Skip to main content

I'm not sure he meant to do it, but until he walks it back, Santorum's remarks today in Ohio, stumping for the Romney/Ryan Go Back Team, clearly endorsed a belief in the supremacy of personal religious practice over the most indirect and incidental, generally applied governmental burden.  

On it's face, Santorum's dream world of religious freedom clearly dictates that religious zealots like the splinter groups of Mormons who still strive to live what some call The Principle, ought to possess a Constitutional right to practice their religion notwithstanding the public interest in suppressing their practices. The present state of government interference with the religious practices of such Mormons is much more intrusive into religion than any burden on the beliefs or practices of employers whose health plans for their workforce include services that they happen to object to on religious grounds. Santorum is arguing that government can't ever tell him to do something that his reliigion forbids, or forbid him to do something his religion demands. That is why I say that Santorum endorses Morman polygamy.  

The existence of such true believing practitioners of a certain kind of Mormonism has been the subject of fictional hit TV, sleazy reality TV, and crime reports for many years. Here are the remarks by Santorum that I find most chilling in their implications:

"We have a president who, for the first time in American history, is directly assaulting the First Amendment and freedom of religion,”

He is going to tell you what to do in the practice of your faith. He is forcing business people right now to do things that are against their conscience

What Paul Ryan stands for in conservative circles and in the media and in this country, for those who know him, is someone who is willing to challenge the status quo and have bold ideas to confront the problems of this country in a truthful fashion.

Santorum also praised Romney for getting an award a few years ago from The Becket Fund, an organization claiming this dubious distinction:
The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty led the charge to legally challenge the Administration’s HHS mandate.  This controversial rule requires religious institutions, in violation of their deeply held religious beliefs, to pay for drugs and services contrary to their teachings, or pay a severe fine.
The very premise of these sanctimonious SOBs is based upon a demonstrable lie, that they are forced to "pay for drugs and services".  Under the actual HHS rule they attack, the services and medications in question are beneficial to women's health and are absorbed as savings by the insurance companies, not passed on to the policy holders.

But here is what really intrigues me about this story. Why is the Romney/Ryan campaign still desperately focused on the GOP base of deluded voterbots? Do they really believe they can win with just the frenzy of the GOP base, voter suppression tactics and billionaire money bomb TV ad carpet bombing? I also wonder if Mitt Romney would become a champion of marriage equality if it was extended to the fringe elements of his own church. I wish that journalists with access to the Romney campaign (are there any?) would ask the candidate questions about batshit crazy stuff like this from his surrogates and his own campaign. If this is the kind of stuff that the Romney/Ryan ticket believe in, where does it stop? Man on dog, perhaps?

In the meantime, I'm glad I've got a little retirement money invested in Jiffy Pop.  

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site