Politics: "Holy" Shit

   So, I scan the news periodically throughout the day. On most days, I glance at headlines every few hours. I like staying somewhat informed, especially when it comes to national politics. Lately I have seen presidential hopeful Rick Santorum in the news on a regular basis, and it seems like every time I see his name it is in an article referring to his stance on one particular, urgent issue. Here are some sample headlines:

"Santorum: I Would Still Love My Son If He Were Gay" - NBC News

"Santorum Says Gay Parents Are Worse Than Convicts"- Advocate.com

"Santorum Says Gay Acts Threat To American Family" - USA Today

"Santorum Tangles With Voters Over Gay Marriage" - LA Times

"Santorum Taking Heat On Gay Rights, Abortion" - Washington Post

   There are more, but you get the idea. I'm sure that Mr. Santorum has plenty of other social issues on his radar, but it seems like lately I'm hearing primarily about his stance on gay rights. Now, whether I agree with Santorum about gay rights or not doesn't really matter. What matters is that this man wants to occupy the Oval Office, and instead of offering up solutions to the problems that plague our nation (and, by extension, the world), he's spending a disproportionate amount of time thinking about gay people, which is weird and kind of creepy. I don't understand the conservative fascination with homosexuality. As a straight man, I don't spend a ton of time thinking about gay sex. I actually would suggest that the conservative voters who are supportive of a guy like Santorum probably think about gay sex more than your average homosexual does. They're fascinated by it. It's all they want to talk about. That, and abortion. These are hot-button issues that determine how vast amounts of people are going to vote in the upcoming election. This is what troubles me. It freaks me out.
   Santorum, who received the coveted endorsement from the Duggar family on January 2nd, is running as the "Jesus" candidate. Jim Bob Duggar, proud owner of two first names and nineteen (holy shit!) children, said "All the people in America that have conservative family values have to get behind Rick Santorum for president," at a rally in Polk City, Iowa. 

