then God must have given her the rapist and the rapist is God's creation so all must be well with the world.!
What a sanctimonious ass Santorum is.
 
 
+27 # fhunter 2012-01-24 19:06
Santorum and all the people who voted for him are criminally stupid. They should be put in an insane asylum with Santorum their President.
 
 
+31 # panhead49 2012-01-24 19:14
I do not want to hear one single word from any human that doesn't have a uterus uttered about uteri.
 
 
+21 # coati 2012-01-24 19:18
Uhoh. When did Santorum join the Taliban? Please consider these suggestions: 1) keep url's of S's statements like this (there will be more) and flood fb and youtube with video shorts with the url list in the 'text' function. Link to that from other social sites a week before elections. To the Newt's list: add recent statement about ordering federal marshals to arrest federal judges he didn't like...The double speak and switch and bait will continue, document it and share. 2) Sign the petitions to eliminate the Electoral College as they can be bought out on the side by big money. 3) Never give up for freedom and keep scanning for ways to create positive non violent change.
 
 
+39 # reiverpacific 2012-01-24 19:19
I'm reminded of a poor Andaluz "peasant" woman who gave birth to yet one more of many children in Franco's Spain when I lived there, being totally under the thumb of a medievalist Catholic Church which of course eternally damned every woman who even considered CONTRACEPTION, let alone abortion (and they accepted it!) who didn't look very happy about the birth at all, when she simply stated resignedly as if in reply to my congratulations , "¡Otra boca pa' dar comer!" ("Another mouth to feed!").
Yet from the party who condemns as many people to peasant, drone or slave status as possible to enhance the bottom line of the "haves" without any recourse to benefits, care, treatment or even compassion, this is the very medievalist society they are trying to re-establish and Sanitary-odium is a poster-boy for such degree of mean-spirited and blinkered posturing.
I wouldn't even dignify this article -which needs to be shouted from the rooftops- with a post if it weren't so representative of a deeply anti-democratic and de-humanized element in the voting -yes, voting- population that has enough numbers to get this ill-conceived son of a dumpster on any ballot.
They want to "Occupy" your uterus and refuse to even acknowledge that it takes two (or more) to create poverty and irresponsibilit y.
 
 
+31 # Sue52 2012-01-24 19:24
If Mr. Santorum were himself raped, then forced to watch his wife be raped, then told he had to raise that child, he just might have an idea of what "rape" does to a person. Until then, he nor any man should be able to determine squat about how or why a woman makes a choice to have an abortion.
 
 
+33 # Texas Aggie 2012-01-24 19:26
The proper comeback to this question is whether Santorum is willing to sponsor government programs to ensure that both the woman and the child get an education, necessary support like child care, medical care, food and subsidized housing, and all the rest of it. If he won't agree with the whole program, then he has to explain why she should suffer the consequences of Santorum's ideology, and not him.
 
 
+23 # sandyboy 2012-01-24 19:52
Does he consider how a child will feel knowing it was the unwanted product of a brutal assault, that mom didn't want he or she to be born and that "dad" was a monster who may not even know he fathered a kid? It really is quite staggering that anyone would consider Sanitarium (!) or indeed any of the other GOP pretenders as suitable for any kind of responsible office, let alone the presidency.
 
 
+22 # Legion 2012-01-24 19:56
Santorum. Add an extra vowel, change one vowel and add one syllable to his name and you have the place where he ought to be---sanitarium . He has no empathy for the victims of sexual violence and the consequences which they bear, especially if Uncle Ricky decides that the woman shall carry her baby to term and keep him or her. Santorum is determined to be the biggest ass he can be, which seems to be a trait very much in vogue among GOP candidates. Would Ricky care to subsidize rape victims and pay for their babies' adoption arrangements?
 
 
+16 # margpark 2012-01-24 20:01
It would be difficult to carry a child sired by someone you hate and give it good loving care when it was born. In almost every case abortion is called for, but if the victim mother doesn't want an abortion, it is probably better to put the baby up for adoption. Someone will love it and care for it without horrible memories of how it was created.
 
 
+17 # in deo veritas 2012-01-24 20:24
This insane degenerate makes even the worst of the other contenders look like they are respectable members of the human race. No wonder the good people of PA bounced his sorry butt.
 
 
-67 # Joeconserve 2012-01-24 20:25
Absolutely none of you understand the meaning of life. None of you recognize the cooperation that exists between God and man (male & female) in the creative act of life however the act is carried out. None of you understand that the resultant life carries the image and likeness of God and that God will take care of that life. All of you should be thankful that your parents chose to have you. It is beyond me that anyone would deny any human person the opportunity to have an eternal life with God. It is beyond me that life is considered so worthless by all of you. But, then, none of you understand life!!!
 
