Eugene Robinson: That story about Santorum and his infant son certainly is weird

posted at 5:42 pm on January 5, 2012 by Allahpundit

First Colmes, now this guy. Is the way Santorum grieved for his dead child really going to be part of the lefty commentariat’s oppo playbook this year? Really? Even after Santorum’s wife was reduced to tears by what Colmes said? If she had aborted the baby a few weeks earlier and let the body be dumped in the trash, these cretins would be marveling at how much more “progressive” she is than her husband. Instead she carried the child to term and the two of them brought the body home for a few hours so that the family could mourn together, and Robinson’s prepared to disqualify him for elected office because of it. Vote Democrat.

Via Peter Wehner, here’s how “weird” this is according to the American Pregnancy Association. Advice to parents of stillborn babies (Santorum’s son was born alive but lived only a few hours):

After the tests are completed, you will usually have the choice to spend time alone with your baby. You can find comfort in looking at, touching, and talking to your baby. Most parents find it helpful to make memories of this precious time that will last a lifetime…

With the loss of your baby, your family members will also grieve. Your baby is someone’s granddaughter, brother, cousin, nephew or sister. It is important for your family members to spend time with the baby. This will help them come to terms with their loss. If you have other children, it is very important to be honest with them about what has happened by using simple and honest explanations. It is your decision whether you would like the children to see the baby. Ask for a Child Life Specialist at the hospital; these are trained professionals who can help you prepare your children for the heartbreaking news, and prepare them to see the baby if you wish.

They suggest bathing the baby, taking photos as a keepsake, or even singing it a lullaby. Go figure that, knowing they’ll have only a precious few hours to share with a lost child, some people want to do what they can to capture the moment. I wonder what Robinson thinks Santorum and his wife should have done instead. Is it a simple matter of venue, i.e. he should have brought his kids to the hospital to see the baby there instead of bringing it to them at home? He did that, I assume, only because he wanted the family to have time together in a normal setting, not an antiseptic obstetrics ward. And yet this personal story, which has zero policy implications but does vividly illustrate Santorum’s belief that dead babies are family members too, somehow has unnerved not one but two pro-choicers to the point where they feel obliged to remark about its “weirdness” on TV. Again, go figure. Click the image to watch.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7

For those claiming to error on the side of sensitivity, perhaps this should trouble you more than anything, as it actually compromises the sanctity of life by blurring the realities of death. Wether you personally believe a body is a vessel, that souls live on, or what, is entirely up to you, and your scriptures, but the dogmatic tone of many posts here is self defeating.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Listen dude. Nothing I have said here is ‘dogmatic’
Definition: dog·mat·ic (dôg-mtk, dg-)
adj.
1. Relating to, characteristic of, or resulting from dogma.
2. Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved or unprovable principles.
How is it arrogant to say keep your hurtful opinions to yourself, stop being insensitive & rude towards others by saying things that are hurtful with no purpose behind them other than to criticize & judge another person’s GRIEF?

Saying goodbye is not the same as posing for photos.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 3:53 AM

This is a very insensitive judgmental statement and is purely subjective on your part.
The ‘reality’ of death is a RELATIVE thing.
We all deal with it differently.
And maybe aside from having sex with a corpse, I would say that a person should be able to feel free to mourn in whatever way they wish without having to worry about what some stranger thinks of their mourning methods.
Your accusation of being dogmatic is nothing more than a lame attack upon our persons to deflect from the very fact that according to many human perceptions, your comments were at the very least, insensitive and uncalled for.
That’s not being dogmatic.
Why are so many people such a-holes?

Badger40 on January 6, 2012 at 3:53 PM

I’m not sure I would count the use of the New York Times as a reliable source as a mere bout of bad luck. Just sayin’.

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 3:54 PM

dont forget that the doctors told the santorums in early pregnancy that the baby would die at birth for sure due a defect. most people would handle the situation with that cursed word, the abortion. but no, the santorums had to go trough with it and I think their faith has something to do with it.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Aren’t you the same guy who was in a similar thread the other day?

People with mental and physical disabilities live happy, fulfilled lives and aren’t a burden to folks, I gave examples such as Stephen Hawking, Joni Eareckson Tada, Nick Vujicic, and another person mentioned Charles Krauthammer.

