Rick Santorum Blames Gay Marriage, Abortion And Porn Ideals On College Indoctrination

48

Rick Santorum said the nation’s colleges are promoting a “sea of antagonism toward Christianity” and “indoctrinating” its youth with ideals that support gay marriage, abortion and pornography.

Santorum called in to Tony Perkins’ “Washington Watch” on Tuesday to talk about the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade ruling. The conversation dealt not only with abortion but also included other “symptoms” that have changed the nation.

Perkins spoke broadly, saying pro-choice Americans represent a troubled country that doesn’t choose life, meaning “That is to follow the principals, the teachings, the instructions of God … You see that as you’ve been in Washington, D.C. There is a rejection of this idea of truth, and that there is a foundation or morality, which needs to be upheld.”

Santorum agreed, adding that less young people devote themselves to Christianity. “If you look at the popular culture and what comes out of Hollywood, if you go to our schools and particularly our colleges and universities, they are indoctrinated in a sea of relativism and a sea of antagonism towards Christianity.”

“Abortion is a symptom. Marriage is a symptom. Pornography [is a symptom],” he continued. “All of these are symptoms to the fundamental issue that we’ve gotten away from the truth and the ‘Truth-Giver.’”

Written By: Cavan Sieczkowski
continue to source article at huffingtonpost.com

48 COMMENTS

  1. I <3 Santorum.

    He is one sick puppy, and totally loose lipped. He actually talks about bestiality in public. How presidential! He almost called Obama a nigger, and the retraction that he stopped himself from saying “nickle” was precious. What was that about napkins he was going on about? He’s just says whatever floats in his head, like a hate-filled Karl Pilkington..

  2. According to Santorum’s own logic, then, he, given that he earned a B.A. from Pennsylvania State University (where, lest we forget, Sandusky was a long-time football coach), a M.B.A. from the University of Pittsburgh, and a J.D. from Dickinson college, must be the most depraved individual of all.

    He is clearly out of touch with reality.

  3. “Abortion is a symptom. Marriage is a symptom. Pornography [is a symptom],” he continued. “All of these are symptoms to the fundamental issue that we’ve gotten away from the truth and the ‘Truth-Giver.’”

    He makes Alex Jones sound completely reasonable.

  4. Rick Santorum: a proud exponent of the argumentum ab rectum (AAR) since circa 1991 (when he took up public office).

    p.s. AAR was coined by someone here on RDFRS, but I can’t remember who it was.

  5. At some point in this guy’s life, his sexual urges got all tied up with guilt and the belief that submission to the fantasies his parents taught him would cleanse him. Consequently, against all logic, he persists in his obsession with other people’s private and sexual lives and the belief that the whole world must submit as he has done. There are probably lots of creeps like him, but he rose to a position of power and visibility on public media. Appalling.

  6. In reply to #11 by justinesaracen:

    At some point in this guy’s life, his sexual urges got all tied up with guilt and the belief that submission to the fantasies his parents taught him would cleanse him. Consequently, against all logic, he persists in his obsession with other people’s private and sexual lives and the belief that the whole world must submit as he has done. There are probably lots of creeps like him, but he rose to a position of power and visibility on public media. Appalling.

    He is probably diverting his energies from his own sexual repression into political activity. That is often what powers fanatics!

  7. he vowed to initiate a war on porn if elected.

    Here we have a man who will say something like “I’ll wage a war on porn”. He probably never paused and thought “Wait, did I just say war on porn? How did it come to this? At what point did my life take the decisive turn that ultimately led to me saying I’ll wage a war on porn without dropping dead from shear embarrassment?”

  8. In reply to #17 by Rosbif:

    For someone who went to law school he has a real problem with the definition of the word “truth”.

    College has a lot to answer for.
    After all, it gave him qualifications, while he failed to learn most of the most important things in life!

  9. It’s odd that Ricks both Perry and Santorum are in the news all of a sudden, the two of them having dropped off the radar last year when Mitt Romney was chosen by the Repubs to go up against President Obama (did anyone hear how that turned out?). I guess this means that both these fools are planning to run against Hilary in 2016 and their election campaigns have already begun. God help us.

    ~

    Civic-minded folks on this site who would like to do their bit to keep Senator Santorum out of the White House could help by bookmarking SpreadingSantorum.com and clicking on it once or twice a week for the next few years to keep it at the top of Google’s search results. It’s a weird form of activism, I know, but every little helps.

  10. let’s not forget education, colleges these days are constantly turning out “educated” young adults. there are people out there who are looking to “educate” your children, sounds like scaremongering but it’s true. even the government are in on this.

