2012 Election | Gay Marriage | New Hampshire | News | Rick Santorum

BigGayDeal.com

Rick Santorum Argues with Students About Same-Sex Marriage and Polygamy: VIDEO

Frothy

Today in Concord, New Hampshire, Rick Santorum was cornered at the podium by a student who demanded to know why he doesn't believe gay people deserve marriage rights.

Santorum lobbed what Think Progress LGBT characterizes as "offensive and circuitous responses" about polygamy:

“So if you’re not happy unless you’re married to five other people, is that OK?...Reason says that if you think it’s okay for two [individuals to marry], then you have to differentiate for me why it’s not okay for three."

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Are you stupid?

    Posted by: Hollywood, CA | Jan 5, 2012 6:09:41 PM


  2. Oh so that "anyone" means your mom and your dad marrying their kids....Yeah Santorum you Ass. Those kids nailed him to the wall. BEHOLD the "rationalization" of the Radical Religious Extremist known as Santorum.

    Posted by: Sargon Bighorn | Jan 5, 2012 6:10:48 PM


  3. instafail: when you have to bring up something else you don't like to explain why you don't like the topic at question.

    "what do you have against pineapples?"
    -Well, I drove a HONDA last night and it was an AWFUL experience!

    WHAT!??!

    he can't argue why he's against gay couples marrying by addressing gay couples marrying. he has to "argue against it" by bringing up something else he doesn't like. that makes no sense.

    if it's ok for him to marry the woman he loves, then why can't Sue marry the woman she loves? because if Deb and Sue get married......uh...something about polygamy?

    way to fail, Ricky.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jan 5, 2012 6:11:10 PM


  4. In fact, allowing hetrosexual to marry has ALREADY led to polygamy.

    Posted by: Talisman | Jan 5, 2012 6:15:24 PM


  5. Ol Frothy Mix shows his true colors again. What a pathetic ass.

    Posted by: Pdxblueys | Jan 5, 2012 6:16:39 PM


  6. Good on all these college students for calling him out on this. It seems to be a situation he can't avoid no matter what college he goes to. It's a shame he's too full of pride to just admit the REAL reason he won't answer the question head-on.

    Posted by: antisaint | Jan 5, 2012 6:25:28 PM


  7. What they should have said to him was "That's a question you should ask Mitt Romney. He's a Mormon. Mormons believe in polygamy. I'm talking about two consenting adults of the same sex. Nothing more."

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jan 5, 2012 6:29:10 PM


  8. "In fact, allowing hetrosexual to marry has ALREADY led to polygamy."

    I love this response. Why have I not heard it before?

    Posted by: Markus | Jan 5, 2012 6:31:42 PM


  9. It IS a common question though so why not answer it?

    Posted by: Charles | Jan 5, 2012 6:31:59 PM


  10. Well, Mr. Santorum... how does it feel to finally have people paying attention to your asinine views?

    I find it kind of humorous that he keeps asking a question and then telling everyone to shut up when they begin to respond. Maybe he should just say, "This is going to sound like a question, but it's really a statement, so please don't respond and let's move on to some other indefensible policy position that I hold."

    Posted by: RyanInSacto | Jan 5, 2012 6:33:23 PM


  11. Again, I don't see a substantial difference between Santorum's position and Romney's. Why aren't these same questions and stories trailing Romney everywhere he goes?

    Posted by: Matt | Jan 5, 2012 6:33:41 PM


  12. bringing up "polygamy" is an oft-used tactic that makes no sense, and yet is done so often that the low-thinkers of America think it's a logical argument.
    it aint.

    it's like how the marriage equality laws keep having to deal with "Children need a mother and father"....
    what does that have to do with LGBT couples marrying? it's not a question of "can gay couples have children" , as they legally can. it's about marriage.

    denying LGBT couples with children the right to marry doesn't make any sense. it puts THE CHILDREN at a disadvantage. and not all lgbt couples will HAVE children should they marry, just as not all straight couples have children.

    but see how often it comes up? "gay marriage" = "children need two parents!!!"

    uh...why are you talking about children at all? we're talking about marriage, not a right to parent.

    *le sighhh*

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jan 5, 2012 6:35:39 PM


  13. He replied the same way these people always answer, if gays can marry, what about animals etc. What a man running for a nomination.

    Posted by: Matt26 | Jan 5, 2012 6:40:57 PM


  14. The answer that student should have given to Frothy Mix is that gays want the LEGAL rights to enter the LEGAL institution of marriage. Polygamy is against the law. Marriage is not.

