• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is Santorum too extreme?

That you have to ask? Really?


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 withCaffeinatedThoughts.com, Oct. 18, 2011)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
9 controversial Rick Santorum quotes - The Week

1. He never said he would legislate it or even attempt to abolish, simply that those were his beliefs. His stated position and its been said over and over again disagrees with current legislative policy and he would abide by it.

2. There are quite a few cases where the man stays at home. Feminism had a direct effect on both parents working if you want to agrue this isnt the case go for it.

3. Historically there was just as much warfare waged by Muslims as by Christians in the middle ages. Historically, either side could make the case for warfare on the other.

4. Well going by your logic I guess they could just migrate back to Asia minor and start laying claim to territory there, eh? Look historically you have Philistines, the 3 Palestines in the middle ages, you have a geographic designation and you have the Roman naming, Provincia Syria Palaestina, at the time of Hadrian. Much like the Jewish people there are a lot of migrations and whatnot. The current designation arises almost entirely from the Palestine mandate after the Ottoman Empire near WW1. It is very unclear who the Palestinian people are, what territory they are "entitled" to and what they deserve. Speaking from a legal standpoint and by treaty, Santorum has a point. Maybe if the Palestinians and the Arab world in general would recognize Israel's right to exist and not try terrorist actions by them all the time, they might be more generous in ceding territory they can be attacked from. This topic is not at all simple or cut and dried as you would make it.

5. Thats not even his view, hes saying some people do believe that. At worst a strawman. Except you are trying to conflate that with his view which makes you a pot stirrer, congratulations.

6. Ok...youre being silly with this one, what the hell is wrong with trying to get more black people employed? THIS is wrong? HOW!?!?

7. Considering what black people had to go through to be recognized as human beings in US history, its hard to believe that someone cognizant of that history would then try to decide that for someone else. Gee look, I reasoned through that and came up with a different answer than you.

8. Context : "Marriage is and always has been more than the acknowledgment of the love between two people." Leave that out and what do you have? Btw, I dont know where you lifted this little list from but...there is no origination point for this quote. Meaning TPM has no way for people to examine the entire article and make an educated decision from his original words.

9. Actually hes saying it ISN'T that. Hes not comparing them, he's saying they are not compareable.

Next time you want to regurgitate talking points find some that arent full of more holes than swiss cheese. One of the more intellectually dishonest things Ive seen posted in a while.
 
1. He never said he would legislate it or even attempt to abolish, simply that those were his beliefs. His stated position and its been said over and over again disagrees with current legislative policy and he would abide by it.

2. There are quite a few cases where the man stays at home. Feminism had a direct effect on both parents working if you want to agrue this isnt the case go for it.

3. Historically there was just as much warfare waged by Muslims as by Christians in the middle ages. Historically, either side could make the case for warfare on the other.

4. Well going by your logic I guess they could just migrate back to Asia minor and start laying claim to territory there, eh? Look historically you have Philistines, the 3 Palestines in the middle ages, you have a geographic designation and you have the Roman naming, Provincia Syria Palaestina, at the time of Hadrian. Much like the Jewish people there are a lot of migrations and whatnot. The current designation arises almost entirely from the Palestine mandate after the Ottoman Empire near WW1. It is very unclear who the Palestinian people are, what territory they are "entitled" to and what they deserve. Speaking from a legal standpoint and by treaty, Santorum has a point. Maybe if the Palestinians and the Arab world in general would recognize Israel's right to exist and not try terrorist actions by them all the time, they might be more generous in ceding territory they can be attacked from. This topic is not at all simple or cut and dried as you would make it.

5. Thats not even his view, hes saying some people do believe that. At worst a strawman. Except you are trying to conflate that with his view which makes you a pot stirrer, congratulations.

6. Ok...youre being silly with this one, what the hell is wrong with trying to get more black people employed? THIS is wrong? HOW!?!?

7. Considering what black people had to go through to be recognized as human beings in US history, its hard to believe that someone cognizant of that history would then try to decide that for someone else. Gee look, I reasoned through that and came up with a different answer than you.