    Pol Pot would be proud

  11. I’m not happy with some of you lot calling this onion “ignorant”….it isn’t fair on the genuinely ignorant to be tarred with the same brush as Rick the Prick. He is an oxygen thief for sure, but, bestiality for example, how could he not? Listen to the articulate way he explains himself…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pmjqavFCWg

    ….fairly obvious to me that he knows what he is talking about }80)~

    I don’t think he is ignorant. A stupid, asinine moron…YES! But he does know about a lot of the stuff he is spouting. He is still spouting a lot of shite, but he knows what he is saying, he doesn’t burble at all, he is just rotten to the core.

  12. He’s right in one respect- religion is losing its grip on a younger populace who see through the control mechanisms. Guilt and fear are giving way to common sense and reason…and the churches hate it.

  13. In reply to #1 by The Truth, the light:

    Scary to think this ignorant idiot was running for the presidency.

    I disagree a bit. Its not scary that he was running. Crazy people running for president is as American as apple pie and baseball. What is scary is that he got so many people in what is supposed to be a mainstream political party to vote for him and that for a while was their leading contender to represent them as their choice for the next president. There is a journalist named Charlie Pierce who wrote a great book called Idiot America on this topic. He traces the history of birthers, climate change deniers, and other groups with nutty ideas and shows how you can trace them back quite a long time in US history. But what is different is that where fringe ideas used to be just that, ideas embraced only by a lunatic fringe, they are now becoming mainstream.

  14. In reply to #11 by justinesaracen:

    At some point in this guy’s life, his sexual urges got all tied up with guilt and the belief that submission to the fantasies his parents taught him would cleanse him. Consequently, against all logic, he persists in his obsession with other people’s private and sexual lives and the belief that the whole world must submit as he has done. There are probably lots of creeps like him, but he rose to a position of power and visibility on public media. Appalling.

    I agree. When I first heard the term “homophobia” many decades ago I thought it was just one more example of PC terminology. But when you actually talk to someone like Santorum the first thing that is obvious is that these people really are obsessed with sex. And when you think about it, they kind of have to be, I mean from a rational standpoint what they do makes absolutely no sense, investing so much time and energy worrying about what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. Why do they even care?

  15. Red Dog, In response to your last sentence…… see comment #26.

    In reply to #27 by Red Dog:

    In reply to #11 by justinesaracen:

    At some point in this guy’s life, his sexual urges got all tied up with guilt and the belief that submission to the fantasies his parents taught him would cleanse him. Consequently, against all logic, he persists in his obsession with other people’s private and sexual lives and the belief that the whole world must submit as he has done. There are probably lots of creeps like him, but he rose to a position of power and visibility on public media. Appalling.

    I agree. When I first heard the term “homophobia” many decades ago I thought it was just one more example of PC terminology. But when you actually talk to someone like Santorum the first thing that is obvious is that these people really are obsessed with sex. And when you think about it, they kind of have to be, I mean from a rational standpoint what they do makes absolutely no sense, investing so much time and energy worrying about what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. Why do they even care?

  16. Santorum says:

    . “If you look at the popular culture and what comes out of Hollywood, if you go to our schools and particularly our colleges and universities, they are indoctrinated in a sea of relativism and a sea of antagonism towards Christianity.”

    Well I could think of quite a few other reasons why people are turning against Christianity, especially Santorum’s RCC. In the RCC’s case: AIDs caused by use of condoms. Paedohiles priests shielded and moved around to continue their crimes elsewhere. Women die because of RCC hospitals refusing them treatment where abortion is needed. Ridiculous posturing on contraception. Interference in scientific research in biology, Interference in the political field where gay marriage is discussed. Interference in people’s sex lives. Bullying believers. And then of course is the RCC’s attitude to non-believers. According to Holy Joe and his gang of desperadoes, we are all Nazis in waiting and “something less than human”.

    And one more reason why the young are turning against Christianity, is that people are not as stupid as Christians think. The whole of Christianity is built on next to zero evidence, with a ridiculous story and anti science content. With men living in great fish for 3 days, and walking on water, and coming back from the dead, and talking snakes, and the sun staying still for a day, people are realising that the Bible is full of nonsense!

  17. The only reason the ReTHUGlicans have let Santorum off his leash is because he and his delusional, frothing at the mouth ilk make Chris Cristi look like the voice of reason and compassion. Cristi is their real candidate. The rest is background noise.

  18. In reply to #31 by LaurieB:

    The only reason the ReTHUGlicans have let Santorum off his leash is because he and his delusional, frothing at the mouth ilk make Chris Cristi look like the voice of reason and compassion. Cristi is their real candidate. The rest is background noise.

