Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you haven't understood the intentions of that man, despite all the flowery language he uses to convey it, you are really naïve. Watch the video from 17:48.
What he exactly says is this:
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.
From the above, what I gather is exactly what I wrote in the OP.
Let me break it down for you again:
1) He does not like contraception and believes it should be banned.
2) He does not like sex for pleasure, only for procreation.
What I wrote in 2 lines is what he says in 200 lines.
Your own quote provided belies your "break down." He never said contraception should be banned. He said "pleasure" is part of sex.
By your overreaching interpretation, you are discrediting yourself. You may not like the candidate and certainly there are legitimate complaints. This isn't one of them.
So, Santorum wants people to have "special" sex with their spouses while in contrast Obama just repeatedly screws the country and doesn't care if those he screws feel special when he is finished.
Your own quote provided belies your "break down." He never said contraception should be banned. He said "pleasure" is part of sex.
By your overreaching interpretation, you are discrediting yourself. You may not like the candidate and certainly there are legitimate complaints. This isn't one of them.
Frothy scrambled to say that when he realized that his previous sentence was total lunacy. So what was his whole point then? "oh, contraception is bad, but don't get me wrong, it's not that bad. We shouldn't fornicate for pleasure, but don't get me wrong, pleasure is part of it. Rape victims should consider pregnancy a gift. But wait, I didn't mean like a real "gift". And I don't wanna give money to blah people." Does any of this even make sense?
The most important takeaway from all this though is that when there are many pressing matters in the country to worry about, and which a presidential candidate should worry about - economy, foreign policy, jobs etc., who in his right mind brings up CONTRACEPTION as a BFD?? Never mind subjects like abortion, same-sex marriage etc about which he already has crazyass views, but friggin' contraception? C'mon. Are we electing a President here or a pastor for the local church? I am waiting in trepidation till he brings up pre-marital sex, vagina locks, honor killings etc.
Santorum is the Christian version of everything the US has been fighting against in the Muslim world. The only difference is that he is white and wears a sweater vest.
Frothy scrambled to say that when he realized that his previous sentence was total lunacy. So what was his whole point then? "oh, contraception is bad, but don't get me wrong, it's not that bad. We shouldn't fornicate for pleasure, but don't get me wrong, pleasure is part of it. Rape victims should consider pregnancy a gift. But wait, I didn't mean like a real "gift". And I don't wanna give money to blah people." Does any of this even make sense?
The most important takeaway from all this though is that when there are many pressing matters in the country to worry about, and which a presidential candidate should worry about - economy, foreign policy, jobs etc., who in his right mind brings up CONTRACEPTION as a BFD?? Never mind subjects like abortion, same-sex marriage etc about which he already has crazyass views, but friggin' contraception? C'mon. Are we electing a President here or a pastor for the local church? I am waiting in trepidation till he brings up pre-marital sex, vagina locks, honor killings etc.
Santorum is the Christian version of everything the US has been fighting against in the Muslim world. The only difference is that he is white and wears a sweater vest.
How about Clinton's Favorite Guy, George Stephanopolis in the debate with his ridiculous, incessent questioning of the candidates on an issue that wasn't an issue? How about Obama with his shrewd & timely attempt to cross the line between church and state and restrict freedom of religion? Don't be sucked into this distraction. No one is attempting to ban birth control; not even Santorum and his sweater vest.
Basically, he is saying that you shouldn't be allowed to use contraception during sex, because then it becomes about "pleasure". He wants sex to be used for procreation purposes and that's it. This, along with his other claims that "Americans shouldn't have privacy" etc., makes me think that he would want government installed cameras in every bedroom in America to make sure that people don't use condoms and every time they have sex, a baby is created. This might seem farfetched to some of you, but with his maniac, we can never be sure. He might very well use an Executive Order to get all this done. How can we stop this madman?
These false religion nutcases are so funny ... I would like to read him the song of Solomon and not tell him what it was(he obviously never read it!) and see how he reacted to it ... He would probably want to ban it until he realized that it was in the bible ... what a puritanical LOSER!
Man do i feel sorry for his wife ...
Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 02-15-2012 at 07:18 PM..
How about Clinton's Favorite Guy, George Stephanopolis in the debate with his ridiculous, incessent questioning of the candidates on an issue that wasn't an issue? How about Obama with his shrewd & timely attempt to cross the line between church and state and restrict freedom of religion? Don't be sucked into this distraction. No one is attempting to ban birth control; not even Santorum and his sweater vest.
What does Stephanopoppopreredsdsl have to do with any of this? He isn't running for president. If you are talking about Obama and the contraception issue, my take was that the so-called religious institutions should first reject taxpayer funds which they take in as grants and then talk about violation of religious freedom. Different issue, for a different thread.
Feel free to cast your precious vote for Grand Ayatollah Rick Al-Santorum El-Frothy. Hallelujah!
What does Stephanopoppopreredsdsl have to do with any of this? He isn't running for president. If you are talking about Obama and the contraception issue, my take was that the so-called religious institutions should first reject taxpayer funds which they take in as grants and then talk about violation of religious freedom. Different issue, for a different thread.
Feel free to cast your precious vote for Grand Ayatollah Rick Al-Santorum El-Frothy. Hallelujah!
I wondered the same thing......the only thing I could take away from that particular post is that doc has a thing for sweater vests.
So, Santorum wants people to have "special" sex with their spouses while in contrast Obama just repeatedly screws the country and doesn't care if those he screws feel special when he is finished.
Got it.
(not a Santorum fan but there are more important things over to be outraged really)
No, no, you are missing the point. While there are more important things to worry about, electing a man who has repeatedly stated his goal is to use the government to regulate sex between consenting adults to only allow sex for procreation, and to essentially USE THE GOVERNMENT to discourage sex for pleasure is the ultimate sacrifice of our individual rights as humans.
You don't want a president who makes you pay for things you don't want like healthcare... That's fine, I agree with you. You want a president that will use your tax money to dictate and enforce what you can and can't do with your spouse in your bedroom, I'm going to be against that all day.
If Santorum believes that sex is supposed to be pleasurable, within marriage, but also procreative? I have to wonder - as soon as his wife hits menopause ... is that it for Santorum's sex life?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
