Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

PRUDEN: The ignorance of Rick Santorum
The Washington Times ^ | February 28, 2012 | Wesley Pruden

Posted on 02/28/2012 8:14:16 PM PST by Mariner

There’s a tiny priest living in Rick Santorum’s trim, toned body, struggling to get out. The rogue priest escaped Sunday and said foolish things.

The candidate most admired for plain speech made it plain and clear that he doesn’t believe in the wall between church and state and doesn’t think much of John F. Kennedy for saying he did.

“I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute,” he told ABC News. “The idea that church can have no influence or involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.”

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: beltwaycrap; corruption; dems4santorum; establishment; idiot; insider; rooster; roosterrick; santorum; twistedlogic; unions4santorum; wespruden; whatanidiot; whatasnob
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-141 next last
I agree with Wes Pruden.

When Santorum said he encouraged a role for the Church in the operation of the state, he disqualified himself from Federal office.

1 posted on 02/28/2012 8:14:19 PM PST by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Wrong. Separation of Church and State is not constitutional. Santorum knows this. JFK spoke that Protestant pastors shouldn’t tell their congregations how to vote. That statement tells me that JFK did not understand the first amendment.


2 posted on 02/28/2012 8:19:04 PM PST by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Do you really think that the Church shouldn’t have influence over the operation of the state? Do you have any idea what is in the constitution?

The Church should be able to do whatever it wants. The constitution only constrains the state. Churches should be able to use whatever influence they have to shape public policy.


3 posted on 02/28/2012 8:22:17 PM PST by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner; All

Yeah; the Kennedy slam (along with a lot of other foolish statements Rick has made “off the cuff”) probably cost him Michigan tonight. I loathe Romney and I like Rick, but every time he starts to speak, I tense up; not knowing what is going to come out of his mouth. When he said the Kennedy speech made him want to throw up, every time he heard it, was the final straw for a lot people. Well..... we still have Newt!


4 posted on 02/28/2012 8:24:10 PM PST by no dems (No RINO-Rom, no Kook-Daddy and no "out of touch" Rev. Rick........Gingrich.... YES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
I listened to his speech tonight and thought it was exceptional.
5 posted on 02/28/2012 8:27:56 PM PST by Tex-Con-Man (T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII 2012 - "Together, I Shall Ride You To Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: impimp
And Rick Santorum said the church should have a role in the operation of the state.

Please address that issue.

6 posted on 02/28/2012 8:31:04 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: impimp
"Churches should be able to use whatever influence they have to shape public policy."

I agree with that.

But I don't believe a church or the church should have a role in the operation of the state.

Should the run the courts and be the judges? Should they run the public schools?

If so, which church?

7 posted on 02/28/2012 8:34:15 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man

Romney won the female vote by 5% and tied the male vote with Santorum.


8 posted on 02/28/2012 8:34:21 PM PST by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Duh, the founders had church in the capitol building. No one was forced to attend.
9 posted on 02/28/2012 8:36:20 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Pruden's column dates JFK's speech to 1963. That is a slip--the date was 1960, before he was elected.

Santorum's comments remind me of Mark Twain's saying about Wagner's music--"it's not as bad as it sounds." I doubt Santorum really wants to create a theocracy but comments like the ones he made the other day will scare a lot of people.

10 posted on 02/28/2012 8:39:25 PM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
I thought the speech went a long way in addressing the presses cartoon characterization of his attitude towards women. Talking about his working mother, his wife and daughter. I was impressed.
11 posted on 02/28/2012 8:40:49 PM PST by Tex-Con-Man (T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII 2012 - "Together, I Shall Ride You To Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

A few weeks back Obama was saying Jesus would raise taxes on ‘the rich’ and was claiming he was doing Jesus work as POTUS.

There was a lot a good material for RS to use against Obama and yet he goes on this diss JFK theme. Lets see, JFK said this 50 YEARS AGO.

Church and state is not the same as beliefs/faith/principles and state.


12 posted on 02/28/2012 8:40:49 PM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
"Duh, the founders had church in the capitol building. No one was forced to attend. "

There's not a damn thing wrong with that.

