By R. Cort Kirkwood
April 25, 2003

(AgapePress) - Sen. Rick Santorum, Republican from Pennsylvania, is now likened to Sen. Trent Lott.

Santorum has upset the homosexuals, and they expect the GOP to dump their No. 3 senator. What happens remains to be seen, but the one thing Santorum must not do is apologize.

Several reasons come to mind, not least of which is that he's right.

What He Said
Referring to a U.S. Supreme Court case that will decide the "constitutionality" of Texas' sodomy law, Santorum, an orthodox Catholic, remarked thusly:

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual [gay] sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything."

Within minutes, a mouthpiece from the disingenuously named Human Rights Campaign, a lobby group for sodomy, was on the blower with the newspapers: "It is stunning, stunning in its insensitivity," David Smith told the Philadelphia Inquirer. "Putting homosexuality on the same moral plane as incest is repulsive."

A Santorum spokeswoman rushed to answer: "[She] said yesterday that Santorum had no problem with gay relationships. 'Sen. Santorum was specifically speaking about the right to privacy within the context of the Supreme Court case,' she said, explaining that he did not want to elevate gay sex to the level of a constitutional right."

Commented Howard Kurtz in The Washington Post, "At least Trent Lott had the good sense to apologize."

The Real Problems
If you want to know what's wrong here, look beyond Santorum. First look to the Supreme Court, which has no role here. The Texas law is "constitutional" because it's none of the federal government's business, regardless of what high court "precedent" says.

If Santorum were smart, he'd be working to undo the 75 years of unconstitutional "civil rights" jurisprudence and legislation that permits the Supreme Court to decide these things.

Second, of course Santorum has "a problem with gay relationships." If one form of extra-marital sex is permissible, Santorum essentially said, all of it is. This is what faithful Catholics like Santorum believe. And that, not politically organized sodomites, Kurtz and others gallingly suggest, is what's wrong.

Citing the AP follow, Kurtz quotes Santorum, then adds a snippy, fallacious analogy: Santorum has "'no problem with homosexuality -- I have a problem with homosexual acts.' Boy, that oughta make everyone feel better. Kind of like saying you have no problem with disabled folks, it's just those blasted wheelchairs."

No, it's not like saying that, but regardless, Santorum is right again. Love the sinner; hate the sin. It's standard Christian teaching. And that, again, is the real evil in this topsy-turvy morality play.

Why He's Right
Now, let's grab the nettle:

"Putting homosexuality on the same moral plane as incest is repulsive," says the professional homosexual. Really?

I'd describe what homosexuals do in detail, but it's so repulsive I'll let readers look into it. They can decide whether anal intercourse is repulsive, or whether a three-man orgy in a bathhouse is morally equivalent to a married man and woman making new life.

Homosexual sodomy, an objectively disordered act, is on the same moral plane as incest. It is a mortal sin, all of which are repulsive to Christians and not only send the unrepentant to Hell but also poison society.

Explanations and apologies didn't help Lott. They won't help Santorum.