    Not all Republicans share the same goals and ideas. The standard analysis of the modern republican party (which for once I think is actually pretty accurate) is that they are primarily two different groups. The “values voters” (sic) who care about abortion, restricting gay rights, etc. and the plutocrats who care about corporate profits and minimizing the tax burden on the very rich. Most of the ones who make it to the level of serious presidential candidates are plutocrats. People like Cheney, the first Bush, John McCain, Romney, those people really don’t give a damn about abortion or gays, they will say whatever it takes though to get elected.

    Actually, what is fairly unique about Santorum is that he represented the “values” Republicans and he got a lot further than anyone else has so far in being a serious presidential candidate, Science help us.

  19. He’s not entirely wrong to identify college as the culprit in the sense that the more educated people are, the more likely they are to have post-medieval social attitudes. As ever, education is the enemy of the religion.

  20. In reply to #32 by Red Dog:

    In reply to #31 by LaurieB:

    The only reason the ReTHUGlicans have let Santorum off his leash is because he and his delusional, frothing at the mouth ilk make Chris Cristi look like the voice of reason and compassion. Cristi is their real candidate. The rest is background noise.

    Not all Republicans share the same goals and ideas. The standard analysis of the modern republican party (which for once I think is actually pretty accurate) is that they are primarily two different groups. The “values voters” (sic) who care about abortion, restricting gay rights, etc. and the plutocrats who care about corporate profits and minimizing the tax burden on the very rich. Most of the ones who make it to the level of serious presidential candidates are plutocrats. People like Cheney, the first Bush, John McCain, Romney, those people really don’t give a damn about abortion or gays, they will say whatever it takes though to get elected.

    Actually, what is fairly unique about Santorum is that he represented the “values” Republicans and he got a lot further than anyone else has so far in being a serious presidential candidate, Science help us.

    Red Dog, i think you are absolutely correct.In the U.K. the Conservative party: our version of your Republicans is split in the same manner.The plutocrats simply wish to preserve the status quo vis-a-vis the very wealthy, whilst the likes of Cameron will jump on the back of any cart that will keep him popular with vested interests such as the religious.He is a very smart and wealthy man but morally he is a total wanker!

  21. Why is it that the Republican right wing Christians are so gullible with regard to conspiracy theories? There is clearly something in their psychological make-up that predisposes then to it. On Thanksgiving I sat across the dinner table from one. She informed me that the Democrats had stolen the election by sending all of the Florida votes to Spain to be counted (don’t ask me, I have no idea why).

    And here is Santorum claiming a giant conspiracy by college professors to indoctrinate our youth.

    The man’s mad as a hatter, but it seems that as long as he keeps his nonsense backed up by his religious faith, he is allowed to say anything, however crazy, without getting laughed at.

  22. Red Dog,

    Hmm, I’m just wondering how divided that party really is. Traits like selfish disregard of the poor, sexism, homophobia seem to fit together in a constellation that goes by the name of Republican. What any of those guys say in public certainly can’t be trusted but I’m willing to bet that if we got any of them aside in a private conversation, after a few beers they’d let slip what they really feel about women who demand control over their own sexuality and fertility and about the “abomination” of gay sex.

    No doubt these guys have devoted their whole lives to accumulating massive wealth, but as a woman, I see this aggressive pursuit of the almighty buck as being all tangled up with control of women and anyone else that comes into their domain. No wonder they all come across as paragons of piety – it’s their main tactic in their plan to control us.

    I have to admit that I feel a gripping fear that men like any of those you mentioned should ever have their way with our legal system. I want to believe that you’re right about those men in terms of them being all about their massive wealth and not giving a damn about social issues, but It’s not something I can give them the benefit of the doubt on since women have so much to lose in terms of reproductive freedom. I fear for the gays in the same way, even though I’m not one of them, I can’t help but think that if their movement takes a hit then women will too and visa versa. It’s very difficult to unweave it all.

    In reply to #32 by Red Dog:

    In reply to #31 by LaurieB:

    The only reason the ReTHUGlicans have let Santorum off his leash is because he and his delusional, frothing at the mouth ilk make Chris Cristi look like the voice of reason and compassion. Cristi is their real candidate. The rest is background noise.

    Not all Republicans share the same goals and ideas. The standard analysis of the modern republican party (which for once I think is actually pretty accurate) is that they are primarily two different groups. The “values voters” (sic) who care about abortion, restricting gay rights, etc. and the plutocrats who care about corporate profits and minimizing the tax burden on the very rich. Most of the ones who make it to the level of serious presidential candidates are plutocrats. People like Cheney, the first Bush, John McCain, Romney, those people really don’t give a damn about abortion or gays, they will say whatever it takes though to get elected.

