Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Video: Rick Santorum booed after anti-gay marriage comments

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Hardly booed really! Not a nice bloke certainly, but booing is rather over-egging it wouldn’t you say?

  2. Ah, the old polygamy argument. Well, the proof is there, is it? In every country that has allowed same sex marriage there has been a dramatic rise in polygamy….

    …..oh, no, wait, there’s hasn’t been any such increase.

    Wonder where he’s getting his “facts” from then? He wouldn’t make them up just to appeal to a bunch of in-bred right wing idiots who never bothered to leave their trailer park to go to school, would he? That would be silly.

    1. “Well if you look in the Old Testament, you’d realise that polygamy is expressly… oh, wait… erm… errr… I’ll get back to you…”

      1. Well Flapjack, keep that up and you’ll be eaten by a whale – that’ll teach you! :)

        1. I always love it when fundies compare the evils of gay marriage to the evils of other things which get the stamp of approval in their holy book.
          The OT is stuffed full of polygamy and incest, with a genepool so shallow it’s practically a genepuddle, but let’s focus on the gays.

          1. Tony Lambert 6 Jan 2012, 4:04pm

            Yep! Gays will destroy society – not the rabid lunacy of people who deny reason and get divorced 5 time because each of their gun-toting drunk of a partner found them cruising park for men at 4am.

          2. “with a genepool so shallow it’s practically a genepuddle”

            LOL! I’m going to have to steal that one. Classic.

          3. de Villiers 7 Jan 2012, 7:36am

            Don’t use the term ‘fundie’. It trivialises and humanises a very unpleasant religious-right group.

    2. Yep, it’s a stupid argument – after all, why would letting one man marry another man or one woman marry another lead to polygamy when allowing one man to marry one woman hasn’t? It’s nonsensical. I put it on a par with those imbeciles who argued that CPs would mean that people would want to marry their siblings – ie some woman would want to marry her sister blah blah. Yet opposite sex marriage apparently wouldn’t mean that that same woman would want to marry her brother! Mad and illogical.

      I can’t believe Santorum is using the Bible as a guide to what’s right in marriage. Just how thick is he? So we’ll be allowing incest, polygamy and allowing people to stone non-virgin brides to death on their fathers’ doorsteps, will we? And encouraging rapists to marry their victims? Nice. All good old biblical morality.

      Nevermind the fact that the US is supposed to have a separation of church and state *rolls eyes*

      1. Its not just a stupid argument, its an insane argument …

        Has anyone asked him what he thinks about separation of church and state?

        1. I wish they would! And ask every other US politician who goes on about the US being founded on Christian values – it drives me mad!

          1. Yep, their constitution is so important to them yet they don’t bother to read it.

      2. If it’s polygamy he disapproves of, why isn’t he going after the Mormons? Or is he still considering being Milt Romney’s running mate as his fallback option?

        1. Clearly, this is his way of subtly jabbing at Romney without appearing too confrontational. Same could be said about bringing up his own grandfather in his “victory” speech the other night in Iowa. Romney’s own grandfather was a known polygamist.

        2. If I recall correctly, most Mormons don’t believe in living polygamy. >99% don’t practice it.

    3. de Villiers 6 Jan 2012, 5:09pm

      The polygamy argument is fanciful. There has never been a broad popular movement for the permitting of polygamy and it in no countries where gay partnerships have been permitted has there been any suggestion of such arguments becoming more prominent.

      It is most unlikely that such a system would be compatible with Western notions of individualism, family and women’s rights. However, we live in a democracy. If it was the popular will of the population that polygamy be permitted, that would be the democratic will.

  3. Am I alone when I find consented polygamy okay?

    1. I wouldn’t really care if people wanted multiple marriage, personally I only really want one to my partner, but the point is that saying polygamy is the natural result of same sex marriage is for people who confuse histrionics with reality. And there’s perfectly good meds available for that condition….

      1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 10:55am

        Indeed. People like Mr Santorum are the people who really cheapen marriage by comparing the love of 2 people to that of polgamy.

        Short sighted and ill thought out as the argument always tends to prove.