So your reasoning about having to abort kids because they are burdens or have hideous lives doesn’t apply. Even if all that was true, they are still human beings.

TigerPaw on January 6, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Wether you personally believe a body is a vessel, that souls live on, or what, is entirely up to you, and your scriptures, but the dogmatic tone of many posts here is self defeating.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 3:44 PM

I agree with Badger. I did not bash anyone in my posts. And I never brought God or religion into it once. You can be against abortion and not be religious. My opposition is solely based on science and the Constitution.

That being said, no one came in here spouting pro-life. That was a response to people like Nathor and thuja who said that a 20 week old fetus was not a baby.

melle1228 on January 6, 2012 at 3:57 PM

Portia46 on January 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

not that issue again. you can can post here to paint me as a monster. ,i wont fight it and i wont discuss it again.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I’m not sure I would count the use of the New York Times as a reliable source as a mere bout of bad luck. Just sayin’.

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 3:54 PM

if you look at the article it seems a huge well research piece.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 4:07 PM

TigerPaw on January 6, 2012 at 3:55 PM

i was wrong about santorum. please check a few posts back

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 4:09 PM

Portia46 – No, just the same way you’re lashing out at people, calling us Liberals, many commenters here have likened their stance to being Pro-Life, and adopted the same arguments where they do not belong.

For those claiming to error on the side of sensitivity, perhaps this should trouble you more than anything, as it actually compromises the sanctity of life by blurring the realities of death. Wether you personally believe a body is a vessel, that souls live on, or what, is entirely up to you, and your scriptures, but the dogmatic tone of many posts here is self defeating.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 3:44 PM

Syntax. That’s also important for coherence. Maybe your private school should fork over $4.95 for a Strunk and White.

“…body is a vessel, that souls live on, or what…” You mean like parasites?

Those of us who have lost a child or a sybling or a parent or a friend understand very well the difference between living and the finality of death. Most of us learn from the billions who have gone before in surviving the unimaginable. Every culture from every corner of the globe have two things in common: marriage and burial customs. But you know much, much better than the billions who have gone before, and since you claim a superior understanding of the human heart and psyche perhaps you can answer this age old condundrum: why is it that the most officious are usually the most ignorant?

Portia46 on January 6, 2012 at 4:12 PM

Portia46 on January 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM

not that issue again. you can can post here to paint me as a monster. ,i wont fight it and i wont discuss it again.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 4:00 PM

But you never “discussed” it and I didn’t paint you as anything. I made a point about applying your relativism argument and you said “drivel”. That doesn’t count as a discussion even in lefty world.

Portia46 on January 6, 2012 at 4:18 PM

And I know I’m kind of tossing out a double-post here, but I’m hoping some of the other posters here will see the distinction between using this revelation as a lesson learned, a call to action – now that the facts are out, where do we go from here? – and using the revelation or his personal story as a bludgeon for retribution. It is my belief that the critical issue here is resolving differences and misunderstandings through facts and debate, not on making sure that all sides of the issue suffer equally, right or wrong.

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 1:05 PM

For those of you just joining:

The Horrible History of Nathor; Abridged (but not by much)

Once upon a time, The Schaef tried to engage the ghostly spector of the evil Nathor, King of Shitzylvania. The Schaef, unused to the written wiles of the evil ass clown, believed that there was common ground to be found with the Head $hit. Unfortunately, The Schaef was etirely wrong. What follows is my tale of woe, regarding the tail of Bo:

