News Is Rick Santorum's Religious Extremism a Deal Breaker for Voters?

[CAC1001]

One of the basic tenets of the American form of government is that public policies are not supposed to based on religious dogma, but, historically that hasn't been the case? Isn't that the same as saying the American form of government has historically been based on religious dogma, but you wish it wasn't?

In any event, the first sentence isn't really correct. Most states in the United States had a state religion. The problem is that they didn't all have the same state religion and a few state constitutions even mandated separation of church and state. When it came to creating a federal government for all 13 states, there was no possibility of having a national religion that all 13 could agree on, hence a separation of church and state for the federal government - which isn't the same as saying the American form government was based on separation of church and state, since all 13 states were part of America whether you mean the country or the continent.

None the less, the problems the federal government had when it came to religion is even more relevant today. You couldn't come up with even one state so homogenous in its religious beliefs that a state could survive linking its state government to a church.

So the separation of church and state wasn't over keeping religion out of government, but because there was no way to create a national religion under the federal government?

 

[CAC1001]

Why do you think anti-intellectualism plays to the base of the republican party?

If by "anti-intellectualism" you mean suspicion of intellectuals, probably because intellectuals have a rather poor history regarding believing in things like Marxism, planned societies, that the U.S. is the source of all the world's major problems, etc...if you mean just a disdain for logic and reason on issues, well both bases of the parties are anti-intellectual in that sense, it's just that the anti-intellectualism kicks in on different issues.

I've often wondered if conservatives have a high need for closure. The world is very complicated, and it has a great deal of uncertainty. But the conservative message offers a very simplistic view of the world. So the message that it's all Satan's fault may provide closure to people afraid of the continuously changing world.

Partisans of both sides have overly-simplistic views of the world.

 

[daveb]

I don't think the general public is so one dimensional in their thinking that only social issues or religious beliefs will determine the fate of the candidate - unless the other issues (economy, foreign affairs, pending legislation, recently enacted legislation, court appointments, budget/failure to budget, taxes, deicits) are not equally considered.

I know numerous people who will/will not vote for a candidate solely on the basis of his or her stance on the abortion issue (I know this because the've said this is the only reason for their support/opposition of that candidate).

 

[daveb]

If we can advance this - I think Santorum was his own worst enemy (with his base including the TEA Party) when he called politics a team sport in the AZ debate.

You may be right about that (considering the number of "boos" I heard in the background), but I have to give him kudos for speaking the turth in that regard (because, sometimes, compromise is necessary, which was his point).

 

[mheslep]

...
One of the basic tenets of the American form of government is that public policies are not supposed to be based on any sort of appeal to any theistic religious dogma or mythology. ...

The term 'theistic' is your interpretation, and not used in the 1st amendment.

 

[ThomasT]

The term 'theistic' is your interpretation, and not used in the 1st amendment.

Yes, I think you're correct about that. But I do think that the intention was to establish a secular government.

Wrt Santorum, I think he would like to see, and would do whatever he could to establish, a Christian theocracy.

 

[WhoWee]

Yes, I think you're correct about that. But I do think that the intention was to establish a secular government.

Wrt Santorum, I think he would like to see, and would do whatever he could to establish, a Christian theocracy.

Has he ever suggested anything of this type on the floor of the US Senate or introduced any such effort into a Bill?

 

[ThomasT]

Has he ever suggested anything of this type on the floor of the US Senate or introduced any such effort into a Bill?

I don't know. I'm just assuming that it's a future possibility (probability?) from his current rhetoric, and the apparent fact that he's a fanatical Christian.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong here. I have a couple, very close, fanatical Christian friends who I love and trust. But I wouldn't want them to be the chief executive.

 

[WhoWee]

I don't know. I'm just assuming that it's a future possibility (probability?) from his current rhetoric, and the apparent fact that he's a fanatical Christian.

EDIT: Don't get me wrong here. I have a couple, very close, fanatical Christian friends who I love and trust. But I wouldn't want them to be the chief executive.

I had no idea the President has that type of power? Moving forward, we'd better consider the religious comments made by every candidate as well as members of their Administrations - shouldn't we? Is there anything else we should be concerned about specifically with Santorum - other than his religious beliefs?

 

[ThomasT]

I had no idea the President has that type of power?

Well, aren't we being sarcastic now. But of course you're correct. The president actually doesn't have that sort of direct power. But he does have a lot of influence. And for that reason I see a Santorum presidency as a negative thing.

Moving forward, we'd better consider the religious comments made by every candidate as well as members of their Administrations - shouldn't we? Is there anything else we should be concerned about specifically with Santorum - other than his religious beliefs?

