For the ladies, why is Santorum TOO conservative?

I teach at a local community college and I have come across the same comment from many of the young ladies; Santorum is too conservative. I have also heard this from other non-students. When I inquire as to what that means exactly I can't get an answer. At school I can't pursue the subject but I ask the ladies on this site (since I have heard the same thing here), why is Santorum too conservative. What has he said, or done, or legislation he has sponsored that makes you think this. I ask that you differentiate between what you've been told and what you know.

As a second question, why is conservatism bad?

I teach at a local community college and I have come across the same comment from many of the young ladies Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

What do you teach them? BBBJ?

Thank you for the constructive criticism young lady.

Y're very welcome

No, actually Santorum isn't a conservative at all. At best, he's a conservative when its convenient. He shouldn't feel bad though, that assessment more or less fits the GOP in general.

You can't be for smaller gov't, and states rights while supporting a law that would require a doctor to perform unnecessary procedures intended purely to guilt/shame a woman into changing her mind about having an abortion. You can't be for smaller gov't while expecting the gov't to decide who can and can't get married.

Conservatives don't trust gov't with their guns. They don't trust gov't to manage public programs efficiently. They don't trust the gov't not to attack their own citizens. Yet they would trust that same gov't enough to appoint them the job of Morality Police to a grateful nation. That isn't conservative, its just stupid.

As for Santorum himself, any idiot who honestly thinks a state has the right pass a law that would deny basic health care to its citizens (the banning contraception comment), is so woefully ignorant of the Constitution it is laughable. He doesn't understand it, but he wants the job of defending and upholding it.

I'm may not be a lady as the question is geared for the ladies, feel free to tell me to go piss off.

He maybe a social conservative, but he is no fiscal conservative. He is a BIG supporter of statism as his record in congress shows.

I have to point out to our snake charmer that Santorum has not threatened to take away healthcare (contraceptives) from women, he just doesn't want to force taxpayers to pay for it.

I could say that many conservatives think that armed citizens deter crime so a conservative Obama could mandate that everyone MUST own a weapon and the gun companies would pay for it. Of course libertarians would say that you can't force a gun company, anymore that you can force an insurance company, to pay for things for other people.

why is Santorum too conservative

Maybe it is because of statements like this:

Speaking to the Ohio Christian Alliance, Santorum went so far as to refer to public schools as "factories" and say that federal or state support for education is an "anachronism."


Santorum: ‘I would overturn’ any Supreme Court ruling same-sex marriage legal

Sorry dumbass but the President cannot overturn Supreme Court rulings.

Maybe it is because of his opposition to birth control of any kind.

Fu*ck, I don't know why those young female students would say such a silly thing. Maybe they screwed up and actually WATCHED his comments come out of his mouth. Stranger things have happened.

Of course, it may be related to how your question was posed, and this is coupled with the ability to arbitrarily decide how grades are arrived at, they could feel a wee bit intimidated.

He was my State rep. He's not "too conservative" he's just an asshole.

http://theweek.com/article/index/223...antorum-quotes

1. Opposing birth control
Quote: "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.... Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that's okay, contraception is okay. 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." (Speaking with CaffeinatedThoughts.com, Oct. 18, 2011)

Reaction: This is "pretty basic: Rick Santorum is coming for your contraception," says Irin Carmon at Salon. "Any and all of it." Threatening to "send the condom police into America's bedrooms" is pretty bad politics: More than 99 percent of sexually active women have used some form of birth control, and "helping people get access to birth control is actually a popular issue," supported by 82 percent of Americans. But a national contraception ban is "clearly the world Santorum wants."

2. Keeping moms at home
Quote: "In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might find they don't both need to. ... What happened in America so that mothers and fathers who leave their children in the care of someone else — or worse yet, home alone after school between three and six in the afternoon — find themselves more affirmed by society? Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism." (Santorum's 2005 book, It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good)

Reaction: Santorum is actually right, says Bonnie Alba at Renew America. Degrading "the stay-at-home wife and mother while idolizing women who chose careers" is "certainly part and parcel of the feminist ideology which has twisted our society into a pretzel of me-ism."

3. Re-spinning the Crusades
Quote: "The idea that the Crusades and the fight of Christendom against Islam is somehow an aggression on our part is absolutely anti-historical. And that is what the perception is by the American Left who hates Christendom. ... What I'm talking about is onward American soldiers. What we're talking about are core American values." (South Carolina campaign stop, Feb. 22, 2011)

Reaction: "If you were worried there wouldn't be a 2012 candidate touting the pro-Crusades platform, then today is your lucky day!" says Jillian Rayfield at Talking Points Memo. The religiously sanctioned European military campaigns were aimed at recapturing Jerusalem, and "along the way the Roman Catholic forces massacred thousands of Jews, among others." I know the Crusades predated the U.S. by a few centuries, but how exactly does this military campaign reflect "core American values"?