(serious part begins) My first response to Hot Air regarding the disgusting Colmes diatribe (different thread) was civil. I described how my wife and I had been through this, how Colmes’ words hurt and how I hoped this wouldn’t become a talking point. I even allowed for the fact that I’d heard Colmes was a decent guy.
The late Nathor and some of its a$$hole buddies proceeded to attack me and anyone who would dare give the Santorums the benefit of the doubt. Nathor described how his wife and it would abort a baby if he thought it was defective enough and couldn’t be moved from its position. In one of its most offensive posts, he actually used the term vegetable to describe a mentally challenged child!
Schaef, there’s some history with this person. It (“It” is its pronoun of choice for any child he considers insufficiently Nathor-esque. (Reap what you sow, N-dawg) It has been relentless in its vitriol and uncaring about the effects of its words.
Its response to you is typical of its tactic…throw a bomb or three and pull back to appear reasonable. This is straight out of Saul Alinski’s Rules for Trolls”.
I appreciate that you have tried to make friends with it. There have been others who have tried to reach out as well, only to have their hands slapped.
Again, what you are trying to do is admirable, but this person has spent the last several days mocking the Santorums and anyone else who has lost a fully formed baby. My argument against this media assault was based on its general cruelty. When I heard Colmes, I knew next to nothing about Santorum. What it said was insulting and repulsive to ME. Politics had nothing to do with it. The dearly departed Nathor would have none of it. You should know what you’re defending. To the best of my memory, Nathor was an execrable chunk of evil.
That it would claim a miscarriage from out of the ether is beyond the pale, or would be if it hadn’t crossed the pale Wednesday. If, by some ironic ball of fate, what it says is true; its words are sick in the extreme. What kind of self-loathing a$$wipe does that?
It wasted everyone’s time, stirred up horrible memories and was an enormous Richard. On top of everything, it spouts off without knowing the FACTS? Idiocy is too kind a description. I’m sticking with “defective”.
Yes, maybe this has become personal, but nobody insults ANY of my children…nobody! If Nathor was still with us, I’d happily make my feelings known, but alas…
All of this is moot. The late, grate (yes, I spelled it that way on purpose. See what I did there?) Nathor has proven itself to be so defective, so devoid of any worth as a human, I have followed its advice. Earlier today, I aborted it. It is no more. It will not be missed. The voice of its ghost will stir no reaction.
You’re a better man than I, Gunga Schaef. God Bless. You’re a mensch (or mensch-ette). And I mean that.

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 4:22 PM

if you look at the article it seems a huge well research piece.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Other than that part that was completely omitted from the article, which also completely changed your perspective on the story?

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 4:39 PM

And maybe aside from having sex with a corpse, I would say that a person should be able to feel free to mourn in whatever way they wish without having to worry about what some stranger thinks of their mourning methods.
Badger40 on January 6, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Then why are you worrying about what strangers think? I don’t think Santorum does. He’s bringing it up in press interviews, proudly. It’s not something he’s keeping a private moment with his family.

You see, the problem is when you try and redefine or mischaracterize his actions as either A) traditional, B) conservatism, pro-life or C) an act of normality which should be advised and followed.

That is when it became a problem. Once people on this forum began to advocate for it in a dogmatic fashion.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 4:48 PM

the thing is that the doctors as melle researched, also proposed some innovative Surgery with some chance to save the baby and it was a chance that the santorums took. this explains why the santorums did not do that early abortion. and also why they where so attached to the baby after he died after they went trough so much to save him.

i dare you to go back to the other thread and see the replies i get when i make my case . it was nuts.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 3:10 PM

No it does not explain why the Santorums “did not do that early abortion”.

You are, with out a doubt, as dense as a pine stump.

Yoop on January 6, 2012 at 4:56 PM

Yes, maybe this has become personal, but nobody insults ANY of my children…nobody! If Nathor was still with us, I’d happily make my feelings known, but alas…

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 4:22 PM

look, your feelings and of others is the reason i dont want to discuss the issue portia64 is trying to bring back. i regret to ever started the issue.
i brought my own miscarriage story into this saga because its was the personal experience i had when i was trying to understand santorum actions.

sorry again, please relax.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:01 PM

Maybe your private school should fork over $4.95 for a Strunk and White.

“…body is a vessel, that souls live on, or what…” You mean like parasites?

Private school? I hate to break it to you, but your presumptions say more about your own intolerance and paranoia than anything. Your need to create a persona you can demonize suggests the topic of this discussion is secondary to your own personal agendas. How very Alinsky of you. See, two can play that game.

Every culture from every corner of the globe have two things in common: marriage and burial customs.

Portia46…. That’s utterly ignorant. Not every culture shares marriage and burial customs.