 
+37 # CL38 2012-01-24 21:10
When you are raped and then FORCED to give birth to the issue of the rapist, you can have a voice in this matter. Until then, it is ABSOLUTELY NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS. BUTT THE HELL OUT. You are completely lacking in compassion and empathy for the REAL victim, here, the victim of rape. You are a MISOGYNIST.
 
 
+15 # reiverpacific 2012-01-25 11:26
Quoting Joeconserve:
Absolutely none of you understand the meaning of life. None of you recognize the cooperation that exists between God and man (male & female) in the creative act of life however the act is carried out. None of you understand that the resultant life carries the image and likeness of God and that God will take care of that life. All of you should be thankful that your parents chose to have you. It is beyond me that anyone would deny any human person the opportunity to have an eternal life with God. It is beyond me that life is considered so worthless by all of you. But, then, none of you understand life!!!

What a smug, patronizing piece of reactionary pap! Try telling the billions of religiously driven conceived then abandoned children in the world including the USA, who don't even make it to one year old and if they do, would face a miserable life in increasingly de-humanizing societies including this one. Your God is really helping them along isn't he??!!
Or how 'bout those who will defend the fetus in a womb even unto murder but will happily send the healthy slightly matured fully formed product thereof to war as cannon-fodder.
ALL life is sacred (and not just human) and our species are allegedly given choices whether to reproduce or not but the victim of rape is given none (unless you figger "God told the rapist to do it!).
I've a distinct feeling I'm wasting my time here o' wise one but I have-ta try.
 
 
+4 # X Dane 2012-01-26 16:36
No River, you are so right on. You are NOT wasting your time.

I was in Brazil years ago, at the same time as the "saintly" Pope John Poul II.
I was so furious , that I wanted to kick in the TV sceen, when I heard him say: "Be fruitful and Multiply"???

In a country where there were so many little ragged kids begging, and getting into trouble. They grew up to be REAL criminals, for they were uncared for and illiterate.
At times they were rounded up and put.....Heaven knows where?

So much for a caring God and human beings as sacred to God... Religious jerks are BAD FOR CHILDERN AND OTHER LIVING THINGS.
 
 
+10 # David Starr 2012-01-25 13:05
Joeconserve,
Why does your rant sound so familiar? Oh, that's right, because you think you speak for God, similar to Santorum; or like Bush Jr., mildly put, the smirking incompetant? Religious fanatics seem so cocksure they have IT down that their blind faith will propel them to absurd, & yes, inhumane excesses. To quote a poster here named "Buddha": "Typical GOP, concern for a 'person' begins at conception but ends at birth." Indeed, & the Iraq War is an obvious example w/ "prolifers" supporting it, & in turn the inevitable suffering & deaths of those beyond birth. That's some high-falutin "morality." And in a show of "religious piousness" you imply to support Santorum's position because it's "God's Will"? Meanwhile reality goes on concerning the victim's rights & individual situation. But you seem to think you have a monopoly on understanding the meaning of life, while in reality there's some degree of various interpretations . Meanwhile, who's the "one true god"? God? Zeus? Lono? Krishna? Etc.? Maybe an alchoholic in a drunken stupor has seen the "real god", i.e., a Pink Elephant.
 
 
+5 # Caballero69 2012-01-25 16:11
Those whom I know who believe in God purport to believe God is all-knowing and all-powerful. Therefore, can we conclude that God knows the rapist will rape and permits it to happen? So the rape is in accord with God's will. Can we further conclude that God knows abortion is a possibility and permits abortions to happen. Therefore, abortions are in accord with God's will.

What we cannot conclude is that anyone who purports to know and announce God's will is telling the truth. If an almighty, omnipotent, ubiquitous allows both rapes and abortions, all we can conclude is that God allows them and allows us to make our own decisions.
 
 
+3 # heraldmage 2012-01-25 16:41
In the USA you have a right to your religious believes. However you do not have the right to impose those beliefs on anyone other than your minor children, who once they reach the age of majority can do & think whatever they like.
I know in some Christian sects you are taught that people can't be saved or enter heaven unless they embrace your specific sect of Christianity. Again it is your right to believe that, however you don't have the right to try to convert others through boisterous sidewalk demonstration of your religious beliefs. While certainly you have the right to pray, but we have the right to live in peace & quite. I'm sure your prayer can be heard just as well if they are performed in silence. As far as I'm concerned you can spend every minute of every day in prayer as long as you do it in silence when you are not within the walls of your home or Church.
It's time the evangelical let people live their live as they will. Their soul is not your business. As adults they have the right to make their own decisions regardless of your opinion or religious belief.
You also have no right to impose your religion by holding our taxes hostage. We don't get to choose what our taxes can be used for. But if we did I'd forbid them it to be used for war, human rights abusers, military foreign aid,etc. It's hypocritical to protect the unborn but support killing of millions in war, especially war for profit
 
 
+3 # Cassandra2012 2012-01-25 17:12
No, it is you who presume 1) to know what God (if she or he actually exists) wants and 2) to tell a woman what do do with her own body, because you find women so worthless!

