Former senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) has been criticized in the past for his statement that he “almost threw up” when he read John F. Kennedy’s famous 1960 comments about the role of religion in public life and the separation of church and state. This weekend he took time out to say that he would still like to throw up.
Santorum is notorious among civil libertarians for his deep-seated opposition to separation principles. It is a view that is becoming all the more common — as this column discusses.
If you recall, Kennedy used the speech to address anti-Catholic prejudice and doubts raised over his ability to be independent of Rome. Kennedy famously said “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.” For most Americans, it was a statement that made them feel proud. For Santorum, it may him feel woozy.
Last year at the College of Saint Mary Magdalen in Warner, N.H., Santorum told the crowd of JFK’s 1960 Greater Houston Ministerial Association speech, “Earlier in my political career, I had the opportunity to read the speech, and I almost threw up. You should read the speech.”
Santorum this weekend left no doubt about his rejection of separation principles: “I don’t believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.”
He later answered that his statement was quite literal in wanting to throw up: “To say that people of faith have no role in the public square? You bet that makes you throw up. What kind of country do we live that says only people of non-faith can come into the public square and make their case? That makes me throw up.”
It is the ultimate expression of faith-based politics. Ironically, it is the type of intermingling of faith and government that many of our most implacable enemies might find appealing. Around the world, nations are reeling from the influence of religion on politics. Yet, in this island of stability of separation of church and state, Santorum appears to want to tear down the wall that has long defined our political system.
With the latest comments, we all may feel a bit woozy.
Source: Washington Post
From “Rick Santorum Asserts Support For Church And State Separation After Saying It Made Him ‘Want To Throw Up'”
“However, at a campaign event on the eve of the Michigan primary, the former Pennsylvania senator described his vision for the role of religion in public life.
‘I’m for separation of church and state,’ he said on Monday. ‘The state has no business telling the church what to do.’
During the interview Sunday, Santorum also criticized fellow Catholic John F. Kennedy, who said in a 1960 speech that ‘I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.’
Santorum said last October that he ‘almost threw up,’ when he first read the speech and that Kennedy had thrown ‘his faith under the bus.’
Religion has become a cornerstone of Santorum’s campaign in recent weeks. The former senator criticized President Obama for ‘oppressing religious freedom,’ and basing his presidential policies on a ‘different theology.'” [emphasis added]
Please do note that Sick Rantorum, in a stunning display of non-apology and still missing the legal point Kennedy didn’t in that the wall created by the Separation Doctrine runs both ways, did NOT say that the church has no business telling government what to do, only that the government has no business telling the church what to do.
Theocratic weasel.
“This schmuck is splurging on the public dime himself. Congressmen and women get free medical care for life for their service, be it harsh, brutish or short.”
There are a lot of criticisms you can make of Congress (and of Santorum), but this claim of free medical care for life for ex-Members of Congresss and families is completely false. I’m suprised no one here has called this out. Members can participate, like all feds, in the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program, and pay their premiums. Also, current Members (not ex)can avail themselves, as can any tourist to the Capitol, of the emergency services of the Capital Physician in some situations on Capitol Hill. Let’s keep it factual, please.
What passes for truth in Dumb-erica:
“our team = the Jesus team”
“their team = the Muhammed team”
You’re either with us or your with the Muhammed team. (even Dubya wasn’t stupid enough to say that, although he got close)
Gotta be that way. Winners and losers. All else follows.
Go team!
Talking Dog
Enjoy your posts but please do me a favor. Double check your info on health insurance for the ex-senator. He is no longer covered by the government health insurance. Our legislators do NOT get lifetime coverage.
Thanks for the link/repost, eniobob.
Blouise,
You mentioned how still politcally connected the churches are.
Which brings us back to JFK’s speech. Now I understand his dream. It’s the same as yours. Let’s hope it will be so.
Rimoving one set of rulers allows us to concentrate on the ones remaining.
And all we need to do is to vote sensebly. Aye, there’s the rub. For whom shall we vote for? Got a name?
Seems to be problem with the link:
http://articles.philly.com/2012-02-20/news/31079862_1_president-santorum-rick-santorum-gop-voters
Blouise,
Beautiful conclusion. Here’s hoping. Who’s gonna lead that? The relics; I can call them, of the middle ages, are fighting like hell to get their science,etc as doctrine in the schools. What makes it urgent now?
Perhaps it is the statistical trend that makes them anxious. You say as much so.
The youth here are just as enlightened, with the usual distinctions between educational and cultural groups, of course.
The church has disappeared from peoples lives, only used for some rites of passage. Some even prefer arranging their own burial ceremonies, as being appropriate to the person honored. And getting away from religion and the priests pall on it all. We are still taxed for maintaining the cemeteries.
So since around 85 the church and state separated. Nobody is registered as a member from birth anymore!!!