Which is why your joke about “parasites” up above may have sounded witty to you, but not to those of the Jewish faith. And perhaps you reject the existence of Buddhists and Hindus as well?

Meanwhile, there was a time when tradition dictated that marriage was by arrangement, or by force. These methods are no longer accepted standards in most Western cultures. Times change. We adapt to modern living, and we reject Barbaric practices, or movements like extremist Islam which attempt to return us to the dark ages.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Other than that part that was completely omitted from the article, which also completely changed your perspective on the story?

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 4:39 PM

yes

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Other than that part that was completely omitted from the article, which also completely changed your perspective on the story?

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 4:39 PM

yes

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:08 PM

And it doesn’t occur to you that the omission of a very critical piece of data in any way compromises your assessment that the article was well-researched?

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 5:10 PM

“We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war!”
Jimmy Hoffa, Sep 5, 2011

Wisconsin? Occupy Wall Street? When Obama loses, there will be riots in the streets. There will be cars burning in the streets. And, without exaggeration, the left, under the Dear Leader, has gone rabid.

PorchDawg on January 6, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Sadly, I agree with you. Owebama won’t go down without taking some with him.
On the positive side, I’m sure glad Hoffa isn’t a Conservative. If he was, his quote (above) would be mean-spirited and un-civil.
Since he’s only a missunderstood Lib, he’s simply speaking truth to power. Nothing to see here…move along.
Hang on; it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 5:13 PM

And it doesn’t occur to you that the omission of a very critical piece of data in any way compromises your assessment that the article was well-researched?

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 5:10 PM

my a priori opinion that the article is well-researched or not is subjective. a posteriori it seems bad.

actually i did not read it. i used the find function on the keyword Gabriel to get to the info i wanted.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Good Morning! It’s nice to have the welfare recipients up and at em, after that late night…er…comparing Rick Santorum to Weekend at Bernies.

There’s nothing more I could possible add, after 6 pages of you two mass tard slapped by the other hundred or so posters.

MNHawk on January 6, 2012 at 5:34 PM

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Congratulations nathor, you have been on this thread for almost 24 hours, are you pleased with how it went for you? There is a thread on Eugene Robinsons apology you might like to check out. You know so you can really flesh out your final position. Here is the link. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/06/eugene-robinson-squirms-through-apology-to-rick-santorum/

Bmore on January 6, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Congratulations nathor, you have been on this thread for almost 24 hours, are you pleased with how it went for you? There is a thread on Eugene Robinsons apology you might like to check out. You know so you can really flesh out your final position. Here is the link. http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/06/eugene-robinson-squirms-through-apology-to-rick-santorum/

Bmore on January 6, 2012 at 5:53 PM

are you going to be my stalker? i am sure i dont deserve it.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:54 PM

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Don’t flatter yourself, I always check back on threads I have commented on.

Bmore on January 6, 2012 at 5:57 PM

I don’t think Santorum does. He’s bringing it up in press interviews, proudly. It’s not something he’s keeping a private moment with his family.

You see, the problem is when you try and redefine or mischaracterize his actions as either A) traditional, B) conservatism, pro-life or C) an act of normality which should be advised and followed.

That is when it became a problem. Once people on this forum began to advocate for it in a dogmatic fashion.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Well said!

metrygirl on January 6, 2012 at 5:58 PM

He’s bringing it up in press interviews, proudly. It’s not something he’s keeping a private moment with his family.

You see, the problem is when you try and redefine or mischaracterize his actions as either A) traditional, B) conservatism, pro-life or C) an act of normality which should be advised and followed.

That is when it became a problem. Once people on this forum began to advocate for it in a dogmatic fashion.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Another dipstick heard from. Santorum’s bringing this up in interviews because he’s being accused of being a ghoul, you douche! Proudly? Yeah, right. “Hey everybody, look at ME! I lost a kid! How cool am I?” Idiot. And as if you didn’t know, this “story” is being sold from the Left to raise questions about Santorum. It is obviously working amongst the ill-informed. Yes, I DO mean you!

And WTF do you mean “advocating FOR IT in a dogmatic fashion”? Advocating for what? Do you also blame rape victims because they are “asking for it”. And dogma? Jeez. THEIR BABY DIED IN THEIR ARMS! What do you want from them, blood?

