It’s amazing that this hasn’t gotten more press, but maybe that will change with a little help from my new allies in the fight against rape apologia, the gang at Big Journalism. If they thought Keith Olbermann‘s apparent denial of sexual assaults at Occupy encampments (since clarified) was revolting, this ought to make their vomit vomit: former Sen. Rick Santorum, national frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination, is not just a rape apologist, but a child rape apologist.
Perhaps it’s a function of our cowed press, which often runs interference for the Catholic church any chance it gets, but Sen. Santorum’s comments seem to be lost to history, which is remarkable, since they were made in the same interview as his infamous “man-on-dog” postulate:
AP: Speaking of liberalism, there was a story in The Washington Post about six months ago, they’d pulled something off the Web, some article that you wrote blaming, according to The Washington Post, blaming in part the Catholic Church scandal on liberalism. Can you explain that?
SANTORUM: You have the problem within the church. Again, it goes back to this moral relativism, which is very accepting of a variety of different lifestyles. And if you make the case that if you can do whatever you want to do, as long as it’s in the privacy of your own home, this “right to privacy,” then why be surprised that people are doing things that are deviant within their own home? If you say, there is no deviant as long as it’s private, as long as it’s consensual, then don’t be surprised what you get. You’re going to get a lot of things that you’re sending signals that as long as you do it privately and consensually, we don’t really care what you do. And that leads to a culture that is not one that is nurturing and necessarily healthy. I would make the argument in areas where you have that as an accepted lifestyle, don’t be surprised that you get more of it.
AP: The right to privacy lifestyle?
SANTORUM: The right to privacy lifestyle.
AP: What’s the alternative?
SANTORUM: In this case, what we’re talking about, basically, is priests who were having sexual relations with post-pubescent men. We’re not talking about priests with 3-year-olds, or 5-year-olds. We’re talking about a basic homosexual relationship. Which, again, according to the world view sense is a a perfectly fine relationship as long as it’s consensual between people. If you view the world that way, and you say that’s fine, you would assume that you would see more of it.
This “logic” is the same sick garbage that’s pushed by professional Catholic apologists like Bill Donahue, but aside from the fact that raping a 15 year-old is still rape, what Santorum says isn’t even close to true. Even a study that was commissioned and paid for by the Catholic Church shows that only 27% of the victims of sexual abuse by priests were aged 15 years or older. Sixteen percent of them were between 8 and 10 years old, and 6% were 7 or younger.
Rick Santorum’s reprehensible, well-known views on homosexuality haven’t hurt him with conservative voters thus far, mainly because even the ones who disagree with him don’t place a high priority on the issue. It will be interesting to see what they think of his views on sexually assaulting children, once Andrew Breitbart gets his conservative media machine cranking on it.
Have a tip we should know? email@example.com