Rick Santorum Wants Your Sex Life to Be 'Special'

[Katzndogz]

This is getting GOOD.

Newt Gingrich is objectionable because he was unfaithful to his wife.

Rick Santorum is objectionable because he wasn't unfaithful to his wife.

 

[bodecea]

No i wouldn't......i believe in the Constitution.......unlike you and the Left.....

And where in the Constitution does it say that government has the right to tell me what to do with my dick?

It's right there under STATES RIGHTS......

Here is the Xth Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

You heard him, folks....ScreamingEagle thinks that means it's ok for the states to say who we can and cannot have sex with.....nothing like clearly flashing your fascist credentials, SE.

 

[Jarhead]

And where in the Constitution does it say that government has the right to tell me what to do with my dick?

It's right there under STATES RIGHTS......

NOPE--NO STATE has the RIGHT to intervene between the intimacy shared between a husband and wife--and or their PERSONAL decision on how many children they have.

Rick Santorum is one special social freak nut-case for making that statement--and Jesus needs to kick his ass through the goal posts of life right back into the 17th century--where he belongs."

He is trying to impose his RELIGOUS beliefs on the rest of us--and there is a constitutional amendment regarding "separation of church and state.

it makes me wonder what his campaign advisors do all day.

I mean...how did he or anyone think that saying this would help his chances for the nomination?

 

[bodecea]

"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... It's not okay because it's a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They're supposed to be within marriage, for purposes that are, yes, conjugal... but also procreative.

That's the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that's not for purposes of procreation, that's not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can't you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it's simply pleasure. And that's certainly a part of it--and it's an important part of it, don't get me wrong--but there's a lot of things we do for pleasure, and this is special, and it needs to be seen as special. Again, I know most presidents don't talk about those things, and maybe people don't want us to talk about those things, but I think it's important that you are who you are. I'm not running for preacher.

I'm not running for pastor, but these are important public policy issues."

Rick Santorum Wants Your Sex Life to Be 'Special' - Conor Friedersdorf - Politics - The Atlantic

Every Sperm is Sacred - YouTube

OK, so Rick Santorum has his own personal beliefs about sex. Big deal. I don't see him trying to impose his beliefs onto the rest of us by proposing some sort of legislation.

Apparently, Rick Santorum is not allowed to express his personal beliefs on various topics that aren't related to economics, wars, welfare, social "injustice", racial divide, etc.

Always interesting to see how all of these "freedom of speech" people don't want to allow people with differing beliefs from theirs, to exercise THEIR "freedom of speech".

It's frightening that's why he has to be silenced. Everyone who has an opinion on how amoral we are has to be silenced. Suppose these ideas grow. Suppose men and women actually find respect for one another and discover that fidelity breeds trust. That ends sexual freedom for all.

It's dangerous.

Oh? Who has suggested arresting him and throwing him in jail for what he said?

Name names.

 

[Katzndogz]

And where in the Constitution does it say that government has the right to tell me what to do with my dick?

It's right there under STATES RIGHTS......

NOPE--NO STATE has the RIGHT to intervene between the intimacy shared between a husband and wife--and or their PERSONAL decision on how many children they have.

Rick Santorum is one special social freak nut-case for making that statement--and Jesus needs to kick his ass through the goal posts of life right back into the 17th century--where he belongs."

He is trying to impose his RELIGOUS beliefs on the rest of us--and there is a constitutional amendment regarding "separation of church and state.

What did he say that would impose anything on you?

It's the IDEA that is intolerable. The whole idea of sex being part of a bond between a man and a woman. It might spread.

 

[Jarhead]

OK, so Rick Santorum has his own personal beliefs about sex. Big deal. I don't see him trying to impose his beliefs onto the rest of us by proposing some sort of legislation.

Apparently, Rick Santorum is not allowed to express his personal beliefs on various topics that aren't related to economics, wars, welfare, social "injustice", racial divide, etc.

Always interesting to see how all of these "freedom of speech" people don't want to allow people with differing beliefs from theirs, to exercise THEIR "freedom of speech".