    2. I can’t imagine polygamy being a choice I would make, but it might be for some people – and who’s to say whats round the corner – provided its consensual and people involved are aware of the emotional issues etc involved then – hey who am I to stand in their way …

      But, there is not widespread demand for polygamy that I am aware of …
      so Santorum’s argument is ridiculous

    3. Spanner1960 9 Jan 2012, 6:01pm

      Hmm. I’m in two minds about polygamy.
      Incidentally, what would you call a polygamous bisexual?

      1. Jock S. Trap 10 Jan 2012, 3:06pm

        Very Happy?

      2. Open Minded?

        1. Jock S. Trap 11 Jan 2012, 12:22pm

          Greedy?

  4. Mr Santorum obviously doesn’t consider children born out of heterosexual relatioships that weren’t born within a marriage. There’s plenty of those. There are also many children who have to deal with their heterosexual parents divorcing. If it were a birthright for children to have a mummy and a daddy, it follows that divorce should be made illegal again and no one should be allowed to have children unless they’re married. Or was that not your aim, Mr Santorum? Hm?

    1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 10:57am

      Exactly, this just shows how out of touch and what hypocrite these people really are. And they want to be people of power… worrying eh?

  5. He throws out the usual fatuous arguments based on the ‘slippery slope to something terrible’ while never justifying the idea that gay marriage occupies the same slope as other things he happens not to like. After all, if one man and one woman are allowed to marry, why can’t any number of them be allowed to do it all together? See what I mean?

    1. Who knows, maybe marriage is like some sort of crack addiction… one’s no longer enough ;)

      1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 10:59am

        More importantly how does 2 men or 2 women affect him personal if he has already married and/or not planning to remarry a same sex partner. How does any relationship affect him or his like minded shallow friends?

        Fact = it doesn’t. Another persons relationship and marriage has nothing to do with him so can’t see how it affects him/them.

  6. David Nottingham 6 Jan 2012, 2:52pm

    Is this silly little man seriously suggesting that gay marriage would naturally lead to polygamy? Are Republican presidential hopefuls allowed to be that stupid? I think this man deserved the booing not so much for his homophobia but for being dangerously unintelligent….

  7. Hmmm…nice editing. If you listen to the longer clip you will see how he handles the rest of the discussion and he is not booed “off stage” for his remarks.

    1. those won’t be the boos “on his exit” then …

      1. They were added in later…. by the gay agenda.

        :)

        1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:01am

          That damn magazine again….lol

      2. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:00am

        mmmm I think they call that ‘selective’ hearing Stu!

  8. …blah indeed..

  9. If you look closely at the video you can see the fecal foam gathering at the corners of Santorum’s mouth as the bull$hit seeps out from inside of his head..

    1. Commander Thor 6 Jan 2012, 4:31pm

      “the boos were reserved for Santorum’s exit”

      1. The fecal foam is probably seeping out of his exit too!

  10. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Jan 2012, 4:29pm

    “God” created man and woman? Really? Last time I checked, my parents created me, their names were on my birth certificate too. Where do these religious nutters get all this nonsense from? If you ask them to provide the evidence to support their claims, they can’t, then they change the subject or make up same lame excuse or dismiss the person asking them the question. Some of them even believe civil marriage is a sacrament. How dumb are they?

    1. Very! :D

    2. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:02am

      Indeed. This is somewhat confusing to some religious extremists who clearly aren’t very bright. Rick Santorum being a prize…… example.

    3. I wish people like you who nothing about God would keep your opinion to yourself.If you knew anything about the Bible you would know that YES God created man and found that he was lonely then he created a woman for him ,not another man.Thank God for men finally standing up to the perverts of this world.Thank God for your coments about me ,a religious nutter ,that showes I an different than the perverted world who believes in same sex marriage..When you want to attack someone first read the bible and see what it says about gay sin.God will destroy them for their sin ..

      1. Jock S. Trap 11 Jan 2012, 12:20pm

        Oh dear, deluded much love?

        Would you like sauce with that rather large chip?

      2. Amberdextrix 28 Feb 2012, 10:46am

        God isn’t real and never was.

  11. Leaving to one side the risible attitude of Santorum to equal marriage and his ignorant attempts to deflect questions about his position by illogically linking it to polygamy …

    Does Santorum really think those following the Republican Presidential campaign are so ignorant that they will fall for his “blah” comment … ???