The the institution didn't have a role in the operation of the state.

The men who attended that church DID have an enormous role.

13 posted on 02/28/2012 8:42:27 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: impimp
Separation of Church and State is not constitutional.

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States, the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history."

James Madison

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions64.html

14 posted on 02/28/2012 8:44:56 PM PST by Ken H (Austerity is the irresistible force. Entitlements are the immovable object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
he doesn’t believe in the wall between church and state

There isn't such a thing.

15 posted on 02/28/2012 8:47:02 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER ( Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Correct, we have a shortage in the men of principle in this government and country today.


16 posted on 02/28/2012 8:49:10 PM PST by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
"There isn't such a thing. "

“The idea that church can have no influence or involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.”

"Involvement in the operation of the state"

In fact our Constitution is absolutely clear that only the institutions of the President, Congress, USSC and The States should be "involved in the operation of the state".

17 posted on 02/28/2012 9:01:42 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

You would think a wordsmith like Pruden would be smart enough not to misuse the term “ignorance” like a bitchy drag queen.

Reading his embellishment of what Santorum *actually said* sounds more like a schoolgirl attempting to destroy a social rival than a competent political analyst.


18 posted on 02/28/2012 9:02:53 PM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
"Reading his embellishment of what Santorum *actually said* sounds more like a schoolgirl attempting to destroy a social rival than a competent political analyst."

Wes Pruden has his conservative bona fides, far more so than Rick Santorum.

And Rick Santorum's words are worthy of such ridicule. They are the antithesis of our constitutional government.

19 posted on 02/28/2012 9:05:55 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: impimp

JFK’s remarks on the SCS fallacy were more than abrasive. Santorum obviously wasn’t thinking about the Presidency when he hyperventilated into that brown paper bag. Two dorks.


20 posted on 02/28/2012 9:07:15 PM PST by Gene Eric (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Oh please

First off there is no such thing as “wall of separation between church and state” in the Constitution.

The freedom of religion does not ban religious persons from holding office.

He is over 35 and a US citizen, he is Constitutionally eligible to be President.

The thing is to keep government out of the church and that has been violated for decades.


21 posted on 02/28/2012 9:07:31 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Santorum mentioned influence over the operation of the state. Did he REALLY say operation of the state? Influence over, and operation of, are two different things.

There are some functions that are called state functions now but they shouldn’t be state functions (education, adoption, healthcare etc.) It is only in that context that a church would “operate” the state.

Don’t buy into radical separation of church and state - the endgame is the Soviet Union if you do.


22 posted on 02/28/2012 9:08:43 PM PST by impimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
In fact our Constitution is absolutely clear that only the institutions of the President, Congress, USSC and The States should be "involved in the operation of the state".

Nope. You missed one. "The People."

And "the people" have very definite opinions that are formed and informed by the church of their choice.

Your assertion is as silly and self serving as the meme that only women can judge women where circumstances are unique to women, or that only veterans are allowed to have any say on what military operations are appropriate.

23 posted on 02/28/2012 9:09:23 PM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Here’s a pretty good summary re the so-called `wall of separation.’ http://www.firebuilders.org/JAmJeff.htm

In the next several months, building to (disappointing, we can only hope) crescendo, we can expect to read about one African-American church minister after another plugging Obama.

And on Jefferson’s tombstone: “Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, Author of the Declaration of Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom and Father of the University of Virginia.”

By “religious freedom,” he meant `freedom from’ as well as `freedom of.’


24 posted on 02/28/2012 9:10:12 PM PST by tumblindice (Nuke Hollywood from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

I am a huge Santorum fan but like Sarah palin before him, he has to know that bold social statements will be turned into spun tweets and late night bits ad infinitum.

Senator, please, THINK before you say things. I’ve agreed with every word you’ve said, but Joe Q Public doesn’t understand you and gets it wrong every time. I never knew I could cheer and grimace at the same time, but every newsworthy line you’ve said, I cheer inwardly and grimace outwardly.

