Santorum: God's Law And Civil Law Must Be The Same

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Jul 14, 2011
158,233
73,122
2,330
Native America
By Kyle Mantyla

During The Family Leader's Thanksgiving Family Forum in Iowa on Saturday, forum moderator Frank Luntz's first question to Rick Santorum was "what's the number one value that America has lost and how would you get it back?"

Santorum's response was that America has lost the recognition that this nation was founded on the principle that our rights come from God and that, as such, we are also required to abide by God's laws ... which, he explained, was totally unlike Sharia:

Now, unlike Islam where the higher law and civil law are the same, in our case, we have civil laws but our civil laws have to comport with the higher law.

Our civil laws have to ... and that's why, with the issue of abortion, as long as abortion is "legal" - at least according to the Supreme Court, "legal" in this country - we will never have rest because that law does not comport with God's law which says that all life has value, all life is created by [God,] I knew you in the womb.

And as long as there is a discordance between the two, there will be agitation.​

So, to clarify: In Islam, God's laws and the civil laws are one-and-the-same and that is theocracy and that is bad ... whereas here in the United States, our civil laws merely must be in accordance with God's law, and that is not theocracy and that is good.

And until that happens, Santorum says, this country will never have rest.
Santorum: God's Law And Civil Law Must Be The Same - YouTube

Santorum: God's Law And Civil Law Must Be The Same | Right Wing Watch
 
Yep, the fellow is a total fruitcake. And that he gained 25% in the Iowa caucuses says all that needs to be said about the present GOP.
 
By Kyle Mantyla

During The Family Leader's Thanksgiving Family Forum in Iowa on Saturday, forum moderator Frank Luntz's first question to Rick Santorum was "what's the number one value that America has lost and how would you get it back?"

Santorum's response was that America has lost the recognition that this nation was founded on the principle that our rights come from God and that, as such, we are also required to abide by God's laws ... which, he explained, was totally unlike Sharia:

Now, unlike Islam where the higher law and civil law are the same, in our case, we have civil laws but our civil laws have to comport with the higher law.

Our civil laws have to ... and that's why, with the issue of abortion, as long as abortion is "legal" - at least according to the Supreme Court, "legal" in this country - we will never have rest because that law does not comport with God's law which says that all life has value, all life is created by [God,] I knew you in the womb.

And as long as there is a discordance between the two, there will be agitation.​

So, to clarify: In Islam, God's laws and the civil laws are one-and-the-same and that is theocracy and that is bad ... whereas here in the United States, our civil laws merely must be in accordance with God's law, and that is not theocracy and that is good.

And until that happens, Santorum says, this country will never have rest.
Santorum: God's Law And Civil Law Must Be The Same - YouTube

Santorum: God's Law And Civil Law Must Be The Same | Right Wing Watch
My God, Santorum is truly insane.
If it's theocracy in the Middle East, it's theocracy here.
 
Last edited:
Probably Romney will get the nomination. And the people that voted for Santorum will either go to a third party candidate or stay home in November.
 
Probably Romney will get the nomination. And the people that voted for Santorum will either go to a third party candidate or stay home in November.

Wishful thinking Rocks in the head.... they'll vote for anyone that runs against Obama, ANYONE.
 
Luckily as president he would not be able to turn the US over into a theocracy all by himself. However, a person with that sort of view of the law and government ought to never inhabit the Oval Office, and I say that as a person who is pro-life.

I call people like him "Talibornagains." Seems rather appropriate.
 
I wonder what issue left wingers were hysterical about before the Supreme Court created a "right" to privacy that didn't exist in the Constitution? Maybe the "unfair" treatment of communists?
 
Probably Romney will get the nomination. And the people that voted for Santorum will either go to a third party candidate or stay home in November.

Wishful thinking Rocks in the head.... they'll vote for anyone that runs against Obama, ANYONE.

Kind of what you guys thought last time.


Not really, there were a lot of conservatives who did not like and did not vote for McCain. And don't tell me the lib/dems didn't do the same against Bush43.
 
Probably Romney will get the nomination. And the people that voted for Santorum will either go to a third party candidate or stay home in November.

Wishful thinking Rocks in the head.... they'll vote for anyone that runs against Obama, ANYONE.

yeah... but the moderates won't vote for a wackjob

True, and Mitt Romney is no wackjob. After he has the nomination locked up, he'll pick a tea party favorite for his running mate and the party will unite.

Romney is the man Obama will face in November.....count on it.
 
Probably Romney will get the nomination. And the people that voted for Santorum will either go to a third party candidate or stay home in November.

Wishful thinking Rocks in the head.... they'll vote for anyone that runs against Obama, ANYONE.

yeah... but the moderates won't vote for a wackjob

yeah right... Only problem with that is they voted for Obama. There goes your theory.
 
I wonder what issue left wingers were hysterical about before the Supreme Court created a "right" to privacy that didn't exist in the Constitution? Maybe the "unfair" treatment of communists?

And people wonder what's wrong with this country.

yeah. Because I am quite confident you were ignorant of the fact that the Supreme Court created the right in the 1970s in Griswold v. Connecticut. Unfortunate many people are ignorant of history.
 
I wonder what issue left wingers were hysterical about before the Supreme Court created a "right" to privacy that didn't exist in the Constitution? Maybe the "unfair" treatment of communists?

And people wonder what's wrong with this country.

yeah. Because I am quite confident you were ignorant of the fact that the Supreme Court created the right in the 1970s in Griswold v. Connecticut. Unfortunate many people are ignorant of history.

/sigh

They didn't "create it".
 

Forum List

Back
Top