    The man is bigoted – both in terms of homophobia, and now it appears in terms of racism …

    He is not fit to hold high office …

    1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:03am

      Lets hope the decent american people run bagshot over the bigotted ones and see that Stu!

    2. Even if he was referring to “blah people,” from which demographic do they come? Is this a racial category (if “blah people” are a race at all) on the U.S. Census?

      With regards to equal marriage, Santorum has made some very “interesting” and clearly bigoted quotes recently:

      Citing the work of one anti-poverty expert, Santorum said, “He found that even fathers in jail who had abandoned their kids were still better than no father at all to have in their children’s lives.”

      Allowing gays to marry and raise children, Santorum said, amounts to “robbing children of something they need, they deserve, they have a right to. You may rationalize that that isn’t true, but in your own life and in your own heart, you know it’s true.”

      During a 2003 interview he stated that gay marriage is no different from “man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be”

      If Santorum becomes Republican Presidential candidate, the US has a choice between reason and theocracy.

  12. Peter & Michael 6 Jan 2012, 5:06pm

    These people are so dumb, hoping that biblical verses will get them into power, if the republicans win the next election in USA, one can expect that country will back step a hundred years in equality, and it will not only LGBT people that will suffer but, the poor, who can’t afford medical care or be able to feed themselves. The rich will get richer!

    1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:04am

      Yep and you can bet they’ll drag us into some shameful war again. The world is not safe under a Republican, from all angles.

  13. de Villiers 6 Jan 2012, 5:11pm

    The polygamy argument is fanciful. There has never been a broad popular movement for the permitting of polygamy and in no countries where gay partnerships or marriages have been permitted has there been any suggestion of such arguments becoming more prominent.

    It is most unlikely that such a system would be compatible with Western notions of individualism, family and women’s rights. However, we live in a democracy. If it was the popular will of the population that polygamy be permitted, that would be the democratic will.

    1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:05am

      Indeed. The polgamy arguement just shows what cheap shots these people are willing to pull to get attention.

      It’s all very sad.

  14. Reck Sanatorium is a sad and pathetic little man who is confused by the Christian religion of hate. He is their little parrot who like a robot spews out the hate programs that have been put into to him. Sad, pathetic little man who wants to rule the world. Now when did we have another sad little mad man in history that wanted to rule the world using his hate of different groups to destroy them? Here is a hint, he was a member of the Catholic church in Germany in the 1930’s and he later went on to be infamous.

  15. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Jan 2012, 5:40pm

    We should all be thankful we live in the UK where religious nutters don’t become Prime Ministers. None of them in that parade of clowns in the republican party would last five minutes in the UK. I don’t know why Americans give them any credence, let alone vote for them. One can only deduce that a large chunk of the American electorate is absolutely dumb or stupid, or both.

  16. Mr. Ripley's Asscrack 6 Jan 2012, 5:59pm

    Wow… Theocracy beckons! Doesn’t Sanitorium realise that god loves polygamy – it’s in his book after all?! Also, in a court of law, could he prove that god ‘made’ men, and subsequently women (from a rib and then from dust – see it doesn’t even know itself)?! It would be a miracle if he could, and hugely funny to try – reason being, he couldn’t prove it. These theocrats need to be bludgeoned by the heaviest leather-bound version of the bibble – but even then it wouldn’t knock any kind of sense into them as they practice their religion freely, ie. make god’s law up as they go along.

    Sanitorium’s video where he says “I don’t want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money; and provide for themselves and their family,” is so telling… it’s like he’s saying ‘goodbye black vote’. What a void.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Jan 2012, 8:50pm

      Santorum has proved himself to be a racist, most are in the rethuglican party of hate. That’s one of the reasons why they never wanted Obama as president.

  17. Robert in S. Kensington 6 Jan 2012, 6:00pm

    You should read the following about just how sick this man really is.

    http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2012/01/21281/

  18. Dave North 6 Jan 2012, 7:55pm

    Check this out.

    They are even re-writing their bibble to SPECIFICALLY hate gays.

    http://www.eurweb.com/2012/01/new-niv-bible-with-revisions-on-homosexuality/

    Christans are sick bar stewards

    1. So the revision of the New International Bible (NIV) leaves no room for interpretation; it insists that men who have sex with men are an abomination in the eyes of God… full stop.