God wants men who neither support nor physically nurture (and change diapers and get up four times in the middle of the night etc.) to be forced to have vasectomies! (if you can presume, so can I......)
 
 
+18 # shaleia 2012-01-24 20:30
The only action that would impact these sociopaths would be to continuously sue them for the money it takes to raise a child born to a woman they have forced into motherhood.
 
 
+24 # moby doug 2012-01-24 20:53
How ANY sane woman, or woman-respectin g man, in the country could vote for this sanctimonious moronic Sanctimonster is beyond me. And why does any part of the media, other than Fux News, take him seriously? He's all about patriarchal control of women's (and raped girls') bodies. Ladies, is that really what you want? To hand control of your bodies over to a hypocritical control freak? Wouldn't you prefer to control your own body?! And don't get me started on what Newt the Grinch wants to do with you, or what Mitt Wrongme wants to do with your money.
 
 
+20 # Kootenay Coyote 2012-01-24 20:57
One of the sorriest of a sorry bunch of idiots.
 
 
+11 # Texas Aggie 2012-01-24 21:04
"But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation."

So like the man says, although abortions aren't always desirable, sometimes they are necessary when you have to make the best out of a bad situation. That's what "the lesser of two evils" means.
 
 
+10 # Merschrod 2012-01-24 21:24
The further the right that the GOP drifts the better the chance for re-election. That being said, it is a sad commentary on the OBama presidency that re-election depends upon an extremist candidate just because Obama has drained the enthusiasm from his bases.
 
 
0 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 20:08
Merschrod: Your comment is Very Important! Obama has not only "drained the enthusiasm from his bases"; he has brought on this EXTREMIST and IRRATIONAL bunch of GOP POTUS candidates by his lackadaisal leadership and lack of commitment to keep his promises to the people who voted him in, What other democratic POTUS would ever sign in a law where an American citizen can be arrested and held in detention without due process? There is no rationale for a POTUS who respects the constitution to do what he did and noone twisted his arm.
 
 
+16 # Susan1989 2012-01-24 21:27
Although Mr. Santorum has a right to his opinion, it is based upon his religious beliefs which have no place in governing the lives of those who do not subscribe to his beliefs. It is very troubling that he leaves no space for people to make their own choices. I would label this immature omnipotence...a very dangerous trait for a leade
 
 
+17 # Susan1989 2012-01-24 21:41
How can this be interpreted other than a way of keeping women under control. Our entire society is based upon the superiority of the white male...which can only be maintained by keeping all other groups powerless...whi te women, black men, and black women. The way to keep women powerless, is to keep them pregnant and poor. The way to keep black men powerless is to have them fill the privately owned jails. We as a country have been acting out this scenaio for centuries...and the men have been doing it in the name of God since the Inquisition.
 
 
+16 # rednancy 2012-01-24 21:45
In the Iroquois Constitution, women have the final say in all decisions that have to do with the home and children. Congress passed a Resolution recognizing the influence of the Iroquois Constitution on our Constitution and Bill of Rights. We should take another look.
 
 
+21 # theshift33 2012-01-24 21:59
Santorum's a cutie pie. I think he should be put in a locked room with
Sandusky for week.
 
 
+2 # kelly 2012-01-25 12:35
I'm with you!
 
 
+16 # lotuslover 2012-01-24 22:54
Santorum seems to forget that it is he who would use government force--that's right, government force--to impose his belief system on all women resident in the USA. Sorry, the old say'n is still true: Don't believe in abortion, don't have one?
 
 
+16 # Electricrailwaygod 2012-01-24 23:02
WHAT! That if a woman should get RAPED and as a result bears a child that ia GOD'S WILL!? That (their) God want's women to get raped as to further contribute to the overpopulation of this finite planet EVEN MORE!?

That bag of bones is an ABSOLUTE MENTAL CASE! ...And he wants to be US President!? He belongs at the The North Infirmary Command on Riker's Island!

This absolute INSANE TURD as my sister calls him has just given me a relapse of gastroenteritis and diarrhoea! Sorry, but the constitutionaö intestinal fortitude of my system just cannot handle RICK SANTORUM¨ Excuse me, I have gotta go NOW!
 
 
+10 # berensmann 2012-01-24 23:05
As Mitt and Newt batter each other into submission, the Republicans will make Santorum their "compromise" candidate, a judas goat, who they'll throw to the wolves hoping they won't lose the House as they would with either of the other two, as they then look toward 2016.
 
 
+9 # Todd Williams 2012-01-25 08:04
Sir, you may have just hit the nail on the head with this comment. I think the Rethugs are more worried about losing the House than winning the presidency.
 
 
+15 # sandyboy 2012-01-25 00:56
Joeconserve: You say we don't understand life, but I'm afraid you don't understand rape. Or compassion for the suffering of others.
 
