Quantcast

«

»

Apr 16 2013

Santorum: Gay Marriage Stops Straight People From Having Kids

Rick Santorum went on the Bill O’Reilly show and made a monumentally idiotic argument. He claimed that allowing gay people to get married will result, and is already resulting, in straight married couples having fewer kids. Why? I have no idea. Neither does he.

“Would we be discouraging heterosexual marriage by allowing gay marriage?” Bill O’Reilly asked Santorum.

“Yeah, I believe we would,” Santorum replied.

Santorum then suggested that legalizing gay marriage results in Americans having fewer children.

“Because we’d be saying that marriage isn’t about children,” Santorum said. “And when we say that, then, of course, the consequences are you’re probably going to have less children. It’s happening as we see it. It’s already happening in America.”

Holy missing causal connection, Batman. Does he really think a single straight person in the world is ever going to say, or has ever said, “Look honey, I’d love to have another baby, but now they’re letting gay people get married so let’s use birth control instead”? Seriously?

56 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    gshelley

    I don’t think so. He seems to be arguing that there are people who are going to say “What’s that, gays can get married? You mean that people who get married don’t have to pop out a child every year to year and a half? Let’s use birth control”
    Which doesn’t make any more sense.

  2. 2
    Rev. BigDumbChimp

    Santurom was here in Charleston this week. The whole place reeks now.

  3. 3
    amyjane

    My daughter and her husband are only having one because of college debt. That’s really the reason this generation of young people are deciding not to have kids. But that makes sense, not something one expects from the Santorums of this world.

  4. 4
    Synfandel

    So, if China had just legalized same-sex marriage, it wouldn’t have had to resort to the one child policy. Go figure.

  5. 5
    Captain Mike

    Same sex marriage was legalized in my province in 2003. At the time I had only one child. Now I have four. Just imagine how many kids I would have if Ontario didn’t allow for same sex unions.

    Up with gay marriage!

  6. 6
    theschwa

    My wife and I have one child and are trying to have another. But it is not happening. We both got tested and I have enough “ammo”. I guess her uterus is on strike because of gay marriage.

  7. 7
    davidct

    In a world with more than 7 billion people, why is not having kids a bad thing? Also given the percentage of kids in single parent families, marriage does not seem to be that closely related to having kids right now. The thing that these clowns fail to realize is that marriage is just a special kind of legal contract. It does set the rules for responsibilities regarding children, but it does not require or ban them.

  8. 8
    Gretchen

    “Because we’d be saying that marriage isn’t about children,”

    It’s the cult of The Only Children Who Should Exist Are Unplanned again.

    You have children because biology, morality, and the law all combine to force you to.
    But only if you’re straight, because straight couples are the only couples who can be forced by biology.
    And only if you’re straight, because God says straight couples are the only ones who can be forced morally. And only if you’re straight, because the law can only ban abortions for people who are actually pregnant, and they’re only allowed to get pregnant in either of the other two ways.

    Having been forced to have children, you ideally are already married but it’s acceptable if you get married Right Fucking Now. Having then wed, you can continue to unintentionally produce children until you’re no longer able.

    Whether you ever wanted a single one or not. What you actually want is irrelevant.

    That’s what marriage is for.

  9. 9
    freemage

    Remember, you have to translate everything through Santorum’s viewpoint, which means you must both insert your head in your ass, AND become a narcissist of the first order, and then become a devout Catholic.

    You see, he thinks that it’s only because of modern liberalism that people don’t regard marriage as simply the thing you do to get babies. He genuinely believes that straight couples throughout history have held the exact same loveless, soulless, degrading view of marriage as a duty and obligation to produce and provide more children, regardless of your feelings about the matter, that he does. And since that isn’t what’s happening any more, it must be liberalism’s fault. So any time a liberal advance is made, it undermines all the good straight people, who start getting married for love and having sex for pleasure, instead of dutifully thinking of Jesus to try and avoid actually enjoying the orgasm (men only; women obviously shouldn’t even have orgasms, or you’re doing sex dirty).

  10. 10
    Jadehawk

    1)pretty sure we’ve been saying marriage isn’t about children since the 60′s
    2)how do you make this argument, and at the same time bewail the numbers of children born out of wedlock? Seems to me fewer marriages doesn’t stop people from spawning.
    3)he seems to be saying that straight people only get married precisely because it gives them a privileged, special status in society
    4)i’m not sure about this, but the form of the argument seems to suggest that people don’t ever have children voluntarily; that the mere idea that you don’t have to marry, and that if you do you don’t have to spawn, is going to stop everyone from spawning.

  11. 11
    dugglebogey

    Santorum is, quite literally, a joke.

  12. 12
    frog

    gshelly:

    “What’s that, gays can get married? You mean that people who get married don’t have to pop out a child every year to year and a half? Let’s use birth control”

    It makes perfect sense, actually. Santorum&Co have been indoctrinating their daughters (and sons as well, but it’s the women who really get the brunt of it) with the ideas that:

    -It is a woman’s sacred duty to have babies
    -Babies should be produced by married couples
    -Birth control is a sin

    Their whole schtick is about how women are supposed to get married while young, and start popping out kids, and they have justified this by claiming the entire purpose of marriage is to produce babies for the greater glory of their god. Their god shows his favor by giving them lots of babies; therefore more babies = We Are Awesome!

    It’s disgusting.

    But if gay couples are allowed to marry, then maybe some of the less-mentally-stunted women (stunted by their abusive environment) will start to wonder about this whole “Women should be married and having babies” thing. It’s a big threat to one of their major brainwashing ideals.

  13. 13
    Jadehawk

    My daughter and her husband are only having one because of college debt. That’s really the reason this generation of young people are deciding not to have kids. But that makes sense, not something one expects from the Santorums of this world.

    personally, i am ambivalent about spawning because it feels a bit like a shit move to put a person into a world that’s teetering on the brink of a massive environmental catastrophe.

    but i’m weird that way.

  14. 14
    scienceavenger

    I wonder what would happen if we let old people incapable of having children get married. Wait a minute…

  15. 15
    matthewpickard

    Christ Jesus Santorum, I wish I would have told me two years ago that once gays marry that my wife and I would be discouraged from having a child. According to Wikipedia two gay men were granted a marriage license in 1975, by Santorum’s own reasoning, he and his wife should have been discouraged from having a family and definitely not a premature son in 1996.

  16. 16
    imrryr

    Sometimes I worry that if I ever have kids they might somehow end up just like Rick Santorum. That small possibility alone is enough to stop me.

  17. 17
    raven

    “Because we’d be saying that marriage isn’t about children,”

    Who is this we anyway?

    It can’t be Satanorum. No one sane and/or intelligent pays any attention to the pronouncements of his dark and empty mind.

    The birth rate has been falling steadily for most of the last century and this one all over the world. All without gay marriage. It has a lot to do with rising standards of living and education.

    If Satanorum really wants to flood the world with more people, he would be encouraging poverty and ignorance instead. Hmmm, oh wait. That is exactly what he wants.

  18. 18
    raven

    “Because we’d be saying that marriage isn’t about children,”

    We, being the 315 million people living in the USA, already say that and have for a century, at least.

    The average family size is 2+.

    Marriage is about al lot of things. As many reasons as there are people who get married.

  19. 19
    Gretchen

    Jadehawk said:

    personally, i am ambivalent about spawning because it feels a bit like a shit move to put a person into a world that’s teetering on the brink of a massive environmental catastrophe.

    but i’m weird that way.

    I’m dedicatedly opposed to spawning because I don’t want kids. It’s amazing how many other people, including Santorum here, consider that their business.

  20. 20
    A. Noyd

    Let’s stick with making marriage about marriage and children about children. Making marriage about children just takes two things that should be done out of desire and joy and turns them into a miserable obligation.

  21. 21
    gshelley

    Frog

    t makes perfect sense, actually. Santorum&Co have been indoctrinating their daughters (and sons as well, but it’s the women who really get the brunt of it) with the ideas that:

    -It is a woman’s sacred duty to have babies
    -Babies should be produced by married couples
    -Birth control is a sin

    Well, I could see that would follow from his worldview if not for the fact that 95% of people already use contraception, people who can’t have children have being getting married for centuries and the number of children born to a couple shows quite clearly that people are already choosing not to have children.
    But I suppose Santorum has quite a track record of ignoring reality and preferring things he knows in his heart to be true, rather than things that are actually true. This could be one of those cases.

  22. 22
    Doug Little

    Less kids is a feature not a bug, bring on gay marriage maybe it can stunt the population growth of the planet just enough so that we all don’t starve to death.

  23. 23
    jayhawk

    World population in billions from United Nations Estimates:

    2012 7 .0
    2020 7.6
    2030 8.3
    2040 8.8
    2050 9.3

    I think we need more gay marriage!

    The good news, SOME models predict the population could stabilize around 2050 (but note the emphasis on some). I do not think those models even take into account the impact of gay marriage (sarcasm).

  24. 24
    tbp1

    And what exactly is wrong with fewer children? (Not “less”—I know people don’t worry about that distinction much any more, but it still bugs me.) I don’t understand at all how anyone, even someone as obviously delusional on so many levels as Santorum, could look at the world today and think, “Wow, there just aren’t enough people having babies.”

  25. 25
    Onamission5

    But.. but.. marriage isn’t about children.

    I’d know, I managed to have four of them despite being A) bisexual and B) not being legally married whatsoever. Also, my (now deceased) grandmother who got married in her 80′s had no desire to have more kids. Ought she to have ended her life lonely and single?

    I have an idea! Let adults who want to get legally married get married, let people who want to have kids or not have them or don’t, and quit conflating legal marriage with a desire for reproduction. How novel!

  26. 26
    tbp1

    @Jadehawk, #13:

    personally, i am ambivalent about spawning because it feels a bit like a shit move to put a person into a world that’s teetering on the brink of a massive environmental catastrophe.

    but i’m weird that way.

    I’m with you. That’s one of many reasons my wife and I didn’t have kids. We’re old enough that I am cautiously optimistic about getting through our lives before the excrement really hits the ventilator, but our nieces and nephews are starting to get married and have families, and I worry a LOT about them and their kids.

  27. 27
    NitricAcid

    The way he sees it, men and women are meant to get married and have lots of kids. When people start accepting that gay marriage is acceptable, then a) the sodomite lifestyle will become even harder to resist than it is already, and b) if such sin is tolerated, then people will become more accepting of other sins (like birth control, or simply not getting married, or being asexual without joining the clergy, etc). All of these will pull people away from the wholesomeness of fecundity.

    And while the world’s population is increasing, Santorum is very opposed to slowing down this growth, because it would mean that America would be outbred by the foreigners! Not even European-type foreigners, but heathen, non-Caucasian Third-world-type foreigners! If “we” don’t breed enough to keep up with them, we’ll be over-run!!

    *Shudder* I need to go wash my brain after seeing things from his point of view.

  28. 28
    Christoph Burschka

    “Money equals power. Power equals camel. Camel equals five celery sticks. Five. Quid pro quo.”

    It’s only logical.

  29. 29
    Alareth

    @davidct #7

    In a world with more than 7 billion people, why is not having kids a bad thing?

    This was answered a week or two ago by another wingnut (I think it was Hagee’s son) explaining how gay marriage would destroy capitalism.

    1. Capitalism require consumers
    2. Gay marriage means no new children to become consumers
    3. Capitalism dies and the world ends

  30. 30
    anubisprime

    Brain dead bigots get cute when they are desperate!

  31. 31
    stever

    The world ends anyway. In the long run, the death rate exactly equals the birth rate.

  32. 32
    whheydt

    Maybe what Santorum is afraid of is this scenario…

    He: Let’s have another kid.

    She: Gays can get married. Don’t you DARE touch me.

  33. 33
    andrewscott

    davidct – “In a world with more than 7 billion people, why is not having kids a bad thing?”

    It’s all about the CORRECT people (Catholic and white) having babies and increasing the flocks numbers which increases the voters for Rick (and any of his spawn that decide to run for politics until a theocracy is installed…)

  34. 34
    JJ831

    [T]he consequences are you’re probably going to have less children.

    We could hope…

  35. 35
    jeevmon

    Santorum feels that today’s unplanned child is tomorrow’s Wal-Mart stocker or Applebee’s busboy/ busgirl. And we need to ensure that our oligarchs aren’t ever faced with a (*gasp*) shortage of workers because a shortage might lead to unreasonable demands for things like a living wage.

  36. 36
    Who Knows?

    “Money equals power. Power equals camel. Camel equals five celery sticks. Five. Quid pro quo.”

    Thanks Chrisoph! When you explain it like that it makes perfect sense. Now I have no idea why I ever disagreed with Santorum.

  37. 37
    Eamon Knight

    Santorum needs to wake up. Westerners, even including devout Christians, have been deciding, in increasing numbers, that children are only *one* of the things that marriage *might* be about (and then only 1 or 2 instead of 4 or 5) for several — I’d say seven or more — *decades* now. And gay marriage has only been a thing for about the last one or two of those. The “blessing of children” phrasing in the traditional wedding liturgy has been problematic (and often omitted) since before I got married. The obligatory-fertility crowd lost the culture war long before the Gay Agenda[tm] tried to take it over.

  38. 38
    Margaret

    the form of the argument seems to suggest that people don’t ever have children voluntarily

    I think that is indeed what he thinks. That’s certainly what I grew up believing though, unlike him, I eventually realized that there are actually some people who for some bizarre reason actually want kids. (Also unlike him, I never thought not having kids was a bad thing — quite the contrary.)

  39. 39
    democommie

    “Their whole schtick is about how women are supposed to get married while young, and start popping out kids, and they have justified this by claiming the entire purpose of marriage is to produce babies for the greater glory of their god. Their god shows his favor by giving them lots of babies; therefore more babies = We Are Awesome!”

    Well, if Santorum (the slimy fuckdouche candidate, not the frothy fuckdouche substance) decides to run again, he should have a punchier campaign slogan:

    “Fucking our way into the White House! If you can’t beat ‘em, outbreed ‘em!!”

    Then again Ex-senaturd Li’l Rick only had 7 kids in 23 years of marriage, what a slacker!

  40. 40
    lofgren

    To be fair to Santorum, I don’t think he believes that any straight couple will actually formulate those thoughts. It should be pretty obvious to people on this blog that humans do not always act rationally. It seems reasonable to me that by shifting the cultural emphasis of marriage to love and companionship rather than a way of legitimizing your heirs and helping to ensure women don’t get stuck raising children by themselves, you end up encouraging more couples who have no desire for children to get married, and you have more people who do plan on having children getting married and yet having fewer children and having them later. Meanwhile, people who do have children don’t necessarily have to get married. Are those rational behaviors? Not necessarily, as there were plenty of people who got married yet remained childless back when the emphasis was on children (and if you broaden the definition of marriage to any lengthy pair-bond with a default assumption of economic, sexual, or emotional commitment, that number climbs ever higher). There has never been any rule or law that marriage is about children, but it was certainly a pervasive cultural attitude.

    Unfortunately for Santorum, I think he’s about 150 years too late to throw himself on the gears of this machine. At this point his only choices are to get out of the way or be ground into blood meal.

  41. 41
    dshetty

    some conservative homophobic nuts who are in the closet might get gay married instead of persisting with their sham marriage thereby reducing the number of children

  42. 42
    D. C. Sessions

    Alternately, since Santorum can only force himself to get it on w. Frau Santorum as an act of pious duty he figures that the rest of us will be working ourselves up to perform our distasteful mitzvot and then remember that other men are married to other men — and get so discouraged that we can’t perform as required.
    Before you know it, the human race goes extinct,and all because of gay marriage.

  43. 43
    Gvlgeologist, FCD

    The US has almost twice as many people as it did when I was born, 57 years ago. It is visibly more crowded, with greater problems (food, pollution, energy, open spaces, waste disposal) than it did when I was growing up. What the hell is wrong with fewer people? If these conservative idiots really want to go back to the 1950s, they should consider that maybe what made their idealistic world so good may have been… fewer people.

  44. 44
    Akira MacKenzie

    Gretchen @ 8

    It’s the cult of The Only Children Who Should Exist Are Unplanned again.

    Oh, that’s not fair, Gretchen, and you know it in your man-hating, Femi-Nazi heart! Sen. Frothy Mixture wants every child to be planned; it is the duty of every woman of childbearing age to plan on getting pregnant each time they have RCC-approved sex with their husband! ;)

  45. 45
    Akira MacKenzie

    lofgren @ 40

    To be fair to Santorum…

    I’d rather not.

  46. 46
    lofgren

    I’d rather not.

    Why not? He fully earns more disgust than any decent person is capable of of giving him. There’s no need to tilt the scales.

  47. 47
    jenniferphillips

    I just saw this article (linked on a conservative friend’s Facebook page) on the Illinois Family Institute website entitled “Homosexual activist admits true purpose of battle is to destroy marriage”. The article “quotes” Masha Gessen in a “radio interview” (unnamed and unsourced), conveniently articulating a number of wingnut fears. Marriage destroyed! Polygamy rampant! The institution of marriage eliminated!