   According to ABCNews.com, at a rally in New Hampshire last Thursday, Santorum addressed an audience member who was suggesting (during a Q&A session at the end of the rally, which was sponsored by the 9/12 Project, a Tea Party group) that "we don't need a Jesus candidate, we need an economic candidate" by saying "We always need a Jesus candidate."
   Santorum went on to say, "We need someone who believes in something more than themselves and not just the economy. When we say, ‘God bless America,’ do we mean it or do we just say it?” These statements from Santorum didn't address the audience member's concerns about the economy, but redirected the topic from practical, tangible problems to the more abstract, intangible realm of religious politicking. Santorum doesn't care about the real-world economic problems that are devastating our country. He cares about getting elected, so that he can impose his radical fundamentalist worldview from a position of great power. 
   So, let's think about what a "Jesus Candidate" means in today's political climate. The first guy to really court the conservative christian base was probably Richard Nixon. While he was vice-president under Eisenhower, Nixon formed an alliance with Rev. Billy Graham, who campaigned for him in the 1968 election. Nixon saw the opportunity to increase his supporters, and Graham sought to align himself (and the evangelical movement) with the most powerful man in the country in an attempt to advance his religious ministry. To be completely fair, Graham later publicly addressed his feelings of remorse for his partnership with Nixon, but continued to served as a bipartisan advisor to future presidents. By 1981, Graham stated "The hard right has no interest in religion except to manipulate it." 
   Still, partnership with conservative politicians has remained the strategy of guys like Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, and Rick Warren. The name of Jesus is used to manipulate ignorant voters, for the dual purpose of advancing corrupt politicians and equally corrupt religious leaders. 
   As conservative politicians continue to throw around the label "christian" and guys like Rick Santorum -as the "Jesus candidate"- offer themselves up as messiah figures, the actual policies that they promote are rooted in philosophy that stands in opposition to the values espoused in the teachings of Jesus, who, I am told, was a major Christian figure.
   Jesus saw all human life as sacred and went out of his way to heal the sick, regardless of age, religious background, gender... considered the care of the sick and the poor to be a moral imperative. He also advocated peaceful conflict resolution, suggesting "turning the other cheek" as an alternative to violence. Lastly, when a group of people were planning on stoning a woman, Jesus put an end to their judgmental condemnation of the offender by saying, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her" (John 8:7). 
   Keep these things in mind the next time you hear a "Jesus candidate" speaking. Look beyond the bullshit and the rhetoric and try to discern whether or not they are actually advocating biblical principles or if they are appealing to racism, selfishness, and xenophobia among the conservative base. 
   Right now the most candidates who are trying to out-Jesus each other are Santorum (Catholic), Bachmann (Evangelical with dominionist views), Perry (Methodist), and Huntsman (Mormon). These guys are battling for the vote of the uneducated, uninformed, "issues" voters. 
   The remaining candidates play the game, just not as aggressively. You can't be a GOP candidate nowadays without some kind of religious affiliation. Newt Gingrich, for example, was raised in a Lutheran family, but when he entered politics he began to hang out with Southern Baptists, eventually becoming one. However, his third wife is Catholic, and after he met the Pope in 2008, Gingrich said, "the joyful and radiating presence of the Holy Father was a moment of confirmation about the many things I have been thinking and experiencing over the last several years" and he converted to Catholicism the same day. Ron Paul is a Lutheran, but his real religion is self-indulgent capitalism. Finally, there is Mitt Romney, who is a Mormon. Romney doesn't play the religious game as much as the other candidates, preferring to remain somewhat vague on what "Christian" values mean to him. 
   I get the feeling that Romney knows that his religious beliefs are kind of weird, and I like how he makes statements like this: (Comparing himself to JFK) "Like him, I am an American running for president. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because he believes in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers - I will be true to them, and to my beliefs."
   What a politician. I love it. He knows how to play a crowd. He also has said, "No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths."
   Mitt doesn't believe that. He knows better. It's a severely patronizing thing to say. As a Mormon, Mitt Romney doesn't give a shit about the prayers of Muslims or Buddhists or anyone else. If he is an authentic Mormon, he believes that non-believers are going to burn in hell. He believes that their prayers are meaningless, offered up to false, nonexistent deities. Romney knows that he would be unelectable if he were to publicly state this... although he has gone on record many, many times in calling himself a Mormon... which is basically the same thing... but the voters still think that he respects them... whatever. 
   Romney is harmless. At his core, he is an opportunist and a politician. He's a competitor, and if he were elected president, he would probably do a fantastic job, because he's a businessman, a natural manager and problem-solver, and, above all, he would want to get re-elected. 
   On the other hand, we have a guy like Santorum. I don't hate the guy. I just resent his existence on the national stage. He is not a statesman. He is either a stupid crackpot, or something much worse. He could be a sinister figure, attempting to take advantage of widespread ignorance among the voters, saying outlandish things to motivate and frighten simple-minded people. He has repeatedly said that the laws of America are important, but that they are secondary in nature to "God's laws" and that our legal system needs to be aligned with "higher" laws. As the self-described "Jesus candidate", Santorum has already demonstrated his religious exclusionary beliefs. He doesn't think that America needs a Mohammed candidate, or a Moses candidate, or a Buddha candidate. When he refers to "God's laws" he is specifically referring to the God that the guys in the Vatican believe in. He is all about that God, and only that one. What he suggests is absolutely the same as the religious tyranny imposed by the Taliban in Afghanistan, and he is only a few points behind Romney and Paul in the polls. 
   Dean Obeidallah, on CNN.com writes:
"Imagine if either of the two Muslim members of Congress declared their support for a proposed American law based on verses from the Quran. The outcry would be deafening, especially from people like Santorum. One of the great ironies is that Santorum has been a leader in sounding alarm bells that Muslims want to impose Islamic law -- called Sharia law -- upon non-Muslims in America. While Santorum fails to offer even a scintilla of credible evidence to support this claim, he continually warns about the "creeping" influence of Muslim law."
   Obeidallah goes on to hypothesize on what a nation under Santorum's leadership may look like.
"So, what type of nation might the United States be under Rick Santorum's Sharia law?

1. Rape victims would be forced to give birth to the rapist's child. Santorum has stated that his religious beliefs dictate that life begins at conception, and as a result, rape victims would be sentenced to carrying the child of the rapist for nine months.

2. Gay marriages would be annulled. Santorum recently declared that not only does he oppose gay marriages, but he supports a federal constitutional amendment that would ban them, invalidating all previous gay marriages that have legally been sanctioned by states and thus callously destroying marriages and thrusting families into chaos.

3. Santorum would ban all federal funding for birth control and would not oppose any state that wanted to pass laws making birth control illegal.

4. No porn! I'm not kidding. Santorum signed "The Marriage Vow" pledge, authored by the Family Leader organization, under which he swears to oppose pornography. I think many would agree that alone should disqualify him from being president."

   It is time for America to stop holding on to ridiculous, superstitious belief systems when it comes to choosing elected officials. Many of the GOP candidates are running on platforms that would seriously harm people, and it is somehow okay because they are doing so in the name of "Christianity". 
   Wake up, people.