Rick Santorum has a history of controversial political positions around privacy rights and government’s authority to regulate consensual sexual behavior between adults. He believes Catholic priests caught in the“pedophile scandal”, were merely affected by the media and a culture of "academic, political and cultural liberalism" that approves of homosexuality. Which may explain why he advocates getting rid of the Department of Education.
His latest rant that “President Obama is trying to crush faith”, drives me to the brink of insanity. Clearly, one cannot legislate faith; religion perhaps, but not faith. Faith in this context refers to the “belief”, “trust” and “confidence” one places in their religion.
I couldn’t help but wonder if Santorum would offer the same pathetic excuse as the reason priests and bishops are raping nuns.
From National Catholic Reporter:
THE PROBLEM OF THE SEXUAL ABUSE OF AFRICAN RELIGIOUS IN AFRICA AND IN ROME
PAPER FOR THE COUNCIL OF “16”
Marie McDonald, MSOLA
“.....This talk refers mainly to AFRICA and to AFRICAN SISTERS, PRIESTS AND BISHOPS.... because the group which met to prepare the input for today’s gathering were drawing mainly on their own experience in Africa and the knowledge they have obtained from the members of their own Congregations or from other congregations....”
We know that the problem exists elsewhere too.
The problem
1. Sexual harassment and even rape of sisters by priests and bishops is allegedly common. Sometimes, when a sister becomes pregnant, the priest insists that she have an abortion. ¨The sister is usually dismissed from her congregation while the priest is often only moved to another parish -- or sent for studies.
2. Many sisters become financially dependent upon priests who may ask for sexual favours in return.
3. Priests sometimes take advantage of spiritual direction and of the sacrament or Reconciliation to ask for sexual favours.....”
From Wikileaks:
VATICAN ACKNOWLEDGES SEXUAL ABUSE BY PRIESTS
--------------------------------------------
¶5. (SBU) IN A RARE STATEMENT ACKNOWLEDGING FAULT, VATICAN SPOKESMAN JOAQUIN NAVARRO-VALLS SAID MARCH 20 THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABUSE OF NUNS BY PRIESTS IN SOME MISSIONARY TERRITORIES. HE SAID THE VATICAN WAS WORKING TO CORRECT THE SITUATION. THE STATEMENT WAS IN RESPONSE TO A MARCH 16 ARTICLE IN U.S. CATHOLIC WEEKLY, NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER THAT CITED FOUR REPORTS BY SENIOR MEMBERS OF WOMEN'S RELIGIOUS ORDERS ASSERTING THAT SEXUAL ABUSE OF NUNS BY PRIESTS, INCLUDING RAPE, WAS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. 
From: “Contraception - False Morality and the War Against Women”
I am repeating the following information because it goes to the question of whether or not Catholic affiliated employers should be exempt from providing contraceptive coverage. I consider the ongoing objection to be phony outrage.
Personally, I felt that President Obama’s first call was correct, especially since Catholic institutions presently operate under the same law without the benefit of a religious exemption in eight states. Several Catholic colleges make coverage available, as well. Which begs the question, is this a matter of government intruding on religion or religion attempting to direct government?
Colleges have huge endowments. Notre Dame reports $7 billion. If contraception is so evil that having coverage provided as part of a comprehensive health insurance plan is objectionable....is it okay to invest in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture and profit from contraceptions? What about the retailers who sell them? I think this is what they call a “slippery slope”.
CATHOLIC AFFILIATED INSTITUTIONS THAT PROVIDE CONTRACEPTIVE COVERAGE
From National Women’s Law Center:
Religious Employers Are Currently Bound by Title VII Duty to Provide Contraceptive Coverage
Title VII does not allow religious organizations to discriminate on the basis of race, sex (including pregnancy-related conditions), national origin or religion in the provision of pay or benefits to their employees....it is sex discrimination for a religious organization to deny benefits to women....”
“..... it is also sex discrimination to exclude contraceptives when other prescription drugs and preventive services are provided as a fringe benefit.....the Title VII exemption applicable to religious employers is explicitly limited to hiring and employment only....”
What do you think?
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Chauncey DeVega
James M. Emmerling
Ted Frier
al loomis
Paul Nevins
Left Is Right
Salon.com
Comments
Peter: The fact that I agree is confirmation that you are absolutely correct. :)
Phyllis: I certainly hope you're right. I fail to understand how they have gained any traction at all. The fact that they have doesn't give me much faith in the electorate.
