Jump to content

Rick Santorum's views on homosexuality: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Undid revision 465205273 by NYyankees51 (talk) Take it to talk.
Undid revision 465205555 by NYyankees51 (talk) TALK,
Line 31: Line 31:
Jordan produced a recording of the interview, after allegations of bias were leveled against her because she is married to a Democratic strategist.<ref>{{cite web|title=News From The Right 2003–2004|url=http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9664|publisher=[[People for the American Way]]|year=2004|accessdate=October 2, 2007 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070927210746/http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9664 <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = September 27, 2007}}</ref>
Jordan produced a recording of the interview, after allegations of bias were leveled against her because she is married to a Democratic strategist.<ref>{{cite web|title=News From The Right 2003–2004|url=http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9664|publisher=[[People for the American Way]]|year=2004|accessdate=October 2, 2007 |archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20070927210746/http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9664 <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = September 27, 2007}}</ref>


==Public response==
==Public reaction and criticism==


Santorum's comments evoked responses ranging from [[George W. Bush]]'s remark, relayed through spokesperson [[Ari Fleischer]], that "the President believes that the senator is an inclusive man",<ref>{{cite web|title=Santorum and gays|url=http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2003/04/26/santorum_quotes/|work=[[Salon.com]]|date=April 26, 2003|accessdate=March 13, 2008}}</ref> to sharp criticism from [[Howard Dean]] that "[[gay-bashing]] is not a legitimate public policy discussion; it is immoral", to conservative groups such as the [[Family Research Council]] and [[Concerned Women for America]] who came to Santorum's defense.<ref name="defends comments"/>
Santorum's comments evoked responses ranging from [[George W. Bush]]'s remark, relayed through spokesperson [[Ari Fleischer]], that "the President believes that the senator is an inclusive man",<ref>{{cite web|title=Santorum and gays|url=http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2003/04/26/santorum_quotes/|work=[[Salon.com]]|date=April 26, 2003|accessdate=March 13, 2008}}</ref> to sharp criticism from [[Howard Dean]] that "[[gay-bashing]] is not a legitimate public policy discussion; it is immoral", to conservative groups such as the [[Family Research Council]] and [[Concerned Women for America]] who came to Santorum's defense.<ref name="defends comments"/>

Revision as of 19:01, 11 December 2011

Rick Santorum

The Santorum controversy arose over Republican former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum's statements about homosexuality and the right to privacy. In an interview with the Associated Press (AP) taped on April 7, 2003,[1] and published April 20, 2003, Santorum stated that he believed mutually consenting adults do not have a constitutional right to privacy with respect to sexual acts. Santorum described the ability to regulate consensual homosexual acts as comparable to the states' ability to regulate other consensual and non-consensual sexual behavior, such as adultery, polygamy, child molestation, incest, sodomy, and bestiality, whose decriminalization he believed would threaten society and the family, as they are not monogamous and heterosexual.

Many Democratic politicians, gay rights advocates, the Log Cabin Republicans, and progressive commentators condemned the statements as homophobic and bigoted,[1] while some conservatives supported Santorum's beliefs.[2] The controversy carried over into Santorum's presidential campaign in 2011.[3][4][5]

Statement

In the interview by Associated Press reporter Lara Jakes Jordan,[6] when asked for his position on the Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, Santorum said that the scandal involved priests and post-pubescent men in "a basic homosexual relationship" (not child sexual abuse), which led the interviewer to ask if homosexuality should be outlawed.[7]

Santorum then brought up the then-pending U.S. Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas, which challenged a Texas sodomy law, and went on to declare that:[7][8]

  • he did not have a problem with homosexuals, but "a problem with homosexual acts"
  • the right to privacy "doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution"
  • and that sodomy laws properly exist to prevent acts which "undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family"

When Jordan asked "Okay, without being too gory or graphic, so if somebody is homosexual, you would argue that they should not have sex?" Santorum's response concluded:[7]

"In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality —"

(At this point, Jordan commented, "I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States senator, it's sort of freaking me out," coining a phrase widely used in connection with this incident.)[7]

In the original version of the AP story, Santorum was quoted as saying:[1]

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

It also included additional remarks criticizing "homosexual acts":[7]

"Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, whether it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family."

