Connect with us

Rick Santorum, The New President Of Jesus

Published

on

As the South Carolina Primary approaches, and the prospect of Willard Mitt Romney becoming the Republican nominee begins to become more and more inevitable, the game of musical chairs that is the search for the Anti-Romney has reached new lows of desperation. Will Republicans be forced to endure yet another Presidential election cycle with an insufficiently hateful candidate at the top of the ticket? Must Evangelical Christians tolerate a candidate who is capable of even the smallest measure of tolerance?

Given this state of emergency, Evangelical leaders descended on the Texas ranch of Judge Paul Pressler in an effort to find a consensus Anti-Romney to swoop in and save the day. After two days of deliberation and three rounds of balloting, it was decided. Evangelical Christians have found their champion, and his name is Rick Santorum.

READ: Santorum Wins Key Endorsement Of Evangelical Anti-Gay Hate Group Consortium

Tony Perkins, President of certified anti-gay hate group Family Research Council and spokesman for the confab, had this to say:

Rick Santorum has consistently articulated the issues that are of concern to conservatives, both the economic and the social, and has woven those into a very solid platform.

As a gay man, I find any large gathering of Evangelical Christians terrifying, especially when that gathering includes people like Gary Bauer, James Dobson and Don Wildmon, or as I like to call them, the Three Tenors of Hate.

In the olden days when Christians gathered in groups it was probably to talk about Jesus, or The Bible, or perhaps to have potluck dinners. Those days appear to be long gone. The focus of modern Evangelical Christians appears to have narrowed to include only issues involving what people should do be allowed to do with their genitals. Oh, and abortion. They still hate the crap out of abortion. Christians have managed to turn from an organization concerned with spreading the message of God’s love, to one that spends most of its time coming up with long lists of things they hate. It must be very fulfilling.

Regardless, the new president of Jesus is Rick Santorum, and I for one would like to offer him my sincerest congratulations. There were several world class anti-gay bigots they could have chosen, and they went with one of the best. If mean-spirited bullying had a hall of fame, Rick Santorum’s induction would surely be lock.

So, if Rick Santorum is the man who best articulates the views of conservatives everywhere, perhaps we should examine some of those views.

READ: Rick Santorum’s Top Ten Most-Offensive Anti-Gay Comments

It is likely no surprise to you that gay people by and large dislike Rick Santorum, to put it mildly. This is because he says things like this little diatribe, delivered to students and local residents attending a Santorum event a couple of weeks go, as reported by the L.A. Times:

Citing the work of one anti-poverty expert, Santorum said, “He found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children’s lives.”

Allowing gays to marry and raise children, Santorum said, amounts to “robbing children of something they need, they deserve, they have a right to. You may rationalize that that isn’t true, but in your own life and in your own heart, you know it’s true.”

That’s right. Rick Santorum would rather your child be raised by violent psychopathic convicts than allow them to be cared for by a loving homosexual couple. He doesn’t stop at merely insisting that gay people shouldn’t marry or raise children. He’s been pissed off since the Supreme Court declared that the government couldn’t put homosexuals in jail anymore.

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. You have the right to anything.

Sure. That was in 2003. Perhaps he’s changed his tune. He did say this after all, during the recent Meet The Press debate, via TPM:

I would be a voice in speaking out for making sure that every person in America, gay or straight, is treated with respect and dignity and has the equality of opportunity.

He even outlined his response should his child come out to him:

“I would love him as much as I did the second before he said it,” Santorum said. “And I would try to do everything I can to be as good a father to him as possible.”

Has Rick Santorum softened his views? No. Not even a little bit. Here is quote from his apperance on renowned bigot Bradlee Dean’s radio show, as reported by the Minnesota Independent:

“I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going to create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong we can’t do this,” Santorum said. ”And so I stood up when no one else did and got hammered for it. I stood up and I continue to stand up.” Santorum added, “I do not believe that sexual orientation should be added to hate crimes, but let me be honest, I don’t believe in hate crimes, period.”

I suppose the idea here is that he is OK with being gay, provided you never have sex with anyone. He would also prefer that view be enforced by penalty of law. Rick Santorum has quite a strange definition of “equality of opportunity.”

But it’s not just gay sex that Rick Santorum finds offensive. He’s got it out for you too, heterosexuals. According to Think Progress:

“(Sex) is supposed to be within marriage. It’s supposed to be for purposes that are yes, conjugal…but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen…This is special and it needs to be seen as special.”

He also goes after, of all things, contraception. The same article quotes him as saying:

“One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country,” the former Pennsylvania senator explained. “It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

Here is a video of him saying it, in case you catch him trying to deny it. Rick does this thing where he says something awful, and then tries to walk it back like he never said it. He tried it recently with his “Black Welfare” comment.

On January 3, Santorum said this:

I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money and provide for themselves and their families.

When asked about it by Bill O’Reilly a few days later, he said this:

“I looked at that, and I didn’t say that,” Santorum told O’Reilly. “If you look at it, what I started to say is a word and then sort of changed and it sort of — blah — came out. And people said I said, ‘Black.’ I didn’t.”

We have this stuff on tape Rick, so stop lying. I thought Christians had a thing about not lying. Perhaps you should try reading the parts of The Bible that don’t deal with gay sex.

To recap. Rick Santorum thinks homosexuality should be illegal, and that contraception leads to, well, I’m not even sure what contraception is supposed to lead to. Jazz and Gin? The loss of womanly virtue? “Doing things in the sexual realm?” Who knows. Rick Santorum is a crazy fundamentalist. What is clear is that Santorum has a lot of opinions about everybody’s sexual business. He also spends a lot of time thinking about sodomy, which is a little strange for a straight guy. When I look at Rick Santorum I see a man terrified of the future, and so filled with hate that he would see the lives of millions of LGBT people around the country destroyed simply to see the world conform to his extreme religious beliefs.

Evangelicals, on the other hand, see the embodiment of the Republican Party.

This raises a question that I would like to ask you rank and file Republicans out there: Are you sure about this? Do you really want to be associated with Rick Santorum? Every civil rights movement contains opponents like Rick Santorum; vicious, nasty, ideologues who remain dedicated to outdated and vile prejudices long after the rest of society has moved on. You read about guys like this in history class. George Wallace comes to mind. People that you look back on, and wince. Rick Santorum is one of these people. The future reveres men like Harvey Milk, and Martin Luther King, Jr., and makes people like Anita Bryant and groups like the KKK the villain of the story. History doesn’t look kindly upon those who work to deprive others of their civil rights.

Who do you want to be? I understand that you are conservatives, but must your desire for smaller government and lower taxes also mean that you must support the deprivation of rights to an entire class of your fellow citizens? Why are those two things connected? Must the preservation of a strong military and the pursuit of an aggressive foreign policy also mean that you must support efforts to deprive LGBT couples hospital visitation and access to adoption? Is that actually who you want to be? Why would that even make sense?

Let’s be clear. If you throw your support behind Rick Santorum, you are making a decision you don’t get to take back. You are deciding to be an embarrassment to your grandchildren. You are choosing to place a black mark on your personal legacy. You are declaring for all to hear that when the time came to stand up for civil rights, you instead worked to keep those rights from people who have never done you a moment’s harm. It makes you the villain of the story. All I am asking is that you consider this carefully, and make absolutely certain that this is who you want to be. Please think this through. Try to take a long view. Rick Santorum is a bad person, and you, or at the very least your children, will be ashamed that you supported him. Don’t let people like Tony Perkins decide who speaks for you, or who represents your values. Speak for yourself. Do the right thing. Don’t be self-righteous. Be righteous.

 Image, top, by boris.rasin

Benjamin Phillips is a Humor Writer, Web Developer, Civics Nerd, and all around crank that spends entirely too much time shouting with deep exasperation at the television, especially whenever cable news is on. He lives in St. Louis, MO and spends most of his time staring at various LCD screens, occasionally taking walks in the park whenever his boyfriend becomes sufficiently convinced that Benjamin is becoming a reclusive hermit person. He is available for children’s parties, provided that those children are entertained by hearing a complete windbag talk for two hours about the importance of science education, or worse yet, poorly researched anecdotes PROVING that James Buchanan was totally gay. If civilization were to collapse due to zombie hoards or nuclear holocaust, Benjamin would be among the first to die as he has no useful skills of any kind. The post-apocalyptic hellscape has no real need for homosexual computer programmers who can name all the presidents in order, as well as the actors who have played all eleven incarnations of Doctor Who.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Stephen Miller’s Latest Rant Prompts Priest to Cite Goebbels Propaganda

Published

on

Stephen Miller’s latest anti-immigrant rant is drawing attention, including from a well-known Catholic Jesuit priest, who appeared to liken the White House Deputy Chief of Staff’s remarks to those made by Hitler’s notorious Reich Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, in 1941.

Miller, one of the most powerful members of the Trump administration, is seen as the principal architect of the President’s anti-immigration and deportation policies.

