Events Calendar

Current Weather

More >>

Sponsored by:

Manatee Road Watch

Eat Here - Gulf Coast Cookery Sean Tampa Bay yacht Management Bills Discount Center - New & used Furnature, Appliances and More!

The Bradenton Times Polls

Poll Question: Do you think the labrador mix Padi, who bit and injured a child while the dog was allegedly protecting himself, should be euthanized?

 Yes  No More polls »

Right column ad

Change Text Size: Larger  Smaller

News Section: Opinion

Rick Santorum's War on Sex

Published Sunday, February 19, 2012 12:08 am

Rick Santorum seems to be positioning himself as the anti-sex candidate. In addition to statements made on women's health issues over the last two weeks, the former Senator from Pennsylvania brings with him a litany of quotes on his personal beliefs and political positions that may play well with the far, far right, though they're likely to have mainstream America scratching its head, should he make it to the big stage, which as implausible as that initially seemed, now appears to be within the realm of some strange reality.

The contraception issue started as just one more red-meat distraction – another way to disparage the Affordable Care Act with distortions that could be blasted through chain emails in the same manner as the fictional death panels and exclusive exemptions for Muslims that always seem to proliferate from various obscure websites that have the word liberty in them. But Santorum seized the chance to take the conversation toward arguments he's been making for years – long before most Americans were listening.

The absurdity of the issue speaks for itself. The law would have required insurance plans to include several women's health services, including contraception – with an exception for churches. The blow up was over Catholic hospitals, universities and other “non-church” religious organizations that perform secular work, while employing and servicing the public at large. The administration contorted itself into a pretzel to devise something just short of its usual cave-in, ensuring that those services are provided by the insurers directly, and that the religious organizations would not have to pay for them – or even fill out paperwork!

Everyone seemed happy. The GOP got to attack President Obama as being not religious enough, while getting some more digs in on the healthcare issue and further confusing Americans as to the President's religion – not that it should matter, but he's a lifelong Christian, though polls show that a growing number of Americans are beginning to assume he's Muslim, so obviously the propaganda is working. Only unlike most instances, when it's just the extreme culture warriors who don't leave sleeping dogs lie, the contraception issue didn't dissipate, because the Culture Warrior in Chief, Rick Santorum, is now on a national stage, which is good for far right extremists, bad for moderates, constitutionalists and socially-indifferent fiscal conservatives that want a chance to elect a new president in 2012.

Rick Santorum will never be elected President of the United States and not just because of his track record as a politician – which itself should be enough. We're talking about a guy who just a few years back, took the worst Congressional pummeling an incumbent has ever suffered in modern American politics – a historic beating, if you will – and in a swing state at that. I lived in Pennsylvania when Santorum was in the Senate, and it wasn't the cultural issues that got him trounced – it was his record as a Senator, which because of all of these sort of distractions, hasn't received much attention. That's probably good for Santorum who would have a hard time painting himself as a fiscal conservative if it was based on his past performance and not his current talking-point rhetoric.

Today, he's doing surprisingly well in conservative states now that he appears to be the last alternative to Mitt Romney still standing – except of course for Ron Paul, who so-called conservatives and even self-labeled Tea Partiers and constitutionalists refuse to get fully behind for some counterintuitive reason. There's also been little attention paid thus far to Santorum's time between Congress and this election, when the beltway insider used his connections to become a multimillionaire Washington “consultant,” routinely accepting large fees as a media consultant and adviser to many of the causes in his current platform – including opposition to healthcare reform. He can play up his “coal mining roots” in Western Pennsylvania, but the fact is, when Santorum left the Senate, he stayed in Washington as an Audi-driving influence peddler. Yet this guy is marketing himself as the GOP's Washington outsider?

Santorum embodies the far right social-issue wing of the Republican Party, which demands that a pretty long list of blocks are all checked if they're not to boo you off the stage. But consider his positions on sex alone and ask whether you can envision a majority of voters pulling the lever for him. Santorum has been quoted extensively as saying that “contraception is not okay,” that it is the President's place to step in and warn Americans of "the dangers of birth control," and that such policies should reflect the notion that sex is only to be engaged in by married couples – and even then, only for the purpose of procreation. We're not talking sound bites and gotcha politics. This guy we'll say that to anyone who puts a microphone in front of him.