 
-35 # Joeconserve 2012-01-25 09:14
Rape is an evil that must be dealt with in the most judicious way. The rapist should never see the light of day again. Where, however, is your compasion for the new life, if one results, that cannot fend for itself, yet? You have condemned the human person to death who, in its beginning innocence, will not now have the opportunity for a life of its own. I suggest your compassion is severly limited.
 
 
+13 # reiverpacific 2012-01-25 11:42
Quoting Joeconserve:
Rape is an evil that must be dealt with in the most judicious way. The rapist should never see the light of day again. Where, however, is your compasion for the new life, if one results, that cannot fend for itself, yet? You have condemned the human person to death who, in its beginning innocence, will not now have the opportunity for a life of its own. I suggest your compassion is severly limited.

Your vague reference to "Judicious" is a bit late for the victim, innit? And it is deeply flawed as many examples exist to illustrate, especially in the South when white males regularly fathered babies with their slaves and then cast them from their area of birth.
Or in fundamentalist Muslim areas where a woman can be "honorably" killed for "Allowing" herself to be raped.
Vaginal mutilation OK -a more extreme form?
Your presumption on the beliefs and compassion of others is unbelievable. You have just confirmed that any exchange with you is a waste of energy.
By the way, would you kindly refer me to a right-wing site that isn't carefully screened where I can gain unfettered access and air my opposing views wildly and irrationally like you do on RSN? I really want to know.
Opposing views are welcome and often illuminating; but yours are declaimed from on high with a blind and irrational conviction which is bordering on the fanatical and demonstrates a mentality utterly closed to reason. or any hope of illumination.
 
 
+12 # Todd Williams 2012-01-25 11:45
That's all baloney and and all rational people recognize you are full of it. You are the person without compassion and I condem you for this narrow minded, anti-feminist way of thinking. You are what's wrong with America today and especially the Rethug party.
 
 
+9 # MEBrowning 2012-01-26 14:44
Who are you to question anyone's level of compassion?

We're bloody weary of people like you (mostly men) passing judgment on our lack of compassion for a handful of immature cells, and refusing to acknowledge their own lack of compassion for those already born.

Such demonstrations of your fellow conservatives' compassion for human life abound: in their support of weapons over victims; in their zeal for war that sends American youth to their deaths so the 1% can rake in more quarterly profits; in their insistence that everyone worship *their* Judeo-Christian god, or else...; in their glee to blame everything that's wrong about this country on those less fortunate; on their egregious lack of support for public education, safety and health for both the living and the unborn; in their blind refusal to acknowledge human-caused climate change — and on and on. If you had an ounce of true compassion, you would recognize the hypocrisy.
 
 
+16 # heraldmage 2012-01-25 03:38
It's just one more civil liberty the GOP want to get rid of religious freedom.
Medical decisions are between the patient & MD its none of there business. Women are taxpayers to.
If life begin with the division of cells rather than the ability to survive outside the womb than cancer cell are life as well. So cancer should be left so what if it kills you or in the case of prostrate prevent sexual function its a living cell therefore can't be removed or chemically killed.
Quite frankly no one has the right to impose their will on another person except a parent on their minor children. Men have no right to say how a women they impregnate deals with the situation unless they sign an irrevocable contract to support & acknowledge the child forever than & only then should he any rights in the matter.
If these pro lifer cared so much about life why are they continually instigating war sending our children off to war based on lies, misrepresentati on, & fabrication to be killed, maimed and kill others.
If we get a choice on how are taxes are spent I say no more war Fund a Department of Peace instead. As long as our world is run the male way we will never have peace. Its time to clip their wings. We no longer need them to provide the roof over our head or put food on the table. Most of us do that for ourselves. Its time to stop playing by their rules Starting with control of our bodies.
 
 
-13 # Joeconserve 2012-01-25 16:38
Your comments make no sense at all! Try taking the sole concept of what the life of a human person means without all the other stuff and try to draw a rational conclusion.
 
 
+3 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 19:55
Joeconserve: Your comment about "all the other stuff" gives us no idea of what the "stuff" includes or involves.
Regarding your suggestion that we "try to draw a rational conclusion"; I suggest you make a greater effor to post a rational comment. What on earth are you talking about when you say "Try taking the sole concept of what the life of a human person means?" and were did you get the ridiculous notion that a human person is not a human being? We are human beings. Read "Being and Time" by Heidegger to grasp the concept of human being. To be a human being is to be in the process of evolving. Being is a verb. To be a human person is to be static. Person is a noun. Santorium and you seem to fit in this category. He's not only static in his thought process, he is regressive. He wants the country to move backwards rather than forward. His intent is for women to go back to a time when women were dependent on men, No way, Jose! Women of today are too well-informed and strong to allow it.
 