I’ll try this again. Please pay attention this time! Couples who go through this are encouraged by medical professionals to make physical contact with the baby and make sure their kids know what happened. This is current Neo-Natal thought on the matter. It is NOT traditional thought. It is NOT conservative or Pro Life thought, nor is it abnormal. This is, if anything; a spin-off from Natural Childbirth theory; hardly a haven for classic Conservatives. It’s kind of a hippie thing, actually. And it WORKS!!!!! The Santorums took the baby home after they woke up in the hospital because their 6, 4 and 2 year olds were there waiting for their new brother to be born. This is not against the law. What else do you need?

I could care less what you think, too, but don’t diminish or mischaracterize the depth of their grief, or how they CHOSE to deal with it. Why are you not Pro-Choice in this instance? Yeah…thought so. Dogma much?

I don’t know where you get your information, but I’d hazard a guess. Go away and read ssomething until you know what you’re talking about.

I’ve lost all patience with dumbasses like you.

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Well said!

metrygirl on January 6, 2012 at 5:58 PM

I know you’re smarter than me and all, but what, exactly did he say well? Please explain the brilliance that is contrarytopopularbelief, because I obviously don’t get it. Wait, you guys are sharing a tent at Occupy Space aren’t you?

So many fools, so little time. I’m going to get Carpal Tunnel Syndrome at this rate.

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 6:10 PM

my a priori opinion that the article is well-researched or not is subjective. a posteriori it seems bad.

actually i did not read it. i used the find function on the keyword Gabriel to get to the info i wanted.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM

And hence, my gentle admonition that you consider the source (i.e. the NYT) more than the word count, and whether some people might find it better to tell a good (read: macabre) story than a true one, because better information tends to yield better conclusions to rational minds. That’s all I’m saying, considering the fiercely negative emotions towards Santorum that this kind of rhetoric is trying to stir up. I’m not saying you’re a sucker, I’m just saying don’t let these guys turn you into one.

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM

And hence, my gentle admonition that you consider the source (i.e. the NYT) more than the word count, and whether some people might find it better to tell a good (read: macabre) story than a true one, because better information tends to yield better conclusions to rational minds. That’s all I’m saying, considering the fiercely negative emotions towards Santorum that this kind of rhetoric is trying to stir up. I’m not saying you’re a sucker, I’m just saying don’t let these guys turn you into one.

The Schaef on January 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM

ok. got your message.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 6:27 PM

are you going to be my stalker? i am sure i dont deserve it.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:54 PM

You have been quite weird with your dedication to this subject.

CW on January 6, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Santorum’s bringing this up in interviews because he’s being accused of being a ghoul, you douche! Proudly? Yeah, right.

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 6:04 PM

No. The story was reported in 2005, in multiple news sources.
Santorum apparently openly introduced the topic to anyone visiting his office where photos of his reportedly dead child were on display.

In addition, that same year, Santorum’s wife published Letters to Gabriel: The True Story of Gabriel Michael Santorum.”

Your ignorance doesn’t justify name calling. You have no clue what you’re even defending Santorum from, it’s all agenda based.

This is, if anything; a spin-off from Natural Childbirth theory; hardly a haven for classic Conservatives. It’s kind of a hippie thing, actually.
Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Isn’t that a problem? It represents a break down in humanity when Pro-Life Conservative Christians are adapting a “hippie thing”, and still managing to pervert it even more by acting as if Natural Childbirth extends to death, post-Childbirth. Truly asinine and as I said before, self defeating.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 7:13 PM

You have been quite weird with your dedication to this subject.

CW on January 6, 2012 at 6:55 PM

and you guys controlling what interest me or not? that is weird.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Wait, you guys are sharing a tent at Occupy Space aren’t you?