99 percent of women use birth control during their lifetime – slightly less than the number who have sex. Many use it for reasons other than sex, like endometriosis to name just one. Others use it for family planning, like when they decide that they couldn't responsibly afford to properly raise another child. Others still, use it to avoid unwanted pregnancies that lead to the other holy grail of social issues – abortion. I know I'm not the first person to point out that reducing access to birth control and reducing abortions seem mutually exclusive in any practical sense.

Santorum has arguably done more for the sweater vest

than anyone since Cliff Huxtable.

  Photo by Gage Skidmore via Wikimedia

Even the Catholic Church caved on the “sex for procreation” issue – and that was all the way back in 1930! The church has condoned Natural Family Planning methods such as timing the menstrual cycle (the infamous rhythm method), ostensibly because the infertile period was created by God, but just as likely because it became pretty clear that human beings have sex whether you tell them to or not.

Then there's the homosexuality issue. At an earlier Fox News debate, Santorum got his first bit of national spotlight for famously piling on the gay Iraqi war-veteran soldier who asked about candidates' policies toward gays in the military and was booed mercilessly, by saying that not only does he oppose homosexuals being able to serve openly, but that “any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military.”

If that's the policy, we really will have an Army of one  – assuming we can find a young healthy American male (Santorum doesn't believe in women serving in combat either) not only willing to risk his life in whatever Middle Eastern desert someone like Santorum sends him to, but do so while celibate, at least as long as he's in the military. Afterward, he could seemingly come home, and assuming he gets married and he and his wife want to have a child, engage in coitus a few times, at least until they're done procreating. What if one's sterile; are they out of luck? I'm not sure anyone's asked Rick that one yet.

I'm not looking for a culture war here, and in truth, as disturbed as I think the guy in the sweater vest is, I admire the fact that he wears his crazy on his sleeve where voters can see it. It doesn't matter where you stand on the issue of sex. Personally, I'm in favor of it and I think it's pretty clear I'm with the vast majority of Americans, at least on this one. What I am suggesting is that someone with such radical views is pretty much disqualified in terms of getting elected. If this is all you've got, it's Romney or it's Obama – deal with it.


The biggest demographic challenge President Obama faces is a disenchanted youth vote, whose record turnout was the biggest factor in his 2008 victory. While unlikely to vote for any of the Republican candidates (again with the exception of Congressman Paul who polls very well with those under 30 across the spectrum), they might not turn out for a president who has largely been a disappointment to them on touchstone issues like the environment and foreign policy. But put Santorum on the ticket, and I can think of no better way to galvanize young voters and spike turnout for the President.


I don't know how many lukewarm young voters will come out to vote against Mitt Romney, but I suspect they'd be tripping over themselves to turn out to vote against the guy who has denied the science of global warming (he calls it a "hoax"), doesn't think abortion should be legal even in cases of rape and incest, advocates discriminating against homosexuals at every turn (he's even lumped it in with bestiality and incest), has promised to invade Iran, denies the very existance of Palestinians (because there is no Palestine), doesn't think birth control should even be used in the first place, let alone covered by insurance, because Americans are only to have sex for the purpose of procreation, etc., etc. Yea, good luck with that.


don't miss:

Crashing the Party

Some Florida lawmakers are bucking the system and actually representing the people

Published Thursday, February 16, 2012 12:10 am


Dennis Maley is a featured columnist and editor for The Bradenton Times. His column appears every Thursday and Sunday on our site and in our free Weekly Recap and Sunday Edition (click here to subscribe). An archive of Dennis' columns is available here. He can be reached at You can also follow Dennis on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the badges below.

Twitter Widgets
Dennis Maley

Join the conversation post Facebook comments here or on our site at the bottom of article.


