2012 Election | Gay Marriage | News | Piers Morgan | Rick Santorum

Santorum Says He Would Outlaw Gay Marriage Because It Doesn't Reflect 'God's Will for Us': VIDEO

Morgan_santorum

CNN's Piers Morgan asked Rick Santorum if there's any chance he'd ever soften his stance on same-sex marriage the way he hardened his stance on abortion, Think Progress reports.

Says Santorum: "No, you know, marriage is an institution that existed before governments existed. It’s something that reflects nature and reflects God and God’s will for us. And both from the standpoint of faith and reason it makes all the sense in the world. And it’s beneficial for society."

Santorum continues on to say he would make marriage for gays uniformly illegal across all 50 states.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. If marriage existed before government existed then why do we need government to protect it? Marriage can obviously survive without government interference

    Posted by: Joe | Jan 23, 2012 2:08:59 PM


  2. And just HOW, Mr. Frothy-Combination-of-Semen-and-Fecal-Matter do you intend to, um... "pull this off?" Last I heard, Presidents cannot summarily create nationwide laws. Or are you planning on crowing yourself Emperor?

    What an ignorant, opportunistic, bigoted tool.

    Posted by: Alexander | Jan 23, 2012 2:19:34 PM


  3. Just a thought, but has Colbert started on the whole "the Bible ban shellfish, lets ban seafood sales as well as gay marriage" schtick yet? Or has someone called Frothy on it?

    Posted by: Stufromoz | Jan 23, 2012 2:49:20 PM


  4. "Selective History" has always been the tool of Bigots. "FORMAL DOCUMENTED Marriage LAWS" were invented by MEN to "LEGALLY BIND" Women to their Husbands for life in permanent servitude. In practice, the Fathers of Brides paid large sums to prospective husbands to take over supporting the women. The Husband's benefit was having "Legal" sons to take over the Family business.

    Posted by: Jerry6 | Jan 23, 2012 2:59:35 PM


  5. what cracks me up is- why doesn't ANY interviewer ever ask these assholes..."Do you honestly think YOU can Annul the Marriages of 10's of 1000's of people"? ..and Do you think these people would just sit back and allow you to do it?

    Posted by: Gay American | Jan 23, 2012 3:04:05 PM


  6. The only reason the evangelicals voted for Gingrich in SC is that they hate Romney. Come general election time, the outcome might be very different with Obama winning a second term. Let's face it, none of the candidates running appeal to the independents, not even Romney.

    Posted by: Robert in NYC | Jan 23, 2012 3:07:58 PM


  7. I'm sorry, would gays getting married STOP straight people from getting? I just don't follow the logic (frothy mix of lube and scat-dat-dat-dat-dat-dat! Honk!)

    Posted by: Hollywood, CA | Jan 23, 2012 3:19:57 PM


  8. First there should be a law that religious bigots can't run for any political office.

    Posted by: jaragon | Jan 23, 2012 5:18:38 PM


  9. Frothy's proposal to strip legally married couples of their legal marriages would be a disastrous legal quagmire, so let him try. Not that he'll have the opportunity to--his presidential aspirations are dead, and it is highly unlikely he would be a VP pick. He's a loser (literally, he lost huge in his last election), he's from the northeast, and he brings nothing to any ticket. The Republican nominee doesn't need the kind of voters Frothy would attract, it needs independents, and he has zero appeal to them.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jan 23, 2012 5:22:52 PM


  10. So, who is this guy? I looked him up on the internet and all I get is a "frothy mix" description. Listening to him, all I HEAR is a frothy mix coming from his mouth...

    Posted by: pdxblueyes | Jan 23, 2012 6:17:55 PM


  11. Santorum continues his wing-nut religious nonsense, spouting "the word of God"...

    He reeks of hate and bigotry.

    And that will likely be his greatest achievement.

    Posted by: bruce | Jan 23, 2012 10:50:41 PM


  12. Remind me of how a couple of gay guys got to see Sanitarium in his office some years ago.

    He discovered they were gay and nearly broke his neck running away.

    I'd tell him I was gay and had HIV.

    Posted by: stevemd2 | Jan 24, 2012 12:13:54 AM


  13. Oh btw how did newt the divorcer cheater get accepted by the catholic church, which abhors divorce.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/nyregion/10indulgence.html?pagewanted=all

    Teh only thing that seems to be missing is the price of the indulgences. Selling indulgences was one of the reasons Martin Luther attacked the church, and was so lucky to get excommunciated.

    As usual the love of money is the root of evil of the church.

    All but bankrupt in europe,where per EWTN onlya bout 15% of catholics regularly attend church.

    to say nothing of the effect of the endless hidden molestation of children.

    And to date not one priest or bishop has been EXcommed for the vilest of crimes.

    While the church still tries to hide behind its policies of OMERTA

    Posted by: stevemd2 | Jan 24, 2012 12:20:16 AM


  14. Too late, Frothy. Democrat Bill Clinton already outlawed marriage equality so Santorum is revisiting the idea of a Federal Marriage amendment like the one first introduced ten years ago by US Representative Democrat Ronnie Shows.

    Santorum and Obama's opinion that marriage equality is wrong is based on their common chuckleheaded superstitious beliefs in sky pixies and their absolute commitment to pandering to the christer bigot vote.

    Both are bigots. Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

    They and their parties differ on the tactical necessity, from their point of view, of a federal marriage amendment to replace Clinton's DOMA.

    Obama supports the second class citizenship of civil unions but it's unlikely that Santorum does. He may be for visitation rights and a few other items but that doesn't quite add up to civil unions.

    Posted by: Bill Perdue | Jan 24, 2012 4:59:50 AM


  15. Every time he invokes God into his campaign, it makes him richer. He knows that he will not win the Republican nomination... but will be able to keep all the dollars not spent from his campaign coffers. Keep in mind, the last time he ran for re-election... he lost by almost 30%. I hope he does get the nomination, it will be easier to re-elect Obama.

    Posted by: Jerry Pritikin aka The Bleacher Preacherj | Jan 24, 2012 9:08:26 AM


  16. If this political wingnut does gain any sort of influence or power in the United States gay marriages will be set back for decades down there. I suggest that perhaps the choice of immigration north to a country that has total "freedom" in regards to samesex marriage should be considered. Prime Minister Harper is conservative and quite religous but he does know that if he tampered with Canada's gay marriage laws he would face a backlash from Canadians that would end his political career here faster than he could ever imagine. Obviously the line in our national anthem "True North Strong and Free" means something to us.

    American elected officials still think that they still live in the distant past in the US by their constant reluctance to move ahead socially and step into the 21st Century.

    Good luck in your upcoming 2012 elections it is sounding like you really need it.

    Posted by: Darrell | Jan 24, 2012 12:15:23 PM


  17. What a dangerous, horrid, sick person. How can people live with themselves with such hatred in their hearts. I pity his family.

    Posted by: Jerry6 | Jan 24, 2012 5:44:33 PM


  18. Fear not my LGBT brothers and sisters, the one thing you and me and rick have in common is that none of us will ever be president.

    Posted by: Jack | Jan 24, 2012 11:36:47 PM


  19. « 1 2

Post a comment







Trending


« «Governor Chris Christie Appoints Openly Gay Man to the New Jersey Supreme Court« «