Quotes of the day
posted at 10:43 pm on February 27, 2012 by Allahpundit
“Just hours before voters in this state go to the polls, Rick Santorum said the separation of church and state in America has been ‘turned on its head.’
“‘You hear so much about separation of church and state. I’m for separation of church and state. The state has no business telling what the church to do,’ Santorum said at a Chamber of Commerce meeting, apparently referring to the requirement from the Obama administration that all institutions that provide health insurance, including Catholic hospitals, cover birth control and emergency contraception.
“‘But the separation of church and state that our founders believed in, which is what I just described, has now been turned on its head. And now it’s the church, people of faith who have no right to come to the public square and express their points of view, or practice their faith outside of their church,’ Santorum said.”
“It’s true that in his famous address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on Sept. 12, 1960, Kennedy stated his belief in an ‘absolute’ separation. But Santorum reads into that speech things that Kennedy did not actually say.
“Kennedy, who was then the Democratic nominee for president, was assuring Protestant ministers that he would not be taking orders from the Vatican should become the first Catholic to be elected to the White House…
“[N]one of the ministers asked Kennedy if he meant that ‘faith is not allowed in the public square’ or that he ‘won’t consult with people of faith,’ the assertions that Santorum now puts in Kennedy’s mouth. Kennedy didn’t say those things, and if any of the ministers who were present in 1960 thought that’s what he meant, none of them said so at the time.”
“If all he wanted to do was talk, we would say, Have at it — no matter how misguided we think he is on birth control and many other matters. But does Mr. Santorum really understand the difference between talking about a policy and imposing his views?
“When he so misreads Mr. Kennedy, when he perceives a war that does not exist, he shows a lack of appreciation for the First Amendment. When he accuses President Obama of harboring a ‘phony theology’ — ‘Not a theology based on Bible. A different theology’ — it seems he does not understand the line between policy and religion. Mr. Santorum later explained that he was not questioning Mr. Obama’s faith, only his environmental policy. But theology means ‘the study of God and of the relations between God, humankind and the universe.’
“That Mr. Santorum believes he has the standing to declaim on the rightness of Mr. Obama’s faith, and whether it is sufficiently Bible-based, is in itself disqualifying.”
“Gingrich, who converted to Catholicism when he married his third wife, has also lashed out against what he perceives as a war on religion by ‘the secular left.’
“‘The forces of the secular left believe passionately and deeply, and with frankly a religious fervor, in their world view and they will regard what I am saying as a horrifying assault on what they think is the truth,’ Gingrich said. ‘Because their version of the truth is to have a totally neutral government that has no meaning,’ said Gingrich in Georgia.
“Mitt Romney, who is Mormon, has accused Obama of having a ‘secular agenda.’
“‘You expect the president of the United States to be sensitive to that freedom and protect it and, unfortunately, perhaps because of the people the president hangs around with, and their agenda, their secular agenda, they have fought against religion,’ Romney said, responding to a question at a town hall recently about religious freedoms, in particular the Obama administration’s recent controversial attempt to require all institutions, including hospitals and colleges with religious affiliations, to offer free birth control and other contraceptives.”
“Oddly, the assurances that Kennedy offered that day are ones that I would like to hear from Santorum. He, too, is a Catholic, although not of the Kennedy variety. Santorum is severe and unamusing about his faith, and that is his prerogative. But he has shoved his beliefs in our faces, leaving no doubt that his presidency would be informed by his extremely conservative Catholicism. Santorum’s views are too conservative even for most Catholics.
“This is a perilous and divisive approach. We have all of world history to warn us about what happens when religion takes too prominent a role. The public square gets used for beheadings and the like. While that is not likely to happen now — zoning rules and such forbid it — we do know that layering religion over politics is dangerous. Santorum cannot impose — and should not argue — that his political beliefs come from God. That closes all debate and often infuriates those who differ.
“This belief that religion has been banished from public discussion is a conservative trope without foundation. New York City is now recovering from a frenzy of celebratory publicity regarding the elevation of Timothy Dolan to cardinal. We have applauded the feats of Tim Tebow, the so-called praying quarterback, who seems unintimidated in publicly expressing his religious convictions. And, of course, we have the prattling of Newt Gingrich, who believes in belief and believes you and I ain’t got any — certainly not if we vote Democratic. As any European can attest, the American public square is soaked in religion or religion-speak.”
“One 50-year-old tea party supporter from Tucson pointed to Santorum’s response to the recent White House decision on whether religious-affiliated institutions should be mandated to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees.
“‘In context, what [Santorum is] saying is that government needs to stay out of religion,’ said the man, who declined to give his name. ‘That’s all religion. That’s as bad as the government being in a mosque. It just so happens that right now [Obama has] got his fingers in Christianity. But it had nothing to do with the other way. From George Washington on, there was always prayer in Congress. But the government was supposed to stay out of religion. And that’s where Obama’s going.’
“Might Santorum’s focus on religion hurt him in the race? The tea party supporter said it depends on context.
“‘If people are here, like today, and get to hear it in context, I think they’re all straw dogs, because almost everything I’ve heard from the press is a twisting of what’s being said,’ he said.”
Via Greg Hengler.
Click the image to watch.
Click the image to listen.
Related Posts:
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 2 3 … 6 Next »
Got a call from a machine (from a Union Hall?) thinking I was a dem, and wanting me to go out and vote for Santy!
KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2012 at 10:46 PM
Intrade has Santorum up in Michigan?
Republicans will be embarrassed if this radical wins the nomination
Obama will win by at least 25 points. In a sane country folks like Santorum are banished from public life.
liberal4life on February 27, 2012 at 10:50 PM
Oh, noes! The God people are coming! The God people are coming!
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 10:51 PM
We’ve got to get a Muslim candidate so religion will never be such a target for the LSM…
d1carter on February 27, 2012 at 10:51 PM
We’ll see. I wonder how much gas will be by November? $5? $6?
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 10:52 PM
This guy is a zealot. Hope Michigan republicans vote tomorrow or this race will become more of a joke.
Rusty Allen on February 27, 2012 at 10:54 PM
Coming from you, that is high praise for Santorum indeed.
Radical? The idea that it is wrong for the government to dictate that religious institutions must provide benefits to employees that violate their religious views is radical?
AZfederalist on February 27, 2012 at 10:54 PM
Just wondering, has the link to Santorum’s op-ed in the WSJ about the ECONOMY been posted today? (I’ve been busy and haven’t seen/read all the articles for the day.)
conservative pilgrim on February 27, 2012 at 10:55 PM
After all, if doing so would do for Muslim-American relations what electing a (somewhat) Black President did for race relations… Oh, wait.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 10:55 PM
I don’t know, but I just read that in my paper edition. I like the child credit idea!
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 10:56 PM
Has Brit Hume officially signed on with the Romney campaign?
JPeterman on February 27, 2012 at 10:57 PM
By at least 25 points? Take it easy with the hyperbole. Neither FDR nor Reagan ever won by that kind of margin(although FDR nearly did in 1936).
Doughboy on February 27, 2012 at 10:57 PM
Allah,Allah,Allah.
Bmore on February 27, 2012 at 10:58 PM
Oh, no most media outlets and HA too, are on the wild eyed religious narrative right now…we don’t want to talk about the economy, you know.
d1carter on February 27, 2012 at 10:59 PM
PPP has Santorum up 38-37 over their 2 day poll and 39-34 just based on tonight, but here’s the kicker (from their twitter page):
“Romney leads among Republicans in Michigan. It’s Democrats putting Santorum over the top. We’ll see if they actually show up.”
RepublicanInMA on February 27, 2012 at 11:00 PM
He has proposed great ideas. I suggest Rick Santorum initiate a personal moratorium on social issues even if he’s asked a question, and speak only about the economy, economy, economy. He is my first choice right now, but I wonder if he has the restraint to do that? I wish he would and stop feeding this narrative.
conservative pilgrim on February 27, 2012 at 11:00 PM
yes and after Romney is elected in Nov Hume will reveal his secret identity as AP ……/sarc
Bradky on February 27, 2012 at 11:00 PM
Thomas Jefferson knew a lot more about the importance of the separation of church and state than Santorum does.
And this kind of comment by Santorum makes me even more convicted of my label of him as a statist theocrat.
MadisonConservative on February 27, 2012 at 11:01 PM
Do you know what activity our Founders did in unison,less than two months before they signed the Declaration of Independence?
On May 17, 1776, they held a unified day of HUMILIATION, FASTING, and PRAYER.
And it was “earnestly recommended” by the Congress…
The Library of Congress Document Image
The Library of Congress Transcript
ITguy on February 27, 2012 at 11:01 PM
After Mitt destroys Sanitorium in the primaries tomorrow. All that will be left of Rick is a pile of ashes and a burnt sweater vest.
Jailbreak on February 27, 2012 at 11:01 PM
Which comment in particular?
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:02 PM
When BOR is the voice of reason, you might be a little biased…
d1carter on February 27, 2012 at 11:02 PM
He does himself no favors by responding to these social issue questions. Those are an important issues, but he needs to understand what the media is doing to him and zip it on social issue questions. No matter what. If he would and talk non-stop about his economic plans that he proposes, he could retain (regain?) his front runner status.
conservative pilgrim on February 27, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Hard to believe anyone or anything could be more embarrassing than Obama.