Jordan produced a recording of the interview, after allegations of bias were leveled against her because she is married to a Democratic strategist.[9]

Public reaction and criticism

Santorum's comments evoked responses ranging from George W. Bush's remark, relayed through spokesperson Ari Fleischer, that "the President believes that the senator is an inclusive man",[10] to sharp criticism from Howard Dean that "gay-bashing is not a legitimate public policy discussion; it is immoral", to conservative groups such as the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America who came to Santorum's defense.[2]

Democratic politicians responding to Santorum's remarks included Former Governor of Vermont Howard Dean, who called on Santorum, "to resign from his post as Republican Conference chairman."[11][12] Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle remarked that Santorum's comments were "out of step with our country's respect for tolerance".[13][14] The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee demanded that Santorum resign as chairman of the Republican Senate Caucus.[15][16] Brad Woodhouse of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee called the comments, "divisive, hurtful and reckless."[13][17] Santorum faced criticism for his comments from Republican Senators including Olympia Snowe,[18][19] Susan Collins,[20] Lincoln Chafee,[18][21] and Gordon H. Smith.[18][22] Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona stated, "I think that he may have been inartful in the way that he described it."[18][23]

Critics of the statement included the Log Cabin Republicans,[24][25] and the Republican Unity Coalition whose members included then-Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney's daughter Mary Cheney and former President Gerald R. Ford.[26][27] LGBT rights groups which condemned the comments by Santorum included the Pennsylvania Gender Rights Coalition, OutFront, the Center for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights,[28][29] and the Human Rights Campaign.[28] The conservative Christian group, Concerned Women for America agreed with Santorum's comments in a written statement.[13][30] The group said Santorum was "exactly right" and attributed criticism of Santorum to the "gay thought police".[13][30] Director of Concerned Women for America's Culture and Family Institute, Robert Knight, criticized those Republicans who spoke out against Santorum, "Maybe they ought to think about switching parties. It shows great disloyalty to their party to join the sworn enemies in calling for the head [of Santorum]. They're doing their party a great disservice."[31] Vice President for Communications at the conservative Family Research Council Genevieve Wood supported Santorum's remarks, and commented, "I think the Republican party would do well to follow Senator Santorum if they want to see pro-family voters show up on Election Day."[13] Conservative publications released articles supporting Santorum's comments, including World Net Daily in an article by Joseph Farah,[32] and National Review with a piece by Robert P. George.[33]

Savage campaign

Main article: Campaign for "santorum" neologism

Dan Savage, a widely syndicated columnist who was offended by Santorum's remarks, hosted a contest in his Savage Love column for readers to create a definition for "santorum". He created a website for the winning definition, assigning it a vulgar meaning. This became a top search result for santorum in 2003, unseating the Senator's official website on many search engines, including Google, Yahoo! Search and Bing.[34] In 2011, during Santorum's presidential campaign, Santorum requested Google's assistance to end the delivery of certain search results, but Google said there was nothing it could do.[4][5]

Defense of the remarks

A representative for Santorum asserted that his comments were relevant specifically to the then-pending case before the Supreme Court of the United States, Lawrence v. Texas.[28] The Associated Press reported Santorum was offered an opportunity to explain his comments prior to the publishing of the interview – he refused to do so and replied, "I can't deny that I said it, and I can't deny that's how I feel."[35][36]

In a follow-up statement released after the Associated Press interview was published, Santorum said some of his remarks were "taken out of context", and defended his comments in the interview asserting "It is simply a reflection of the law."[11] In an interview with Fox News Channel, Santorum said he was not going to apologize for his remarks, "I do not need to give an apology based on what I said and what I'm saying now – I think this is a legitimate public policy discussion. These are not, you know, ridiculous, you know, comments. These are very much a very important point."[18]

Santorum defended his remarks, declaring that his comments were not intended to equate homosexuality with incest and adultery, but rather to challenge the specific legal position that the right to privacy prevents the government from regulating consensual acts among adults, a position he disputes, because he does not believe that there is a general constitutional right to privacy.[2]

The dissenting opinion in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) took a similar view—that, as the Texas homosexuality law had been ruled unconstitutional, because states have no right to interfere with an individual's choice of sexual partners, then the same ruling seems to imply that states have no right to legislate against incest, bigamy, adultery, polygamy, or any other mutually consensual sexual act not involving minors.

Homosexuality and the United States military comments

Main article: Sexual orientation and the United States military

During the Fox News/Google-sponsored debate, which took place in Orlando, Florida on September 22, 2011, a gay soldier deployed in Iraq asked the candidates if they would take measures to "circumvent" the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," if elected president.[3]

Santorum, who answered the question, called the repeal of DADT "social experimentation" - and "tragic."

"I would say any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military," Santorum responded. "And the fact that they're making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to -- and removing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military's job is to do one thing, and that is to defend our country."[3]

He added: "What we're doing is playing social experimentation with our military right now. And that's tragic."

