We previously discussed the unease of civil libertarians over Rick Santorum, particularly his privacy positions. His appeal to evangelical and faith-based voters was evident in a remarkable appearance in Sioux Center, Iowa. Santorum has a tense exchange over his position on same-sex marriage and health care — making the factual representation that no one has ever died from lack of health care protection and same-sex marriage would have horrific consequences for the nation.

The first exchange was with Jason Kornelis, 23, who started out by asking Santorum about his opposition to same-sex marriage. Santorum expressed disbelief in the statement of Kornelis that he could not see how same-sex marriage would “be a hit to faith and family in America . . . You can’t think of any consequence?”

Santorum raised the specter of teaching such “sexual activity” in schools and added

“Really- wow- um okay, well let’s see if we can have a discussion. We can flesh out some, well, let’s look at what’s going to be taught in our schools because now we have same sex couples being the same and their sexual activity being seen as equal and being affirmed by society as heterosexual couples and their activity . . . so what is going to be taught to our people in health class in our schools? What is going to be taught to our children about who in our stories, even to little children — what are married couples? What families look like in America? So, you are going to have in our curriculum spread throughout our curriculum worldview that is fundamentally different than what is taught in schools today? Is that not a consequence of gay marriage?”

When Kornelis said that he was still not convinced, Santorum said “I think you’re wrong — okay, in fact you have to know you’re wrong, because if we say legally if this type of relationship is identical to other type relationships than of course more of it will be taught because this is what the law says.”

When a student asked Santorum asked about health care, the student cited a 2009 Harvard study and noted that he did not “think God appreciates the fact that we have 50 to 100,000 uninsured Americans dying due to a lack of healthcare every year.” He should know better to cite an academic study to Santorum during an election with experts and intellectuals have been denounced as virtual threats to the nation. Santorum responded

“Dying?” . . . the answer is not what can we do to prevent deaths because of a lack of health insurance. There’s — I reject that number completely, that people die in America because of lack of health insurance . . . People die in America because people die in America. And people make poor decisions with respect to their health and their healthcare. And they don’t go to the emergency room or they don’t go to the doctor when they need to . . . And it’s not the fault of the government for not providing some sort of universal benefit.”

Few candidates are willing to take those breast cancer victims to task for their “poor decision” to have cancer. Not since Ann Coulter took on those 9-11 widows has a Republican shown such daring. I am not sure who is more benefitted from the Santorum surge: Romney or Obama. I expect both. What is remarkable is that Santorum can in good faith oppose the national health care legislation on federalism grounds without asserting that the lack of health care does not cause some harm or deaths to uncovered individuals.

After a long and bizarre GOP primary season, I expect voters in South Carolina and New Hampshire may want to consider the response of Melvin Udall when Santorum comes knocking:

Source: ABC