Anything out of the mainstream has to be patiently explained BEFORE you say it. Sorry, but it’s true. Throwing up at Kennedy?? Didn’t you THINK people would then say that Michigan is throwing up rather than vote for you, etc.? Don’t feed the beast so much. Be you, but save some of this stuff until you Get the bully pulpit.

I am so sorry you didn’t knock Romney out in MI tonight.


25 posted on 02/28/2012 9:10:34 PM PST by Yaelle (Rick Santorum for People's Representative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Wes Pruden has his conservative bona fides, far more so than Rick Santorum.

His "bona fides" don't have a thing to do with evaluating what he wrote.

I don't care if Neal Armstrong says the moon is made of green cheese. I know he's wrong just by what he said.

26 posted on 02/28/2012 9:12:01 PM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: papertyger

Now we know why the Washington Times never sold many papers


27 posted on 02/28/2012 9:12:43 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
In fact our Constitution is absolutely clear that only the institutions of the President, Congress, USSC and The States should be "involved in the operation of the state".

The Constitution limits the federal government...nothing else. It simply states that the federal government cannot establish an official church.

28 posted on 02/28/2012 9:14:37 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER ( Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man

>> I listened to his speech tonight and thought it was exceptional.

Regardless of his hoarse voice, he sounds like Obama with the breathy supplication.


29 posted on 02/28/2012 9:16:13 PM PST by Gene Eric (Newt/Sarah 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
I am a huge Santorum fan but like Sarah palin before him, he has to know that bold social statements will be turned into spun tweets and late night bits ad infinitum.

Then he has to ask himself if there are enough stupid people out there to make the spin determinative.

I like his obvious answer to that question better than yours.

30 posted on 02/28/2012 9:16:19 PM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
In fact our Constitution is absolutely clear that only the institutions of the President, Congress, USSC and The States should be "involved in the operation of the state".

You are without a doubt the worst statist I have ever seen on FR.

31 posted on 02/28/2012 9:18:42 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Pruden misunderstands what JFK was actually saying and how his comments on church and state were subsequently put into practice.

Kennedy made it clear that his religious convictions would be walled apart from his political practice.
It is the same argument made by Catholic politicians today when they support laws at variance with their church’s teachings. It was the same argument used by Jesuit priest/congressman Robert Drinan when he lent all his support for abortion.

32 posted on 02/28/2012 9:21:58 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

I used to like what Wes Pruden wrote, but not any more.
Sooner or later, it seems that everyone shows who they really are.


33 posted on 02/28/2012 9:22:14 PM PST by Gosh I love this neighborhood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner; All

Santorum’s speech simply repeats the standard positions I’ve heard for many years in conservative evangelical Christian circles. Frankly, when I read speeches like this, I’m more pleased than annoyed by Santorum.

That’s also true about his criticism of higher education which generated a similar article attacking him this week in the New York Times. The only thing I find surprising is that I’m not used to hearing Roman Catholics talk this way. Maybe I need to spend more time paying attention to politically active conservative Catholic intellectuals; Santorum didn’t come up with this on his own and he probably didn’t get this worldview exclusively or even primarily from the Protestant evangelical community.

Unlike the New York Times, I expect the Washington Times and its senior management and emeritus management to understand conservative Christian views.

Pruden is a legitimate conservative leader. I find it difficult to believe he doesn’t know better, but perhaps he’s spent so much time in the secular conservative environment of Washington that “red meat” conservative Christians.


34 posted on 02/28/2012 9:27:30 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darrellmaurina

Typo deletion: “Pruden is a legitimate conservative leader. I find it difficult to believe he doesn’t know better, but perhaps he’s spent so much time in the secular conservative environment of Washington that “red meat” conservative Christians (ADD) are not what he’s used to hearing.”


35 posted on 02/28/2012 9:29:04 PM PST by darrellmaurina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: impimp
"Did he REALLY say operation of the state?"

"“The idea that church can have no influence or involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.”

A direct quote from the article and I saw him say it myself on youtube. This last weekend.

"involvement in the operation of the state".

36 posted on 02/28/2012 9:33:58 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: papertyger
"Nope. You missed one. "The People.""

