The interview in question.
First off let me just say that on homosexuality I’m not one of those fire and brimstone they’re all going to hell types. I’m not exactly on the other side though. I just kind of fall somewhere in the “it’s icky” category. They can do what they want; I’d just prefer that I didn’t have to spend too much time thinking about the fact that there are guys making out with other guys.
That being said, I’m kind of torn about what I think of the specific case before the Supreme Court that Santorum mentions about sodomy laws. Part of me says that an individual should be able to do just about anything they please within reason and that the government shouldn’t be able to regulate how people have sex. There’s a nagging part of me however that says that if the state or local governments want to make up a rule about it they also have that right and that if people don’t like it they should either move or try to change it in their state or locality. I’m not a huge proponent of the right to privacy that took the abortion issue out of the hands of the states, and that’s pretty much what’s being used in this particular case as well. Long story short, I guess I just haven’t worked out where I come down on this issue, but in my mind it’s much more about states rights vs. individual rights, and not about the morality of sodomy and all that.
I do however very much enjoy this line by the AP guy in the interview:

AP: I’m sorry, I didn’t think I was going to talk about “man on dog” with a United States senator, it’s sort of freaking me out.

In a related note, I think Brian Griffin takes his condemnation of Santorum’s moral relativism too far. Santorum obviously doesn’t see “moral relativism” as being about each person making up their own minds, I would presume he instead sees it from the “we’re not allowed to judge anybody because we’re not in their shoes” angle. Certain moral issues have to be universally applied in order to have a society. Things like not having sex with 4 year olds and not shooting every third person you meet on the street. Moral relativism as I think Santorum sees it says that you’re not allowed to pass judgment on people for doing these things. Brian is pretty much redefining the term “moral relativism” and then calling Sen. Santorum a hypocrite for not following Griffin’s definition of the word.
You can think Sen. Santorum is wrong all you want and if you want to vent on religion in general that

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *