I listened to a radio show where the host made the most bald-faced, radical claims against Rick Santorum, I just had to go look them up. You’ll notice, one statement over and over in quotes…the rest is speculation attached to an out of context statement…
I am sick to death of so-called constitutional conservative/libertarian rabble rousers who speak out of their hat with no proof except their say-so.
The United States is a nation FOUNDED on Judeo-christian values, the Constitution says our RIGHTS are guaranteed by our Creator…but because he says the same things, we should be a moral nation, obey our laws and the higher law of morality, he’s labeled a theocrat…what a line of bull crap…the ONLY places I can find any of this is off of leftwing, liberal, commie, fascist bastards web sites…so if this is your source, all I can say is get off the damn koolaide and quit spewing the progressive crap and parroting the MSM in attacking real conservatives just because the have a Christian set of values!
Libtard Bull Sh*t follows::::
U.S. law should follow God’s law. As Rick Santorum put it:
Unlike Islam, where the higher law and the civil law are the same, in our case, we have civil laws. But our civil laws have to comport with the higher law. … As long as abortion is legal—at least according to the Supreme Court—legal in this country, we will never have rest, because that law does not comport with God’s law.
Anything that’s immoral by religious standards should be outlawed. Santorum again:
God gave us rights, but He also gave us laws upon which to exercise those rights, and that’s what you ought to do. And, by the way, the law should comport—the laws of this country should comport with that moral vision. Why? Because the law is a teacher. If something is illegal in this country because it is immoral and it is wrong and it is harmful to society, saying that it is illegal and putting a law in place teaches. It’s not just—laws cannot be neutral. There is no neutral, Ron. There is only moral and immoral. And the law has to reflect what is right and good and just for our society.
The federal government should impose this morality on the states. Santorum once more:
The idea that the only things that the states are prevented from doing are only things specifically established in the Constitution is wrong. Our country is based on a moral enterprise. Gay marriage is wrong. As Abraham Lincoln said, the states do not have the right to do wrong. … As a president, I will get involved, because the states do not have the right to undermine the basic, fundamental values that hold this country together.
Freedom means obeying morality. Santorum concluded, “Our founders understood liberty is not what you want to do, but what you ought to do. That’s what liberty really is about.”
There was one voice of dissent among the candidates. Ron Paul, the libertarian congressman from Texas, argued that people should be allowed to make bad decisions, that freedom of choice in religious matters should extend to atheists, and that powers not reserved to the federal government should be left to the states. But in a field of candidates bent on legislating Christian morality and purging uncooperative judges, Paul stood alone. Protecting America is too important to let the Constitution get in the way.
Atheist commentary: Rick Santorum: We Are Obliged to Make America a Christian Theocracy
Are there any major Republican political leaders who aren’t theocrats? I’m not sure there are, though some are more open about their theocratic intentions than others. Rick Santorum is especially honest about his intentions. When he filled in for Tony Perkins on the American Family Association’s program “Today’s Issues,” he tried to argue that Shariah law is incompatible with western civilization while at the same time Christian Shariah is necessary for western civilization.
Jesus said “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s” and that huge piece of wisdom has really set the course for western civilization where you have civil laws and have civil penalties – we exact justice in a civil fashion – and then we have higher laws, we have God’s law.
Now our civil laws are supposed to comport with God’s laws but sometimes they don’t, and so it is always the obligation of those, for example, the issue of abortion – the civil law does not comport with God’s law, in my opinion and I think the opinion of many people in this country and it is our obligation to continue to try and change that law. We have to live under the civil law, we have to obey that law because it is the civil law but we need to continue to try to change it to make sure that these laws, the laws our country, comport.
In the Islamic world, that is not the case. Mohammad did not say “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s” because the civil law in Islam and the sacred law are one in the same. Shariah is both a civil code and a religious code.
Source: Right Wing Watch
Rick Santorum starts out making an argument that you’d normally hear from a Christian defending church/state separation: some things belong to God and some things belong to Caesar, so don’t mix the two. Santorum is correct in noting that this separation has been important to western civilization where civil authority and religious authority have been kept separate (at least ideally, though not always in practice).
Then, sadly, Rick Santorum goes right off the deep end by asserting that civil laws must “comport” with God’s laws. That’s the antithesis of separating church and state. He asserts that we must obey civil laws, but then he insists that those laws must be changed to match “God’s laws.”[ this is bull sh*t because the laws we already have comport to biblical teachings ] What are “God’s laws”? They are the Christian equivalent of Shariah. So why must we follow his god’s laws?
I don’t think that Rick Santorum has enough of a sense of irony to realize the contradictions in his words. People capable of a bit more introspection might notice that they were condemning one set of religious laws while endorsing the imposition of another set of religious laws — but I’ve never seen Santorum demonstrate anywhere near that level of self-understanding and I’ve had to watch him for years now.
More Bull crap from the radical left atheists:
We’ve been ringing the alarm bell for months now on the theocratic leanings of the various Republican presidential candidates. William Saletan over at Slate suffered through the latest Republican “debate” – this past weekend’s “Thanksgiving Family Forum”. He provides 12 direct quotes from candidates that only further emphasize that the true threat to religious pluralism (including the freedom not to worship/believe) in America isn’t sharia law, it’s Judeo-Christian theocracy, with the emphasis strongly on Christian.
I could go on with pointing out these lies but what it the use…the self-puffery of the “I am always right and you are always wrong” group will never admit they were snookered…