Last edited: February 11, 2005


Santorum’s Passions

Boston Globe, May 2, 2003
Box 2378, Boston, MA 02107
Fax: 617-929-2098
Email: letter@globe.com

Members of the Republican club are closing ranks behind Senator Rick Santorum, the number three man in the GOP leadership with the number one strange philosophy on the perils of personal freedom. With the notable exception of John McCain—who said that he would have apologized to gays for remarks many considered offensive—most of Santorum’s Senate colleagues said this week that his views are perfectly within the mainstream. The Senate majority leader, Bill Frist—who owes his own job to the impolitic remarks of Senator Trent Lott on the more universally condemned subject of racial segregation—even cited Santorum as a voice of “inclusion.” Santorum caused a stir recently when he commented to the Associated Press on a US Supreme Court case reviewing antisodomy laws in Texas. Santorum said that enshrining a right to private, consensual, adult gay sex would open the door to polygamy, adultery, and incest. Such a remark is irrational and bigoted. But the mind-set revealed in the rest of the interview is an especially odd fit in the “big tent” Republicans like to tout.

For one thing, Santorum blamed declining moral standards for the child abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. He said acceptance of “deviant” behavior in society was bound to lead to the same in the church. But sexual abuse is neither an indulgence nor accepted; it is a crime. The culture of repression, secrecy, and coverup in the Catholic Church is to blame for the scandal, not liberal tolerance of homosexuality. In the interview, Santorum also said he opposes sodomy because it is “antithetical to healthy, stable, traditional families,” as if traditional families are the only ones that can be stable or healthy. Santorum should take a tour of Pennsylvania, his home state, and see how many adoptive, blended, multiracial, second, and, yes, gay families he is insulting.

Santorum said the trouble all started with Connecticut v. Griswold, the 1965 Supreme Court decision legalizing birth control. For him, any societal right to privacy, even for adult married couples, opens a Pandora’s box of unhealthy behavior. The government, he said, has a responsibility to “limit an individual’s wants and passions.”

Republicans may figure that whatever support Santorum squanders among moderates is worth it to solidify a base among social conservatives. The party has worked hard to woo traditionally Democratic constituencies, including Catholics, union members, and blacks. By firing up divisive social issues they hope to keep these voters from thinking too hard about the economic issues, where Republican policies are doing them great harm.

Still, we have to ask if “limiting an individual’s wants and passions” is something most Republicans want in their party platform. That could make for a fairly stifling—if uncrowded—big tent.


[Home] [Editorials] [Santorum] [Spreading Santorum]