8. Context : "Marriage is and always has been more than the acknowledgment of the love between two people." Leave that out and what do you have? Btw, I dont know where you lifted this little list from but...there is no origination point for this quote. Meaning TPM has no way for people to examine the entire article and make an educated decision from his original words.

9. Actually hes saying it ISN'T that. Hes not comparing them, he's saying they are not compareable.

Next time you want to regurgitate talking points find some that arent full of more holes than swiss cheese. One of the more intellectually dishonest things Ive seen posted in a while.

You are soooo right. Santorum is far and away the Republican's best candidate.

snicker128616081670414731.jpg
 
So, Santorum wants to go back to the 1950s. OK, that was a pretty good era, if you were a white, heterosexual male.

Since I'm a white, heterosexual male, go ahead. Elect Santorum.

It's hard to see how he would get enough votes from the women and minorities to be elected, however.
 
he seems to believe women are just totally inferior. I consider that hatred of women.

hyperbole my ass.

Women are superior to men in some ways, inferior in others. As a rule women are smaller and weaker than men and more emotional this can't be denied. I know theres exceptions to the rule believe me. Years ago I was getting out of hand in some biker bar in Kingston AZ and this huge bull dyke bartender comes up to me and says, mellow out or I'll kick the crap out of you right here right now, I mellowed out!

Now on the other hand women as a rule stand up better under long term stress, they seem to be put together to withstand the rigors of child bearing and birth while men are built to win a fight fast or not at all.
 
So, Santorum wants to go back to the 1950s. OK, that was a pretty good era, if you were a white, heterosexual male.

Since I'm a white, heterosexual male, go ahead. Elect Santorum.

It's hard to see how he would get enough votes from the women and minorities to be elected, however.

or gays....or Jews...or Muslims..or atheists.

or anyone who supports the Seperation of Church & State, and supports keeping the damn government out of our bedrooms.
 
1. He never said he would legislate it or even attempt to abolish, simply that those were his beliefs. His stated position and its been said over and over again disagrees with current legislative policy and he would abide by it.

2. There are quite a few cases where the man stays at home. Feminism had a direct effect on both parents working if you want to agrue this isnt the case go for it.

3. Historically there was just as much warfare waged by Muslims as by Christians in the middle ages. Historically, either side could make the case for warfare on the other.

4. Well going by your logic I guess they could just migrate back to Asia minor and start laying claim to territory there, eh? Look historically you have Philistines, the 3 Palestines in the middle ages, you have a geographic designation and you have the Roman naming, Provincia Syria Palaestina, at the time of Hadrian. Much like the Jewish people there are a lot of migrations and whatnot. The current designation arises almost entirely from the Palestine mandate after the Ottoman Empire near WW1. It is very unclear who the Palestinian people are, what territory they are "entitled" to and what they deserve. Speaking from a legal standpoint and by treaty, Santorum has a point. Maybe if the Palestinians and the Arab world in general would recognize Israel's right to exist and not try terrorist actions by them all the time, they might be more generous in ceding territory they can be attacked from. This topic is not at all simple or cut and dried as you would make it.

5. Thats not even his view, hes saying some people do believe that. At worst a strawman. Except you are trying to conflate that with his view which makes you a pot stirrer, congratulations.

6. Ok...youre being silly with this one, what the hell is wrong with trying to get more black people employed? THIS is wrong? HOW!?!?

7. Considering what black people had to go through to be recognized as human beings in US history, its hard to believe that someone cognizant of that history would then try to decide that for someone else. Gee look, I reasoned through that and came up with a different answer than you.

8. Context : "Marriage is and always has been more than the acknowledgment of the love between two people." Leave that out and what do you have? Btw, I dont know where you lifted this little list from but...there is no origination point for this quote. Meaning TPM has no way for people to examine the entire article and make an educated decision from his original words.

9. Actually hes saying it ISN'T that. Hes not comparing them, he's saying they are not compareable.

Next time you want to regurgitate talking points find some that arent full of more holes than swiss cheese. One of the more intellectually dishonest things Ive seen posted in a while.

