Good Ol' Saint Rick
[A note to those of you--and you know who you are--who have been bugging me incessantly about finally adding a new friggin' post. First, thank you for bugging me--you should do it more. And second, I am declaring my intention here and now to break things off with online poker and get back together with the blog, which is much better for me and, of course, for my devoted fans! Thanks again--I love you all. Now back to the matter at hand.]
Look at this picture:
How would you describe the look on this man’s face?
A. Pious
B. Self-righteous
C. Holier-than-thou
D. Constipated
For those of you who don’t know, this is a pic of the illustrious Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, right-wing crusader extraordinaire. His mission in life consists of the following:
1. Make sure no woman in America has control over her own body.
2. Make sure the government dictates who is allowed to sleep with whom. (And also what kind of sex you’re allowed to have. Some acts, even between consenting adults, should be jailable offenses.)
3. Remain forever freakishly boyish-looking.
4. Appear on the cover of the New York Times Magazine.
Well, last week Santorum got to scratch the fourth item off the list. I actually made myself read the entire article, just to, you know, keep informed of the beliefs and actions of this . . . person. (I’m trying so hard to be civil here.)
Before I get to the most unpleasant (and almost mystifying) part of the article, I will say this: Besides striving to write hateful discrimination into the Constitution, and besides wanting to come into everyone’s bedroom and orchestrate their love lives, Santorum does seem to have a modicum of concern for the poor. He does believe that some people occasionally need a helping hand—as long as it’s the hand of God, that is, because he also thinks all social services should be faith-based. You know, kind of in the "Do you believe Jesus died for your sins? O.K., here's a dinner roll" vein. So, thank you, Rick Santorum, for giving a shit about the poor.
Now for the freakishness.
Rick and his wife, Mrs. Rick Santorum (that is her official name now, I believe), as extremely devout Catholics and uber-conservatives, naturally are anti-choice. (Of course, like many "pro-life" people, they think the death penalty is just dandy and have no problem with preemptive war. It's O.K. to "disagree" with the Pope on those issues, I guess. Because of course, the sanctity of life of a fetus is much more valid than the sanctity of life of an actual born person, unless the born person happens to be brain dead. But I digress.) Anyway, I'm sure it's no surprise that the Santorums have six children. (And by the way, I can guarantee that that's six children who spend their Sunday mornings incredibly bored and yet at the same time vaguely terrified while sitting through mass for three hours.) So far, so good. That's not the bizarre part.
This is the bizarre part: Mrs. Rick was at one point pregnant with a seventh child, and they were told early in the pregnancy that the fetus had a fatal birth defect and wouldn't survive outside the womb. So then, of course, Mrs. Rick had to carry through with the pregnancy anyway, because of their beliefs. At this point I just have to say, I have a hard time imagining a more horrible experience. It seems to me that even if you're anti-choice, this would be one of those situations where you get a pass. But for the Santorums, there's always that chance of a miracle, I guess. I just don't get it. But it was their decision--fine.
When Mrs. Rick hit 20 weeks in the pregnancy, according to the Times, she "developed a life-threatening interuterine infection and a fever that reached nearly 105 degrees." And she went into labor. So she's in labor, severely sick, and about to die, so, after some resistance, she finally allows the doctors to induce her, and she gives birth to a 20-week-old fetus that dies two hours later. (*See note at end of post.)
O.K. I don't understand the Santorums' actions up to this point, but they acted according to their beliefs, and it's their business alone, and I respect that. But I really don't get what happened next. The Santorums would not allow the doctors to take the body of the fetus away. (Keep in mind that we're talking about a 20-week pregnancy, only halfway through--in my opinion, this is a fetus, not a baby.) Instead, they slept that night with the dead body between them on the hospital bed. Then, the next day, they took the fetus home to . . . spend time? with their other children; the siblings held and cuddled with the tiny, dead fetus.
Is it just me? Am I overly cynical, insensitive, non-empathetic? Or is this just about one of the most fucked up things you've ever heard?
I just don't get it. But I would recommend reading the whole article if you get a chance. In it, you'll learn other exciting tidbits about this senator (who's up for reelection next year, by the way--more on that later). For example:
READ about how the Santorums, who supposedly hate all forms of government spending, received over $70,000 from the state and the Penn Hills School District for home-schooling their disciples, er, children!
READ about how the Santorums were awarded $350,000 in a malpractice suit they filed for injuries suffered by Mrs. Rick after treatment for back pain! Wow, lucky they got in on the action before legislation sponsered by Mr. Rick that severly limits the award amounts for these specific types of cases kicks in!
PONDER the meaning of hypocrisy!
*Concerning Mrs. Rick allowing the doctors to induce her pregnancy, effectively causing an abortion, the following was taken, verbatim, from Catholic.net, an anti-choice web site (editorial notes mine):
In 1996, a bill was introduce [sic] into Congress that would ban partial birth abortions. It passed [sic] by both the House and the Senate. However, President Clinton vetoed the bill because it didn't allow exceptions where the "health" of the mother was threatened. The House voted successfully to override President Clinton's veto but the Senate attempt to override the veto failed by a few votes.
Notice the quotes around the word "health"? You know what putting quotes around a word means, right? It means basically that you are using the word ironically, that you don't really buy it. The official National Right to Life stance is that abortion is almost never necessary to save the life or health of the mother. But I guess Mrs. Rick is that one, almost-never-happens exception! Thank God she still has her "health." (Of course, another possibility is that the writer for the Caltholic.net web site doesn't actually know what putting quotes around a word means. That's entirely likely.)
Look at this picture:
How would you describe the look on this man’s face?