    Posted by: Sergio | Jan 5, 2012 6:47:17 PM


  15. the tricky thing is actually this - rick santorum knows and understands everything that we're saying on here. literally. they know it. they know their arguments have no merit. however, they also know that the core voting base of the GOP is populated by the stupidest members of the scum of america. they believe it.

    you will not find high-ranking religious leaders who believe that the story of Adam & Eve is anything other than an allegory. truly. they know it's not a literal historical account. but they tell their braindead flocks that it is.

    thus, they break the 9th Commandment. regularly. oh how it boggles the mind...

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jan 5, 2012 6:52:19 PM


  16. Isn't Canada going on eleven years of marriage equality? How does he even figure his bullsh holds water at this point? I imagine these things are so on-the-spot but I sure wish one of the news hosts would bring that up.

    Posted by: antisaint | Jan 5, 2012 6:53:35 PM


  17. Canada has also has had LGBT people serving openly in our military since 1992.

    LITERALLY. Since 1992. And the first legal gay marriage in Canada was in 2001. it's only been officiall across the country since the mid-naughts, but 2001 was the first one, that started it all.

    but hey, the last thing an American Conservative politician wants to do is remind Americans that Canada exists.

    full and total LGBT Equality? Universal Healthcare? government-regulation on big business which is the reason Canada didn't really join in the "global financial meltdown" of 2008? healthier children due to healthy food programs in school? higher literacy levels, lower gun-violence rates all the while with higher percentages of cultural ethnic diversity? please, Canada is a nightmare for the conservative right - it flourishes and proves them all wrong.


    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jan 5, 2012 7:03:19 PM


  18. I was watching a tv add promoting one of those "male sexual enhancing" drugs,i.e. viagra. So, if you need a drug to "get it up"...therefore procreate...is marriage not an option for you? Do all existing marriages become null & void once the male partner reaches that stage in life? Better ask rick what his god's latest memo said about that. After all, if using technology to create babies circumvents their "make children" excuse for hetero marriage, gays can use technology too, yes? Do the same rules apply rick? Of course, he would respond by talking about man on dog sex.

    Posted by: Paul B. | Jan 5, 2012 7:04:57 PM


  19. Ugh all Presidential candidates are the same Democrat or Republican. They don't believe in gay marriage, or their religion doesn't believe in it, or they just hate gays.

    Posted by: Name: | Jan 5, 2012 7:06:14 PM


  20. Then by his own definition of "reason," polygamous heterosexual marriages are valid options given that he supports hetero marriage but not same gender marriage.

    Posted by: Bob | Jan 5, 2012 7:08:44 PM


  21. "If you think it's OK for two, then you have to differentiate for me why it's not OK for three."

    OK Rick. YOU think it's OK for two people to get married. Why do you think it's not OK for a man to have two wives?

    Posted by: Andrew W | Jan 5, 2012 7:23:32 PM


  22. Polygamy may have no necesssary connection to gay marriage per se, but the ARGUMENTS used to validate the legalization of gay marriage are similar to the arguments used to advocate polygamy. The Senator was NOT changing the subject. His point is that when you start defining marriage as any legal bond that makes an individual happy you can come up with some pretty extreme changes in law (polygamy, incest, bestiality). How will advocates of gay marriage answer these questions in the future? The intensity of their anger is not an argument, just proof that political consistency is frustrating.

    And come to think of it, why is it my business if a man marries two women? Does he tell ME who to marry? And do I have any actual PROOF that children raised in polygamous households are worse off then those in the broken homes of today? Any why is it my business to tell anyone what to do with his parents? Isn't that a private family matter? And on and on it goes. Based on the reasoning usually used to advocate social change, liberals who don't yet support polygamy or incest simply haven't "evolved" yet.

    Posted by: Mary | Jan 5, 2012 7:30:11 PM


  23. i have a question for Santorum: did you get your Intelligence and Logic out of Cracker Jack box?

    Posted by: Silas | Jan 5, 2012 7:30:59 PM


  24. would someone that meets Santorum ask him if he got his intelligence and logic out of a Cracker Jack box? if i meet up with him i will...but is most likely not that i will meet up with him...

    Posted by: Silas | Jan 5, 2012 7:32:58 PM


  25. actually, Mary, you're completely wrong as usual.

    marriage laws already exist. "gay marriage" is not a new law. it's extending an aleady-existing law to include LGBT couples.

    polygamy would actually be an entirely new set of laws, as it would be an utterly different arrangement.

    do you understand this mary? if not, you prove yourself to be even more stupid than we already know.

    that said your last comment linking it to incest and then a dig at "liberals" proves you to be the scum-sucking worthless troll that you are. make no mistake Mary, you dying in a violent car wreck would be poetic :D

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Jan 5, 2012 7:36:12 PM


  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Towleroad Guide to the Tube #1036« «