Rick Santorum Says the Darndest Things!

On Tuesday, August 30th, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum spoke to students at Penn State's HUB-Robeson Center. Santorum answered questions from students on his presidential campaign, religious beliefs, and views on same-sex marriage. Predictably, his talk was brimming with dubious arguments against same-sex marriage, which he believes will undermine the "moral ecology" of America. However, a video of the talk is worth watching because of the challenge Santorum received from a student who criticized his stance on LGBT issues. (The original video is available on YouTube, but unfortunately its embedding function has been disabled, as it has been on videos of shorter excerpts.)

When asked why he did not support protection for same-sex marriage in the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the 14th and 15th Amendments, Santorum's response at the 2:11 mark was predictable.

"Well, I don't find it there because I'm not an activist ... looks at the Constitution as a way to  justify my own personal beliefs and impose them on the rest of society. I don't think that's what the Constitution was there for. The Constitution was there to say what it said, not to say what future generations want it to say. From the standpoint of why I don't support a change in the marriage laws, because marriage is--I know I get criticized for saying, but marriage is what marriage is. Marriage existed before government, before the Constitution, before western civilization. Marriage has always been predominantly, overwhelmingly so, reflected in nature as such, the union of one man and one woman. It's reflected in nature, it's reflected in human society, from the very beginning of time."

Reflected in nature? Are you sure about that, Rick?

At the 3:50 mark, Santorum scoffed at the idea of equal protection, insisting that marriage was a privilege rather that a right. Surprisingly, he upheld government as the ultimate arbiter of marriage, which seems to contradict the right-wing mantra of "small government." As he has done before, Santorum resorted to the usual tired arguments of procreation and child-rearing as the purpose of marriage (as if same-sex couples were incapable of either), referencing a God who conveniently agrees with him.

"Everyone wants equal protection. Equal protection for what? Marriage is a privilege given out by government that gives government benefits to people who are recognized by the government. It's not a right. No one has the right to get married. It's a privilege that the government grants. They get benefits. Why? Why does government grant these benefits? Because it has an innate benefit to society. We recognize marriage as government because we want to encourage it. We want to secure it because it has a useful purpose to society. What is that purpose? To bond men and women together as nature designed them to be in a bond for the purposes of procreation and raising children, and being there to love and support each other as they were meant to be by nature and nature's God."

To defend his stance, Santorum made the discredited claim that married heterosexual couples provide the healthiest family environment for children. At the 4:48 mark, he insisted that social science research proved this claim.

"... Men and women married, raising children, is the best possible place for children to be raised. You want to look at the social science on that? Don't even try if you disagree with me, because you will be overwhelmed by the social science that tells that men and women together in marriage provide by far, by every measure, the best habitat for children to be raised, whether it's health, education, jobs, whatever the case may be."

Rick, please do your research. The social science research does NOT confirm your assertion.

The strange reasoning continues. At the 5:41 mark, Santorum defends the "unique" status of marriage by stating that his relationship with his aunt is not like marriage (!?).

"So government should be all about promoting what is good for society, not promoting relationships that may be beneficial relationships in some way. My relationship with my aunt is a very nice relationship, but we're not going to say we're married and 'give us special priveleges' because I love my aunt. Or because you happen to be friends with this guy. Just because your friends ... it's a good relationship, it's beneficial to society that you have friends, but we're not going to elevate it. Why? Because marriage is unique, and when we say it's not unique, then we destroy it."

LGBT rights supporters have long looked askance at Santorum for his views, which Santorum is unhappy about. At the 9:01 mark, he lamented that others have called him a "bigot", painting those who espouse anti-gay views as the real victims.

"I had Piers Morgan call me a bigot because I believe what the Catholic Church teaches with respect to homosexuality. I'm a bigot. So now I'm a bigot because I believe what the Bible teaches? Now, two thousand years of teaching and moral theology is now bigoted? And of course we don't elect bigots to office. We don't give them professional licenses. We don't give them preferential tax treatment. If you're a preacher and you preach bigoted things, you think you're going to be allowed to have a 501c3 as a church? Of course not. No, this has profound consequence to the entire ecology, moral ecology of America. It will undermine the family. It will destroy faith in America."

Shortly thereafter, a student criticized Santorum's social science assumptions, citing the American Psychological Association's statements. Santorum responded by downplaying the APA and AMA for their alleged agendas, leading to a heated debate with the young lady. The student, in my opinion, won the argument. But rather than hear it from me, watch the exchange yourselves -- it's that good.


For additional commentary, visit the following links.

Time: Rick Santorum vs. the APA

Think Progress: Penn State Students Grill Alum Rick Santorum on Marriage Views

Towleroad: Rick Santorum Says Piers Morgan Called Him a 'Bigot', Gets Ripped by Penn State Student

Truth Wins Out: Frothy Mix Loses Argument to Penn State Student, Does a Lot of Bellyaching