You are here

Home ›

"To say Santorum is soft on sodomy and abortion is beyond laughable."

by David and Tim Bayly on January 9, 2012 - 9:22am

This comment from a Presbyterian pastor named Benjamin Glaser who got his M.Div. in Pittsburgh and knows Santorum well (TB):

"The 17.6% loss against Casey is massively overplayed by those that dislike Santorum. 2006 was a bloodbath year for the GOP and most of that 17.6% can be attributed to it and the fact Bob Casey, Jr. was supported by many that loved his father. They seem to forget Santorum won 4 times before that in a heavy Democratic House district and in a heavy Democratic state, twice beating well-liked incumbents. 

"To say Santorum is soft on Sodomy and Abortion is beyond laughable. Santorum is the only candidate that will not allow abortions in the case of rape or incest. He lives his Pro-Life convictions both in his own life and in his opposition to abortifacients and birth control. He is also the only candidate that has spoken openly against gay adoption."

Tags: 
Politics
Homosexuality
Abortion euthanasia...

Permalink

Comments

Submitted by Lewis Toms on January 9, 2012 - 12:54pm

What's laughable is how easy it is for candidate Santorum to snooker US evangelical voters into supporting him. Just how would a President Santorum "not allow abortions in the case of rape or incest?" We wouldn't be electing him king over a theocracy. I know of nothing in his record as a legislator, first as a representative and then as a senator, of him proposing any legislation that would have reversed Roe v. Wade.

Paul can point to the Sanctity of Life Act that he introduced to at least three Congresses. What can Santorum point to? He voted for Title X funding of abortion (via grants to Planned Parenthood) and he endorsed Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey.

Let's be careful to not be so easily manipulated and bamboozled by a career politician/lobbyist who will say just what we're itching to hear, but, if his past actions provide any indication of what he'd do if elected, who'll then fail to back up his tough words on the stump with anything substantive in the way of proposed legislation. Paul's proposed legislation would return jurisdiction of abortion to the states. This is, by the way, what Santorum has proposed when campaigning, but hasn't, to my knowledge, ever acted upon while in office.

Submitted by Allan on January 9, 2012 - 1:29pm

Why would he wring his hands over obtaining a Constitutional amendment, developing better legislation, or replacing SCOTUS justices?

As POTUS, by way of Executive Order etc, why wouldn't he immediately require the DOD to cease & desist all land, sea & air abortions and simultaneously request each governor to send out his National Guard to close each of his abortion clinics since every abortion is the taking of, yet, another American life? 1.2 million per year. 55 million in all.

Is this in the too hard pile?

Submitted by Scott on January 9, 2012 - 4:31pm

I may be joining this discussion a bit late, so I apologize in advance if I'm covering old ground that has already been tread. However, I have been unable to forget how Senator Santorum "turned his back" on the pro-life cause back in 2004. His actions speak much louder than his words ever could! Here is how Senator Santorum responded when given the opportunity to support either a pro-life Representative in Pennsylvania in 2004 or to support "the party" and walk the line following then-President Bush and Karl Rove with a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual candidate running against him. It also seems indicative of the view of most professing Christian politicians who hold their moral view personally...but not at the expense of their office/election. The 2004 actions by Senator Santorum are reminiscent of the path traveled by Alabama AG Bill Pryor when given the opportunity to stand with Alabama State Chief Justice Roy Moore. Here are three links that provide a brief overview of both instances for further reflection:

http://educationviews.org/2011/07/30/remembering-rick-santorum-arlen-specter-pat-toomey/

http://ccofal.org/alabama/pryor/fob_james_statement.phtml

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/judas_money.html

I appreciate your willingness to consider these things in seeking wisdom to make God-honoring decisions as we endeavor to choose among those who are put before us as political leaders.

Submitted by Eliza on January 10, 2012 - 12:10am

Thanks for the information.
I wasn't aware of these things. I was opposing Santorum on his big-government votes, such as doubling the size of the Department of Education.

Submitted by Kamilla on January 10, 2012 - 6:38am

Santorum has answered his critics on supporting Specter in 2004 more than once. He did it for strategic reasons that I would argue are valid, even if I don't agree with them. His answer consists of two names:

Alito
Roberts

Which may be the more effective strategy in the long run - one more pro-life legislator or a court that is two votes closer to doing substantive damage to Roe and Doe? Specter may have been an utter loss for the pro-life cause everywhere but the Judiciary committee. I don't know that I agree with Santorum, but to slam him as one who abandons the cause when party politics demand it is dishonest and unfair.

Add new comment

2013 Clearnote Summer Conference
Man vs. Lust
Sexual by Design