As far as I'm concerned Santorum's extreme religiosity is reason enough not to vote for him.

 

[WhoWee]

Well, aren't we being sarcastic now. But of course you're correct. The president actually doesn't have that sort of direct power. But he does have a lot of influence. And for that reason I see a Santorum presidency as a negative thing.

As far as I'm concerned Santorum's extreme religiosity is reason enough not to vote for him.

Thus far, it sounds as the only reason anyone has to not vote for him are his stated religious beliefs? I think it's best to let him wear those beliefs on his sleeve - if he starts to head down that road - there's a quick pull handle to get him back on track (for opponents) isn't there? IMO - it would be much worse to find that he harbored strong religious/philosophical beliefs that we were unaware of - wouldn't it?

 

[ThomasT]

Thus far, it sounds as the only reason anyone has to not vote for him are his stated religious beliefs?

I don't know about anyone, but that's my main reason to not vote for him.

I think it's best to let him wear those beliefs on his sleeve ...

Do we have a choice? I mean, isn't that part of his campaign strategy?

... - if he starts to head down that road - there's a quick pull handle to get him back on track (for opponents) isn't there?

He's already "down that road" as far as I can tell. And the solution is to not vote for him.

IMO - it would be much worse to find that he harbored strong religious/philosophical beliefs that we were unaware of - wouldn't it?

Like maybe he's in league with Satan? Yeah, that would be worse.

 

[WhoWee]

My point is that vetting is good - would you rather know his beliefs now or later? Rather than your Satan scenario - if Santorum ever tried to promote a religious agenda from the Oval Office - it would be very easy for opponents to counter.

 

[ThomasT]

My point is that vetting is good - would you rather know his beliefs now or later? Rather than your Satan scenario - if Santorum ever tried to promote a religious agenda from the Oval Office - it would be very easy for opponents to counter.

What's the point? That he's honest about being a fanatical Christian? Ok. That means I don't vote for him. But of course about half the country disagrees with me.

 

[daveb]

Again, does anyone have any reason other than religious beliefs not to vote for Santorum?

Most of the economic policies he would promote and/or support.
Most of the social policies he would promote and/or support.
The potential judges for SCOTUS (and other courts) he would appoint (because despite all appearances, all of the judges are influenced by their political philosophies - I happen to prefer progressive policies rather than consevrative ones.)

How's that for reasons not to vote for hi.

One other - I'm registered Green Party, so can't vote in the primary anyway.

 

[WhoWee]

Most of the economic policies he would promote and/or support.
Most of the social policies he would promote and/or support.
The potential judges for SCOTUS (and other courts) he would appoint (because despite all appearances, all of the judges are influenced by their political philosophies - I happen to prefer progressive policies rather than consevrative ones.)

How's that for reasons not to vote for hi.

One other - I'm registered Green Party, so can't vote in the primary anyway.

Which policies (other than religious speculation)?

 

[Hobin]

Such as?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/santorum-says-he-would-bomb-irans-nuclear-plants/

http://grist.org/climate-change/2011-06-24-rick-santorum-glenn-beck-global-warming-skeptic-hoax/

You can also check his own site and his 'accomplishments', to get a general idea of the kinds of things he'd like to see.

There's plenty of stuff.

 

[WhoWee]

I don't know. But the point is that he's a religious nutcase. So, there's no telling what he might do. I'm not willing to take the chance. Obama has performed according to the status quo, so at least I know what to expect from him. Santorum is a question mark. We know that he's a Christian zealot. Who knows what strange and damaging directives might emanate from a Santorum administration?

Nutcase and zealot (?) - again - has he ever promoted a religious ideology on the floor of the Senate - wouldn't someone fitting these extreme descriptions have some type of a legislative record?

 

[Pythagorean]

here's one:

One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, well, that’s OK, contraception is OK. It’s not OK. It’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage. They’re supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal … but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen.

More:

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/03/396516/santorum-states-should-have-the-right-to-outlaw-birth-control/?mobile=nc

 

[turbo]

Such as?

The president has a lot of power over the administrative departments. Some of his statements make me fear for the integrity of Education, DHHS, and other favorite whipping-boys of the right. If he can find a way to gut or hobble the Education department, he may well do so. His pronouncements about contraception and abortion make women wary about what might happen to reproductive health issues if he is elected. My sisters and their daughters are not wealthy, and they have tried to limit the sizes of their families. Santorum is not too comforting to them in regard to these issues. My sisters are now past child-bearing age, but their daughters and daughters in-law are not, and when we talk on the phone, the issue of reproductive health under Santorum comes up regularly. IMO, if the GOP nominates Santorum, there will be an impressive flood of women voters to Obama. Quite the gift for a sitting president in a crappy economy with rising energy prices.

 

[WhoWee]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/santorum-says-he-would-bomb-irans-nuclear-plants/

http://grist.org/climate-change/2011-06-24-rick-santorum-glenn-beck-global-warming-skeptic-hoax/

You can also check his own site and his 'accomplishments', to get a general idea of the kinds of things he'd like to see.

There's plenty of stuff.

Is grist.org an approved source on PF?

If you want to discuss his political views about Iran - that's a good start - IMO.

Your link specifies:

"Rick Santorum said today that he would be in favor of launching airstrikes against Iranian nuclear facilities.

“We will degrade those facilities through airstrikes, and make it very public that we are doing that,” Santorum said on “Meet the Press.”"

He clearly doesn't want Iran to develop a nuclear weapon and would be willing to take action if necessary. Do you think he would be wrong to threaten to bomb the Iranian facilities if sanctions don't work - then follow through with the pledge if necessary? I think Iran would take Santorum seriously.

 

[Pythagorean]

and this one is popular:

"I don't believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."

and of course, he's well know for his position against same-sex marriage.

The interesting question to me is: How can you not see Santorum's religious agenda.

 

[WhoWee]

The president has a lot of power over the administrative departments. Some of his statements make me fear for the integrity of Education, DHHS, and other favorite whipping-boys of the right. If he can find a way to gut or hobble the Education department, he may well do so. His pronouncements about contraception and abortion make women wary about what might happen to reproductive health issues if he is elected. My sisters and their daughters are not wealthy, and they have tried to limit the sizes of their families. Santorum is not too comforting to them in regard to these issues. My sisters are now past child-bearing age, but their daughters and daughters in-law are not, and when we talk on the phone, the issue of reproductive health under Santorum comes up regularly. IMO, if the GOP nominates Santorum, there will be an impressive flood of women voters to Obama. Quite the gift for a sitting president in a crappy economy with rising energy prices.

The Obama comments don't belong in this thread. Aside from a fear that Santorum will make birth control unavailable for your family members - are there any other specific concerns?

 

[WhoWee]

and this one is popular:

"I don't believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."

and of course, he's well know for his position against same-sex marriage.

The interesting question to me is: How can you not see Santorum's religious agenda.

Again, he wears the religion on his sleeve - is there any other non-religion reason to not vote for him?

 

[lisab]

The Obama comments don't belong in this thread. Aside from a fear that Santorum will make birth control unavailable for your family members - are there any other specific concerns?

You are sounding very troll-ish: "Apart from the fact that he's way off on the fringe, what's not to like about the guy?"

 

[WhoWee]

here's one:

More:

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/03/396516/santorum-states-should-have-the-right-to-outlaw-birth-control/?mobile=nc

Campaign talk is one thing - is there anything in his legislative record?

 

[WhoWee]

You are sounding very troll-ish: "Apart from the fact that he's way off on the fringe, what's not to like about the guy?"

I am not permitted to discuss other candidates in this thread. I'm asking a very simple question - other than religion - what do you not like about Santorum - that's not a troll.

 

[Number Nine]

I am not permitted to discuss other candidates in this thread. I'm asking a very simple question - other than religion - what do you not like about Santorum - that's not a troll.

No one here has argued against Santorum on the basis of his religion; they have argued that his religious convictions will lead him to make specific policy decisions that they disagree with. His open contempt towards gay people and his stated aim to put an end to gay marriage are one such example. Everyone has made their objections very clear.

On a somewhat related note: Given that Santorum's entire campaign has centred around his religiosity (and the non-religiosity of his opponents), I don't understand the problem with "opposing him on the basis of his religion". His religion is his entire identity.

 

[WhoWee]

His religion is his entire identity.

Does everyone (except me) agree with this statement?

 

[Evo]

I am not permitted to discuss other candidates in this thread. I'm asking a very simple question - other than religion - what do you not like about Santorum - that's not a troll.

I don't like his tax cuts for the rich and large businesses. I don't like his proposal to triple the IRS tax deduction per child. I don't like his proposal to take away standardized proper education and allow parents, not educators, to determine what is acceptable to be taught in schools.

I disagree with all of this.

Executive Orders, Rulemaking and other Executive Branch Actions

Repeal Clinton-era Title X family planning regulations, and will direct HHS to restore the separation of Title X family planning from abortion practices and restore a ban on referrals for abortion

Reinstitute the Mexico City Policy to stop tax-payer funding or promotion of abortion overseas

Ban federal funding for embryonic stem cell research

Restore conscience clause protections for health care workers
Defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court

Ban military chaplains from performing same sex marriage ceremonies on military bases or other Federal properties

Repeal Obamacare mandate for contraceptive services in healthcare plans
Re-direct funds within HHS so it can create a public/private partnership with state &local communities, not-for-profit organizations, and faith-based organizations for the purpose of strengthening marriages, families, and fatherhood

Veto any bill or budget that funds abortion or funds any organization that performs abortions including Planned Parenthood

Congressional Directives

Call on Congress to abolish the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Advocate for a Personhood Amendment to the Constitution

Call on Congress to pass the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

Advocate for a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution

Call on Congress to reinstitute Don't Ask/Don't Tell

Call on Congress to pass the Workplace Religious Freedom Act

Call on Congress to reinstitute 2008-level funding for the Community Based Abstinence Education program

Advocate for a federal law permitting schools to allow prayer at graduations, football games and other school functions

Named by Time magazine as one of the 25 most influential evangelical leaders

IMO, he's a dangerous man that wishes to reverse the freedoms and social advances this country has made in the last 100 years that go against his personal religious beliefs.

http://www.ricksantorum.com/faith-family-and-freedom-tour

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

If you are pro-choice and vote against Santorum because he is pro-life, are you voting against him for religious reasons?

 

[WhoWee]

I don't like his tax cuts for the rich and large businesses. I don't like his proposal to triple the IRS tax deduction per child. I don't like his proposal to take away standardized proper education and allow parents, not educators, to determine what is acceptable to be taught in schools.

I disagree with all of this.

IMO, he's a dangerous man that wishes to reverse the freedoms and social advances this country has made in the last 100 years that go against his personal religious beliefs.

http://www.ricksantorum.com/faith-family-and-freedom-tour

I think his pro-manufacturing plan is more political than realistic. IMO - it's intended to appeal to the heavy industry (and heavy union) Great Lakes states >PA, OH, MI, IL, NY,IN. I think it actually helped him initially in MI.

I haven't read through his new plan (apparently released today).

 

[JDoolin]

I don't think this is a fair summation of the argument. While what you have said is part of the debate, another important aspect is the degree to which local control versus state or federal control produces the best outcomes. For example, with federally mandated tests determining funding, teachers "teach to the test" and in some cases (like at my old high school) teachers allow cheating to boost scores. A lot of the debate does have to do with the bureaucratic nature of these things, and the question as to whether one size fits all policies actually work.

That's very well said. But are any of the Republican candidates publicly making that argument? Probably, in local elections, but what about nationally?

 

[Pythagorean]

his religious convictions will lead him to make specific policy decisions that they disagree with.

yep, this is what it comes down to. If you call that "because he's religious" then YES, that's the reason.

 

[Char. Limit]

Again, does anyone have any reason other than religious beliefs not to vote for Santorum?

This is much like Jimmy's question above, but I do not support Santorum because he claims evolution to be "only a theory". People like that, I don't want in office. Is that non-religious, though?

 

[WhoWee]

This is much like Jimmy's question above, but I do not support Santorum because he claims evolution to be "only a theory". People like that, I don't want in office. Is that non-religious, though?

I received another infraction and won't be responding in this thread any more - please continue with your thoughts Char.

 

[Hobin]

This is much like Jimmy's question above, but I do not support Santorum because he claims evolution to be "only a theory". People like that, I don't want in office. Is that non-religious, though?

I don't think it's religious. At least, I suspect you don't want him in office not because of his disbelief in evolution per se, but more because this shows a.) lack of rational thought, and b.) that he's most likely a fundamentalist.

That's reason enough not to want someone in office, methinks.

 

[Pythagorean]

We can't truly say whether his irrational thought processes are due to religion; we just assume they are since:

1) they're congruent with fundamentalist Christian ideals
2) his campaign talk has a lot of Christian reference.
3) he has specifically stated that church and state shouldn't be completely separate

 

[Galteeth]

I don't think it's religious. At least, I suspect you don't want him in office not because of his disbelief in evolution per se, but more because this shows a.) lack of rational thought, and b.) that he's most likely a fundamentalist.

That's reason enough not to want someone in office, methinks.

I'm not so sure a a lot of isn't posturing. Much has been made of the fact that earlier in his career, Santorum was considerably more moderate. It calls into question how much of his own rhetoric he actually believes.

 

[Hobin]

I'm not so sure a a lot of isn't posturing. Much has been made of the fact that earlier in his career, Santorum was considerably more moderate. It calls into question how much of his own rhetoric he actually believes.

That's possible, of course. On the other hand, I doubt I'd vote for someone "just in case he doesn't believe his own rhetoric."

 

[SixNein]

We can't truly say whether his irrational thought processes are due to religion; we just assume they are since:

1) they're congruent with fundamentalist Christian ideals
2) his campaign talk has a lot of Christian reference.
3) he has specifically stated that church and state shouldn't be completely separate

I'll say this much about him. He's God's gift to the democrats if he wins primaries. There is no way he'll get elected.

 

[Pythagorean]

yeah, I will actually bother voting if Santorum wins the primaries.

 

[turbo]

yeah, I will actually bother voting if Santorum wins the primaries.

All the women in my extended family will join you Pyth. We are not normally a politically-united family, but this time there is unity.

 

[jreelawg]

Santorum's recent comments about college.

Over the weekend, Santorum said “President Obama once said he wants everybody in America to go to college. What a snob. There are good decent men and women who go out and work hard every day and put their skills to test that aren’t taught by some liberal college professor to try to indoctrinate them. Oh, I understand why he wants you to go to college he wants to remake you in his image.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...b-remark-and-his-incorrect-underlying-charge/

Santorum, Feb. 26: You know the statistic that at least I was familiar with from a few years ago — I don't know if it still holds true but I suspect it may even be worse - that 62% of kids who enter college with some sort of faith commitment leave without it.
...
Santorum made the claim more forcefully at a Jan. 25 appearance in Naples, Fla., where he said "you know 62% of children who enter college with a faith conviction leave without it." He also encouraged people to not give money to colleges.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politi...-santorum-college-faith/53274624/1?csp=34news
And he had some things to say about JFK also.

Rick Santorum: JFK’s 1960 Speech Made Me Want to Throw Up

“I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country,” said Santorum.

Santorum:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...um-jfks-1960-speech-made-me-want-to-throw-up/

JFK's speech: www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAvHHTt2czU

I can see how he would find it offensive.

 

[Fredrik]

Santorum's recent comments about college.



http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...b-remark-and-his-incorrect-underlying-charge/



http://www.usatoday.com/news/politi...-santorum-college-faith/53274624/1?csp=34news



And he had some things to say about JFK also.



Santorum:

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...um-jfks-1960-speech-made-me-want-to-throw-up/

JFK's speech: www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAvHHTt2czU

I can see how he would find it offensive.

Based on yesterday's The daily show, it seems that Santorum didn't understand what he read. He was upset about the suggestion that a person of faith has no place in the public square, that only people of non-faith can come in the public square and make their case. The speech didn't actually say anything like that, but Santorum is clearly one of those guys who couldn't care less about the facts.

The comment about Obama being a snob because he wants everyone to go to college turned out to be just as misguided. When Santorum clarified his position, he said essentially the same thing that Obama did.

Santorum is quite scary, but I think I still want him to win against Romney, because he should have no chance against Obama in the actual election.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Apparently, the Santorum campaign has been robocalling Democrats in order to encourage them to vote for Santorum. According to them, they are trying to reach out to Reagan Democrats, but according to me, they're going to reach a lot more Obama Democrats, only too happy to oblige. I think it's called taking one from the team

 

[MarcoD]

Odd thing. I don't feel comfortable commenting on US politics, I am a rabid atheist, I can't vote in the US, the guy has made some unfavorable remarks about my country, about every religious statement he makes goes against what I believe, but I find myself warming up on the guy...

What kind of odd psychological trick is that? Branding?

 

[Hobin]

What kind of odd psychological trick is that? Branding?

The closest thing I can think of would be Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[MarcoD]

No. I think it's, among other things, the comment he made about the Netherlands. According to him, we would euthanize 10% of the elderly and elderly would wear bracelets to prevent that from happening.

Now that clearly isn't true, right? But that doesn't matter. The thing is that in case it would be true, he would be at the right side of the fence. So you end up with the idea: 'This is really a decent chap.'

 

[Evo]

No. I think it's, among other things, the comment he made about the Netherlands. According to him, we would euthanize 10% of the elderly and elderly would wear bracelets to prevent that from happening.

Now that clearly isn't true, right? But that doesn't matter. The thing is that in case it would be true, he would be at the right side of the fence. So you end up with the idea: 'This is really a decent chap.'

But he's nuts if he thinks people are going to be euthanized against their will, IMO.