    Actually, what is fairly unique about Santorum is that he represented the “values” Republicans and he got a lot further than anyone else has so far in being a serious presidential candidate, Science help us.

  23. In reply to #37 by LaurieB:

    Red Dog,

    Hmm, I’m just wondering how divided that party really is. Traits like selfish disregard of the poor, sexism, homophobia seem to fit together in a constellation that goes by the name of Republican. What any of those guys say in public certainly can’t be trusted but I’m willing to bet that if we got any of them aside in a private conversation, after a few beers they’d let slip what they really feel about women who demand control over their own sexuality and fertility and about the “abomination” of gay sex.

    I agree with you for the most part. First, I would say that to a great extent it doesn’t really matter what people like Cheney, Bush Sr., and Romney think inside, what matters is what they end up supporting. Also, I agree fear and hatred of women plays a big role, more so then people usually acknowledge. Actually, I think another interesting related topic is the way the current Republican agenda is drive by a macho man mentality, what Steven Pinker in his book The Better Angels describes as an “honor based” culture rather than one based on reason. I think a lot of that mentality is what is really behind the insane worship of guns in the US and its why I was so disappointed to see Harris come down on the side of the macho men.

    But getting back to the original topic, if you look at what they actually say, I think its pretty clear that people like Cheney, Bush Sr., and Romney really care about corporate profits and tax minimization and don’t care one way or the other about “values” issues. Romney is the most blatant example. He is on the record as declaring himself as or more pro choice and pro gay rights as Ted Kennedy. McCain is another good example, he was on the record as calling Jerry Falwell and others like him Agents of Intolerance. The reason they both changed their positions had nothing to do with their actual beliefs, it was because the Republican party is so warped that only someone who wants to move women’s and gay rights back to the 19th century has a chance to win a major primary these days.

    I have to admit that I feel a gripping fear that men like any of those you mentioned should ever have their way with our legal system. I want to believe that you’re right about those men in terms of them being all about their massive wealth and not giving a damn about social issues, but It’s not something I can give them the benefit of the doubt on since women have so much to lose in terms of reproductive freedom. I fear for the gays in the same way, even though I’m not one of them, I can’t help but think that if their movement takes a hit then women will too and visa versa. It’s very difficult to unweave it all.

    Oh, don’t get the wrong idea, I am equally concerned about letting these people get more power. Even if I’m right the fact that they don’t care about basic human rights (as opposed to actively wanting to over turn them) is pretty much just as bad as being actively against them. In either case they were willing to sacrifice human rights for political expediency, whether their underlying motive is they hate women or just don’t care about women doesn’t really matter, the end result is the same.

  24. In either case they were willing to sacrifice human rights for political expediency, whether their underlying motive is they hate women or just don’t care about women doesn’t really matter, the end result is the same.

    Oh yes, this really does sum up their toxic bullshit right there. They’d throw their own Grammy under the bus for a donation to their campaign and a few more votes.

    And I’m with you on Pinker’s idea on macho culture. Loved that book. (My copy is signed by the author.
    Sorry, I couldn’t resist slipping that in) :-D

    Harris is upsetting me about the guns and Coyne is upsetting me about the Israel thing. sigh.

    Why is this system forcing me to include huge blocks of previous comments? It’s cluttering up the whole thread. I won’t use “reply” anymore.

    In reply to #38 by Red Dog:

    In reply to #37 by LaurieB:

    Red Dog,

    Hmm, I’m just wondering how divided that party really is. Traits like selfish disregard of the poor, sexism, homophobia seem to fit together in a constellation that goes by the name of Republican. What any of those guys say in public certainly can’t be trusted but I’m willing to bet that if we got any of them aside in a private conversation, after a few beers they’d let slip what they really feel about women who demand control over their own sexuality and fertility and about the “abomination” of gay sex.

    I agree with you for the most part. First, I would say that to a great extent it doesn’t really matter what people like Cheney, Bush Sr., and Romney think inside, what matters is what they end up supporting. Also, I agree fear and hatred of women plays a big role, more so then people usually acknowledge. Actually, I think another interesting related topic is the way the current Republican agenda is drive by a macho man mentality, what Steven Pinker in his book The Better Angels describes as an “honor based” culture rather than one based on reason. I think a lot of that mentality is what is really behind the insane worship of guns in the US and its why I was so disappointed to see Harris come down on the side of the macho men.

