<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Did evangelical support for Santorum sink him in South Carolina?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/</link>
	<description>A [retired] college psychology professor&#039;s observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 19:55:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: stephen		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/#comment-91306</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[stephen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 19:55:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=10953#comment-91306</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hilarious. Santorum. About as electable as a roll of Bounty. If he was only as useful. Corrupt, ignorant, and deceitful. However, tonight he&#039;s been trounced by the evangelicals&#039; new boyfriend, values candidate, serial adulterer, Gingrinch.



Can we please have an explanation?



How did honorable evangelical Christianity become corrupted into the current vote-getting, fag-bashing, money-making, Republican organization? Does anyone wonder why many of us look on appalled? How did this happen? And why do you who claim to be evangelical Christians put up with it? You must know the Bible. You&#039;re not fools. What&#039;s going on?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hilarious. Santorum. About as electable as a roll of Bounty. If he was only as useful. Corrupt, ignorant, and deceitful. However, tonight he&#8217;s been trounced by the evangelicals&#8217; new boyfriend, values candidate, serial adulterer, Gingrinch.</p>
<p>Can we please have an explanation?</p>
<p>How did honorable evangelical Christianity become corrupted into the current vote-getting, fag-bashing, money-making, Republican organization? Does anyone wonder why many of us look on appalled? How did this happen? And why do you who claim to be evangelical Christians put up with it? You must know the Bible. You&#8217;re not fools. What&#8217;s going on?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Willmer		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/#comment-91304</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Willmer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 19:55:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=10953#comment-91304</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Also, I&#039;m not sure that Santorum&#039;s characterization (caricature) of &#039;non-traditional conservatism&#039; is, in any case, correct.  The idea that &#039;there is such a thing as Society&#039; is in no way the sole property of &#039;traditional conservatives&#039; as seemingly defined by Santorum.



What Santorum may be trying (and failing miserably) to say in the piece Zoe quoted above is that NEO-LIBERALISM is not the panacea that it was believed to be back in the 1980s.  It have never really been part of the &#039;Catholic mindset&#039; to embrace neo-liberalism; calls to protect the vulnerable go hand-in-hand with calls for social responsibility and discipline.



What we are perhaps seeing here is Santorum being the neo-liberal (on economic issues), and forty Church luminaries responding with some enlightened &#039;traditional conservatism&#039;!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, I&#8217;m not sure that Santorum&#8217;s characterization (caricature) of &#8216;non-traditional conservatism&#8217; is, in any case, correct.  The idea that &#8216;there is such a thing as Society&#8217; is in no way the sole property of &#8216;traditional conservatives&#8217; as seemingly defined by Santorum.</p>
<p>What Santorum may be trying (and failing miserably) to say in the piece Zoe quoted above is that NEO-LIBERALISM is not the panacea that it was believed to be back in the 1980s.  It have never really been part of the &#8216;Catholic mindset&#8217; to embrace neo-liberalism; calls to protect the vulnerable go hand-in-hand with calls for social responsibility and discipline.</p>
<p>What we are perhaps seeing here is Santorum being the neo-liberal (on economic issues), and forty Church luminaries responding with some enlightened &#8216;traditional conservatism&#8217;!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Lynn David		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/#comment-91280</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lynn David]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 19:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=10953#comment-91280</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[More than 40 national Catholic leaders and prominent theologians at universities across the country released a strongly worded open letter today urging &quot;our fellow Catholics Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail.&quot;



&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/newsroom/press/catholic-leaders-challenge-gingrich-and-santorum-on-divisive-rhetoric-around-race-and-poverty/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;An Open Letter to Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt; 



As Catholic leaders who recognize that the moral scandals of racism and poverty remain a blemish on the American soul, we challenge our fellow Catholics Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail. Mr. Gingrich has frequently attacked President Obama as a &quot;food stamp president&quot; and claimed that African Americans are content to collect welfare benefits rather than pursue employment. Campaigning in Iowa, Mr. Santorum remarked: &quot;I don&#039;t want to make black people&#039;s lives better by giving them somebody else&#039;s money.&quot; Labeling our nation&#039;s first African-American president with a title that evokes the past myth of &quot;welfare queens&quot; and inflaming other racist caricatures is irresponsible, immoral and unworthy of political leaders.



Some presidential candidates now courting &quot;values voters&quot; seem to have forgotten that defending human life and dignity does not stop with protecting the unborn. We remind Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Santorum that Catholic bishops describe racism as an &quot;intrinsic evil&quot; and consistently defend vital government programs such as food stamps and unemployment benefits that help struggling Americans. At a time when nearly 1 in 6 Americans live in poverty, charities and the free market alone can&#039;t address the urgent needs of our most vulnerable neighbors. And while jobseekers outnumber job openings 4-to-1, suggesting that the unemployed would rather collect benefits than work is misleading and insulting.