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 6:10 PM

VIewing discussions of personal morality through a politicized partisanship lens to the point where you’re comparing us to Anarchists strikes me as not just knee jerk, but bizarre. Odd that you were trying to argue as if you had compassion for parents of such situations. I guess that was just convenience, and you dropped the charade of pretending you care.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 7:30 PM

look, your feelings and of others is the reason i dont want to discuss the issue portia64 is trying to bring back.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 5:01 PM

that a still born baby, but santorums case was only 20 weeks old. its more a fetus than an baby and only 10 inches long. I not even sure you can do foot prints of that.

nathor on January 5, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Our granddaughter was stillborn at 21 weeks. Her little footprints are tiny and perfect.

Lily on January 5, 2012 at 7:46 PM

This is the most eloquent and heart-rending post in the thread. Thank you, Lily.

In fact, the discussion might well have been closed after that, since it perfectly demonstrated the intellectual rationalization offered by the left for their monstrous behavior.

bofh on January 5, 2012 at 8:14 PM

someone tell a personal case that you dont want to touch so that you don’t hurt their feelings and then come the triumphalism assh….

you guys are amazing.

you guys might tell all the personal cases you want, there is a limit to the charade. many people wont imitate your actions or find your actions normal.

nathor on January 5, 2012 at 8:32 PM

You don’t really sound that concerned about hurting people’s feelings above. The “charade” comment. I’m seriously not trying to trap you, but maybe you don’t realize what you’re saying in context. It comes across really badly.

I am sorry you and your wife had to go through a miscarriage. It’s terrible and tragic. But not everyone can just brush that off like you seem to think they should. For those of us who believe it’s a baby whether it is 4 weeks or 38 weeks old, you lose a child and you feel the heartache that goes with that. Rationalizing that it was a “lump of cells” doesn’t make the pain any less.

BakerAllie on January 6, 2012 at 7:39 PM

You don’t really sound that concerned about hurting people’s feelings above. The “charade” comment. I’m seriously not trying to trap you, but maybe you don’t realize what you’re saying in context. It comes across really badly.

this is why i am feed up with this saga. the situation is: or you shut up, or you tell your opinion and someone gets hurt because of their personal cases.
i feel i am being censored out of pity. and when you are in the middle of an intense argument with people insulting you all the time , i might just let it rip.and this is what happened. i am not made of iron.

I am sorry you and your wife had to go through a miscarriage. It’s terrible and tragic. But not everyone can just brush that off like you seem to think they should. For those of us who believe it’s a baby whether it is 4 weeks or 38 weeks old, you lose a child and you feel the heartache that goes with that. Rationalizing that it was a “lump of cells” doesn’t make the pain any less.

BakerAllie on January 6, 2012 at 7:39 PM

no, you can rationalize and you should especially for your own personal cases like a miscarriage. or else it can tear you apart.
for your own sake, you should differentiate rhetoric of the prolife political combat and the real life where compromises are made.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Late to this party, but when the comments are 10 times stranger than the story itself…

The Santorum family faced a horrible situation and made a choice. Wow, I managed to use the word choice without it meaning abortion, amazing. I’d better repeat it, they made a choice. Now, to the arguments and pseudo-arguments.

If you believe that a fetus is not a person, but rather a “mass of tissue” or whatever the appropriate description is, and you therefore think that what the Santorum’s did was abnormal, creepy, or “ghoulish”, then you have your opinion and there it should end. The Santorum’s don’t intend to force you to share their feelings, beliefs, or decisions. That they are neither ashamed nor afraid of what they decided speaks to a sense of integrity and character, and nothing more.

The fact is that the baby was not still-born, it was alive at birth. By their faith and personal principles, they could not in good conscience kill the baby, even aware that it would not survive long. Once born, it is no longer a fetus, and by ANYBODY’s definition, is a person. Following that, they chose to mourn it as they would have a child who had spent more substantial time with them.

No matter whether I agree or disagree with any of the decisions made along the way during this unfortunate time in their lives, the Santorum family made those decisions deliberately, thoughtfully, and it would seem lovingly. There is no weakness of character being displayed by this episode, no lack of compassion.

There is an utter lack of concern for the opinions of strangers, to which I say good for them. If they believe one thing, and the result harms nobody, commits no crime, who on Earth is any one of us to tell them they are wrong, or to call them horrible names as a result?

If you have chosen to suddenly dislike Rick Santorum because you disagree with how his family behaved during this tragic time, then I submit you would have already found plenty of reasons to dislike him, and are only using this as a brickbat. Get a life.