Next time you offer arguments, try using common sense. Every one of those quotes is substantiated from the source at the end of the quote. Your reference to TPM is, what did you call it? oh yeah... Intellectually dishonest. How ironic?
 
Last edited:
or gays....or Jews...or Muslims..or atheists.

or anyone who supports the Seperation of Church & State, and supports keeping the damn government out of our bedrooms.

Originally, the phrase "all men are created equal" didn't mean "all mankind", the way we think of it now. "All men" meant "all white males who own property".

So, Santorum just wants to go back to the 18th. century. There may be quite a few who agree, and want this country to go back to its roots.

Just not enough to get him elected, thankfully.
 
Next time you offer arguments, try using common sense. Every one of those quotes is substantiated from the source at the end of the quote. Your reference to TPM is, what did you call it? oh yeah... Intellectually dishonest. How ironic?

Such talk will get you in trouble. This is the Age of Beliefs. One believes what they opt to believe simply because they want to believe it. Anything else merely serves that self imposed belief system.
 
Next time you offer arguments, try using common sense. Every one of those quotes is substantiated from the source at the end of the quote. Your reference to TPM is, what did you call it? oh yeah... Intellectually dishonest. How ironic?

The TPM link to the original story and the transcript is a dead link, maybe if you werent so busy trying to score forum points and checked what I was talking about you would know that.

Top Cat you are nothing but a liberal bomb thrower. I used logic in every examination of your 9 points of fiction. It employs twisting quotes, contextual trickery and not once does it examine various meanings of what Santorum was saying. So it, like you, had a terrible argument. But then again, thats the only kind Ive ever seen you employ.
 
Women have superior dexterity and coordination? Where in the world did you get that? Perfect example of this is the FACT that women can't drive a race car, in any discipline of racing. Indy, NASCAR, F1, pick your racing style, women can't hang with the men. Why? Their dexterity and coordination is not up to par with the men.

FAIL. It's an issue of endurance on NASCAR.

And F-1 a woman has won:

List of female Formula One drivers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Seriously, do you hate women?
 
The TPM link to the original story and the transcript is a dead link, maybe if you werent so busy trying to score forum points and checked what I was talking about you would know that.

Those must be some huge pants you wear around to carry those huge balls of yours. You call me a liberal bomb thrower while you make **** up? Your claim that my link is a dead one is a bold faced lie.

Go back and click on the last link... the one below. It's very much a good link.

9 controversial Rick Santorum quotes - The Week

Top Cat you are nothing but a liberal bomb thrower.

I have substantiated my post. Santorum said those things.

I used logic in every examination of your 9 points of fiction.

So let's see, your extremist opinion is defined as "logic". Thank you. i will update my dictionary.
 
Last edited:
Everyone on here can accuse me of hate all they want. Doesn't bother me in the least. I have said, numerous times, that women DO have a role in the military. That women DO a good job, in the fields they are allowed to serve in. Many of things said on here have been to prove others points invalid. It is a fact that women, overall, are physically weaker than men. It is a fact that women require a cleaner living environment than men. It is a fact that intergrating women into line units would require a bigger logistical and facility footprint in a place where its too big already. Those are the facts, and they are indisputable. Now, on to the points I have made and what they have been a response to.
1) Women are more mature. I beg to differ. My entire point of posting the study about female Marines being more likely to have unprotected sex and more likely to not associate drinking until they black out with a drinking problem was to show that women can be just as immature as men. Immaturity is not a sex based thing. It is something some people have and some don't, regardless of sex. It has to do with upbringing, genes, and many other things. At young ages, yes, women are more mature than men. I will agree with that. By the time they reach the age of enlistment in the military, that difference in maturity is non-existant. Anyone with a teenage daughter knows this.
2) Women's dexterity and coordination is better. The example I used was female race car drivers do not succeed like their male counterparts. You can bring up endurance, I'm sure someone will try to bring up sexism too. Whatever you want to bring up, the fact is women have never succeeded at any racing discipline. Why is this relevant? Because its the closest thing we have a large pool of data of that compares to flying a fighter jet. If women can't drive race cars, what makes anyone think they could out perform males flying jets? Now, I do believe that women can and should fly jets. Why? Because they are capable of meeting the minimum required to do so. The argument wasn't if they could do it or not. The argument was if they could outperform males. They can't.
3) I brought up the female pilot who ditched me on patrol. The point wasn't her cowardice. Males can do that too. The point was that she had not served as a Forward Air Controller (FAC) due to the fact that the unit didn't want her because of her physical weakness. The male pilot flying with her had served as a FAC and, upon review of the footage, said exactly what I said. She didn't know what she was looking at because she had never served with infantry before. You marginalize that all you want but I'm wearing a bracelet with 2 guys names on it because she failed to recognize a very elementary ambush. In fact, her words of "hiding in a ditch" are what compelled us to walk straight at the ditch to begin with. We certainly would have maneuvered on them had we known they were still hostile and not hiding.
Once again, women do have a role in the military. Just not up front with the grunts, or in any combat MOS.
 
