Rick Santorum Shatters Liberal Student’s Argument in 90 Seconds

In his YAF lecture at Vanderbilt University, Rick Santorum shows the double standard that exists in the “legislating morality” argument used by the Left. Part of YAF’s Wendy P. McCaw Freedom Lecture Series.

Comments

  1. Marriage is traditionally a business contract between two men to dispense with a useless daughter in exchange for real estate aka dowery. It's a bad deal for every one so I don't see why gays want any part of it except for the insurance, end of life issues and inheritance just like straight people. So that makes gays like straight people. I don't think that's what they intended.

  2. Unfortunately for Rick, he appeals to the crowd to isolate his opponents.  On a more level playing field I am not too sure if he fairs as well.

  3. keep your skydaddy out of our secular government. Our founders chose to make the constitution entirely secular (no mention of god at all) AND they deliberately said that the government cannot establish a religion. So shut the fuck up Santorum, your barbaric religious views have no place in our secular government. If you want a government that is based on religion, please move to Saudi Arabia where they do have an established religion and it fucking sucks shit. If you want to be in a society that obeys the standard religious practice of hating and discriminating against homosexual people… please move to Saudi fucking Arabia where they murder homosexuals every day.

  4. Actually, as per usual, Rick destroys his own argument….

    "As long as I don't have any Faith precepts related to my opinion then its a valid thing to do….But if I have anything related to my Christian understanding of what is Right and Wrong then its invalid. I'm not allowed to make that …<point, claim?kinda peters off here>"

    Actually, Ricky? Yes that is exactly right.

    Why?

    Because you are a goddamn politician in a SECULAR government. Your religious views should NOT be informing your legislation. You SHOULD be pretending they don't exist as far as your job is concerned. Your job as a politician is to uphold the Constitution and IT'S views of what is Right and Wrong.

    When we are "Legislating Morality" in terms of Constitutionality then technically his smarmy retort is correct. We ARE doing that.

    Perhaps to be more clear in the future we need to make a clear definitive 'line in the sand' between someone Legislating Constitutional Morality and Legislating Christian Morality….one is the definition of the job of a Legislator, the other is the antithesis.

  5. If religion wants to keep sticking its nose into politics then it should be taxed. Tax them all.

  6. The historical basis for marriage licensure falls upon the Catholic Church in Europe during it's governmental reign over the lives, liberties and property of it's peoples. The Church-Government found a way to collect taxes and control the private behavior of people with one law. American colonies, to become States, followed the historical tradition of marriage licensure for the same historical reasons. Get the government out of marriage…oh wait, there are too many tax-loopholes with a marriage license…oh wait, our nation unconstitutionally taxes labor directly (Article I, section 2, clause 3; 9 clause 4) and has marriage tax loopholes built into the tax code.. End the payroll withholding system and you end the marriage debate for both hetero's and homo's.

  7. Anti-gay activist Santorum wants to impose his religious beliefs on everyone else. The Constitution does not allow that. End of story.

  8. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I've got to say from a logical standpoint, Santorum's argument was incorrect. It's possible to have a viewpoint on marriage that is not based primarily on morality and still come up with both Santorum's and liberal brat's opinions; it is therefore not necessarily 'legislating from morality' for libbrat to oppose Santorum's views on marriage.

Leave a Reply