    But getting back to the original topic, if you look at what they actually say, I think its pretty clear that people like Cheney, Bush Sr., and Romney really care about corporate profits and tax minimization and don’t care one way or the other about “values” issues. Romney is the most blatant example. He is on the record as declaring himself as or more pro choice and pro gay rights as Ted Kennedy. McCain is another good example, he was on the record as calling Jerry Falwell and others like him Agents of Intolerance. The reason they both changed their positions had nothing to do with their actual beliefs, it was because the Republican party is so warped that only someone who wants to move women’s and gay rights back to the 19th century has a chance to win a major primary these days.

    I have to admit that I feel a gripping fear that men like any of those you mentioned should ever have their way with our legal system. I want to believe that you’re right about those men in terms of them being all about their massive wealth and not giving a damn about social issues, but It’s not something I can give them the benefit of the doubt on since women have so much to lose in terms of reproductive freedom. I fear for the gays in the same way, even though I’m not one of them, I can’t help but think that if their movement takes a hit then women will too and visa versa. It’s very difficult to unweave it all.

    Oh, don’t get the wrong idea, I am equally concerned about letting these people get more power. Even if I’m right the fact that they don’t care about basic human rights (as opposed to actively wanting to over turn them) is pretty much just as bad as being actively against them. In either case they were willing to sacrifice human rights for political expediency, whether their underlying motive is they hate women or just don’t care about women doesn’t really matter, the end result is the same.

  25. Red Dog,

    I tend to think that if you and I were pitted against each other in a debate, that it would be the most dusty dull event of all times. I can’t think of anything to argue about. But if you ever think of something, please be sure to let me know right away. :-)

  26. In reply to #15 by foundationist:

    he vowed to initiate a war on porn if elected.

    Here we have a man who will say something like “I’ll wage a war on porn”. He probably never paused and thought “Wait, did I just say war on porn? How did it come to this? At what point did my life take the decisive turn that ultimately led to me saying I’ll wage a war on porn without dropping dead from shear embarrassment?”

    Yes, and what sort of uniform do you wear to a war on porn? How do you arm yourself?

  27. A blindfold and handcuffs? Errrr….never mind….

    In reply to #42 by Reckless Monkey:

    In reply to #15 by foundationist:

    he vowed to initiate a war on porn if elected.

    Here we have a man who will say something like “I’ll wage a war on porn”. He probably never paused and thought “Wait, did I just say war on porn? How did it come to this? At what point did my life take the decisive turn that ultimately led to me saying I’ll wage a war on porn without dropping dead from shear embarrassment?”

    Yes, and what sort of uniform do you wear to a war on porn? How do you arm yourself?

  28. “Scary to think this ignorant idiot was running for the presidency.”

    Yes, very, but at least he was rooted out. I’m more bothered by Paul Broun’s position on the science and technology committee. Even in a nation as religious as the US, how he manages to remain on any non-inherently religious board overseeing/commenting on science applications boggles and horrifies me.

    Anyway, if Santorum thinks education is a problem for Christianity, that only serves to demean his idea of Christianity more than anything found on this website. You could almost describe this unfortunate man as one of the secular movement’s biggest assets.

  29. In reply to #8 by Jos Gibbons:

    In short, Santorum attributed three things that are OK to a thing in which he participated.

    He attributed two things that are not only ok but are fundamental rights – ie the rights of women over their own bodies and the rights of gay people to be treated equally the third is a little more complex and contentious and might just make him more in tune with a lot of people who wouldn’t touch any of his other ideas with a barge pole (parents, teachers, groups against violence to women and even some in the more mainstream porn industry). What seems to be unique to this site is some kind of belief that porn is still just a few adolescents/adults looking at razzle or watching actors playing consenting adults having fun sex when in fact it is going way beyond that into directions that are causing real alarm and harm to lots of groups. Go look at TES for concerns, or parenting websites – neither of which are packed out with religiuos, right wing prudes. Porn these days ranges from the harmless fun through to the sort of things that I imagine inspired the gang rapists in Delhi. And there are also issues of access because what is natural and normal for a fourteen year old is actually damaging for a eight or nine year old.

    So yes criticise on the first two and make qualified within limits criticisms of the third?

  30. …and I blame religion for homophobia, world over population, and the death toll for the AIDS epidemic (based on 2005 figures, the equivalent of over 15 Jumbo Jet crashes EVERY DAY for the entire year).

    Colleges can solve all of these problems and will unless Rick and his friends manage to destroy the education system.

    It seems he is trying to broaden the War On Science into a wider War On Knowledge. I doubt it will be mentioned on Fox News because its an actual war being waged by Neo-Cons, and not an imaginary one being waged against them

Leave a Reply