Santorum booed in contentious exchange over gay marriage

Santorum didn't win any friends in a town hall meeting attended mostly by college students. He was apparently speaking at a "College Convention" and a student asked him why he opposed gay marriage. His answer had the crowd shouting questions at him -- it was briefly calmed and then started back up again.

In what has to be a prize-winning irony, the article concludes with this little gem:

After the event, Santorum dismissed the hostile environment, saying only that he wanted "to engage them to get them thinking about why they're thinking the way you're thinking."

...this, from the man who, when asked about his views on medical marijuana admitted that he hadn't actually studied the subject and used "his own life experiences" to inform his judgements. He shot back, "I went to college, too."

Y'know, in a room with (liberal and well read) undergrads and grads and various professors, that dog just ain't gonna hunt.

He's not forecast to do well in New Hampshire, and his best tactic might be to head off to Florida or South Carolina. I don't think he'll be able to do that well in most states, but he might get a small boost in the South.

And actually, he made the whole situation even worse for himself:

The crowd quieted and one woman spoke for the pro-gay marriage faction by saying that married couples don't harm anybody.


Replied Santorum: "What about three men?" He was being provocative and might not have expected the answer he got.


"Go for it," she said. Once he realized that she was condoning polygamy among same-sex couples, Santorum sarcastically framed the pro-gay marriage argument: Anybody, he said, can marry as many people as they want. The gay rights supporters stood and applauded Santorum, apparently mocking him.

www.cbsnews.com...

The first article I linked implied that he was booed off stage, but this isn't the case. He did get booed as he walked out, but the students were generally civil given how offended many of them were by his statements.

What a joke, the GOP voters are just trying every single candidate out because they really, really, really don't want to support Romney or Paul. But those two are the only serious contenders and the sooner that is realized, the less embarrassed I will have to be about the people we are actually considering as president.

Such a clown. That was some hurtful watching.
And this guy basically won in Iowa....

"why don't you want me to build that bridge?"

reply to post by Indellkoffer

What a moron. I got as far as his first question (who wants to change the law?) and just facepalmed. The answer is obvious.... "The People!". Please excuse me while I descend into expletives....

And thanks for showing us even more how much of a moron he is!

He has more nads than most people speaking in public vying for any type of office. I have more respect for him sticking to his beliefs, right or wrong in anyone's eyes.
I'll take him over Romney any day of the week and our current POTUS.

How can you be mad at him for standing up for what he believes? I for one want a politician to tell me what he/she really thinks, then let me decide if I want to vote for him/her.

To Santorum. I really hope he and Paul can push Romney to the back burner.

reply to post by Indellkoffer


um....
AAAAAWKWARD!
damn that was tough to watch.

Did anyone else see Santorum's face/reaction to the audience applause/cheering after he said:
"what we're saying here...is that marriage really means, whatever you want it to mean."
?!?!?

***Watch 6:45 through 7:10- the specific reaction I'm talking about is from 7:00-7:05***


lol

reply to post by mugger

Guess you missed this. I may not discuss the contents. Well, it's Ron Paul.



ETA Next thing you know and it will be a loud knock on the door in the middle of the night.
"EXCUSE ME SIR! ONLY THE MISSIONARY POSITION IS ALLOWED DUE TO THE FALLING GLOBAL SPERM COUNT YOU UNDERSTand....yes, thank you sir, you have a good nite too sir... Just doing my job, you understand. Thank you sir, sleep well."

I think this takes the cake!

Santorum - 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)

Reaction: "Rick Santorum has expended a great deal of thought and energy to finding new words to disparage gay marriage," says Daryl Lang at Breaking Copy. And even if you agree with Santorum, "would you really want a president who is this obsessed" with gay sex?

This guy is one SICK PUPPY!

reply to post by SpaceJockey1


That's actually the position of some anti-gay groups.

Particularly the ones that don't know much about the rest of the world. I've read several accounts of men marrying dogs in India (no, not kidding. Google it up) and women marrying trees (Kipling reported on this) in India. They're very harsh on homosexual men in that country; nevertheless, men would marry dogs if the astrologer told them their first marriage would be unlucky and if a village lacked a prostitute (according to Kipling and many other sources) they would select a girl to service the men and then marry her to a tree so that she could have a "proper husband" like everyone else and still be available to whatever man wanted her.

reply to post by Indellkoffer


Mankind has got a LONG way to go before enlightment...

Starting to believe that we're heading back in the WRONG direction!

Originally posted by kyotoseoul
How can you be mad at him for standing up for what he believes? I for one want a politician to tell me what he/she really thinks, then let me decide if I want to vote for him/her.

To Santorum. I really hope he and Paul can push Romney to the back burner.

Way to miss the point. Santorum, like most anti-gay marriage advocates, stick their noses into other people's business, for incredbly idiotic reasons, and have succeeded in doing so.

reply to post by Indellkoffer


Oh poor Rick,

Here's the problem. He could have won that exchange without changing his stance. He could have said something like this:

" I personally, believe that marriage is between a man and a women, and I will not support any bid for the laws changing until the American Public decides it would like it changed. I still will not personally support it, but my job is to carry out the will of the people, not my own."

He just has REALLY bad handlers for some issues.

~Keeper

reply to post by spacekc929


Yeah.. two choices: the establishment candidate and the people's candidate.

To me this is such a non-issue. But Santorum's argument wasn't even really about Marriage, it was about raising the best environment for children....ummm...last time I checked, you could still marry and not have kids. The guy, just doesn't agree with it, fine, but his reasoning is all conjecture, and has no real basis in his argument. He wouldn't hesitate fusing church and state, and most likely believes that is the direction to take things in.

Santourm is a joke... why does the government even have any say or license a religous ceramony uniting two people under their God... The government has no f'in business about my relationship. I have been engaged for 19 years. When has a piece of paper ever held a man or woman with in a relationship?

This marriage issue is bullCRAP and it is nothing more than another way to divide people so we are more easily controled....

Originally posted by mugger
He has more nads than most people speaking in public vying for any type of office. I have more respect for him sticking to his beliefs, right or wrong in anyone's eyes.
I'll take him over Romney any day of the week and our current POTUS.

Even when those beliefs go against the will of the people? Would you vote for a man wishing to bring back slavery just because he was passionate enough about it?

Sorry, but that logic is simply ridiculous. I would prefer some honesty from politicians too, but it's not going to happen. You have to accept that people will often tell you what you want to hear to get your vote, and then when they fail you can try your hardest to call them on it. But saying he deserves some credit for being openly homophobic and going against a widely held public opinion is just laughable.
And what if he's just saying it to secure the radical Christian vote? How do you know he isn't pandering?

Still, it's good to see that the youth are actually forward thinking in America. There may be millions of right wing religious freaks who would gladly treat gay people as second-class citizens, but they are a dying breed as the clever kids take over.

I long for the day when we can truly say that organized religion is dead enough to no longer affect our governance!

Originally posted by technical difficulties

Originally posted by kyotoseoul
How can you be mad at him for standing up for what he believes? I for one want a politician to tell me what he/she really thinks, then let me decide if I want to vote for him/her.

To Santorum. I really hope he and Paul can push Romney to the back burner.

Way to miss the point. Santorum, like most anti-gay marriage advocates, stick their noses into other people's business, for incredbly idiotic reasons, and have succeeded in doing so.

Fact is, the man is running for President. Would you rather him lie about his positions and sucker people into voting for him, or or lay them out on the table so we can make an informed decision? Like him or not, you know where he stands.

I'm not the one missing the point.