How good for us Turleyites that you have the inside dope.
That the church and state (or really rulers) supported each other, etc was what the FFs wanted to stop. But did ignoring the church start herein Europe? The youth (and parents truth to tell) have been anti-religious for many decades, long before 1968. ´Reason I ask is that American pop culture has been recognized as a great influence around the world for decades.
And for us to be ahead of you seems strange.
Some say America is churchly as a way of coming into a community, a way of socializing, etc. My mom didn’t, and my wife was no socializer. So wonder if the folks at home were, or was it the “climbers” that were??
A repost for some who missed it:
“eniobob
1, February 20, 2012 at 2:38 pm
I guess the “home folks” know the real deal:
John Baer: Santorum? Really? He’s atop the GOP heap. Are they nuts?
John Baer, Daily News Political Columnist
Philadelphia Daily News:
“HERE’S A THOUGHT for Presidents Day: President Santorum.
Did you just shiver?
How in the name of all that’s holy is Rick Santorum atop national polls for the Republican nomination?
Get it? All that’s holy? Maybe that’s the answer. You know, the Tebow factor; the Jeremy Lin effect? Well, I have another theory”
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20120220_John_Baer__HED_ALL_ACRO“
Frankly wrote: “Nobody (except Ricky & company) is saying you can’t use your faith and beliefs to form your political desires. But he has to pretend there are people saying this or he loses the debate.”
Well said. Exactly my thoughts on this. Santorum is being very disingenuous about this (or frightfully unable to understand the distinctions) and doing what almost all these politicians do. Lie, lie, lie; and manipulate the ignorant.
And in conclusion:
It is my opinion that now is definitely the time to push the “separation principles” for there are whole generations of young people unencumbered by the bigotry of the God-teachers and thanks to the technological advances they are easily reachable. We could begin to experience an actual “New Age of Enlightenment”.
whom – who
ps
No up tick in attendance during the latest financial mess, foreclosures, and resulting recession … highly unusual and very troubling for church leaders.
id707,
The reference to 9/11 is something those conducting the latest interviews and polls have been hearing for quite some time. Young people whom seem to draw little distinction between the God of Christianity and the Allah of Islam … it’s all religious tom-foolery to them and they aren’t interested.
Feeling a little “woozy”…
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/2/27/headlines#1
Santorum: Obama Should Not Have Apologized for Koran Burning
In campaign news, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum criticized President Obama on Sunday for apologizing to the Afghan people for the Koran burning incident.
Rick Santorum: “There was no act that needed an apology. It was an inadvertent act, and it should have been left at that. And I think the response needs to be apologized for by Karzai and the Afghan people of attacking and killing our men and women in uniform and overreacting to this inadvertent mistake. That is—that is the real crime here, not what our soldiers did.”
id707,
I used to do some work for a large mainline Christian institution back in the 90’s. They were analyzing the drop in church membership across the board. With maintenance cost raising and financial support disappearing, they were quite anxious about their future.
The most troublesome fact to emerge from all the polls and research done all over the country was that young couples who used to return to the church when they started having children were no longer doing so. That coupled with the fall off in youth group membership did not bode well for the future.
I am still in touch with many of those church leaders and nothing has changed. They enjoyed a small up tick after 9/11 but that only lasted for a few months. What has changed is that the fall off in membership that the mainlines began to experience in the 80’s has now spread to the evangelicals.
As for the tax matter … the fact that churches enjoyed exemption from taxes and still do should show everyone just how politically active/connected they are.
Blouise,
Another dirty corner of the RCC. Did they need the money to pay for abortions after monkly orgies?
The hairbrushes were replacements for candles which get too easily soft. (Forbidden to have hairbrushes, particularly unneccesary for the shaved heads.)
Speaking of nuns and sex. (Rafflaw, cover your ears!)
Who was the beartiful actress, playing the nun, who “pleasured” herself in pornocolor, after her priestly hot-hot put her over the limit. Quite graphicly clear. It, however, was her beauty which struck me most.
She had been watching him from a cellar window, as he walked by.
Could it have been dragging the ground and thus came into view.
As I recall the camera was focused on his manly handsome profile.
They do admit a few as priests to keep the nuns in line.
Blouise,
Thank for the education I never got, sitting in the corner.
Never thought of it that way. Sure, they don’t qualify for “tax-free”, not as political players, which I assume you mean
Interesting take on 9/11 effects.
raf,
My mother was an R.N.and worked at hospitals across the country as she followed my father from post to post during WWII. She worked at several Catholic hospitals and told my brothers and I that there was one thing all the Catholic hospitals had in common and that was Nuns whole stole from the patients … flowers, money, hairbrushes(!) … they stole anything.
Blouise,
I remember being “churched” many times by the Nuns. Wait, that should be “clocked” not “churched”! My bad.