Shame On You, Senator Santorum (Or Comparing Apples To Peanut Butter)
By Aaron Goldstein (05/03/03)
Senator Rick Santorum stepped into it and has been trying to wipe his shoe clean ever since.
"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. All of those things are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family. And that's sort of where we are in today's world, unfortunately. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist, in my opinion, in the United States Constitution."
Nonsense.
The only issue before the U.S. Supreme Court is whether sex between two consenting adults (who in this case happen to both be men) is a criminal activity. One may not like the fact that two adult males engage in sexual activity with one another, but that does not make the act criminal.
Senator Santorum's comments were specious, inflammatory and irrelevant to the matter at hand. It's like comparing apples to oranges. Or for that matter, apples to peanut butter.
There are those who in defense of Santorum argue that his comments have merit because decriminalizing homosexual sodomy is the slippery slope to incest, bigamy and polygamy. To suggest that incest, bigamy and polygamy will be sanctioned by law as a result of a Supreme Court decision decriminalizing sodomy for homosexuals is sensationalistic and without foundation.
I don't believe it is a stretch to argue that most Americans do not want the government in the bedrooms of the nation where it concerns consenting adults. Thirty-eight out of fifty states have repealed sodomy laws concerning both homosexuals and heterosexuals. If this case does not cry for limited government, I do not know what does.
Yet I do not see a public outcry for the repeal of incest laws. Indeed, incest laws are on the books to protect children from sexual exploitation from parents and other family members. The protection of children is a compelling public interest. The likelihood of a state legislature repealing, much less the court overturning, the right of a state to impose sanctions concerning incest are next to none. Any attempt to do so would be subject to a massive onslaught of public (and justifiable) outrage.
So clearly incest has nothing to do with sodomy between consenting adults.
When one thinks of bigamy or polygamy, the State of Utah comes to mind. Utah was admitted into the Union in 1890 on the condition that bigamy/polygamy be outlawed. The Church of Latter Day Saints also prohibited the practice. Notwithstanding these sanctions, bigamy/polygamy is still practiced in that state. Yet there has only been one prosecution against bigamy/polygamy in 50 years. Law enforcement in Utah have commented that the bigamy/polygamy statutes are not observed because there are not sufficient correctional facilities necessary for the law to be enforced. So law enforcement looks the other way.
Governor Mike Leavitt did cause a stir in 1998 when he suggested that bigamy/polygamy be guaranteed in the State Constitution. This trial balloon popped faster than firecrackers. Essentially, there is a stalemate concerning polygamy/bigamy. Those who practice it do not want to draw attention to themselves, and law enforcement is perfectly happy to leave these people alone.
What is also curious is that those critical of gays and lesbians link their activities to that of bigamists and polygamists. Yet these groups are not mutually exclusive. Those who practice bigamy and polygamy have not been historically supportive of the advancement of gays and lesbians.
So clearly bigamy/polygamy has nothing to do with sodomy between consenting adults.
What is perhaps most disturbing about Santorum's comments is that he went out of his way to alienate a constituency of potential allies. Contrary to popular belief, gays and lesbians do not blindly follow the Radical Left. I have personally known gays and lesbians who support a strong national defense, lower taxes, school choice and the right to bear arms to name but a few issues more commonly associated with conservatives than liberals or socialists.
But what Senator Santorum is basically telling gays and lesbians is 'Get lost. Don't vote for us. We don't need you.'
His worst comment was that sodomy between two consenting homosexuals was "antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family".
How would Senator Santorum know this to be true? Has he ever met a same sex couple that is raising or has raised a child? I have known same sex couples that have done so. While it may not be traditional it is certainly healthy and stable. Would Senator Santorum prefer that a child be placed in a heterosexual household knowing that the child would be subject to physical abuse than with a same sex household where that same child's needs would be met?
Indeed, many same sex couples are a beacon of middle class respectability. Solid jobs. Steady incomes. Active in the PTA. It should be a Republican's wet dream.
Fortunately, Senator Santorum does not speak for all Republicans, conservatives and those who are generally right of center on the political spectrum. Four of Santorum's GOP colleagues in the Senate – John McCain (AZ), Olympia Snowe (ME), Susan Collins (ME) and Lincoln Chafee (RI) - all took Santorum to task for his remarks. Chafee commented, "I thought his choice of comparisons was unfortunate and the premise that the right of privacy does not exist – just plain wrong. Senator Santorum's views are not held by this Republican and many others in our party."
The Log Cabin Republicans, an alliance of gay and lesbian Republicans that is celebrating its 25th anniversary, has also condemned Santorum's remarks (check out www.lcr.org). It's Chairman, Patrick Guerriero (who was once the mayor of Melrose, Massachusetts) stated, "There is nothing conservative about allowing law enforcement officials to enter the home of any American and arrest them for simply being gay. I am deeply troubled that Senator Santorum would divide America in a time of war. Mainstream America is embracing tolerance and inclusion. I am appalled that a member of the United States Senate leadership would advocate dividing Americans with ugly hate filled rhetoric." Andrew Sullivan, who is as openly conservative as he is openly gay, has been particularly eloquent on this matter (check out www.andrewsullivan.com).
Senator Santorum's outburst sadly feeds into the perception that Republicans and conservatives as a whole are intolerant and hostile to those who are different. I would not be involved in the Republican Party if I believed that sentiment were true. Indeed, the Republican Party has gone to great pains to gain the support of African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans and Jews. However, there are some within the Republican Party who cling to old suspicions and dated dogmas. The time has come for those old suspicions and dated dogmas to be exposed for what they are. Until that happens the Republican Party will remain under a cloud of suspicion on the words and actions of a few bad apples.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Aaron Goldstein