Freelancer on January 6, 2012 at 9:14 PM

you should differentiate rhetoric of the prolife political combat and the real life where compromises are made.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 8:51 PM

And this is why you are completely reprobate. Compromise on life,and nothing else matters.

What a horrible and reprehensible human being. Thank God Almighty for justice.

‘real life’ where ‘life’ doesn’t matter…what a SICK JOKE!

tom daschle concerned on January 6, 2012 at 9:39 PM

And this is why you are completely reprobate. Compromise on life,and nothing else matters.

What a horrible and reprehensible human being. Thank God Almighty for justice.

‘real life’ where ‘life’ doesn’t matter…what a SICK JOKE!

tom daschle concerned on January 6, 2012 at 9:39 PM

we where in the context of miscarriages, there is no life anymore for pete sake.

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Freelancer on January 6, 2012 at 9:14 PM

Back from dinner break.

Anyway, thank you for coming along Freelancer. Several of us have been trying to get the same point across since Colmes crapped the bed, but the usual assortment of useless idiots has been dutifully trying to polish their rhetorical turd.

You have, like others before you, come to this subject instinctively understanding that it’s a delicate subject and should be addressed as such. You, like those others before you, will probably end up pissed off and amazed at the same time. I feel ya. There are good and decent people here. There are those trying to figure out why this is even an issue…and then there are those who, for whatever sadistic or political (both?) reason; feel the need (or desire?) to rub salt in open wounds.

Welcome to DNC 2012, Freelancer. Grid your lions! Or something like that.

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 11:46 PM

nathor on January 6, 2012 at 9:47 PM

nathor check this one out, you two should get along fine.

contrarytopopularbelief on January 6, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Bmore on January 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Bmore on January 7, 2012 at 11:59 AM

contrary to your popular belief, I am fed up with this issue.there has been new threads coming up and i am no touching them.

nathor on January 7, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Kenz on January 6, 2012 at 6:10 PM

I think “well said” is self-explanatory. I agree with his(her?) points and I think they were said in a succint, understandable way.

Santorum’s bringing this up in interviews because he’s being accused of being a ghoul, you douche! Proudly? Yeah, right. “Hey everybody, look at ME! I lost a kid! How cool am I?”

This is untrue. This story was not dug up by some sleazy tabloid reporter. The Santorums chose to make this a public issue. She wrote a book about their son and this experience. He has referred to it frequently in public forums and has somehow tied it into his political life. I’m not a fan of making one’s private grief public, but that’s exactly what the Santorums chose to do. Once someone makes a private issue public, they must accept that the public will judge, positively or negatively.

Couples who go through this are encouraged by medical professionals to make physical contact with the baby and make sure their kids know what happened. This is current Neo-Natal thought on the matter.

This refers to a child that has just died, not a corpse that has, after many hours, become cold, stiff and discolored. As many families who live through this ordeal have done, the siblings could have met their brother in the short time that he lived or immediately after. In my educated opinion, they made a poor, even psychologically damaging choice for their surviving children.

Wait, you guys are sharing a tent at Occupy Space aren’t you?

I don’t understand why you are making this a personal issue. I’ve never said anything about my personal political beliefs, and your assumptions about me are untrue. I only see this as a political issue in that the Santorums have made it a political issue. It’s not even a pro-life issue, since we’re not talking about an unborn fetus, but a child that was born and died after a short time. What does any of that have to do with Occupy Whatever?

metrygirl on January 7, 2012 at 2:09 PM

In my educated opinion, they made a poor, even psychologically damaging choice for their surviving children.

metrygirl on January 7, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Fortunately for them, your educated opinion (whatever that means) has no bearing on that family’s personal decision about how they manage their grieving process.

More to the point, that grieving process has no bearing whatsoever on his policies or his politcal acumen. Therefore, the only reason even to revisit a six-year-old non-political topic is to attempt a character assassination, and the only reason people would go for this line is if they WANT a reason not to like the guy, without regard for how subjective or relevant the reason. Not unlike Obama’s “secret Muslim” critics and the birthers (both Obama and Trig varieties).

