Replies

The posts of most of you are scaring me. I don't want the government passing laws regarding what I can and can't do in my home. It seems to me that Santorum is saying that any sex that doesn't lead to procreation (or at least the potential for it) should be illegal. That would therefore include sex using contraception or oral sex. That's not the government's business. Do you think there would be such an uproar if the case involved two women instead of two men? What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is just that, private. You may not like homosexuality, and I certainly don't, but that doesn't mean that they don't have the right to privacy that has evolved in our society.

I don't want the government passing laws regarding what I can and can't do in my home. It seems to me that Santorum is saying that any sex that doesn't lead to procreation (or at least the potential for it) should be illegal. That would therefore include sex using contraception or oral sex. That's not the government's business. Do you think there would be such an uproar if the case involved two women instead of two men? What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is just that, private. You may not like homosexuality, and I certainly don't, but that doesn't mean that they don't have the right to privacy that has evolved in our society

I, personally, am not arguing for or against the ideas expressed by Santorum. There can certainly disagreement with his position. But disagreement with his position is not the same as calling him names and trying to ruin his career. He feels the way he does as according to his moral beliefts. Kudos to him for saying so. You feel they way you do based on your beliefs, that's fine too. Kudos to you too for saying so. But I draw the line at trying to ruin the man for having beliefs, and trying to distort what he is saying about law to create an uprising against him.