      Clinics to cure homophobia are sorely needed – now more than ever – as the christian wing-nuts react irrationally to the immense progress made by the global movement to promote human rights of all, especially minority groups.

    2. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:06am

      Doesn’t surprise me in the slightest, they change history to suit why not their own Bible.

  19. Geesh Mr Santorum… most gay Americans would just be happy to have the equal right to one husband… you really way ahead of us paranoid delusions if your talking polygamy!

    1. Santorum fails to understand gay Americans.

      In fact, he may not understand mainstream America.

      Blah..

      1. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 11:07am

        Santorum fails to understand….. well anything really. And he wants to run the country/world.

        Mini Me anyone?

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 8 Jan 2012, 5:48pm

      Polygamy is condoned in the old testament. Sharia law also permits up to 4 wives at a time. Several islamic countries still practice it, some have abolished it. Up until the 1890’s, the Mormon sect practiced it too.

  20. GingerlyColors 6 Jan 2012, 10:15pm

    While opinion polls in he USA show an increasing percentage of Americans prepared to accept equality for gays, the likes of Rick Santorum become more vocal as their breed is dying. As I have mentioned if he were ever to become President he is unlikely to get a constitutional amendment against gay marriage through – unless he changes the rules.
    A fundalmentalist Christian America if it were to happen will be just as bad as Iran and should a situation arise, I would be quite happy to see them bomb each other out of existance provided they don’t involve the UK.

  21. If hetero union is biblical so do polygamy, incest, stoning to death, rape, slavery, sexism are all biblical. Devout Christians should never eat pork, shrimp, and shellfish. Male Christians should never shave their beards as well.
    Oh God, What is happening to America? Isn’t America is the land of liberty and freedom

    1. de Villiers 8 Jan 2012, 8:30am

      I’m sure there is more to the argument than that – if it were that simple then there would be none of these difficulties.

  22. Santorum was asked a question and he then tried to change the subject, he didn’t give an answer because he has no answer, Santorum loses.

  23. Jock S. Trap 7 Jan 2012, 10:51am

    The mans an asshole who doesn’t have a clue about humanity. Still goes by the joke God made man I assume the 6.000 year old story rather the fact the millions of years of evolution.

    It’s sad and it’s very cheap and exactly why people like Rick Santorum should be nowhere in power influencing anyone.

    His cheap attempt to divert the arguement is pure bigotry since polygamy serves no purpose in the country’s laws.

    All cheap and very desperate if you ask me.

  24. The oft-repeated misinformation and lies Santorum likes to parrot are all here below, they have each been addressed and dismissed time and time again.

    But marriage is between one man and one woman.

    But marriage has been restricted to heterosexuals for thousands of years.

    But marriage is for procreation.

    But same sex couples don’t do as good a job raising children as opposite sex couples.

    But same sex marriage will start us down a slippery slope.

    But gay relationships are immoral.

    But same sex marriage threatens the institution of marriage.

    1. Nawal Husnoo 7 Jan 2012, 5:09pm

      I have addressed all of these in The Gay Agenda :)

      http://www.gayagendabook.com/

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 8 Jan 2012, 5:46pm

      He and other hatemongers like him can’t even produce the documentary evidence to prove any of their claims. Marriage hasn’t always been between one man and one woman. Several islamic countries still practice polygamy, but I’ve not heard Santorum comment on that. The judeo-christian tradition of marriage has evolved for almost two millenia and continues to evolve. Same-sex marriage in a civil context is part of that very evolution. The problem with these right wing opponents is that none of them can distinguish between what is religious and what is civil. End of.

  25. Fab commentary from the LA Times:

    “I will say this for Rick Santorum: He’s one of the more well-spoken bigots I’ve heard in a while. His defense of his absolutist position on gay marriage, delivered in front of a largely hostile crowd of college Republicans in Concord, N.H., was concise, logical and delivered with the rhetorical flourish of a seasoned attorney. None of it hadn’t been expressed by same-sex marriage opponents before, but Santorum’s gift is to make his morally and legally untenable position sound reasonable.

    Boiled to its essence, his argument has three parts: First, the burden of demonstrating that same-sex marriage should be legalized falls on its supporters rather than its opponents, because the former group is the one that wants to change the law. Fair enough. Here’s the reason, Rick: Because discriminating against a class of people by failing to grant them the same rights enjoyed by everyone else is unfair and unconstitutional.

