Andrew Belonsky

Rick Santorum Doesn't Know The Meaning of 'Personal'

Filed By Andrew Belonsky | May 20, 2011 4:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Marriage Equality, Politics
Tags: Behar Santorum, Rick Santorum Homophobe, Rick Santorum Homophobia, Rick Santorum Joy Behar, Rick Santorum LGBT

Rick Santorum has some nerve!

The former Pennsylvania Senator and super long shot presidential claimed this week that rick_santorum_cpac.jpghe's not a homophobe, and anyone who says otherwise is just "personalizing" a political debate, which is a bizarre statement, because all of Santorum's comments on LGBT people founded on personal attacks that paint us as menacing, un-American and inhuman.

Santorum's self-defense came after Joy Behar said he "seems like a big homophobe" on her CNN Headline News show, a remark that spurred conservative radio host Steve Malzberg to wonder, "where does she get that you are a homophobe?"

Santorum at least has the sense to know "homophobe" is a pejorative, and whined, "I guess because you stand for traditional marriage and you believe that, you know, that people should, we should have a society that affirms one man and one woman as marriage, that makes you someone who's a hater, someone that doesn't, doesn't like people."

He went on to say Behar and his other progressive critics are "personalizing politics:" "It's a public policy discussion, and this is the, this is really the problem that we see on the left which is the personalization of politics. I mean, we have a policy disagreement, and, and which I am very passionate about.... The only thing that's wrong [with equality activists] is their opinion."

So, wait, Santorum thinks the fight for equality boils down to just policy? It's just a difference of opinion and there's nothing personal about it? Then why do all of Santorum's arguments against same-sex marriage, adoption and love rest on personal judgement?

The most political of Santorum's personal assaults can be found in the "future of our country" contention. To him, same-sex couples are a threat to the family and by extension, the country. We're a menace, like al-Qaeda and other terrorists.

Gay marriage "is an issue just like 9-11," Santorum said in 2004. "We didn't decide we wanted to fight the war on terrorism because we wanted to. It was brought to us."

Later the same year, Santorum claimed, "The future of America hangs in the balance, because the future of the family hangs in the balance. Isn't that the ultimate homeland security, standing up and defending marriage?"

In the same way communists were painted as un-American and radical reds, LGBT people are, through Santorum's twisted prism, surreptitious queers. We are homegrown terrorists not worthy of full American citizenship, the most elementary and indispensable bond among the conservative set.

That same idea lays the foundation for Santorum's diehard opposition to same-sex adoption. Adoption is "a privilege that society recognizes because society sees intrinsic value to that relationship over any other relationship."

Queer relationships are less-than worthy. They're debased, separate and not in anyway equal, a belief that allowed Santorum to famously equate gay sex as "man on dog." Comparing at least one in a pair of loving, consensual adults to a dog? Does it get any more personal than that? Actually, yes.

Santorum included his most insidious anti-gay argument in January 2011 remarks about how marriage equality and same-sex adoption "go against natural law." Prohibiting and combating equality therefore makes "common sense."

"This is nature. And what we're trying to do is defy nature because a certain group of people want to be affirmed by society," he said.

There are two offensive, dehumanizing aspects to this assertion. First, that LGBT people go against nature, and, second, that "a certain group of people" need affirmation, like we're insolent children who are imagining our deepest desires.

By Santorum's logic, queers are both unnatural and delusional. His thinking, if you can call such a blind prescription to a discriminatory mindset "thinking," strips LGBT people of their most basic humanity. Our personal DNA is boiled down to just political opinion. Any emotional pulls we may feel to the same sex and any passions that churn inside of us simply do not exist.

We do not exist, something perhaps Santorum secretly wishes.

Image via Gage Skidmore's Flickr.


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


So what is Rick Santorum's take on the Rapture?
Is he calling Harold Camping wrong? They are both saying the same thing! Rick Guess that you expect to be here on the 22nd also? So you don't believe> If the Rapture does not occur May 21st, then maybe you are being a bigot and a hater? Rick,Could you at least admit that your thoughts are wrong? Oh what is the nickname Joe, of Joe my God, calls you?
Love you! Rick

Don Sherfick Don Sherfick | May 21, 2011 7:26 AM

"So what is Rick Santorum's take on the Rapture?"

Undoubtedly that if it occurs he will be taken up into the parting clouds away from us.

Which may not make the idea so ridiculous after all.

Where do I buy one?

So much of modern politics is about "personalizing" attacks against people, so I'm confused on whether Santorum believes that all politicians are "personalizing" or just his LGBT critics...