 
+14 # firefly 2012-01-25 06:40
Until and unless every person who insists that a woman should be forced to carry and give birth to an unwanted child volunteers to raise the resulting human, they should keep their opinion to themself.
 
 
-1 # sandyboy 2012-01-25 08:50
Heraldmage: Funnily enough, re males being cause of war, a reported study the other day found that all war stems from testosterone-fu elled ancient imperative to secure territory, supplies and a mate. I recall some sage said ages ago words to the effect of "Why do men fight? Because the women are watching". Given that most modern women are not impressed by these antics maybe we ought to let em run things - of course, this doesn't take account of mendacious wackjobs like Sarah Palin and "we came, we saw, he died!" HilLary Clinton. Ladies, I know it be temptin', but please do not cut off our gonads!
 
 
0 # Todd Williams 2012-01-25 11:48
Good one old Sandyboy, my Scottish friend. I never thought of it that way. We are so freaking primal and never far removed from early man behavior. Maybe that's why I have a "man cave" in my barn!
 
 
+3 # kelly 2012-01-25 12:41
Besides, religion caused more wars and death than anything else in human history. So it seems to me that Santorium is still in on the cause. I say cut his!
 
 
-2 # heraldmage 2012-01-25 15:28
Of course you have to consider that Clinton & Palin were chosen by men to be in positions under them. McCain chose Palin to draw men based on her sexual appeal & ties to NRA & big oil. There were plenty of highly qualified women in GOP for him to choose from. But, had he been elected, he needed a bimbo like Palin to preserve his presidency since according to Article 2 Section 1, he wasn't qualified to be President of USA. The Dem's (Men)chose Clinton to get the women to vote as the wronged wife who stood by her man. They did everything to make it happen, the endorsements from leaders, bought the house, got the unemployed couple on a government pension a $10 million mortgage. The people however didn't buy her qualification for the job was that she was the wife of the former President.
Women will be able to rise to power in the USA when the people finally realize that after the Revolution, nothing changed, it was business as usual just without George III, family hereditary obligations & titles.
The Constitution was written by white, wealthy, literate,land owner, men for themselves. The people have been brainwashed to believe we have a choice, when it is they who determine who & what we have to choose from.
To give meaning to our Founding Documents we need regime change, now. Replacing both ruling parties starting with the 2012 elections before they eliminate the rest of our rights. How about a real Democracy?
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 19:31
Heraldimage: You are a Chauvinist... despite being anti-Santorium. Hillary Clinton was and is highly qualified to be President based on her own qualities of leadership and experience. She is the most popular political figure in the US at this time. Go on the web and find out for yourself. ,
Sarah Palin, on the other hand is NOT qualified, not because she is a woman or "bimbo"(your chauvinism is apparent with your choice of words here) but because her intelligence, leadership qualities and understanding of the constitution, and lack of education and insight. which is similar to Santorium. They are both hypocritical, inauthentic and dangerous to our democracy. If you are going to "give meaning to our Founding Documents" and the separation of church and state, and feministic ideas; DON'T refer to women as sexual objects or as subservient to their husbands or in soap opera terms such as "wronged wife who stood by her man". I know Hillary Clinton and she is a brilliant, powerful woman who had her reasons for staying with Bill which you assume you understand but YOU DO NOT!
Chauvinists tend to put women in boxes and label them them in accordance with their assumptions which are generally wrong. Don't do that!
 
 
0 # X Dane 2012-01-25 21:23
Are you crazy Sandy, we have no desire to do that. We want our menfolk whole.
Ha Ha. I agree with what you wrote. In general I think women would do a good job of being leaders, but of course. there are some exceptions, as you mentioned. you just forgot a very bad specimen....Mar garet Thatcher.
 
 
+15 # stonecutter 2012-01-25 09:54
While Santorum was considering the facts of abortion in his quest for "public life", he should have given equal time to study the meaning of "freedom" and "personal liberty" underscored by the Bill of Rights. Obviously, his perception of those conditions, at least when it comes to freedom of choice, but I would bet covers many more aspects of life in our society, has more in common with life in North Korea than in the United States.

I'm perfectly comfortable with people who think like Santorum and Gingrich--I exclude Romney, since I believe he's a cynical phony, not a true hard right ideologue--if they remain in the private background, living whatever lives they choose in obscurity, where they can't impose their twisted reactionary views on the rest of us. After all, "this is a free country".

However, when they end up running for president of the United States, that's a different kettle of fish. The regressive ideology of these guys-- skimming along the surface of much darker strains of race hatred, anti-gay bigotry, perpetual war, profligate military spending, rationalized gun violence and general contempt for anyone who can think critically about issues that directly effect their lives, let alone challenge the authority or assumed wisdom of elected officials--may be acceptable at the local level, say in White Arizona or Mississippi, but not on the national stage, not when it might impact all of us. Sell this regressive trash-talk somewhere else.
 
