People of PA--what's your opinion of Santorum? (Freedom, Penn: places to live, horses)

[Geeo]

Curses! You've de-coded gay agenda item number three: destabilize the entire economic system through pensions. (Does anybody get a pension anymore?)

[mancat100]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

OK .... Personally. I try to maintain a neutral position on sexual issues.

But a key component of the push for same-sex marriage, or civil unions, or however you care to describe them, is to put further strain on an already-underfunded penasion system, thereby further diminishing accountabilty for one's own security.

I'll await your reply on this one, which never seems to get much of the attention it deserves.

On the other hand, you're already free to move to Massachusetts, which is not that far away.

That's the second time you've suggested that I should move to another state. My answer is the same. Let Santorum move. I'm staying put.

Regarding pensions. First of all, hardly anybody gets pensions anymore. So this doesn't apply for most people. Second of all, recognizing rights shouldn't depend on economic factors. Either the rights exist or they don't. That's my answer.

[simetime]

Originally Posted by bnepler

After reading all these hateful pages, it makes me want to vote for Rick.

Slick Rick the rapper? What is he running for?

[katnip kid]

What disturbs me is that,after viewing the video link supplied here, Santorum would equate me with a felon if I was a gay parent. Hardly a way to win friends and influence people, is it? Now, he could have some good ideas for addressing issues pertaining to the economy, energy, etc., BUT when he presents his beliefs so loudly, so openly, I of course am not going to listen. It is a given that the media will have a field day bashing him over it. Better politics on this issue would have been to have been more vague, just announce he is not for gay marriage or gay adoption. Nothing new about that stance. It is how the stance is presented to the voting public. Keep in mind plenty of other candidates-and I believe that includes President Obama- are not supportive of gay marriage, either. I am not sure of how Obama feels about gay adoption. For all I know, he could be against it.

[Geeo]

Santorum's views on this issue go back 20 years. It's been documented. This has always been one of his rallying cries that if gay people were allowed the same rights as others, civilization as we know it would crumble, straight people would be getting divorced, children would be born out of wedlock, young people would start living together without benefit of marriage. Gee....none of that stuff has ever happened!

Fortunately, the vast majority of people don't think that way. Seems that these conservative states are shaping the nominee. Strange.

[simetime]

If santorum was so concerned about the preservation of heterosexual marriage he should be more mad at Newt then at gay people. Newt has committed adultery in at least two (known) marriages.

[2nd trick op]

Originally Posted by mancat100

That's the second time you've suggested that I should move to another state. My answer is the same. Let Santorum move. I'm staying put.

So, like most people on the left side of the fence, you are more receptive to using the power of the Federal Monster to force your particular views into the law of the land,

than in taking action on your own part to address your personal wants.

Personaly. I find Santorom's apparent desire to force his views on everybody just as offensive as that of many (but not all) of the gay community to use the same mechanism to underwrite their choce of lifestyle.

That is the essential difference between a libertarian conservative and a (pseudo-)liberal. Who's the real Fascist in this instance?

[wanneroo]

The media worked after Iowa to skew Santorum as though he wanted some totalitarian Catholic state and instead once you wade past the media tripe and the old trick of frankenbited comments, he's not advocated anything of the sort. The market will still be flooded with condoms and people will be able to partake of whatever sexual gymnastics they want in their own bedroom.

One of the aims of the leftists is to eliminate the family unit, because without the family unit, the state raises and educates the children in it's own image and most everyone ends up dependent on the government for handouts to exist, thereby guaranteeing power to the totalitarians in charge.

People think it will never happen to them, but it happened in plenty of other countries such as North Korea, where the state works to pulverize any respect of life and the family unit and you can see what an abject failure and hell on earth that country is. And based on interviews with North Korean defectors, nearly every male does a 10 year stint in the military. Homosexuality is common amongst soldiers to a rate of about 50% as the military forbids contact with women or supports families and baring that rape of local women is common. Afghanistan is another hell hole of a country that embarked on a destruction of the family unit in the 1970's and it's where women are treated worse than wild animals and men view boys as being for pleasure and women merely as packhorses for babies.

So to me if you examine the historical and current evidence around the world, there is nothing wrong with promoting and supporting the family unit which provides a social structure of support and socialization with other people. The people smearing Santorum for supporting family values need to have a look around the world where the opposite is true and see what horrifying places to live those countries are.

[mancat100]

Originally Posted by wanneroo

One of the aims of the leftists is to eliminate the family unit, because without the family unit, the state raises and educates the children in it's own image and most everyone ends up dependent on the government for handouts to exist, thereby guaranteeing power to the totalitarians in charge.

This is the single most ridiculous thing I've ever read or heard in my entire life.

[mancat100]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

So, like most people on the left side of the fence, you are more receptive to using the power of the Federal Monster to force your particular views into the law of the land,

than in taking action on your own part to address your personal wants.

Personaly. I find Santorom's apparent desire to force his views on everybody just as offensive as that of many (but not all) of the gay community to use the same mechanism to underwrite their choce of lifestyle.

That is the essential difference between a libertarian conservative and a (pseudo-)liberal. Who's the real Fascist in this instance?

So, you're saying that by choosing to stay in Pennsylvania and advocate for my own interests, that makes me a fascist? See, I was under the impression that in our country that was my right as a citizen. Senator Santorum advocates for his beliefs. I advocate for mine. Whoever manages to convince the most people over time, and therby win elections and enact laws, gets to claim victory. Sounds like a democratic republic to me, not fascism.