Cindy Munford on February 27, 2012 at 11:04 PM
Thanks for that, it never saw the light of day here at HA. I wonder why that is?
Meow.
JPeterman on February 27, 2012 at 11:04 PM
There should be no religious litmus test in anything government related.
If you take away the killing and murdering part, How is his views different from the Taliban?
liberal4life on February 27, 2012 at 11:04 PM
Santorum is the paraclete in the coal mine.
profitsbeard on February 27, 2012 at 11:05 PM
It’s almost like Santorum is trying to be wrong about every topic he speaks about.
mythicknight on February 27, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Nov 12 could be a long month for you…. followed by years of denial.
Bradky on February 27, 2012 at 11:05 PM
I sent the link into HA tips. Ah well. I saw it on http://www.memeorandum.com/
conservative pilgrim on February 27, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Oh my.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Jailbait, he still has to come thru the South.
Bmore on February 27, 2012 at 11:06 PM
Santorum: I was against separation of church and state before I was for it.
kastor on February 27, 2012 at 11:06 PM
With Santorum, what you see is what you get. With Obama…we’re still trying to figure out his agenda. Which one, indeed, is the more radical to traditional American values
HoosierStateofMind on February 27, 2012 at 11:06 PM
You say a lot of stuff I don’t like, Brad, but when you’re right, you’re golden.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:06 PM
Because Romney has had the fix in from the beginning. Paul, Santorum, Cain, Michelle, and Newt will have some lovely vacation homes for being the marionettes for Mitt….
Bradky on February 27, 2012 at 11:07 PM
Rick Santorum is the GOP’s Jimmy Carter with his constant preaching, statism, and fondness for knitwear. This is truly an absolutely depressing primary to suffer through. :-(
Punchenko on February 27, 2012 at 11:09 PM
“for a day of humiliation…” you got that right
kastor on February 27, 2012 at 11:10 PM
Thanks. Hank the congress cat wants some Ben & Jerry’s////
JPeterman on February 27, 2012 at 11:11 PM
Deep in my heart I know that Obama will have far too many things to say in the future for liberal4life to admire and agree with, president or not.
Cindy Munford on February 27, 2012 at 11:13 PM
I almost hope he does win Michigan. Its a meaningless win as Michigan is proportional, but it will draw out the contest between Romney and Santorum for a longer period possibly leading to a brokered convention.
thphilli on February 27, 2012 at 11:15 PM
Are you pretending not to get it? Obama is quite willing to use the state to impose his secular views on Christians. Santorum is quite willing to use the state to impose his religious views on everyone. They are both anti-first amendment fascists.
Basilsbest on February 27, 2012 at 11:15 PM
Your comment is Taurus Fimus.
Jefferson didn’t say or mean what you think he meant.
Jefferson didn’t say that religious expression had to be separated from state activities.
Jefferson was assuring the Danbury Baptists that the state would not establish a state-run church that would tell the Danbury Baptists what they could and could not do.
Contrary to today, when we have the Obama administration dictating to Catholic and Protestant churches that they will have to provide products and services contrary to their religious beliefs.
The “wall of separation” to which Jefferson referred was to keep the state out of the church. But it was never intended to limit the free exercise of religion, including in the free exercise of religion by those in public office. The first amendment prohibits Congress from passing any law which prohibit the free exercise of religion. And while the first amendment prohibits state establishment of religion, it does not prohibit state endorsement of religion.
ITguy on February 27, 2012 at 11:16 PM
Please don’t stop talking Ricky!
lester on February 27, 2012 at 11:17 PM
When he leaves office he’ll probably have little groups that follow him from stop to stop on his speaking tour, like Deadheads. (Someone else can coin a name for them — I don’t want to go there) They probably won’t be able to actually afford a ticket into the event, they’ll just park their VW buses in the parking lot and smoke while it’s going on without them. Or maybe they can pool the money they earn from panhandling on the exit ramps and selling braided friendship bracelets so that one of them can go into each event, in turn.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:17 PM
It was probably from the Santorum campaign. As Allah noted earlier today, they have admitting making such calls.
cam2 on February 27, 2012 at 11:18 PM
Sorry, my above comment was meant for KOOLAID2.
cam2 on February 27, 2012 at 11:20 PM
IGOR!
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:22 PM
Levin has it wrong. One of the main reasons people CAME to the colonies was to escape the centuries of religious conflict in Europe. When we finally freed ourselves from British rule, one of the left over conflicts that was still raging among the colonists was religious bigotry.