The people have no role in the operation of the state.

They elect representatives to operate the state.

The people have no direct power other than the vote the ability to sit as a juror.

Nowhere does the constitution allow for any other INSTITUTION to have a role and Santorum's words clearly advocate for that.

37 posted on 02/28/2012 9:37:45 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: impimp

That is a green light to Muslims.


38 posted on 02/28/2012 9:38:23 PM PST by SatinDoll (No Foreign Naionals as our President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: impimp
The Soviet Union's game was the elimination of religion, not the separation of church and state.
39 posted on 02/28/2012 9:38:33 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: impimp

“The Church should be able to do whatever it wants. The constitution only constrains the state.”

Amen! A church that cannot challenge the state is a church subservient to the state.


40 posted on 02/28/2012 9:41:07 PM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

You probably separation of church and state is actually in the constitution. I know Pruden is smarter than that so I must attribute his diatribe, to some other motive. So what is yours?


41 posted on 02/28/2012 9:43:37 PM PST by itsahoot (Much easier to tear down a building, than to build one. Bigger mess though.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
"The Constitution limits the federal government...nothing else."

Bullsh!t.

The constitution lays out very specific and considerable powers to the Federal Government. The power to make laws. To tax. To spend. To regulate interstate commerce. To make war etc.

Yes, the federal government is LIMITED but it is also empowered.

That makes your statement patently false.

42 posted on 02/28/2012 9:44:00 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Of he had actually said what you think he said, then maybe I would address it, since he didn’t then you need to lighten up.


43 posted on 02/28/2012 9:45:27 PM PST by itsahoot (Much easier to tear down a building, than to build one. Bigger mess though.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
The people have no role in the operation of the state.

That is the most utterly asinine statement I have ever read on FR.

I have no intention of wasting my time debating someone who simply makes up nonsense to avoid conceding his errors.

Do you think you're the first genius to go literal to deny philosophical, and philosophical to deny literal?

44 posted on 02/28/2012 9:46:06 PM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
"You are without a doubt the worst statist I have ever seen on FR. "

Attacking the messenger becauwse you can't reconcile your zeal for the real statist with the words he spoke?

Hell, I doubt you even know what a statist is.

45 posted on 02/28/2012 9:46:06 PM PST by Mariner (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: impimp

JFK was trying to assure Protestant ministers that he wasn’t going to take orders from the Pope. People today forget the times. In 1960, in many regions of the US, Catholicism was looked at in much the same light as say Mormonism. It was Evangelicals, a term I believe not used at the time, but correct me if I’m wrong, who wanted to hear those words from JFK before they would consider voting for him.


46 posted on 02/28/2012 9:47:03 PM PST by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change

“Kennedy made it clear that his religious convictions would be walled apart from his political practice.”

Given that Kennedy had no religious convictions whatsoever, that wouldn’t be hard for him to do. In essence, Kennedy said, “My actions will not be affected by things I do not believe...”


47 posted on 02/28/2012 9:47:08 PM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Why are you going out of your way to insult Christians, on a forum that is owned by an unabashed Christian?


48 posted on 02/28/2012 9:50:46 PM PST by itsahoot (Much easier to tear down a building, than to build one. Bigger mess though.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
"“The idea that church can have no influence or involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.”

Thus the Congressional Chaplain is unconstitutional. Military chaplains likewise unconstitutional. Input from the public square by people of faith unconstitutional. Priests, Pastors and Rabbis in Congress unconstitutional. Catholic Hospitals treating patients at public expense unconstitutional. Jewish homeless shelters housing the homeless at public expense unconstitutional. Chaplains presiding over the dead at their funerals at public military hospitals unconstitutional. Is this your position?

Of course this is not what Santorum was talking about but let's take it to the extreme of your nutty argument.

49 posted on 02/28/2012 9:51:59 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
And your zeal has nothing to do with your obvious preference for activist SCOTUS precedent to the actual Constitution?

Yeah, I know...the Constitutions says what the SC says it does...

50 posted on 02/28/2012 9:52:59 PM PST by papertyger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-141 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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