“U.S. Marines on the streets of Los Angeles. Masked immigration officers at courthouses and popular restaurants. Bans on travelers from more than a dozen countries,” Reuters reported on Friday. “For senior White House aide Stephen Miller, the architect of President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, things were going according to plan.”

READ MORE: ‘Dumb-Dumb’: Fox News Host Declares Rising Democrat a ‘Mental Deficient’ Amid Senate Buzz

Denouncing the city government of Los Angeles as “waging a campaign of insurrection against the federal government,” Miller on Friday painted a scenario without undocumented immigrants in remarks made to Fox News.

“Let’s be very clear,” he said. “What would Los Angeles look like without illegal aliens?”

“Here’s what it would look like: You would be able to see a doctor in the emergency room right away, no wait time, no problem. Your kids would go to a public school that had more money than they know what to do with. Classrooms would be half the size. Students who had special needs would get all the attention that they needed.”

“There would be no violent transnational gangs. There would be no cartels. There would be no Mexican Mafia. There would be no Sureños. There would be no MS-13 There would be no TdA.”

“You would be living in a city that would be safe, that would be clean, there would be no fentanyl, there would be no drug dens,” he alleged. “That could be the future Los Angeles could have, but the leaders in Los Angeles have formed an alliance with the cartels and their criminal aliens.”

READ MORE: Record Majority of Americans Support Immigration in Massive Blow to Trump Agenda

Some of Miller’s claims are incorrect. For example, public schools often receive state funding in part based on the number of students and their attendance rate. Fewer students in classrooms means fewer dollars. And federal funding is tied to the number of low-income students and students with disabilities.

Miller’s claims about fentanyl and “drug dens” also don’t hold up. Most fentanyl comes into the U.S. via U.S. citizens, according to the Cato Institute.

Father James Martin, editor-at-large for America Magazine, which is published by the Jesuits, responded to Miller’s remarks by posting a quote from Goebbels:

“The enemy is in our midst. What makes more sense than to at least make this plainly visible to our citizens?”

It’s not the first time Father Martin has responded to Miller’s anti-immigrant rants with a quote.

In April, he quoted the Bible:

“‘I was a stranger and you did not welcome me’ (Matthew 25).”

See Martin’s post and video of Miller’s remarks below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Racial Profiling’: Border Czar Blasted for Claim ICE Can Detain for ‘Personal Appearance’

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Record Majority of Americans Support Immigration in Massive Blow to Trump Agenda

Published

on

A record-high majority—nearly eight in ten Americans—now view immigration positively, with similarly strong support for a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants—particularly those brought to the U.S. as children. The Gallup poll also found that most Americans favor maintaining or increasing current immigration levels.

Meanwhile, large segments of the public oppose expanding the number of immigration enforcement agents—a cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s immigration agenda. Overall, just 35% of Americans approve of Trump’s immigration policies, while 65% disapprove.

Gallup’s report deals a major blow to the very core of President Donald Trump’s agenda, and his “One Big, Beautiful Bill” that dramatically increases spending on immigration enforcement, including detention camps, deportations, and removal, even to third-party countries.

RELATED: ‘Racial Profiling’: Border Czar Blasted for Claim ICE Can Detain for ‘Personal Appearance’

“Americans have grown markedly more positive toward immigration over the past year, with the share wanting immigration reduced dropping from 55% in 2024 to 30% today,” Gallup reported on Friday. “At the same time, a record-high 79% of U.S. adults say immigration is a good thing for the country.”

“These shifts reverse a four-year trend of rising concern about immigration that began in 2021 and reflect changes among all major party groups,” the top-rated pollster also reported.

Now, just 38% of Americans support deporting all undocumented immigrants, in vast contrast to the stated Trump agenda. That’s down from 47% last year.

In what could be seen as a warning to the GOP, Gallup notes that “the desire for less immigration has fallen among all party groups, but it is most pronounced among Republicans, down 40 percentage points over the past year to 48%.”

Just this week, several top Trump administration officials have continued to promote his anti-immigrant policies.

READ MORE: ‘Dumb-Dumb’: Fox News Host Declares Rising Democrat a ‘Mental Deficient’ Amid Senate Buzz

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins this week told reporters there will be “no amnesty” for undocumented farm workers while insisting adults on Medicaid could replace them.

“There will be no amnesty, the mass deportations continue, but in a strategic way, and we move the workforce towards automation and 100% American participation,” Secretary Rollins said.

Republican Senators have been promoting the Trump anti-immigrant agenda as well. On Thursday, U.S. Senator Ashley Moody (R-FL) called Democrats who oppose the often warrantless raids and tactics used by the DHS’s frequently masked ICE agents, “ignorant pawns of a subversive anarchist agenda.”

President Donald Trump’s and the Republican Party’s budget, which Trump signed into law last weekend, is tremendously unpopular, including his exponential expansion of immigration enforcement budgets, as well as aspects that gut vital social safety net programs like Medicaid and Medicare.

Critics praised Gallup’s findings.

“Nativism had its 6 months and now it’s clear that it’s not the answer,” wrote Cato Institute Director of Immigration Studies David J. Bier.

NBC News senior national political reporter Sahil Kapur, pointing to the Gallup statistics, called it “backlash politics.”

“Turns out, mass kidnappings and deportations are deeply unpopular when put into practice,” observed New York State Democratic Assemblywoman Emily Gallagher.

See the social media post above or at this link.

READ MORE: Luxury Air Force One, Rose Garden Reno? ‘Priorities’ Says Trump Budget Chief

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Racial Profiling’: Border Czar Blasted for Claim ICE Can Detain for ‘Personal Appearance’

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s hand-picked border czar, Tom Homan, is facing backlash from legal and political experts after asserting that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents do not need “probable cause” to detain individuals—and can do so based on factors like “personal appearance.”

“Look, people need to understand,” Homan told Fox News on Friday. ICE officers “don’t need probable cause to walk up to somebody, briefly detain and question them.”

“They just need to tally the circumstances, right?” he claimed. “They just go through their observation, you know, get out typical facts based on the location, the occupation, their physical appearance, their actions.”

“A uniformed border police officer walks up to them, for instance, at a Home Depot. And they got all these … facts, plus the person walks away or runs away,” Homan said, offering one scenario. “Agents are trained. What they need to detain somebody temporarily and question them.”

READ MORE: ‘Dumb-Dumb’: Fox News Host Declares Rising Democrat a ‘Mental Deficient’ Amid Senate Buzz

“It’s not probable cause,” he insisted. “It’s reasonable suspicion.”

“We’re trained on that. Every agent, every six months, gets Fourth Amendment training over and over again,” Homan said.

Legal experts blasted Homan’s remarks.

Professor of Law, former U.S. Attorney and MSNBC/NBC News legal analyst Joyce Vance summed up Homan’s remarks: “Racial profiling.”

“This is patently false,” declared U.S. Rep. Daniel Goldman (D-NY), also an attorney, “DHS has authority to question and search people coming into the country at points of entry. But ICE may not detain and question anyone without reasonable suspicion — and certainly not based on their physical appearance alone. This lawlessness must stop.”

Attorney and California Democratic state Senator Scott Wiener charged, “This is literally the definition of a white nationalist police state.”

U.S. Rep. Yvette Clark (D-NY) warned, “Trump’s thugs will racially profile you, then go on national television to brag about getting away with it.”

READ MORE: Luxury Air Force One, Rose Garden Reno? ‘Priorities’ Says Trump Budget Chief

Attorney and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Evan Gold explained, “Walking up to people (without threatening) is legal. But ‘detaining’ people without ‘reasonable suspicion’ of criminal or quasi-criminal activity is illegal. Racial profiling is not cause for the required reasonable suspicion. ‘Let me see your papers’ is un-American.”

U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA), who, in a highly-publicized incident was forcibly removed and handcuffed by federal agents at a DHS press conference, wrote: “And there you have it. Under the Trump Administration, ICE and Border Patrol are being empowered to stop and question you based solely on how you look. No probable cause. No real reason. Just your ‘physical appearance.’ That’s not justice—it’s profiling.”

“They’re saying the quiet part out loud now,” wrote New York Democratic State Senator Gustavo Rivera. “Don’t get it twisted: if we let them keep doing this, they’ll find a reason to come for ANY ONE OF US soon enough.”

“THEY ARE ADMITTING IT,” wrote David J. Bier, Cato Institute Director of Immigration Studies and an expert on legal immigration, border security, and interior enforcement. “Homan is admitting to participating in a criminal conspiracy against the Constitution of the United States,” he alleged.

Max Flugrath, communications director for Fair Fight Action, wrote: “Trump’s Border Czar and Project 2025 contributor says ICE can detain anyone based on ‘suspicion’ and physical ‘appearance.’ That’s not immigration policy, it’s fascism.”

Watch the video below or at this link:

READ MORE: Trump Dodges, Denies and Deflects Questions as Ukraine Weapons Scandal Grows

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.