The Schaef on January 7, 2012 at 7:37 PM

The Schaef on January 7, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Fortunately for them, your educated opinion (whatever that means) has no bearing on that family’s personal decision about how they manage their grieving process.

Of course my opinion has no bearing on the families actions. I never said or implied it did. I’m just expressing my opinion like everyone else on this forum, and unless some of the commentators know the Santorums personally, none of our opinions have any bearing on their decisions.

I say “in my educated opinion” because my opinion isn’t simply based on my emotional reaction to this. It seems on this forum anyone who disagrees with the Santorum’s decisions is told “unless you’ve had a child who died you cannot judge anyone else.”

More to the point, that grieving process has no bearing whatsoever on his policies or his politcal acumen.

I agree with you there. That’s why I question the Santorum’s decision to be so public about their private grief (writing a book about it, repeatedly bringing it up over the years). It seems to me that he has made this a political issue, by telling the story repeatedly and tying it in with his views as a pro-life politician.

And to be clear, I’m not objecting to the family grieving the loss of their child. I take issue with them bringing home their son’s corpse after many hours, when the corpse has become cold, grey and stiff and “introducing” it to their young children to hold and sing lullabies to. The children could have been introduced to their brother in the few hours he lived or immediately after.

metrygirl on January 8, 2012 at 3:46 AM

…I’m not objecting to the family grieving the loss of their child. I take issue with them…

metrygirl on January 8, 2012 at 3:46 AM

This was the way the family chose to do what they felt was right. If you have “no objections”, why comment? If you “take issue with” it, you’ve contradicted yourself.

It’s clear by now that exploiting this issue is part of an organized political operation to discredit or raise questions about Santorum. Following you and others like ‘contrarytopopularbelief’, I have come to the educated opinion that you are both part of that operation. While the story has gained traction in the Leftist commentariat, most here accept unconditionally,the right of the Santorums to do what they felt was appropriate. You have the right to disagree, but common sense would indicate that the opinion of those who have experienced this sort of loss should carry more weight. You might want to consider that the educating of one’s opinion in an ongoing process. Perhaps you should take some advanced courses in humility, empathy and the acceptance that you don’t know everything. That’s just my opinion, though.

With all due respect, your opinions, regardless of how well educated, are not going to sway anyone here. I think (and I’m certainly share blame in this) this issue has been thoroughly dissected. There is nothing constructive to be added.

Kenz on January 9, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Maybe your private school should fork over $4.95 for a Strunk and White.

“…body is a vessel, that souls live on, or what…” You mean like parasites?
Private school? I hate to break it to you, but your presumptions say more about your own intolerance and paranoia than anything. Your need to create a persona you can demonize suggests the topic of this discussion is secondary to your own personal agendas. How very Alinsky of you. See, two can play that game.

Every culture from every corner of the globe have two things in common: marriage and burial customs.
Portia46…. That’s utterly ignorant. Not every culture shares marriage and burial customs.

Which is why your joke about “parasites” up above may have sounded witty to you, but not to those of the Jewish faith. And perhaps you reject the existence of Buddhists and Hindus as well?

Shall I include reading comprehension to word usage and syntax?

You misuse the word “concept” making your profundity totally incomprehensible. You misuse the preposition “on” and make your claim that souls live ON bodies, like parasides and which is anathema to the Judaeo/Christian concept of the soul, and where, please, did I claim ALL marriage and burial ceremonies were the SAME (thus my questioning your reading comprehension)?

OK, my presumption that you are a product of an expensive private school was a bit of sarcasm…except I’m not exactly certain if I’m insulting private schools or public schools. You forgot that I also recommended a return to the Socaratic Method of teaching and that the school system needs to resurrect Strunk and White.

I do not normally conentrate on communicaton skills or mis-spellings except when the speaker presents himself/herself/itself as some sort of advanced thinker. I’m always amazed that conservatives take a rap for being anti-intellectual when they send out an army of ignorant, illiterate, practicioners of logical fallacies to tell us what barbarians we are.

Oh, BTW, you’re pulling an Alinsky when you accuse me of exactly what you’re doing. It’s called projection.

Portia46 on January 9, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7