The Politics of Birth Control


I was surprised to see a commentary piece, titled "An open invitation to Rick Santorum" by Aimee Patton in the Saturday edition of the Kansas City Star that referenced a post from my blogging friend Shane. Here is the Santorum quote that she cited:

“One of the things I will talk about that no president has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. … Many of the Christian faith have said, well, that’s OK, contraception is OK. It’s not OK. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.”

I really did not know that candidate Santorum had such a political position on birth control. Most of the Roman Catholics that I know (evidenced by the size of their family) do not seem to have this view. Yet it reveals to me how this view (i.e. that sexual intimacy in marriage is all about procreation) is still alive and well on planet earth. I do not agree with that view but suspect that some of you might or maybe know a person that holds that view. Even so, do you think it odd that a candidate would make an issue of it?


8 comments:

  1. I don't know that Santorum makes an issue of it as much as it's made an issue for Santorum because his views are so far out of the mainstream. He hasn't said he would outlaw contraception. But, he has said it would be within a state's rights to do so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I read that too Brian. Hard to think that it would even occur to any state to do so.

      Delete
    2. Not too long ago, government was way deep in prohibiting this.

      Connecticut set the stage in 1965 with Griswold vs. Connecticut in which the Supreme Court overturned state law and determined that married couples have the right to purchase contraceptives. In 1972, the decision for Eisenstadt vs. Baird overturned a Massachusetts law and extended those rights to unmarried couples.

      I really think Santorum should first get lay Catholics to agree on not using contraception, before inflicting his doctrine on others with very different interpretations. It because of stuff like this that really makes me think Santorum doesn't have a 'Conservative' viewpoint -- His is more of a reactionary. The problem with Santorum is that he expects received religious doctrines to necessarily make sense. But natural theology is a pretty hoary chestnut of special pleading (IMO). Santorum isn't content to say, 'because God said so', he also wants to claim he knows why God said so. And that's a stretch for us simple mortals.

      Delete
    3. Thanks Argon for the background info. I tend to agree that this is not an issue that a conservative candidate should be advocating.

      Delete
  2. This is something I hadn't heard of. I think that I don't know what to think, but the gov't shouldn't be involved in this!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree Ma. Hard to believe that some think that the govt should be.

      Delete
  3. At least Santorum is honest. He doesn't hide what is surely not a widely-held view.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point Joe! I do wonder why he felt the need to say it though.

      Delete

I love to get comments and usually respond. So come back to see my reply. You can click here to see my comment policy.