Only it's all "opinion". - I appreciate your post so much because you are so good with supporting research. Thank you for doing the nuts and bolts work.
r./
Island: I have to stick to facts. If I wrote my opinion, it would go on forever and besides, I cuss. :)
is it okay to invest in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture and profit from contraceptions? What about the retailers who sell them? I think this is what they call a “slippery slope”.
everything these bastards do is slippery slope material. because in the end it has nothing to do with god, and everything to do with craven power, domination, greed and who gets to wear versace shoes and crazy ass big pointed silk hats decorated with pure gold with a straight face.
I see it the way you do. If a religious organization wants to object on the grounds that it infringes on their faith, then perhaps they should be operating with funds right from their tithes and only hire parishioners and laity of their faith -- and not help anyone outside their faith!
Oh wait, it's a sin to deny someone necessary medical care, even at a Catholic Hospital. I notice we don't hear anyone from Shriner's Hospital complaining about this issue. No voices raised in ire from Beth-Israel.
So what is it about contraception that so ignites the hypocritical elite of the Christian Religious Zealous Right? Don't they already think we have too many poor, uneducated, lazy hoping-for-a-handout miscreants as it is?
That whole "Go forth and multiply," thing sure makes people crazy. Maybe it's just too much inbreeding? I mean if it works for royalty, maybe it's "working" for the corporatized feudal elite? Insanity would explain the mixed messages, the hypocrisy of say one thing, do another, and their complete lack of compassion as they preach from the pulpit of a religion that is based on compassion, care for each other and -- believe it or not -- forgiveness.
Shout it, sister!
--r--
As for Santorum, he is an example of what the current right wing/Tea Partian/Republican forces throw up. Saner Repubs like Pawlenty or Huntsman can't get anywhere in this environment.
R♥
(Mumbling) i...am...so...sick...of...this...BS!
Lezlie
Could it be that he wants to hammer in some of his own planks in the Republican 2012 platform?
On...the...other...hand...this is the craziest election season I've seen in all my considerable years of observing politics.
As for "Holy Mother the Church"...the abuse of power - temporal or spiritual - is as old as the church itself and, frankly, it is not peculiar to the CC, either.
But this is no apology. Just an observation. These people definitely need to be brought into account for their behavior, from bishops, to pastors, to parish priests.
Tax all organized religions!
r
Santorum should be the poster boy for that very idea. He feels his church can do no wrong, and that whatever it says on faith and morals is a no brainer. His other ideas scare me as well. As a gay man, I would truly fear this man sitting in the Oval Office. Personally if this guy manages to be elected President, I will definitely leave the country!
They want Obama to stay in office. They expect, as do many others, that the second half of this economic crunch is about to hit, and hit hard. They want to tie the can for that debacle to Obama's tail and to the Democrats. They figure that if Obama can stave it off for four more years, then they'll stage a "come-back" push in 2016 and continue to hold it off by following Obama's policies once in office.
It's diabolically clever. And it will work too! In 2016 you may see the biggest GOP landslide in history. That, at least, is what the Skypixie0 crystal ball says.......
.
I'm adding you to my favorites list.
Rated!
Thanks Sheila.
Dunniteowl: Welcome. I hope I have it out of my system...it's raising my blood pressure. :)
Abra: Honestly, I don't know how long it will be before I can respond to you without cracking-up about brownies.
Fusun: I'm glad you find the information educational. Disgusting, isn't it?
Lezlie: Me too...only I'm not mumbling.
Toritto: Hello again. Thanks for your support.
Malcolm: I'm no expert of Biblical interpretations, but I'm certain none of this crap they're spouting sits right with me. Thank you so much for adding to the dialogue.
Kenny: I'm thinking South America. Which way are you going? :)
Skye: We must have bought our crystal balls from the same place. I have long advocated that they have something up their sleeve. Though I don't agree that they're clever...the electorate is a little, you know. :)
A common error is to consider "them guys" as 'stoopid' because they don't agree with "us." They are smart, tough, competitiors. They wouldn't be the danger that they are if they were not.
"It's not the fools who worry me - it's the clever men who act like fools."
.
Host said, ‘how come church against contraception?”