  In Addition to Facebook Comments You Can Also Post Comments Below

Non-Facebook Comments:

You just seem to "slam" every Republican that comes along. You need to advertise yourself as an Obama boy and be done with it.,
Posted by Dunham Swift on February 20, 2012

He has only seen the spotlight because of primaries in the conservative states such as Missouri. He obviously wins the fundamentalist vote. It will not work with the majority of Republicans. I wish the Republicans had a stronger candidate. Our government needs to be run like a business, not a circus.
Posted by Ryan McClash on February 20, 2012

I'VE HAD ENOUGH! In this Holy War on Religion, of Religion, and by Religion. I SURRENDER! I'm a lover, not a fighter.  Instead... I'm gonna start my OWN religion, and get in on the good stuff: tax exemptions, and lots of taxpayer money to do what I want, in the name of religious liberty. Most definitely! Hey NEWT -wanna join? We're gonna have open marriages and multiple wives and all SORTS of neat stuff that you're just gonna love! But don't you worry your little head Newt: we'll have no -I repeat- NO nasty stoning of adulterers. None of that stuff. I Promise! As for SANTORUM, he just LOVES to tell other people how they should live. He'll make us a REAL fine preacher-man. In fact, we'll make him Saint Santorum. AND fix his Google search results! As for Mr. Obama,  obviously, we'll need to (severely) demonize him, even further. And his dog Toto too. Last but not least: MITT and RON. Hmmm. Hey, I know. Just for you two guys: we'll insist on NO TAXES AT ALL for church members?AND human sacrifice of illegal aliens. Out with their hearts! Televised! Live! Whoooppee! WHAT A COUNTRY!  :-)
Posted by Stan Chaz on February 20, 2012

I'VE HAD ENOUGH! In this Holy War on Sex, on Religion, of Religion, and by Religion. I SURRENDER! I?m a lover, not a fighter.  Instead... I?m gonna start my OWN religion, and get in on the good stuff: tax exemptions, and lots of taxpayer money to do what I want, in the name of religious liberty. Most definitely! Hey NEWT -wanna join? We?re gonna have open marriages and multiple wives and all SORTS of neat stuff that you?re just gonna love! But don?t you worry your little head Newt: we?ll have no -I repeat- NO nasty stoning of adulterers. None of that stuff. I Promise! As for SANTORUM, he just LOVES to tell other people how they should live. He?ll make us a REAL fine preacher-man. In fact, we?ll make him Saint Santorum. AND fix his Google search results! As for Mr. Obama,  obviously, we?ll need to (severely) demonize him, even further. And his dog Toto too. Last but not least: MITT and RON. Hmmm. Hey, I know. Just for you two guys: we?ll insist on NO TAXES AT ALL for church members?AND human sacrifice of illegal aliens. Out with their hearts! Televised! Live! Whoooppee! WHAT A COUNTRY!  :-)
By the way, please don?t mention the REASON that Mitt Romney?s dad was born in Mexico (i.e. The fact that Mitt?s Mormon grand-dad left the United States in the 1880?s. He went to Mexico BECAUSE laws against polygamy were passed in the U.S. ; Being a Mormon back then, Mitt?s grand-dad wanted to keep his multiple wives. Hey, who wouldn?t?) Bottom line: if we follow the ?logic? of the people crying crocodile tears about a non-existent ?war on religion?, then the U.S. should have allowed polygamy (and who knows what else) just because a particular religion claimed it as their cherished belief. GIVE ME A BREAK!
Absolutely NO ONE is coming into our Churches or places of worship and trying to tell parishioners what to believe.....or forcing them to use contraception. BUT If the Bishops (and other denominations) want to continue running businesses that employ millions of people of varying faiths -or no "faith" at all- THEN they must play by the same rules and rights that other workers have and enjoy...especially if their businesses use our tax dollars (and skip paying taxes) in the process. This is not a ?war on religion?. It?s a war on women and men who simply want to plan their families and control their future. Now that?s REAL religious liberty!
p. s. I come from a religious background. I know that their are MANY good people out there, in various faiths (and outside of those faiths); many good people searching for answers, for community, for a this all-too-harsh world. There's only one thing I can say to you: think for yourself, be yourself, trust yourself. Don't just accept something because it comes from a "voice of authority". That?s why you have a conscience: to choose, not just to follow....
Posted by stan chaz on February 20, 2012