    The second part of Santorum’s …”

    1. “… argument is that many of the legal benefits of marriage, such as the right to visit a hospitalized spouse, can be obtained via legal contract, so why should gays insist on marriage rights? This is monstrously disingenuous, as Santorum the lawyer well knows, but it seemed to confuse the crowd, so apparently there weren’t any law students among them. Santorum is correct that property and inheritance rights can be transferred to another via contract — gay partners can leave their houses to each other in their wills, for example. But, as Oakland attorney and author Fred Hertz explains, public benefits — tax advantages, health insurance and so on — can’t be transferred via contract, except in states that recognize domestic partnership agreements (and most states, including Santorum’s native Pennsylvania, don’t). Even in the domestic partnership states, no federal tax, Social Security or other benefits apply to such partners because of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

      Finally, …

    2. … here is Santorum’s third argument, which by now is pretty familiar to anyone following the same-sex marriage debate: If you allow same-sex couples to marry, why not allow polygamy? This one’s tougher to refute because it gets to a truism that gay-marriage proponents don’t like to discuss — there is a social-values component to marriage. Religious conservatives see no distinction between same-sex marriage and incest or polygamy, because to them, all of these things represent sexual sins. Yet there are obvious differences.

      Setting aside the ick factor of incestuous marriage, sexual liaisons between family members can lead to offspring with terrible genetic abnormalities. Polygamy is slightly less objectionable on its face, but in practice it causes enormous social problems — polygamous societies inevitably create a surplus population of young, restive males who end up on the streets or fuel upheaval because they can’t find wives, most of whom have been snapped up by powerful …

    3. … older men. Underage women are frequently forced into marriages with much older men, and there is an innate power imbalance built into any relationship between one man (or one woman) and multiple partners of the opposite sex.

      But more important than any of these distinctions is the fact that the entire comparison is irrelevant. There is no mainstream political movement in this country to legalize polygamy or incestuous marriage; when and if there is, we can debate whether it’s appropriate. By dragging these things into the debate over same-sex marriage, Santorum and his ilk are simply playing reductio-ad-absurdem rhetorical games. This technique can be used to discredit nearly any position on anything: If we allow same-sex marriage, what’s next, people marrying dogs? If we allow people to drink alcohol, why not let them snort cocaine? If we guarantee the right to bear arms, why not guarantee the right to build thermonuclear devices in one’s garage?

      The answer: Because it’s …

    4. … ridiculous. Let’s stick to the matter at hand — whether consenting adults of the same sex should be allowed to marry. It’s OK to agree with Santorum that they shouldn’t, but let’s not drag the cast of “Big Love” into the discussion.

  26. carrie baker 7 Jan 2012, 10:19pm

    His ass do not belong in no presidents seat he should not hold any seat that has to do with caring for a nation and its people, he is like the rest of the bigotted republican running all bad for this nati0n and its people, the nation had better start paying attention, and tracing history, and finding out what the hell have the republican party every done really for anyone other than rich people , not your seniors , minorities , women, lgbt, children concerns, humanatraian aid, only a few republicans mostly women, have pulled away from the rest of the republeicans in different states and countries and started to use their own brains, and conssciences on treating others right, one of them said i dare not let my republican coleagues cloud my judgement on loving my son and wishing him the happiness, he deserves, i choose my son over strangers i work with and leave to go home to my real family, that my commission to love my family not a hate group telling me to abuse or diown, or har

  27. Would be theocrats like to dream up pretexts to disguise the fact that they just want to impose their religious beliefs.

  28. Robert in S. Kensington 9 Jan 2012, 3:04pm

    This is the same man who, originally form Virginia, moved to Pennsylvania and became it’s senator and had big government which republicans hate so much pay for his children’s home-schooling. He also served as a trustee of a hospital that condoned exorcism for autistic children. The list is endless.

    Now his rival, Mitt Romney, wants to make abortion illegal in America by supporting repeal of the Roe v. Wade case that heralded legalisation of abortion. That will sit well with American women I’m sure.

    It’s clear that if you want more regression and oppression in America, then people should vote republican. Isn’t it sad that there are many gay people who vote for their oppressors too, a clear case of the Stockholm Syndrome.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all