Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: HiTech RedNeck
And that would be a complete mischaracterization of how Santorum would govern.

Agreed, but it is how he would be perceived by the electorate based on his own statements.

Here is Santorum yammering on about how he thinks contraception is "not okay" and how he wants to talk about it as President:

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, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay. It’s not okay..."

Sorry, but we are trying to elect a President, not a priest. This sort of talk is absolute poison to a general election audience. Santorum would lose in a landslide that would take our house majority with it. Rick would lose near the entire midde/moderate/indie/libertine voter demographic(s) that are open to our message on debt, out of control spending, etc, but will not vote for someone who wants to discuss things like the evils of contraception.

32 posted on 03/08/2012 6:48:04 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]


To: Longbow1969

Part of the problem is that it is addressing the issue from the negative side. Rather than calling contraception (or whatever) bad, identify the opposite thing, sex saved for marriage and fully open to procreation, as good. This fits a biblical model of one role of good government (Romans 13), i.e. praising what is good.


35 posted on 03/08/2012 6:55:24 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson