BUCK writes:

Yesterday, Rick Santorum was quoted as saying about Bruce Jenner: “If he says he’s a woman, then he’s a woman,” and that “My responsibility as a human being is to love and accept everybody. Not to criticize people for who they are. I can criticize, and I do, for what people do, for their behavior. But as far as for who they are, you have to respect everybody.”

How stupid is Rick Santorum? “He’s a woman?” “You have to respect…who they are?”

Santorum is actually arguing that Bruce Jenner is NOT “behaving” when he mutilates himself and pretends to be female; that Jenner is a woman. Jenner’s sick compulsion is nothing but behavior. What the hell is wrong with Santorum?

Then he doubles down on stupid. Santorum says: “So these are tough issues. I haven’t got into the whole issue, and I don’t think the federal government should get into the whole issue of bathrooms,” Santorum said after being asked whether he thinks Jenner should be able to use women’s public restrooms. “I think those are things that the business community and local agencies and organizations should deal with.”

On what planet is this moron living?

— Comments —

Jewel writes:

I wish I could convey how truly heartbreaking it is to see someone you know and care about in the grip of a sexual identity crisis. When sex became about everything but making babies, why did anyone expect anything else but mass confusion? Santorum’s statement is evocative of the fear of offending the favored group – whomever they happen to be at the moment. Today it’s the sex changers, and tomorrow it will be someone else.

I know someone who is coming out as a ‘woman.’ Eddy has changed his name to Abby, donned a wig, taken his hormone shots, going for the whole nine yards. I won’t address him as Abby. He’s not a woman. When my daughter was complaining to him about the aches and pains of ‘girl time’ – her euphemism for her monthly period, he didn’t know what ‘girl time’ was. Most women and girls have all kinds of euphemisms for menstruation, but Eddy didn’t know them, can’t possibly identify. All he can do is mimic what he thinks a woman is. All he can possibly hope to be is a caricature of a woman.
This is insanity. You can’t win a war on nature and expect to come out better for it.

Laura writes:

I think we all feel sorry for the Eddy’s of the world.

That’s the bottom line. It’s about encouraging and applauding mental illness.

Jeanette V. writes:

I have several friends who know Santorum. This is what he wrote to one friend in his email, “I am not going argue with him [Bruce Jenner] as to whether he is a man or a woman. He is obviously biologically male and that cannot change.”

Laura writes:

“Rick” does not deny the report on his Facebook page, where he writes:

Many of you may have read a story published by the website BuzzFeed where I was asked for my thoughts regarding Bruce Jenner. My comment affirmed Jenner as a person, made by God in His likeness as we all are. It was meant to express empathy not a change in public policy.

Ephrem writes:

Rick Santorum has always been a Novus Ordo embarrassment. Santorum’s theology is much closer to evangelical Protestantism than anything recognizably Catholic. Even where he is right, Santorum’s other toxic positions, such as his knee jerk support for Israel, taint noble movements like the Catholic Crusades. There is also the story that Santorum’s wife dated an abortionist years ago.

Alex writes:

When confronted with the adulterous woman, Jesus, after asking who among you has not sinned, told the woman to go and “sin no more” or “leave your sinful life.” He in effect told her to stop sinning, not to keep doing what she had been doing. Mr. Santorum, like most politicians today, is a coward. He is afraid to be seen as serious about what he believes. You see Jesus was not afraid and he eventually got killed for it. Santorum is the type who would deny Christ not only three times but as many times as needed to cover his ass.

Mary writes:

I know next to nothing about Karen Santorum so I read the Daily Mail piece, which describes the abortionist in question as a close friend of her parents (who actually brought Karen herself into the world). Through this friendship with an abortionist I think we can conclude that she was raised in quite a liberal-minded household. The abortionist in question was a prosperous, charming playboy, albeit an older one; Karen Santorum is not the first young woman to fall into the hands of a man of this sort and won’t be the last. But she is quite possibly the only one who, following such an episode, went on to live a counter-cultural life as a professed Catholic, and have seven children in a marriage to a man who through his views and political ambitions has brought immeasurable derision and ridicule – and probably death threats – upon their family by speaking out against abortion, contraception, pornography, homosexual marriage, etc. etc. Say what you will about the wisdom of desiring a public life, I think it can be safely said they both have paid some serious dues.

