Rick Santorum Would 'Invalidate' Gay Marriages

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum once again touted his support for a federal ban on gay marriage, saying on Saturday that any now-legal same-sex marriages would be invalid under a constitutional amendment.

In an interview with NBC's Chuck Todd at his campaign headquarters in Iowa, Santorum said there needs to be one marriage law for all 50 states. When asked if he would make same-sex couples get divorced, he responded, "Well their marriage would be invalid. If the constitution says 'marriage is this,' then people whose marriages are not consistent with the constitution ... (shrug.) I'd love to think that there was another way of doing it."

Santorum said he has hesitations about the Supreme Court taking the decision about marriage away from the people. "32 times marriage has been voted on, in 32 different states from Maine to California, and 32 times marriage has won," he said. But later in the interview Santorum acknowledged that "just because public opinion says something, doesn't mean something's right if it's not right."

Santorum's comments are the latest in his long fight against gay marriage, which he thinks would have dire consequences for American society. Santorum said Saturday that though friendship and familial love are important, "It's not as important for the health of society as men and women coming together, joining together in marriage, having children and raising those children for the future of society."

Last month Santorum blamed same-sex marriage for plummeting rates of marriage across the nation. In November, at an event sponsored by the Christian group the FAMiLY LEADER in Des Moines, Santorum said gay marriage could doom the U.S. "Unless we protect it with the institution of marriage, our country will fail," he said.

Santorum has recently surged to a third place spot in Iowa, just days before the Iowa caucuses.

H/T Thinkprogress

Comments

[Lisa Bouchard]

09:19 PM on 06/20/2012

Rick Santorum Accidentally Masturbates and Creates a New Life - must see hilarious animation that targets major social issues. Share The Link...Post the link!
Why does Rick scare so many normal people. Twisted and funny. He is out of the race but will still be pushing his agenda, and just the fact that he won so many primaries is quite unbelievable.
http://youtu.be/JLtpbaFnjng

[mountanben]

10:33 PM on 02/07/2012

this man is a moron,whats next a religions state where we have to fall down and pray 5 times a day .Look back at histroy and see what religion did to the people of the world.Millions killed in the name of God .is this what this man will do to us.O Lord please protect me from your followers.

[Johnbon]

03:19 PM on 01/10/2012

Part One:

This hysterical headline may be fairly equated with the smut we see spewed across the walls of public toilets. It’s worthy of a tabloid rag and the kind of he said, she said, ‘objective reporting’ that all ethical journalists should despise but which every lazy propagandist resorts to.

Garbage like this perpetuates legal ignorance. It’s what’s wrong with Journalism today and a perfect example of how journalism has descended into the dark ages. It is worse then beauty shop gossip!

Those of us who favor marriage equality should all despise such tactics and when you pander to ignorance you do us all a dis-service.

I despise Santorum but what he said was, "Well their marriage would be invalid. If the constitution says 'marriage is this,' then people whose marriages are not consistent with the constitution ...”

Resorting to tabloid method you missed the perfect opportunity to attack Santorum where it would be most effective: his legal ignorance and incompetence. See Part Two here. It's a legal no-brainrer

[Johnbon]

03:17 PM on 01/10/2012

Part II.

First, this is first year law school stuff. “He” (Santorum) as president COULD not do that. He is merely resurrecting the tired old canard of a constitutional amendment which is legislative process that history shows has a snow ball's chance in hell! Are you too young to remember the ERA? Do you have a clue how hard it is to amend the Constitution? Do you know how many times it has been tried and failed? Do you have even a clue what it takes? Why not try to educate people rather than pander to ignorance?

Second, what you and Santorum are essentially talking about is tantamount to an ex post facto law. Even if the Constitution could be amended that, as a matter of law, could not void prior marriage contracts entered into at a time when such contracts were legal. They would be grand fathered in.

Those two rudimentary points of bedrock law are where ANY responsible journalist should begin. When pundits grasp such statements for propagandistic purpose they not only miss a perfect opportunity to educate but prove Janet Malcolm’s famous thesis that, "Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible."