    I’ve never actually read anything by Masha Gessen–I know her name vaguely as someone who has spoken out against draconian Russian policies against gays. Even if the quotes are 100% true and not redacted in any way, I don’t recall her being recognized as the official spokesperson for marriage equality. I’m a little skeptical that she hit all the notes on the dog whistle in this one “radio interview”, though. Anyone know more about this?

  48. 48
  49. 49
    dingojack

    Jennifer – not exactly ‘google-fu’ but here perhaps this will help refresh your memory.
    Hope that helps,
    Dingo
    ——–
    Note the line: “Gessen speaks of her own beliefs in many interviews, and does not speak for the entire LGBT Community”.

  50. 50
    bad Jim

    We’re over-thinking this. It’s really simple: gay sex is icky, so gay marriage is icky, which makes all marriage icky. When a man kisses his wife, he’s can’t help being disturbed by the thought that gays kiss their partners in exactly the same way.

    To a Catholic, sex is something so dirty, disgusting and perverted that you can only do it with the one person you love. It’s still normal, though. Gay sex is something so perverted, disgusting and dirty that it’s orthogonal to our five-dimensional framework of God, parents, spouse, children, and community, disrupts the space-time continuum and threatens us with rainbows and unicorns.

  51. 51
    mikee

    Hurrah, gay marriage will now be possible in New Zealand in a few months (parliamentary bill passed tonight). Thirteen country in the world to embrace same sex marriage

  52. 52
    Marty Erwin

    The vermin preying on the undeveloped minds of youngsters in their tax-exempt propaganda havens known as churches are probably the only demographic Sanctimonius Santorum is aiming to impact with his current round of pre-election drivel. Sad that the moron cannot just shut up and go away after a resounding defeat in the last election.

  53. 53
    tbp1

    Honestly, doesn’t everything about Rick Santorum just scream “deeply-closeted, self-loathing, utterly miserable gay guy?”

    I can almost hear him thinking, “Well, I had to marry someone I didn’t love and was barely attracted to, if at all, and then turn out a whole mess of kids who will come to loathe me if they don’t already, all in a vain effort to hide my true nature, so why doesn’t everyone else have to be as unhappy as I am? Oh, and because I had to have all those kids, no one else gets to use birth control.”

  54. 54
    caseloweraz

    tbp1: And what exactly is wrong with fewer children? (Not “less”—I know people don’t worry about that distinction much any more, but it still bugs me.) I don’t understand at all how anyone, even someone as obviously delusional on so many levels as Santorum, could look at the world today and think, “Wow, there just aren’t enough people having babies.”

    Put it this way and it makes a bit more sense: “Wow, there aren’t enough of our kind of people having babies.”

    In the battle of the tribes, IOW, the Muslim tribe is out-breeding the Christian tribe.

    NitricAcid (#27) said this already. Oh, and capitalism: Alareth (#29).

  55. 55
    Sastra

    Gretchen #8 wrote:

    It’s the cult of The Only Children Who Should Exist Are Unplanned again.

    And I’d combine this with the Becoming a Mother or Father Makes You Unselfish cult. Santorum and those who agree with him see seeking self-fulfillment as a danger to be avoided. It’s individualism and leads towards anarchy and away from God. The proper role for women and men is one of subjugation, sublimation, submission, and duty. Gay marriage just contributes to the idea that we can pursue happiness as we see it.

    No. We must pursue happiness as God sees it. As interpreted by His spokesmen, of course.

    Rev. BigDumbChimp #2 wrote:

    Santurom was here in Charleston this week. The whole place reeks now.

    Ah, but my daughter in Charleston told me she just heard Sandra Day O’Connor give a talk there on the Establishment Clause — so the air must smell sweeter.

  56. 56
    tk421

    jenniferphillips, I shared your concerns when I read this. The lack of attribution and the “perfect” nature of the quote had me wondering if this was a made up quote. I did some digging and I found the interview.

    It was an Australian show called Life Matters from June 11, 2012. Here’s the link to it. The quote begins around the 6:30 mark. The url is:

    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/why-get-married/4058506

    The quoting is accurate.

    I hope that helps.

    - tk421

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site