I’m not a huge fan of the Santorums but I never tire of a good conversion story and that’s what Karen Santorum’s story is – such a win for the team! Why look at this through the eyes of the Daily Mail, through the eyes of the world? If there is no such thing as conversion after dissolute living then right off the bat we lose St. Mary Magdalene who “left her sinful life”, not to mention St. Augustine. Somebody tell St. Monica her prayers were in vain.

Laura writes:

It would be a scandal for Santorum if she had not rejected that past and started a new life. I don’t see her story as a blot on his reputation because she obviously changed.

Buck writes:

Santorum could have casually spoken truth to modern liberal power by simply using the correct terms. He could have done so in any number of obvious ways without getting stuck on the defensive.

Also, when asked about the infinitely complex public bathroom issue confronting the modern liberal state, he escapes into federalism: “I think those are things that the business community and local agencies and organizations should deal with.”

Homophobia – the real and palpable fear of serious retribution – grows stronger at every turn. Soon, the only place where men and women will speak the truth, in plain terms verboten in public, will be in venues like this.

Paul C. writes:

Any conservative running for president needs to study how Ronald Reagan handled questions about highly-sensitive issues.  I don’t recall any specifics that I can share, but he was never baffled when he was running.  Of course, he was naturally witty and deflected some questions by using his wit.  Except maybe for Senator Ted Cruz (which we don’t see enough of, yet), none of the current conservative candidates is witty and capable of a disarming riposte.  This is why they need to study Reagan diligently, not to learn how to be witty (which is a gift) but to learn what his principles were and how he handled sensitive issues.

I supported Rick Santorum during the primaries in the last election.  He is a good man, a family man, patriotic, and conservative, but he behaves as a politician, almost all of whom speak out of both sides of their mouths.  Reagan was unique, which is a big reason he won in landslides.  Reagan knew what he stood for on all the major issues.  I recall Senator Santorum being squishy on some major social issue, but I can’t recall which one.  He was criticized by a Republican strategist for allowing himself to answer highly-sensitive questions instead of changing the subject as most politicians do.

After the horrible Jimmy Carter and horrible Vietnam experiences, it was a glorious evening the first time Reagan was arriving or departing in the beautiful Air Force 1 very soon after he took office.  I recall watching it with my conservative mother, who was equally excited.  I was living at home while in law school.

The most intelligent candidate is clearly Ted Cruz, but he needs to study Reagan (who was intelligent contrary to his critics’ opinions).  Senator Cruz needs polish.  I am supporting Cruz, but I also like Governor Scott Walker a lot and have supported him in past elections; he has more experience in tough elections.

Laura writes:

I don’t see why a politician should study clever strategy on this issue. Jenner’s a man. He will always be a man. That’s all one has to say.

NP writes:

While I don’t agree that “she/he’s a woman” (about Bruce Jenner) I try to be sympathetic about someone’s problems. I know my flaws, but if they were directed concerning same sex relationships or the desire to mutilate my body they would be a lot worse.

Why not just say that some problems are intractable and that a celibate lifestyle is the best solution to a bad problem.

Buck writes:

I don’t understand. How do you define “a man,” as in “he will always be a man”?

Jenner meets none of the criteria for manhood that I can think of. In the narrow context of species, maybe; but that is not this context. A man is the counter part to a woman. He is male, but he is the antithesis of a man – not the opposite – but the anti.

Laura writes:

I define a man as a human being who is male.

James P. writes:

Santorum said,

“My responsibility as a human being is to love and accept everybody. Not to criticize people for who they are. I can criticize, and I do, for what people do, for their behavior. But as far as for who they are, you have to respect everybody.”

There is no responsibility to “accept everybody”. Those who are evil and destructive should be rejected as a matter of self-defense and civilizational survival.

I certainly don’t see a requirement to “respect” people who make false claims about what they are (like men who insist they are women) or insist that their sinful behavior is something “they are”.

As Buck said, Santorum is truly a moron if he thinks his maxim of “criticize what they do not what they are” applies to Bruce Jenner. Becoming a transgendered creature involves a very lengthy process of drugs, psychological treatment, and surgery. That is a behavior — something Jenner did  — not an intrinsic condition (something he “is”).

Please follow and like us: