From today's
New York Times: A spokeswoman for Mr. Santorum said ... that "as a matter of public policy, Senator Santorum does not oppose birth control."
BUT in the infamous 2003 "man on dog" interview, Santorum said "It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold -- Griswold was the contraceptive case -- and abortion. And now we're just extending it out."
Well, he's already contradicted himself on whether PA members of Congress should have their primary residence in PA, tort reform, and Lord knows what else.. why not this, too?
Griswold was the 1965 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that struck down state bans on birth control for married couples. I wouldn't be surprised if he also opposes the court's Eisenstadt decision of 1972 that extended this basic right of privacy to unmarried people.
Does the senator still think the Griswold decision was wrongly decided and that states should have the right to ban birth control? Or is he contradicting himself on yet another issue?
By the way, speaking as a pro-choice, pro-privacy Democrat, I am proud to support Bob Casey for U.S. Senate.