The Penn senator was on IMUS this morning, touting his book. He made the point that he was offering a contrast to Hillary's approach a while back, saying in (paraphrased form) that it doesn't take government to build strong families; it takes the family itself... This is yet another example of Santorum -- and by extension the GOP generally, given all the endorsements of his book on that side - saying one thing, but in action standing for something totally different.
In end, Santorum's problem is only with the TYPE of government involvement in the lives of families, not the idea of state engagement generally.
Whereas Hillary called for social institutions to supplement a family's private desires, Santorum and company call on the government to POLICE that privacy and freedom of conscience.
For instance, how are families strengthened by:
-- the power of the state to break down a bedroom door and arrest consenting adults for acts of sexual intimacy?
-- the power of the federal government to swoop into a private end-of-life matter, and declare itself the final decision-maker?
-- the power of the state to deny a family the power of decision over their own medical concerns?
-- the power of the state to proselytize our children into Christianity?
-- the power of the state to declare you to be an "enemy combatant" out of thin air with no due process, locking you away indefinitely at the whim of men, not law?
-- the power of the state to censor speech on television, instead of letting parents monitor what their kids watch?
You get the idea...
How do we expose this hypocrisy for the invasion of rights it truly is? ... Why are people like Ricky constantly allowed to get away with riding a Trojan horse to election victories?