A. Pious
B. Self-righteous
C. Holier-than-thou
D. Constipated
For those of you who don’t know, this is a pic of the illustrious Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, right-wing crusader extraordinaire. His mission in life consists of the following:
1. Make sure no woman in America has control over her own body.
2. Make sure the government dictates who is allowed to sleep with whom. (And also what kind of sex you’re allowed to have. Some acts, even between consenting adults, should be jailable offenses.)
3. Remain forever freakishly boyish-looking.
4. Appear on the cover of the New York Times Magazine.
Well, last week Santorum got to scratch the fourth item off the list. I actually made myself read the entire article, just to, you know, keep informed of the beliefs and actions of this . . . person. (I’m trying so hard to be civil here.)
Before I get to the most unpleasant (and almost mystifying) part of the article, I will say this: Besides striving to write hateful discrimination into the Constitution, and besides wanting to come into everyone’s bedroom and orchestrate their love lives, Santorum does seem to have a modicum of concern for the poor. He does believe that some people occasionally need a helping hand—as long as it’s the hand of God, that is, because he also thinks all social services should be faith-based. You know, kind of in the "Do you believe Jesus died for your sins? O.K., here's a dinner roll" vein. So, thank you, Rick Santorum, for giving a shit about the poor.
Now for the freakishness.
Rick and his wife, Mrs. Rick Santorum (that is her official name now, I believe), as extremely devout Catholics and uber-conservatives, naturally are anti-choice. (Of course, like many "pro-life" people, they think the death penalty is just dandy and have no problem with preemptive war. It's O.K. to "disagree" with the Pope on those issues, I guess. Because of course, the sanctity of life of a fetus is much more valid than the sanctity of life of an actual born person, unless the born person happens to be brain dead. But I digress.) Anyway, I'm sure it's no surprise that the Santorums have six children. (And by the way, I can guarantee that that's six children who spend their Sunday mornings incredibly bored and yet at the same time vaguely terrified while sitting through mass for three hours.) So far, so good. That's not the bizarre part.
This is the bizarre part: Mrs. Rick was at one point pregnant with a seventh child, and they were told early in the pregnancy that the fetus had a fatal birth defect and wouldn't survive outside the womb. So then, of course, Mrs. Rick had to carry through with the pregnancy anyway, because of their beliefs. At this point I just have to say, I have a hard time imagining a more horrible experience. It seems to me that even if you're anti-choice, this would be one of those situations where you get a pass. But for the Santorums, there's always that chance of a miracle, I guess. I just don't get it. But it was their decision--fine.
When Mrs. Rick hit 20 weeks in the pregnancy, according to the Times, she "developed a life-threatening interuterine infection and a fever that reached nearly 105 degrees." And she went into labor. So she's in labor, severely sick, and about to die, so, after some resistance, she finally allows the doctors to induce her, and she gives birth to a 20-week-old fetus that dies two hours later. (*See note at end of post.)
O.K. I don't understand the Santorums' actions up to this point, but they acted according to their beliefs, and it's their business alone, and I respect that. But I really don't get what happened next. The Santorums would not allow the doctors to take the body of the fetus away. (Keep in mind that we're talking about a 20-week pregnancy, only halfway through--in my opinion, this is a fetus, not a baby.) Instead, they slept that night with the dead body between them on the hospital bed. Then, the next day, they took the fetus home to . . . spend time? with their other children; the siblings held and cuddled with the tiny, dead fetus.
Is it just me? Am I overly cynical, insensitive, non-empathetic? Or is this just about one of the most fucked up things you've ever heard?
I just don't get it. But I would recommend reading the whole article if you get a chance. In it, you'll learn other exciting tidbits about this senator (who's up for reelection next year, by the way--more on that later). For example:
READ about how the Santorums, who supposedly hate all forms of government spending, received over $70,000 from the state and the Penn Hills School District for home-schooling their disciples, er, children!
READ about how the Santorums were awarded $350,000 in a malpractice suit they filed for injuries suffered by Mrs. Rick after treatment for back pain! Wow, lucky they got in on the action before legislation sponsered by Mr. Rick that severly limits the award amounts for these specific types of cases kicks in!
PONDER the meaning of hypocrisy!
*Concerning Mrs. Rick allowing the doctors to induce her pregnancy, effectively causing an abortion, the following was taken, verbatim, from Catholic.net, an anti-choice web site (editorial notes mine):
In 1996, a bill was introduce [sic] into Congress that would ban partial birth abortions. It passed [sic] by both the House and the Senate. However, President Clinton vetoed the bill because it didn't allow exceptions where the "health" of the mother was threatened. The House voted successfully to override President Clinton's veto but the Senate attempt to override the veto failed by a few votes.
Notice the quotes around the word "health"? You know what putting quotes around a word means, right? It means basically that you are using the word ironically, that you don't really buy it. The official National Right to Life stance is that abortion is almost never necessary to save the life or health of the mother. But I guess Mrs. Rick is that one, almost-never-happens exception! Thank God she still has her "health." (Of course, another possibility is that the writer for the Caltholic.net web site doesn't actually know what putting quotes around a word means. That's entirely likely.)
posted by flipper @ 3:38 PM
1 Comments:
At 3:38 PM,
A P said…
Oy . . .
That interview you linked to was priceless. That's some hardcore hypocracy right there.
I just love the double-talk and pure asinine backtracking in the paragraph where Rick says that he has no problems with homosexuals, so long as they don't commit homosexual acts. What the hell is that?!
Also, why is it that every time some ultra Conservative talks about homosexual relationships or legalizing same-sex marriages, they immediately jump to equating it with beastiality (as Ricky does in the AP interview)?
Post a Comment
<< Home