It's frightening that's why he has to be silenced. Everyone who has an opinion on how amoral we are has to be silenced. Suppose these ideas grow. Suppose men and women actually find respect for one another and discover that fidelity breeds trust. That ends sexual freedom for all.

It's dangerous.

Oh? Who has suggested arresting him and throwing him in jail for what he said?

Name names.

I think their names were Frank, Tom, Joe and Nancy.

 

[Sallow]

OK, so Rick Santorum has his own personal beliefs about sex. Big deal. I don't see him trying to impose his beliefs onto the rest of us by proposing some sort of legislation.

Apparently, Rick Santorum is not allowed to express his personal beliefs on various topics that aren't related to economics, wars, welfare, social "injustice", racial divide, etc.

Always interesting to see how all of these "freedom of speech" people don't want to allow people with differing beliefs from theirs, to exercise THEIR "freedom of speech".

Freedom of speech is fine. But when someone is proposing to have government dictate to you what you can and can't do in the bedroom between consenting adults..it gives you pause to think. Especially if that person is running for the highest government office in the land.

but it doesnt give you reason to pause and think when someone who is IN the highest office in the land wants to tell a private company what they MUST sell if they want to remain in business?

That's two different issues.

And..in any case..that "private" company has gotten government support in the past. It wasn't just this time.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

And where in the Constitution does it say that government has the right to tell me what to do with my dick?

It's right there under STATES RIGHTS......

Here is the Xth Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

You heard him, folks....ScreamingEagle thinks that means it's ok for the states to say who we can and cannot have sex with.....nothing like clearly flashing your fascist credentials, SE.

so you object to various states making gay marriage legal..........

 

[bodecea]

It's right there under STATES RIGHTS......

Apparently you skipped a couple of things..



what does contraception have to do with the Constitution or treaties.....? ....except of course the 1st Amendment.....

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

tell that to the Lefie Food Nazis who are searching your childrens' sack lunches from home....and replacing turkey/cheese sandwiches with their "nuggets".....

tell that to the Lefties like Obama who want to insert their fat noses under your tent wherever....and then arrest you if they don't like what they see or hear......[/quote].

I believe those things are incredibly stupid too.

But, then again, I'm not as repressed as you, so I don't fell this compulsion to deflect from the topic of this thread.

 

[Katzndogz]

OK, so Rick Santorum has his own personal beliefs about sex. Big deal. I don't see him trying to impose his beliefs onto the rest of us by proposing some sort of legislation.

Apparently, Rick Santorum is not allowed to express his personal beliefs on various topics that aren't related to economics, wars, welfare, social "injustice", racial divide, etc.

Always interesting to see how all of these "freedom of speech" people don't want to allow people with differing beliefs from theirs, to exercise THEIR "freedom of speech".

It's frightening that's why he has to be silenced. Everyone who has an opinion on how amoral we are has to be silenced. Suppose these ideas grow. Suppose men and women actually find respect for one another and discover that fidelity breeds trust. That ends sexual freedom for all.

It's dangerous.

Oh? Who has suggested arresting him and throwing him in jail for what he said?

Name names.

I never said that he should be thrown in jail for what he said. But there are an awful lot of people here, you included that think what he said was objectionable. Can we have a president that is faithful to his wife and thinks that sex is a special relationship? Can we tolerate someone that comes out and says so?

Certainly someone who thinks like that shouldn't be president!

 

[Sallow]

It's right there under STATES RIGHTS......

Apparently you skipped a couple of things..



what does contraception have to do with the Constitution or treaties.....? ....except of course the 1st Amendment.....

Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

tell that to the Lefie Food Nazis who are searching your childrens' sack lunches from home....and replacing turkey/cheese sandwiches with their "nuggets".....

tell that to the Lefties like Obama who want to insert their fat noses under your tent wherever....and then arrest you if they don't like what they see or hear......[/quote].

Deflection..fail..total.

Reboot.