 
0 # CL38 2012-01-25 12:31
Agree with everything you said, but doubt that AZ is 'white'.
 
 
+3 # Interested Observer 2012-01-25 09:55
Who does he think he is? Mother Teresa in pants?
 
 
+9 # Skeeziks 2012-01-25 10:04
What if one believes that the soul, after death, just bops around the inky universe then gets into a "string" line to be turned into a being. Then when its turn is next, gets into an entity that was fashioned by an unwanted, forced attack? Then aborted.

The abortion is carried out and the soul goes to wait for another line to join.

We still have a victim who should be able to decide whether or not to have that forced soul as her own.

That decision should always be hers.

We appear to be unique in the universe and once born on this Earth should have the right to live our time here as we wish. Especially free from forced decisions by religious sects.
 
 
+6 # Todd Williams 2012-01-25 11:52
Wow, man, that's heavy. I never thought about it that way. But anything is possible. The key is always "the decision should be hers." Period. End of bullshit.
 
 
+11 # lilpat126 2012-01-25 10:06
Abortion is legal by law. It was illegal when I was growing up but that did not stop it. It was preformed by back alley occupants, or by the woman herself using knitting needles, coat hangers, or what ever she could find. often resulting in her perforating her own uterus and bleeding to death or dying of a massive infection. Or used
abortionists under unsanitary conditions, resulting in the death of the mother. If one was fortunate there was a local DR. who would prescribe a D&C for the mother and help the mother. People knew about him but keep their mouths shut because they felt he was providing a service to the community. All this crap talk about ending abortion is just that crap. Read the paper, how many babies have been found in dumpsters, in closets, trunks of cars etc. This is better? You cannot not legislate morality, we tried with Prohibition and it was a dismal failure that took untold lives and only served to make a few very rich bootleggers. The law against abortion didn't work before and it won't work now. Think of all the ways that profits could be made from it. New millionaires from baby killing.
 
 
+13 # Hank 2012-01-25 10:08
Remember, the other GOP presidential candidates silently agree with Santorum.
 
 
+17 # castaway5555 2012-01-25 10:31
Santorum is the perfect example of a witless legalist, and, to boot, a Roman Catholic legalist with a fixation on suffering - that suffering is always good, whatever the cause. I dealt with this when I was working with Dr. Kevorkian - letters from Roman Catholics, and fundamentalist Protestants, mostly tended to express high value for suffering. I wonder if Santorum would remove an infected appendix? Or shall we let nature take its course at this point? His position is finally one of absurdity - a do-nothing ethic that lets everything, including evil, have its way, and whatever suffering someone experiences - well, Jesus suffered, too - and there ya' have it! I have only one word for all of this: SICK!
 
 
+9 # sandyboy 2012-01-25 11:35
Read Skeeziks point, Joeconserve. You may not agree, but I bet you don't believe in stem cells used to cure blindness either. Your view that life begins as a fully formed human at the instant of fertilisation is not to be imposed on others - I thought you GOP types felt govt should butt out of peoples lives as much as possible. All monotheistic faiths are the same: intolerant. My great aunt lived life as a caring Christian but didn't force her ideology on others. Try it.
 
 
-12 # Joeconserve 2012-01-25 14:04
I recommend that you find a quite place where you won't be disturbed and read "Theology of the Body Explained" by Christopher West. It's content will require some fundamental thinking so take your time and be open to simple concepts about the meaning of life. Leave politics at the door. Leave science at the door. Be prepared to think about the human person as opposed to the human being. Open yourself up to the concept of the purpose of life. Put aside all those biases I see above. This suggested reading is recommended to all who can original thinking, ie, use their own brain.
 
 
+5 # David Starr 2012-01-25 15:58
Joeconserve,
That's quite a book recommendation. So, it requires, shall I say, some fundamentalist (i.e., fanatical) thinking or "thinking"? And we're supposed to leave everything else at the door, i.e., we're not allowed to question & criticize theology? This post is as vague & antiquated as your previous ones. "Original thinking"? I suggest not using that term since you're apparently blinded by ancient, abstract assumptions created by earlier humans w/in a given level of development prioritizing blind faith over original thinking. Now, I'll recommend some things to you: "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins, the documentary, "Religulous" by Bill Maher (although this could be the only thing I agree w/ him on), & I refer to my previous post re. who the "true god" could be, e.g., an alchoholic in a drunken stupor who just may have seen him/her/it, (Do you really know if "God" has a gender?), i.e, a Pink Elephant.
 
 
-14 # Joeconserve 2012-01-25 17:29
For original thinking, think in terms of Plato or Aristotle's method. They took a concept to its logical conclusion eliminating all the baloney, real or imagined, you know like that stuff you guys try to use.
 
