|
tazzygirl -> RE: The Vigina Ideologues (2/14/2012 10:27:57 AM)
|
quote:
Ok I found it. I should have known it would be a anal sex crack. I gotta say, as insults go, that one is really lame. Maybe you should start looking outside of the jr highs for your material.
Maybe if you research why he earned it, it would make so much more sense.
Oh, and btw, his first name also has a meaning.
In 2003, in response to comments by then-U.S. Senator Rick Santorum that were criticized as anti-gay, sex columnist and gay rights activist Dan Savage began a campaign to (in Savage's words) "memorialize the Santorum scandal [...] by attaching his name to a sex act that would make his big, white teeth fall out of his big, empty head".[1][2]
Santorum made the comments to which Savage took offense in an April 2003 interview with the Associated Press. Discussing a recent United States Supreme Court decision striking down an anti-sodomy law, Santorum compared the right to consensual (homosexual) sex within the home to polygamy, incest and adultery, and made references to bestiality and child sexual abuse in the context of distinguishing them from monogamous, heterosexual marriage as forms of deviant sexual behavior.
Savage subsequently asked his readers to coin a definition for santorum,[2] and announced the winner as "the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex." Savage created a web site to promote this definition, which became a prominent search result for Santorum's name on several web search engines. In 2010 Savage offered to take the website down if Santorum donated US$5 million to Freedom to Marry, a group advocating legal recognition of same-sex marriages.
In September 2011 Santorum asked Google to remove the definition from its search engine index. In response, Google said that the company does not remove content from search results except in very limited circumstances.
What was that comment he made?
We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual 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. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.[3]
http://books.google.com/books?id=U34pJTdF-VcC&pg=PA67#v=onepage&q&f=false
Its quick to find that by google search.
Consensual sex.... he equates that with bigamy, polygamy, incest, adultery
But, according to unedited excerpts of the taped interview released late Tuesday by The Associated Press, Santorum spoke at length about homosexuality, and he made clear he did not approve of "acts outside of traditional heterosexual relationships."
In the April 7 interview, Santorum describes homosexual acts as a threat to society and the family. "I have no problem with homosexuality," Santorum said, according to the AP. "I have a problem with homosexual acts."
A man who would make such a jr high school ish comment deserves a jr high school-ish nickname.
|
|
|
|