 

[jillian]

This is what we are becoming isn't it. This degnerate. Sex has no more meaning that an after dinner toast, or shaking hands. Naturally it follows that the pregnancies of such casual unions are as meaningless as the act that created them.

Santorum was only speaking a simple truth. Sexual union should not be reduced to simple pleasure and lose it's meaning and use of creating a special relationship between two people that creates a bond of trust not shared by anyone else.

While we SHOULD recognize the importance of these kinds of bonds. Just like we shouldn't burn down our neighbor's home, or steal the family silver. It should be something we already know. We should not have to be told.

Santorum brings up a very important point which is are we moving into a culture that places individual pleasure above all other human attributes. It was this kind of understanding that enabled Jeffrey Dahmer to kill and eat his victims. He was able to reject all forms of morality and was answerable only to himself and what felt good to him.

i think the point is that government should stay out of our personal lives.

funny how the 'small government' wingnuts don't see it that way.

 

[Jarhead]

Freedom of speech is fine. But when someone is proposing to have government dictate to you what you can and can't do in the bedroom between consenting adults..it gives you pause to think. Especially if that person is running for the highest government office in the land.

but it doesnt give you reason to pause and think when someone who is IN the highest office in the land wants to tell a private company what they MUST sell if they want to remain in business?

That's two different issues.

And..in any case..that "private" company has gotten government support in the past. It wasn't just this time.

That private comapany is an insurer who will be forced to offer contraceptives at no cost to the insured.

 

[bodecea]

Pervs......

We laugh at your kind.

You can laugh all you want, we're not the repressed ones.

that's true......you just splat your filth anywhere and everywhere.....

You are sooo repressed, it's funny!

 

[bodecea]

No i wouldn't......i believe in the Constitution.......unlike you and the Left.....

OK, Mr. "I believe in the Constitution"...show us where it allows the government to control our sex.

Im with you on this topic....

But....

Exactly where in the constitution does it say that the government can demand a company give a product away to a consumer for free?

Don't agree with that one either.

 

[bodecea]

This is getting GOOD.

Newt Gingrich is objectionable because he was unfaithful to his wife.

Rick Santorum is objectionable because he wasn't unfaithful to his wife.

Wow! Can you be anymore of a liar? Don't think so.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Apparently you skipped a couple of things..



what does contraception have to do with the Constitution or treaties.....? ....except of course the 1st Amendment.....


tell that to the Lefie Food Nazis who are searching your childrens' sack lunches from home....and replacing turkey/cheese sandwiches with their "nuggets".....

tell that to the Lefties like Obama who want to insert their fat noses under your tent wherever....and then arrest you if they don't like what they see or hear......[/quote].

Deflection..fail..total.

Reboot.

not a deflection at all......those things are VERY SIMILAR to what Obama is doing iwth contraception.......he's pushing his nose under the tent with abortifacients......next thing he'll force the Church to pay for full term abortions.....

 

[bodecea]

Please do....

Ah, but you seem to be more the type to want to tell people when, where, and how they have sex. Iran is more your kind of place.

Iran is a country with one person(s) dictating what you do.......very much like Obama......

Wow....aren't YOU the Ignorant one.

The Mullahs run that country. You know....the RELIGIOUS Leaders trying to shove their puritanical Islam down everyone's throat.

 

[Sallow]

but it doesnt give you reason to pause and think when someone who is IN the highest office in the land wants to tell a private company what they MUST sell if they want to remain in business?

That's two different issues.

And..in any case..that "private" company has gotten government support in the past. It wasn't just this time.

That private comapany is an insurer who will be forced to offer contraceptives at no cost to the insured.

You may not believe this...but HMOs were tickled pink when they heard everyone is required to have insurance.

 

[bodecea]

Deflection..fail..total.

Reboot.

not a deflection at all......those things are VERY SIMILAR to what Obama is doing iwth contraception.......he's pushing his nose under the tent with abortifacients......next thing the Church will be paying for full term abortions.....

Deflection Alert! Deflection Alert!


Poster ScreamingEagle has failed to make a logical point on this thread and has switched to

Deflection Alert! Deflection Alert!