 
+5 # David Starr 2012-01-26 13:02
Obviously, Plato or Aristotle weren't perfect but they were definately more reliable in their thinking then say a medieval inquisitor, a revivalist, a restorationist, a dominionist, a Santorum, etc. were/are in their own imaginings.
 
 
+1 # dorianb@fuse.net 2012-01-28 18:34
David Starr: In "The Republic" Plato's theory about men and women is that they are equal and equally capable of being "Philosopher Kings". Plato and Aristotle did not believe that women were subservient to men or that they were necessarily put on this earth for the sole purpose of bearing children.
 
 
+10 # tinkertoodle 2012-01-25 12:34
wonder what his tune would be if his wife or daughter got raped and pregnant! Did you ever notice it's the men who never have to worry about pregnancy who spout this rubbish
 
 
+5 # Skeeziks 2012-01-25 12:45
"Ricky's Santorum" a place to go where you will find the most holy of holies.
Seems as though he took the "c" out of care and out of his name.
 
 
+9 # MicheleB 2012-01-25 13:17
The reality is that currently, the federal government does not ban abortion. Currently, we operate under the basic idea that church and state are separate -- however thin that wall has become.

As a former Catholic, I have many negative views of the church's position on many different issues affecting women's lives. Some same positions exist outside religious ideologies. Regan was hardly a church-goer, but he was opposed to abortion. And clearly, many of these positions are narrowly defined to suit the pontificator. (Romney & Gingrich).

The greater issue is women's reproductive *health* -- the right to care and compassion for unrequested consequences. I didn't ever see anyone refer to incest which is rape of a particularly heinous kind. Should we ask someone who may be only a very young child to maintain a pregnancy? Have we considered the psychological and potential genetic damage incest has on the victims - mother and child?

Reminds me of a song called Makes Good Sense/Cheryl Wheeler done during Newt's reign of terror:

"Now if some pretty little lady gets herself knocked up good
She'll have to have that baby just because we think she should
In who's sick mind did it ever occur
That a choice like that should be up to her
They're a godless bunch, a cross we bear
But as soon as that little tike draws air
We can wash our hands of the whole affair
Makes good sense to me"
 
 
+15 # Kimberly999 2012-01-25 13:17
Victims of sexual violence have a hard enough time recovering without extending the assault for a full 9 months. The government takeover of One's womb is an atrocity. These same Republicans that force women to bear these children will starve the child upon arrival, deny it medical care and adequate education. To what purpose?
 
 
+5 # Christo 2012-01-25 13:50
I know. They are so concerned that a baby wasn't born that could be a soldier when it turns twenty to fight their Christian war against Muslims. Read the C street chronicles.
 
 
+4 # Don Thomann 2012-01-25 13:39
So what else is new?
Santorum wants to be the new Mullah of the Tea-liban!
AND he wants to impose "Mosaic law" on everybody!
Don't believe me? Read Leviticus!
 
 
+6 # Christo 2012-01-25 13:42
All Santorum can do is pontificate. The President can not make Law. He can write Bills and send them to Congress but the chance of anything passing Congress would be remote. Some on this blog have eluded to laws being on the books that legalize abortion. Actually none exist. The only thing allowing abortions to happen at the federal level is Roe VS Wade which was a Supreme Court ruling that declared a state ban on abortion unconstitional. Since then states have quitely passed new laws that ban abortion. For example the only way to get an abortion in South Dakota is to go to an Indian Reservation. And I wouldn't want to live in Kansas either. Some of these new state laws have been challenged but when it gets to the US Supreme Court they refuse to hear the case. The Nebraska partial birth abortion ban comes to mind. The Federal government has been neutral on this and for a good reason. Legislating religious beliefs never works. Politicians that run on some kind of an anti-abortion platform are only doing that for votes. BTW: Ever hear of a woman politician running an anti-abortion campaign? No and you never will. Why? It's because they get it! No woman ever wants to have an abortion. You never hear little girls saying "when I grow up I want to get pregnant then have an abortion". It's like cancer, you always want that to be someone else. So when it happens to a woman it should be her and her God that decides. As a man I can't imagine a law telling her what to do.
 
 
+5 # vegaspat 2012-01-25 13:47
It takes a male (not a 'man') to dictate what a woman should do with her body. If we had a law castrating men, so they could not 'rape', you can bet it would be gone in a minute. As for Santorum watching his wife or daughter being raped, want to bet he would be thanking God? And he would be rejoicing, watching them grow larger with a child? Why are we focusing on such things now? The laws are good as they are and there are more important things facing our country and the Republicans are more focused on taking away our freedoms and giving the rich more money. We are a third world country, thanks to Republicans and Democrats trying to appease the Republicans to get their bills through. Both parties are to blame, so lets get rid of all and start over with some people that are not rich, but have good ideas and strengths and are not determined to 'put women in their place'.
 
 
+5 # sandyboy 2012-01-25 16:00
Quoting vegaspat:
It takes a male (not a 'man') to dictate what a woman should do with her body. If we had a law castrating men, so they could not 'rape', you can bet it would be gone in a minute. As for Santorum watching his wife or daughter being raped, want to bet he would be thanking God? And he would be rejoicing, watching them grow larger with a child? Why are we focusing on such things now? The laws are good as they are and there are more important things facing our country and the Republicans are more focused on taking away our freedoms and giving the rich more money. We are a third world country, thanks to Republicans and Democrats trying to appease the Republicans to get their bills through. Both parties are to blame, so lets get rid of all and start over with some people that are not rich, but have good ideas and strengths and are not determined to 'put women in their place'.

Well said! But isn't it heartening that this matter has attracted well over 100 quotes and nary a one agrees with Santorum or Joeconserve?
 
 
-14 # Joeconserve 2012-01-25 17:33
How does the 100 compare to the billion on my and Santorum's side?
 
 
+6 # reiverpacific 2012-01-25 22:18
Quoting Joeconserve:
How does the 100 compare to the billion on my and Santorum's side?

Where the Hell did you get that one?
And you still haven't answered my question about where on the right I can go to share my opinions, however varying from their rants, without being screened, refused and cut off.
Otherwise I rest my case about any hope of enlightening or progressive (as in mutual understanding) on ANY subject in your case, like most of your ilk.
And while we are at it, why is it mostly males o' the species who do the shoutin', rapine and violence (Thatcher notwithstanding).
Y'know, one of the functions of the American "Indian" Sun Dance is to attempt to suffer the pain and understand what the woman goes through to give birth and give thanks to them for continuing the great circle of life. But they don't rape them or they'd have their goolies whacked off (I've spoken at length about this with many elders and shared the sweat lodge in contemplation thereof: (I'm not nearly tough enough to do the Sun Dance). If a child is born to a tribe (or should I say "was:") it was nurtured by the whole village and fostered by appointment of the spiritual leader after much debate and consultation.
What do the likes of Santorum have to offer but let the unwanted wander unnoticed or stick 'em in the forces as cannon fodder, the quicker they expire the better for the economy and God wants it that way.
Really!
 
 
+1 # David Starr 2012-01-26 13:44
A billion, eh? Trying to copy the McDonald's slogan, "A Billion Served"? That may work for a fastfood restaurant but it doesn't work in this case. I'm vaguely reminded of Ghengis Khan & the Mongol tactic of going into war having tree branches tied to their horses while galloping toward their enemy whooping up enough smoke to create the illusion that there were more of them than there really was. But you keep banging your head against that totalitarian-li ke wall.
 
 
+6 # flippancy 2012-01-26 14:27
Quoting Joeconserve:
How does the 100 compare to the billion on my and Santorum's side?



Sorry dude, but the pro choice side has a far greater % than the anti choice people. Even a majority of Catholics support abortion.
 
 
+6 # BobbyLip 2012-01-25 15:09
In the case of Santorums, contraception should not only not be outlawed, it should be MANDATORY!
 
 
+2 # oldmaninhisunderwear 2012-01-26 01:40
Enough said:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Santorum
 
 
+11 # Barbara N Shabo RN 2012-01-26 04:01
I began my nursing studies when abortion was illegal and contraception outlawed in NY city hospitals. So many young women died because they were forced to seek illegal abortions.

Santorum is an idiot. Enough said.
 
 
+9 # ericlipps 2012-01-26 08:37
Evidently it doesn't occur to Mr. Santorum that a child of rape, unwanted and associated with terrible trauma, is a likely target for neglect and/or abuse and thus likely to grow up (assuming he or she survives) warped.

One might argue that it shouldn't be that way, that a mother should be a mother regardless, but there's only so much one can ask of any human being.

As for giving the child up for adoption--that still entails bearing a child of rape. And as someone whjo has worked in the child welfare system, let me state that foster care and adoption are no picnics either. Sometimnes they work out, but all too often they don't. The best solution is to do everything possible to prevent sexual assault while leaving open the option of terminating a pregnacy which results from rape.
 
 
+6 # Scott479 2012-01-26 10:49
Santorum to the Sanitarium-STAT !
 
 
+6 # flippancy 2012-01-26 14:24
I got here late, but I saw upstream a comment by Andrew about the technology to perform an abortion didn't exist when his mother was pregnant before marriage. FYI Andrew, abortion was safely performed in Julius Caesar's time and was legal in our own colonial dayts.

BTW, when he was a senator, Santorum was the Republican running the vile K Street project and was also known by his Republican colleagues as "the dumbest senator in history."
 
 
+5 # cvahr2 2012-01-27 01:00
I’m waiting for Santorum to take the next step in his “making the best of a bad situation” craziness by requiring a rape victim to share parental rights and custody of the resulting child with her rapist because you know a child really needs to have both a mother and a father…

He needs to sit the hell down and shut up.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN