Rick Santorum: Top 7 culture war moments

As a senator, Rick Santorum was one of the Republican Party's best-known culture warriors. Now, as a surging presidential contender, Mr. Santorum is still leading the charge, and facing questions about some of his old, and not so old, comments. Here is a sample.

6. On whether homosexual acts should be legal

AP Photo/Patrick Semansky
Protesters rally against a gay marriage bill that the Maryland House of Delegates is expected to vote on in Annapolis, Md., Friday, Feb. 17, 2012.

This one dates back to April 2003, and it certainly helped put Santorum on the map as a culture warrior. It also led to his famous, and still unresolved, “Google problem.” An Associated Press reporter asked then-Senator Santorum about the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, and that led to a discussion about whether homosexuality should be legal. At the time, the Supreme Court was considering a case focused on whether states had the right to ban sodomy.

“I have no problem with homosexuality,” Santorum said in the interview, according to a transcript of the tape. “I have a problem with homosexual acts.”

“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,” Santorum said later in the interview. “You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.”

“You say, well, it’s my individual freedom,” he continued. “Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong healthy families.”

Further in the interview, he mentioned pedophilia and bestiality, and came to be seen as viewing homosexual sex in a similar vein. But in fact, he pointed out later, he was saying that homosexuality is not equivalent to “man on child” or “man on dog.”

In June 2003, the Supreme Court’s Lawrence v. Texas ruling invalidated antisodomy laws around the country, on grounds of liberty. But Santorum has not eased up on his views of homosexual activity.

6 of 7

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.