References

  1. ^ a b c Loughlin, Sean (April 22, 2003). "Santorum under fire for comments on homosexuality". CNN. Retrieved March 13, 2008.
  2. ^ a b c "Santorum defends comments on homosexuality". CNN. April 23, 2003. Retrieved March 13, 2008.
  3. ^ a b c Lucy Madison (September 23, 2011). "Republican Gay rights group demands apology from Santorum". CBS News.
  4. ^ a b Rolph, Amy. "Rick Santorum wants Google to take down 'frothy mix' definition", Seattle Post Intelligencer (September 22, 2011).
  5. ^ a b Zorn, Eric. "Poor Rick S@ntorum", Chicago Tribune (September 21, 2011).
  6. ^ Farah, Joseph (April 28, 2003). "Santorum is right". World Net Daily. Retrieved March 13, 2008.
  7. ^ a b c d e "Excerpt from Santorum interview". USA Today. Associated Press. April 23, 2003. Retrieved March 13, 2008.
  8. ^ George, Robert P. (May 27, 2003). "Rick Santorum Is Right". The National Review. Retrieved March 13, 2008.
  9. ^ "News From The Right 2003–2004". People for the American Way. 2004. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved October 2, 2007.
  10. ^ "Santorum and gays". Salon.com. April 26, 2003. Retrieved March 13, 2008.
  11. ^ a b Loughlin, Sean (April 23, 2003). "Santorum defends comments on homosexuality". CNN. Time Warner. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  12. ^ Associated Press (April 24, 2003). "Dean: Senator should quit post - Politics: Santorum continues to defend remarks on gay sex". Long Beach Press-Telegram. p. A13.
  13. ^ a b c d e Loughlin, Sean (April 22, 2003). "Santorum under fire for comments on homosexuality". CNN. Time Warner. Retrieved October 2, 2007.
  14. ^ Hearst News Services (April 23, 2003). "Pennsylvania Senator's anti-gay remarks stir firestorm". The Miami Herald. p. 15A.
  15. ^ "Santorum Comments Draw Fire". Fox News Channel. www.foxnews.com. April 23, 2003. Retrieved December 21, 2010.
  16. ^ Straub, Noelle (April 23, 2003). "Senator's anti-gay comments draw fire". Boston Herald. p. 3.
  17. ^ Wright, Greg (Gannett News Service) (April 22, 2003). "Democrats demand Santorum resign leadership post over anti-gay comments". USA Today. Gannett Co., Inc.
  18. ^ a b c d e "Santorum and gays". Salon. April 26, 2003. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  19. ^ "Santorum slammed for anti-gay bigotry". People's World. www.peoplesworld.org. May 7, 2003. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  20. ^ Enrich, David (State News Service) (April 23, 2003). "Collins criticizes Santorum comments". Bangor Daily News. p. A3.
  21. ^ Associated Press (April 24, 2003). "Chafee Second Republican to Slam Santorum Remarks". Fox News Channel. Fox News Network, LLC. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  22. ^ Detzel, Tom (April 25, 2003). "Smith calls Santorum's remarks on gays 'hurtful'". The Oregonian. Oregonian Publishing Co. p. A01. {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  23. ^ Matthews, Chris (April 23, 2003). "Hardball College Tour: John McCain University of Notre Dame, April 23, 7 p.m. ET". MSNBC. NBC. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  24. ^ Shepard, Scott (May 10, 2003). "Both parties see benefit of courting gay vote". Cox News Service. www.seattlepi.com. Retrieved May 10, 2011.
  25. ^ Knight Ridder Newspapers (April 22, 2003). "Santorum statement riles gays - Remarks referred to incest, bigamy". Columbia Daily Tribune.
  26. ^ Stolberg, Sheryl Gay (April 24, 2003). "A Republican Group Demands That Senator Apologize to Gays". The New York Times. The New York Times Company. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  27. ^ "The Last Sanction". The Gainesville Sun. April 30, 2003. p. 12A.
  28. ^ a b c Jordan, Lisa Jakes (April 22, 2003). "Gay groups want Santorum out of leadership". Associated Press.
  29. ^ Cooperman, Alan (April 22, 2003). "Santorum Angers Gay Rights Groups". The Washington Post. The Washington Post Company. p. A04.
  30. ^ a b Gzedit (April 30, 2003). "Jailing gays Does the GOP approve?". Charleston Gazette. p. P4A.
  31. ^ Enrich, David (State News Service) (April 25, 2003). "Mods Vs. Santorum: Another battle with the GOP's liberal wing". National Review. www.nationalreview.com. Retrieved May 13, 2011.
  32. ^ Farah, Joseph (April 28, 2003). "Santorum is right". World Net Daily. www.wnd.com. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  33. ^ George, Robert P. (May 27, 2003). "Rick Santorum is right". National Review. www.nationalreview.com. Retrieved May 12, 2011.
  34. ^ Amira, Dan (February 16, 2011). "Rick Santorum Has Come to Terms With His Google Problem". New York Magazine. nymag.com. Retrieved May 27, 2011.
  35. ^ "Santorum stands behind comments on homosexuality". The Intelligencer. Doylestown, Pennsylvania. April 23, 2003. p. 6B, Section: Daily B.
  36. ^ Donovan, Gill (May 9, 2003). "Santorum's remarks draw both affirmation, criticism from Catholics". National Catholic Reporter.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rick_Santorum%27s_views_on_homosexuality&oldid=465326036"