4. Rejecting the very idea of "Palestinians"
Quote: "All the people who live in the West Bank are Israelis, they're not Palestinians. There is no 'Palestinian.' This is Israeli land." (Campaign stop in Iowa, Nov. 18, 2011)

Reaction: "The striking thing about his comments is that they represent an even more conservative position than that taken by the Israeli government," says Glenn Kessler at The Washington Post. Israel's anti-Palestinian position itself isn't "accepted by much of the world, but it seems that the very least a potential U.S. president could do is accept the definitions used by the Israeli government."

5. Reminding America that some view Mormonism as "a dangerous cult"
Quote: "Would the potential attraction to Mormonism by simply having a Mormon in the White House threaten traditional Christianity by leading more Americans to a church that some Christians believe misleadingly calls itself Christian, is an active missionary church, and a dangerous cult?" (Santorum's Philadelphia Inquirer column, Dec. 20, 2007)

Reaction: Santorum was responding to Mitt Romney's famous speech reassuring evangelical Christians that he shares their values, and to be fair, "Santorum's ultimate verdict on Romney was more or less positive," says Dan Froomkin at The Huffington Post. But he draws plenty of "distinctions between Mormonism and Christianity that others have avoided lest they seem overly inflammatory."

6. Dissing welfare programs that "make black people's lives better"
Quote: "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." (Campaign stop in Iowa, Jan. 2, 2012)

Reaction: "This is the sort of subtle racism" that should, but won't, harm Santorum among Republicans, says Steve Benen at Washington Monthly. Why did he single out black people when talking about cutting government aid?

7. Bringing race into Obama's abortion views
Quote: "The question is — and this is what Barack Obama didn't want to answer — is that human life a person under the Constitution? And Barack Obama says no. Well if that person — human life is not a person, then — I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say, 'We're going to decide who are people and who are not people.'" (CNS News interview, Jan. 19, 2011)

Reaction: Equating fetuses to slaves got Santorum some pretty bad press, says David Weigel at Slate. But critics don't "appreciate how mainstream Santorum's point is among pro-life activists" who commonly "consider their work a continuation of other movements that protected human life and elevated the status of people whom the law doesn't consider 'human.' In the 19th century, it was African-Americans; in the 21st century, it's children in the womb."

8. Equating gay marriage to loving your mother-in-law
Quote: "Is anyone saying same-sex couples can't love each other? I love my children. I love my friends, my brother. Heck, I even love my mother-in-law. Should we call these relationships marriage, too?" (Santorum's Philadelphia Inquirer column, May 22, 2008)

Reaction: Did noted "homophobe" Santorum just admit to a "weird sexual relationship with his mother-in-law" and brother? says Michael J.W. Stickings at The Reaction. He may be atop the Republican heap, "but make no mistake about it, Santorum's still a bigot and a moron."

9. Comparing homosexuality to "man-on-dog" sex
Quote: "If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] 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. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. ... That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing." (AP interview, April 7, 2003)

Reaction: "Rick Santorum has expended a great deal of thought and energy to finding new words to disparage gay marriage," says Daryl Lang at Breaking Copy. And even if you agree with Santorum, "would you really want a president who is this obsessed" with gay sex?
...

Note how Kool Aid Louie just "makes up" Santorum statements without any references or links to his sources. That is because he doesn't have any i guess.

Missy does a slightly better job. In that she posts her source but makes us hunt down a link to find out the true context.

BTW; Santorum IS more onservative than Romney and less so than Ron Paul. http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/16...nservative-rat

More importantly, Gallup polling says Americans see the views of GOP candidates closer to their own !

Hussein Obama is at the bottom of the Gallup "Distance From All Americans Ideology" index. Even Michelle Bachman was closer to most Americans !




http://www.gallup.com/poll/151814/am...logically.aspx

Rick Santorum Wants to Fight ‘The Dangers Of Contraception’

http://swampland.time.com/2012/02/14...#ixzz1mSaoeHOa

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 whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.”

It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also [inaudible], but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.

Again, I know most Presidents don’t talk about those things, and maybe people don’t want us to talk about those things, but I think it’s important that you are who you are. I’m not running for preacher. I’m not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues. These how profound impact on the health of our society.

We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure. And that’s certainly a part of it—and it’s an important part of it, don’t get me wrong—but there’s a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special.

Am i the only one who thinks that Santorum seems to be arguing that even using the rhythm method is contrary to "how things are supposed to be"?

Am i the only one who thinks that Santorum seems to be arguing that even using the rhythm method is contrary to "how things are supposed to be"? Originally Posted by Doove

It obviously didn’t work for your mom and dad; so abstinence would have been their best choice.

Santorum speech inadvertently leads to mind-blowingly sexual headline:

http://www.happyplace.com/14362/sant...called-cumming