If you think the debate over abortion in this country has gone forever, consider the one over birth control. Eight years before Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court ruled that states could not block access to birth control. The court wrote in Griswold vs. Connecticut that birth control was part of marital privacy.
Nearly half a century later, birth control remains a live and disputed issue, especially in Republican politics. On Friday in New Hampshire, Senator Rick Santorum told the kids and families at the Dublin School in New Hampshire:
This was the Griswold vs. Connecticut case which I was asked about, which created a new constitutional right, which in my opinion is judicial activism, just like Roe vs. Wade was judicial activism, just like the Kelo decision was judicial activism, which is a group of people creating rights in the Constitution that don't exist. We have a way to create new rights. And that way is through the constitutional amendment process. I don't know how any reasonable person can say that the founders intended a right to an abortion in the Constitution when they wrote it. I mean, it would be beyond fantasy to think that that's what the writing of that constitutional document meant. So, if the Supreme Court wants to change things, then what they should is, you know, we write papers about it and say we think this is a bad idea, but it's up to the people to make these decisions, and so with respect to contraception, I think the Griswold decision was wrong. I don't care whether it was about contraception or anything else. It was just creating a right that didn't exist.
On the surface, Mr. Santorum sounds like he's again making a small-government argument -- like he's saying the Supreme Court outgrew its britches on that one. After hearing his answer when Rachel asked him about it after the show on Friday, I'm not sure that's all of it. More on the show tonight.
Thanks to Mark Dunau and Richard Moran of Don'tSubmit.org for sending the video above.
Leave a Comment:
How shallow must a person be to suggest that, as the Brookings Institute suggested, all you need to do to succeed in life is graduate high school, get a job, and get married (before having children).
Really, Rick Santorum? Do you really believe those 3 things are the cause of a person's success?
An effect only occurs as a result of a CAUSE! Something causes a person to be able to graduate, get a job and get married. It has a lot to do with the social background of the person. If you're hungry or don't have help with your homework, or you're left on your own with too much time, you probably won't do as well in school, you may not graduate or be able to find a job. If you're raised in a dangerous neighborhood you may be more worried about your life than graduating or getting a job; or regardless of your neighborhood if you have little or no supervision you may not do well in school, you may not be protected from dangers around you, you may even end up pregnant. The success has nothing to do with those 3 magic actions identified by Brookings and embraced by Santorum, they are merely results - it's what led up to them that caused the success.
You don't suppose he took deliberately cherry picked those figures and bent them to his will? Never mind. No republican would mislead people with half truths.
I bet people are now wishing we had them pills about 60 or 70 years ago.
Not really since mankind seems determined to buck the trend nature sets. Jerks would have avoided those pills and proudly reproduced more jerks anyway.
You see one must at least be bright enough to know he/she is stupid -otherwise you get a republican.
I hesitate to jump in here. There were a few things from the 2 debates that struck me as strange:
1) If we are going to discuss 1789: Abortion did exist. It was done by midwives and chemists. Women were lucky to survive childbirth more than twice due to infections and complications. Men viewed women (and still do) as replacable commodities. They get rid of the previous wife by getting her pregnant enough times and move on to the younger newer model. She usually came with a dowery.
In my own family history, my great grandfather had 2 kids with the first wife who died iin childbirth. He took those 2 children back to her parents and left them. He married my great grand mother and she had 6 children before she passed. He just moved on.
2) Both Newt G. and Rick Santorum used the term "Sacrament" in reference to marriage. Since when is marriage "a sacrament" in the civil courts? Divorce would not be a civil matter, but an annulment within the Church. Good luck with that approach as 1/2 of all marriages end.
3) If "personhood" is attained at the time of conception... when does CITIZENSHIP attach? Anchor Zygotes anyone?? Where is their fear mongering over that?
I still believe that the issue over birth control and abortion leads back to the women "ideals" in the Bible. There is the Virgin Mary and the Whore Mary. To the stupid, woman must fit into one of these two categories; she is either Virgin and therefore to be protected at all costs or a Whore in which case she deserves whatever she gets.
Virgins don't need birth control. Virgins don't need abortions.
Whores? Who really cares what happens to them as long as it's not shoved into the public's eye?
Now, to the rest of us, real women are virgins for a while. And then we are not. (Very few of us go on to actually become whores.) We no longer live in a society with a huge infant and childhood morality rate. We no longer need to bear 10 children so 3 will live to adulthood. So we now should now have the option of deciding when we want to have children and how many we want.
The religious nuts need to grow up and start treating women as WOMEN. With actual thoughts and emotions and the ability to decide what is best for our bodies.
The best deterrent to abortion is a robust economy. So if they want to reduce abortions maybe they should quit making it easy for companies to outsource jobs and stop deregulating business and banking? Truth is they are just saying what they think their base wants to hear.
I am also SO tired of men telling women what they can and can not do. Women, it is time to turn the table. If women cannot use BC then men can not use Viagra.
I'm tired of girls pledging to their father to remain a virgin. Fathers should be getting the pledge from their sons, so mothers have your sons make the pledge to their fathers.
IF the woman does not want the baby, then the man take full responsibility - no exception.
This man will never get my vote!!! He's not a woman and does not know anything about women,as most men don't know anything about women's reproductive system.See, when a man knocks-up a women,they can walk away anytime they want too.It's the woman that has all the responsibility of carrying that fetus for 9 months,giving birth and then raising it for the next 18 years, men don't. I get so tired of hearing people complain about this issue,but yet complain when they have to pay for them to be on welfare,higher school taxes,higher state & federal taxes. Wake up folks!!! The more and more humans on this planet,the more taxes we have to pay to support these humans. Keep this up and we'll end up in the same condition as the Philippines(that banned abortion & birth control) are in. Pro-life and Catholic Churches groups are over there right now and not helping at all.People have to dig through garbage to eat & make a few pennies for survival.
This guy and others like him will never have my vote!!
"Birth control should be legal in the United States. The states should not ban it, and I would oppose any effort to ban it." ` Rick Santorum
You really shouldn't listen to Rachel Maddow.
Rachel you are one lying sack of crap!
"Birth control should be legal in the United States. The states should not ban it, and I would oppose any effort to ban it." ` Rick Santorum