[tadpole112202]

11:16 PM on 01/04/2012

He's just trying to get otherwise lazy non-voting Teapublicans out to vote.

[bklynsparrow]

08:15 PM on 01/04/2012

"Santorum said Saturday that though friendship and familial love are important, "It's not as important for the health of society as men and women coming together, joining together in marriage, having children and raising those children for the future of society." Well, Rick, there is a lot more to a healthy society than just procreating and raising kids. Yo would see the truth of this if you ever visited a trailer park in the bible belt.

[Tim Fredrick]

03:09 PM on 01/04/2012

Rick: There needs to be one marriage law, huh? Yesterday, you were saying that states should have the freedom to decide to ban abortion or sodomy. So, what is it? States' rights, or not? Or, are you for states rights when they align with your morality and not for them when they don't? That, my man, would make you a hypocrite of the highest order.

[jm26dream]

05:43 PM on 01/03/2012

Everyone in the country needs to have their sexuality validated or not by my judgements, because other people's private lives are important to me

[TarzanaGirl]

03:27 PM on 01/03/2012

So I guess this means that he won't be receiving any support from the Bachmanns???

[TXanimal]

03:03 PM on 01/03/2012

Well, if you're allowed to annul my marriage, then I should be able to live tax-free. Since I'm not good enough to have equality, then I'm not good enough to pay taxes. Deal?

[Ioan Lightoller]

03:52 PM on 01/03/2012

Suppose that your proposition became law--I suspect people like Santorum wouls be out there whipping up hatred against "more special rights for GLBT people". Bigoted jerks.

[blue rylie]

08:58 PM on 01/04/2012

If it meant another way for Santorum to avoid paying taxes, he may convert and announce his homosexuality.

[bklynsparrow]

08:17 PM on 01/04/2012

I've asked anti- gay marriage people exactly the same question. Why should gays pay taxes if they don't have the same rights? I get the deafening sound of crickets.

[sobe123]

01:04 PM on 01/03/2012

I glad that in his little fantasy world he somehow believes that he could be elected President. Once Iowa and South Carolina primaries are done he will start to see and feel reality. In case he doesn't get it, which I doubt he does, Americans are split or a little better than even on gay marriage. And that trend continues to move upward.

[bstone441]

12:14 PM on 01/03/2012

Santorum = Sharia Law. Do Regugs really want a Theocracy govt with Evangelical Law? It frightens me that the rights of religion over individual pursuit of happiness is so strong in their party.

[steveham13]

10:37 AM on 01/03/2012

It would be wrong to say I've never realized what a big deal this was...because I always have. It's just that with each negative article and comment, I'm more aware of how unjust this whole thing is. Life's always been nothing short of wonderful...and I guess wrongly, I've looked the other way...or just been glad the glass was half full. All of this absurd press is doing just the opposite of all it was intended to. Rather than push folks apart...it will make them band together. Everyone will be more ticked off and less afraid...and will come together as one voice. That voice will not be one thought with a bunch of echoes, as the meek voice of those opposing equality is...but rather millions of different voices creating a perfect harmony.
CON'D

[darlenebonny]

09:22 AM on 01/03/2012

Rick just loves to show off his low IQ.

[klwarner]

03:02 AM on 01/03/2012

This is absolutely unforgivable. To take away the rights that American citizens have been afforded by their states is unconstitutional, nothing short of it. Electing ANYONE that wants to take away the rights of american citizens is totally unforgivable.

[Ioan Lightoller]

03:06 PM on 01/03/2012

Please keep that in mind the next time your state wants to have people vote on the rights of GLBT people--or anyone else for that matter.

[tadpole112202]

11:13 PM on 01/04/2012

Then I guess we can't vote for Obama. He still sends the feds to raid state-legal medical cannabis growers on the west coast. It's ironic that Ron Paul is the only candidate who would allow states to legalize it (or so he says).

[klwarner]

10:15 AM on 01/05/2012

Let me start with, I agree with you. But there are other places where this isn't necessarily happening the same way.

[klwarner]

10:16 AM on 01/05/2012

But, this is taking away something unbelievably personal that so many fought to have. It's marriage, so it hits closer to home than the cannibis debate.