With Santorum & the other two leading contenders on the hunt for the republican nomination I don't think Pres.Obama has much to worry about for the general election. These guys are so busy attacking each other that the democrats won't need too much to finish the nominee off.This bunch plays well in their sideshow with the extremists of the right but come election time the extremists won't be the only people voting.About the only hope of the GOP is a dark horse candidate coming forward like Jimmy Carter did in the 70s but I don't see that happening.
Posted by William E.Moore on February 19, 2012

My guess is that his rigidity regarding sexuality is masking some very frightening and unconscious impulses in his mind that he cannot directly deal with. The battle gets waged outside the self in these instances. With regards to Mr. Winfield's comments, we have had to tolerate the fusion of social and fisal conservatism for the past 2 decades at least. Unfortunately the GOP has not been able to provide much of a distinction to the voter. So many who vote for the GOP are made to swallow wholesale the fusion of the social and fiscal to our civil societies detriment.
Posted by Dr. Joseph J Amato on February 19, 2012

Mr. Maley, you would do well by yourself if you refrained from lumping all conservative thought into the large anonymous bucket of "far, far right". There are social conservatives, to which Santorum is a member and pandering hard to, and there are fiscal conservatives who are sometimes more socially liberal than a liberal democrat. Many of these fiscal conservatives are libertarians, and, in this election, align themselves with someone like Ron Paul. The size of Paul's constituency is enough, I think, to begin making distinctions in op-ed's as to just what the author means when he mentions "far right". Santorum is a social conservative, but he hasn't shown himself to be a limited-government fiscal conservative when his vote actually counted.
Posted by David Winfield on February 19, 2012

Thanks for shinning the light on Rick Santorum! Someone known as the "Prince of Pork" during his last time in Washington & pandering to special interest is the last person we need in charge of our economy and our hard earned dollars!

Today we are sitting on the sidelines listening to debate after debate as potential Republican candidates trashed each other rather than focus on the "Real Problems" that are destroying our economy & our American way of life!

This year's debates started out to be something special because most of our Republican candidates, thanks to Newt Gingrich stayed focused on the "Real Problem" we Americans are facing!! President Obama & his dictatorial ways of making decisions!

We must understand that no one candidate will satisfy all our expectations so we must be willing to work together and find the one that has the best chance to win!!

Unfortunately we are again seeing & experiencing first hand the medias ability to control how people think! Four years ago we suddenly saw what most of us considered our "Weakest" Republican candidate come from behind to win the nomination!! Now four years later it appears to be happening all over again!!

From the very beginning the questions asked by most of those in control of the debates were phrased in ways that most often encouraged our candidates to start attacking each other rather than focus on what they would do different than Obama to help the American People & Our Failing Economy.

This "Gotcha" tactic used by the media has denied both Democrats / Republicans & Independents a real chance to hear how Our Party and Our Candidates think, and what they believe could be done to put "All Americans" back to work and save our Country.

We Republicans & like minded thinkers must unite "Early" if we are going to win in 2012!! Obama has amassed "Millions if not Billion's" of dollars from individuals and countries that want him to finish the job he is doing by destroying the American economy and America's financial freedom!!

We have a bunch of individuals in Washington on "Both Sides" that hold themselves "Above the Law" and pass laws that "We the Little People" must live by while they exempt themselves from these same laws!!


Sincerely, Travis Cundiff
Posted by Trais Cundiff on February 19, 2012

Click here to add a Non-Facebook comment to this page

 Sign up for our free news subscription - a great way to stay informed!

News World Round UpSports Roundup

Manatee Rural Health Certificate


Name Date
Dorothy Hill July 28 2015
David Maberry July 24, 2015
Juanita Floyd June 26, 2015
Elizabeth Bennett July 22, 2015
John Lawler July 21, 2015
Marilyn Doxey July 22, 2015
Donald Mills July 23, 2015
Allene O'Brien July 23, 2015
Irene Brothers July 24, 2015
All Obituaries

Copyright © 2009 - 2015 | The Bradenton Times | More than just an Online Newspaper |
405 26 Avenue Bradenton, FL 34205
Phone: 941-896-7857 - Privacy Policy - RSS Feed
Template provided by Free CSS Templates