When we finally ended up with the constitution we had, one of the main things the founders were trying to do was to erect a government that could no longer meddle in the religious affairs of its citizens, and more importantly that the citizens couldn’t use government to shoehorn in specific religions as being state religions.
The United States IS a secular society, there is no denying it. It’s all wrapped up in the constitution my friends, and Levin’s attempt at brushing off one of the letters one of our founding fathers wrote (Jefferson) is a BIT selective when weaving the tale he’s telling isn’t it? Jefferson himself said it best in his letter to the Danbury Baptists Association way back when…
SauerKraut537 on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 PM
He always has that “I need some Milk of Magnesia” look. Why is that?
capitalist piglet on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 PM
Please provide a quote that indicates Santorum will use the state to impose his religious views on everyone.
He has stated he would use the bully pulpit to make his views known. That is a far cry from imposing those views.
Unless you are counting working to stop the destruction of pre-born babies as imposing religious views.
Again, provide those links that show that Santorum wants to impose by law his religious views on everyone.
AZfederalist on February 27, 2012 at 11:23 PM
So this is the hill we’re going to die on because we really, really don’t like that Romney guy, huh?
Swerve22 on February 27, 2012 at 11:24 PM
Larry Sabato, the always ‘neutral’ political ‘guru’ is already rubbing his hands in glee over the MI results….Unspinable if Mitt loses the raw vote.
Maybe he doesn’t know about Rick’s effort to sabotage the R party. Here’s the deal, the right (Newt, Rick) seem to be perfectly happy to have Obama for 4 more years.
Perhaps, they are thinking they’ll be next in line…all about themselves…nothing about the country. Sad, really.
But it won’t be either of them…they are destroying themselves too. Like I said…say, really.
r keller on February 27, 2012 at 11:24 PM
My new favorite phrase is a tried and true phrase for situations like this.
‘We’re phuqt’.
Wolfmoon on February 27, 2012 at 11:24 PM
I know I’ve said this too often but he’s going to make Jimmah look like a piker. There won’t be anything he won’t feel compelled to remark on. He will be the antithesis of W.
Cindy Munford on February 27, 2012 at 11:25 PM
Romney? Hehe. That’s his “I’m really really really a humble down to earth guy that feels your pain so VOTE FOR ME PLEEEEEEEEZZE” look.
Wolfmoon on February 27, 2012 at 11:27 PM
Santorum is an idiot and this religious kick he is on is wearing thin.
Santorum says Obama harbors a “phony theology” because it is not based on the Bible.
Romney is a Mormon and his religion is not based on the Bible either.
So, I guess Romney also harbors a “phony religion” too.
Were Santorum elected I do not doubt that he would try to inject his severe Catholic dogma into government legislation.
I do not want a Pastor in Chief!
Sparky5253 on February 27, 2012 at 11:30 PM
Hope Rick wins in Michigan.
ABR!
Anybody but Romney!
KirknBurker on February 27, 2012 at 11:30 PM
Mark Levin:
…Rick Santorum! A practicing Catholic!
Practicing??? You would think he’d have a handle on it by now./
:)
Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on February 27, 2012 at 11:31 PM
Don’t worry. Santorum will protect your right to be a hedonist better than Obama will protect your right to be something besides a hedonist. It’s just that hedonism doesn’t give people the right to kill babies. That’s the only “right” that might be in trouble if Santorum gets to nominate a couple of justices to the Supreme Court.
RBMN on February 27, 2012 at 11:31 PM
that’s a pretty big part!
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:32 PM
ITguy on February 27, 2012 at 11:32 PM
ITguy on February 27, 2012 at 11:32 PM
I wish we could get back to the economy, it’s The Won’s weak spot.
Cindy Munford on February 27, 2012 at 11:33 PM
The GOP is going down in flames fueled by sweater vests!
SMOD indeed
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:33 PM
Correctomundo!!
Yes, we …can’t….stand…..Mittens.
There is ONLY one way for Mittens to repair the damage.
Put Rand Paul on the ticket.
Of course, unlike Mittens, Rand is a man of principle, convictions, and yet prudence too. He’d refuse any VP offer by the phony rich out-of-touch wooden convictionless squish.
Walker/Paul(Rand) 2016
2012?
Let’s focus on the Senate.
KirknBurker on February 27, 2012 at 11:33 PM
Knock it off with the logic, it just upsets them more.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:34 PM
Thick as a brick…
vilebody on February 27, 2012 at 11:35 PM
Go Home Preacher
dmann on February 27, 2012 at 11:36 PM
Sadly, I don’t believe this appeared on the HA radar today….
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:36 PM
Fair enough:
“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.”
lester on February 27, 2012 at 11:37 PM
me too.
SparkPlug on February 27, 2012 at 11:37 PM
What’s more important – the economy or your soul?!? I rest my case.
The Nerve on February 27, 2012 at 11:38 PM
lester has the right to molest her
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:39 PM
Ever since Obama’s mandate, the topic has changed. And I don’t believe that was an accident.
Cindy Munford on February 27, 2012 at 11:40 PM
You by yourself are the whole cast…from ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo Nest’ …and you talk about a sane country?
KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2012 at 11:41 PM
Your soul is not a political issue. How hard is this to understand?
joana on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 PM
I don’t either, but it could backfire on them. It’s not like people don’t see the gas and milk prices going up every single week.
BakerAllie on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 PM
This quote is taken out of context; he was clearly referring to homosexual sex in the frame of state sodomy laws and in relation to Lawrence v. Texas. Many Constitutional scholars held the same view before he made his remarks and many Constitutional scholars continue to hold this view.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 PM
The GOP will ebay you.
SparkPlug on February 27, 2012 at 11:42 PM
there’s a reason we’re talking about Santorum and birth control…because the Dems are dumb and the GOP is dumberest
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:43 PM
Another brilliant quote from our preacher.
lester on February 27, 2012 at 11:43 PM
Skim through the WSJ piece, I thought it was very good.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:43 PM
The First Amendment expressly prohibits discrimination, including “banishment from public life”, on the basis of religious belief.
So you are a bigot. And you’re making that completely clear. You and your bigot Barack Obama support and endorse banishing anyone with religious beliefs from any participation in government.
That is why Santorum is ahead. He illuminates the vicious, hatemongering bigotry that you and the idiot Obama practice and are using government to enforce against people. And people are sick of it. Sick. Of. It.
Your bigot Obama is losing. You are losing. And soon you will no longer be anything more than a historical footnote, an example of the insane bigoted left that no one will ever associate with again.
northdallasthirty on February 27, 2012 at 11:43 PM
And I don’t want RomneyCare.
JPeterman on February 27, 2012 at 11:44 PM
the man (Santz) clearly hates libertarians…that’s not a smart stance in this political climate
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:45 PM
How many branches of Planned Parenthood do the Taliban run?
KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2012 at 11:45 PM
I am pro life, so no, I’m not talking about abortion. Being opposed to abortion is fully justified on the basis that no one has a right to take another life. Being willing to use the state to prevent contraception is the imposition of religious views. You asked for a quote. Here are two.
Basilsbest on February 27, 2012 at 11:46 PM
Dire ! ! !
KOOLAID2 on February 27, 2012 at 11:46 PM
So you’re all for letting people like Jerry Sandusky live out “whatever wants or passions they desire?” Because that’s what he was talking about.
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:46 PM
They’re against abortion — JUST LIKE SANTORUM! Da Da DAAAA
cynccook on February 27, 2012 at 11:47 PM
Move out of Massachusetts then.
joana on February 27, 2012 at 11:47 PM
Such a liar you are, bigot. Remember? You just called for Christians to be banished from government activity and public life.
You and your Barack Obama Party support and endorse the Taliban and their views, bigot.
Now why don’t you explain that, sick bigot? You and your fellow bigots shriek and scream about “women’s rights”, but you support and endorse rape, genital mutilation, stripping women of all rights, and honor killings when your Taliban allies do them.
Answer the question, sick bigot. When do you intend to condemn the Taliban’s behavior — and your Barack Obama for supporting them?
northdallasthirty on February 27, 2012 at 11:49 PM
What kind of politician goes out of his way to insult a part of his base over and over and over?
He’s completely crazy. There’s a reason this guy lost by 18%.
joana on February 27, 2012 at 11:49 PM
George Stephanopoulos changed the topic in that debate when he asked Mitt about contraception.
JPeterman on February 27, 2012 at 11:49 PM
It’s worse than that: he hates everyone who’s not a catholic
kastor on February 27, 2012 at 11:50 PM
It sounds great, I hope he gets to talk about it. Oh course, saying something and getting it done in D.C. never seems to work out as they plan.
Cindy Munford on February 27, 2012 at 11:50 PM
Santorum is clearly only against separation of Christians and state. He has no problem treating Muslims like second class citizens
ElenaKagan on February 27, 2012 at 11:51 PM
yes cynccook, we’re advocating pedophilia…cue the outrageous outrage
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:51 PM
yeah, I was living in PA when that happened. that’s unheard of for an incumbent.
DHChron on February 27, 2012 at 11:52 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 … 6 Next »