“ah, “ said fancy archfiend. “it is the traditional view of the church that the sexual act in marriage is governed by certain eternal principles..blah blah…” then he drifted off into politics, which bore the shit out of me, except to see the republicans dig this mannequin boy Romney or the momma’s boy santorum..momma being the Church,whatever f-ing church he follows….
Contraception will save the earth from overpopulation, me thinks.
Unless the catholic & other damn fool churches put their money into going to the moon, where they can be chaste to their heart’s content in some enclosed phony world on a rock without air to breathe. They can breed themselves silly up there. Who cares. People are crazy, when a church got em by the balls.
My humble opinion on this farce of an issue.
Stim: That's the absolute truth!
Santorum cannot be allowed to be president EVER!!
Rated
Makes me long for William F. Buckley, a conservative who could put together an English sentence and construct arguments that made sense even when I didn't agree with them.
Now can Funny Fay come out to play???
•.•♥╔╗╦╦╗▄║╔╗╔╗ & ╗╔╗╔╔╗╔╗•(¯ `v´¯ )◦•*✿
•.•♥╚╗║║║╦║╠╝╚╗ & ╠╣║║║╦╚╗(¯` ❤ .¯ )✿
•.•♥╚╝──╚╩╚╚╝╚╝ & ╝╚╚╝╚╝╚╝◦.(_.^._)•*¨✫
❊¸.•*´¨`*•.¸❊¸.•*´¨`*•.¸❊¸.•*´ ¨`*•.¸❊¸.•*´¨`*•.¸❊
Have a beautiful new week with love and happiness❤¸.•*¨✫
Shiral: I can't figure out if Santorum is running for President or Pope.
Cathy: This country has been in worse financial shape than it is now and we survived...but we worked together with a purpose.
Scanner: I agree with you, but don't get so comfortable with the idea that there aren't enough idiots out there to put Santorum in office.
Jett: Welcome and thanks for stopping by.
Lady: I'm glad you enjoy my little funny tales. My life is stranger than fiction, so I'm certain I'll have something insane to tell soon.
Algis: Welcome and thank you so much for your support.
Hello Sarah: Nice to see you again. You mustn't feel dismayed. Your faith in the word and God should not be diminished by the deeds of mere men. Your faith and bond with God belongs to you alone.
So you would have been okay with his comments if he had said, 'President Obama is trying to crush religion"? Your problem is his choice of words?
I think the left, in general, does have a problem with, in particular, conservative Jews and Christians practicing their religion/faith if that means that they will not do some of the things the left wants them to do. I think trying to force an institution to pay for - directly or indirectly - a medical item it does not approve does imply at least an attempt to crush that institution - or to render it less than free - and I suspect that is what Santorum, even while using wrong-in-your-view choice of words, was trying to say.
I do have an issue with the way people express religion, or in this instance faith, if it means they have a right to impose it on me. I am totally without concern about the religion one practices or what they have faith in. So yes, if Santorum had said President Obama is trying to crush religion, that would have made sense to me. But to suggest "religion" is the object would have been a step too far...faith appeals to the emotional senses. He's a politician and a lawyer...he knows better.
This article is about hypocrisy. There is hypocrisy in Santorum's statement as well as the Catholic outcry. I would not say a word if the law did not already exist (for years) in over twenty states. Eight states have no religious exception at all. Seems the Bishops should have spoken out long before now. The fact that they didn't, suggests they are motivated by politics...not a religious belief.
To me, it's real simple...don't want to follow federal law, don't accept federal funds. Finally, I personally couldn't care less what religion one espouses, but I should also add that I believe one's relationship with God is personal and does not need interpretation or guidance by anything or anyone but one's own heart and conscience.
This isn't about the right of people to chose their own beliefs it is about the right of powerful institutions to decide for their employees and customers what should be available.
Obama managed to be on the right side of the issue and before most of the Republican party changed positions they agreed in 28 states.
As far as Santorum goes if he has a rational constituency his campaign will self destruct; but that doesn't seem to be happening because his constituency isn't rational and the other candidates are just as bade.
Fortunately in the general elections the public won't go for that but that doesn't mean we should fall for the corporate candidate leading the democratic party.
I was in Bangkok during the 2008 election...didn't vote, but I was able to observe the campaign from afar. I am not at all surprised by the amount of ire and anger people feel...although, it makes no sense to me. But it started long before he was elected. In all the excitement, no one paid attention. I'm always amused at how people see him.