Actually I am just tweeking him.

But MarineTpartier seems to be unaware of a thing called "Google."

Also unaware of a thing called white space.
 
Solyndra is an example of a poor investment, hardly extreme. If you want to knock the administration for funding it, you would have a point. To call it extreme though, is absurd.

DOE investment backing for energy has happened for a long time. Those who bitch about Solyndra generally are ignorant of this simple fact:


Private lenders decline to finance new reactors because of the substantial risk that the investment will fail. In 2003, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the chance of a loan for new nuclear reactor construction resulting in default would be “very high – well over 50 percent.” In 2008, the Government Accountability Office estimated a default rate of just over 50 percent for all loan guarantees (including other eligible projects in addition to nuclear power plants).​
 
Actually I am just tweeking him.

But MarineTpartier seems to be unaware of a thing called "Google."

You're not tweaking me bro. Sorry, but a tough guy behind a key board is the least of things that I have encountered. You keep thinking your doing something cool though. I'll let you in on a little secret, I'll whisper it its just a website
 
What female race car drivers are you talking about?

Danica Patrick is an obvious one. She is the best female driver to come along in a while, maybe ever, and she's only won one Indy race off of fuel mileage. A win nevertheless though so I give her credit. She is a marketing colossus though.
 
Danica Patrick is an obvious one. She is the best female driver to come along in a while, maybe ever, and she's only won one Indy race off of fuel mileage. A win nevertheless though so I give her credit. She is a marketing colossus though.

Alright, I'm going to list all the reasons why your logic is weak.

1. Race-car driving is not the same as flying a jet.
2. The culture surrounding being a racecar driver likely precludes many women who would be superior drivers.
3. There is nowhere near a sufficient sample size of female race-car drivers to generalize whether they are inferior to men in that respect.
4. Many, many studies of dexterity in controlled experimental conditions show that women possess dexterity that is equal to or better than male dexterity.

I would put a controlled experimental setting that measures dexterity well, well above a situation with thousands of different variables like the race-car circuit.
 
Last edited:
Alright, I'm going to list all the reasons why your logic is weak.
1. Race-car driving is not the same as flying a jet.
2. The culture surrounding being a racecar driver likely precludes many women who would be superior drivers.
3. There is nowhere near a sufficient sample size of female race-car drivers to generalize whether they are inferior to men in that respect.
4. Many, many studies of dexterity in controlled experimental conditions show that women possess dexterity that is equal to or better than male dexterity.
I would put a controlled experimental setting that measures dexterity well, well above a situation with thousands of different variables like the race-car circuit.
Do you have a link to this experimental setting you speak of? If you posted it already, sorry, I missed it. I agree that 2 does have something to do with it as well, btw.
 
I do not know if he is too extreme, he is allowed his opinions and has the right to express them but should expect and respect that other people have very different opinions. If he makes outrageous statements he should expect opposition and comments.
 
Back
Top Bottom