As the South Carolina primary approaches, we urge Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Santorum and all presidential candidates to reject the politics of racial division, refrain from offensive rhetoric and unite behind an agenda that promotes racial and economic justice.&lt;/blockquote&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More than 40 national Catholic leaders and prominent theologians at universities across the country released a strongly worded open letter today urging &#8220;our fellow Catholics Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail.&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/newsroom/press/catholic-leaders-challenge-gingrich-and-santorum-on-divisive-rhetoric-around-race-and-poverty/" rel="nofollow"><b>An Open Letter to Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum</b></a> </p>
<p>As Catholic leaders who recognize that the moral scandals of racism and poverty remain a blemish on the American soul, we challenge our fellow Catholics Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum to stop perpetuating ugly racial stereotypes on the campaign trail. Mr. Gingrich has frequently attacked President Obama as a &#8220;food stamp president&#8221; and claimed that African Americans are content to collect welfare benefits rather than pursue employment. Campaigning in Iowa, Mr. Santorum remarked: &#8220;I don&#8217;t want to make black people&#8217;s lives better by giving them somebody else&#8217;s money.&#8221; Labeling our nation&#8217;s first African-American president with a title that evokes the past myth of &#8220;welfare queens&#8221; and inflaming other racist caricatures is irresponsible, immoral and unworthy of political leaders.</p>
<p>Some presidential candidates now courting &#8220;values voters&#8221; seem to have forgotten that defending human life and dignity does not stop with protecting the unborn. We remind Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Santorum that Catholic bishops describe racism as an &#8220;intrinsic evil&#8221; and consistently defend vital government programs such as food stamps and unemployment benefits that help struggling Americans. At a time when nearly 1 in 6 Americans live in poverty, charities and the free market alone can&#8217;t address the urgent needs of our most vulnerable neighbors. And while jobseekers outnumber job openings 4-to-1, suggesting that the unemployed would rather collect benefits than work is misleading and insulting.</p>
<p>As the South Carolina primary approaches, we urge Mr. Gingrich, Mr. Santorum and all presidential candidates to reject the politics of racial division, refrain from offensive rhetoric and unite behind an agenda that promotes racial and economic justice.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Richard Willmer		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/#comment-91286</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Willmer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 19:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=10953#comment-91286</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I very much doubt that the USCCB will have that much of problem with this letter.  In fact, I suspect that key USCCB members will have seen it in advance of publication and may even be behind it.  (The Bishops themselves would probably not wish to make such a statement about any of the candidates, as it might look like &#039;political interference&#039;.   Like many of us, they probably - and rightly - take the view that either endorsing or rubbishing any candidate(s) would be dangerous, damaging and counter-democratic.)



The Bishops of Stockton, CA (a leading member of the USCCB) and of Albany, NY posted this comment (I suspect in response to a Santorum/Gingrich supporter):



&#039; If you believe only dissenters and apostates are speaking out against the stereotyping, it begs the question: where are the voices of Church leaders you recognize?



&#039; After all, last spring, Catholic bishops cautioned both houses of Congress: &quot;The moral measure of this budget debate is not which party wins or which powerful interests prevail, but rather how those who are jobless, hungry, homeless or poor are treated. Their voices are too often missing in these debates, but they have the most compelling moral claim on our consciences and our common resources.&quot; &#039;



I also doubt that the Vatican will take issue with the general concerns the letter raises.



Whether the letter represents fairly Santorum&#039;s and Gingrich&#039;s &#039;campaign behaviour&#039; is a matter for another discussion.  I suspect it does - at least in part.  Some people (e.g. Santorum/Gingrich supporters) will be pretty peeved about this, but I doubt there will be any meaningful &#039;reprisals&#039; against any of the authors.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I very much doubt that the USCCB will have that much of problem with this letter.  In fact, I suspect that key USCCB members will have seen it in advance of publication and may even be behind it.  (The Bishops themselves would probably not wish to make such a statement about any of the candidates, as it might look like &#8216;political interference&#8217;.   Like many of us, they probably &#8211; and rightly &#8211; take the view that either endorsing or rubbishing any candidate(s) would be dangerous, damaging and counter-democratic.)</p>
<p>The Bishops of Stockton, CA (a leading member of the USCCB) and of Albany, NY posted this comment (I suspect in response to a Santorum/Gingrich supporter):</p>
<p>&#8216; If you believe only dissenters and apostates are speaking out against the stereotyping, it begs the question: where are the voices of Church leaders you recognize?</p>
<p>&#8216; After all, last spring, Catholic bishops cautioned both houses of Congress: &#8220;The moral measure of this budget debate is not which party wins or which powerful interests prevail, but rather how those who are jobless, hungry, homeless or poor are treated. Their voices are too often missing in these debates, but they have the most compelling moral claim on our consciences and our common resources.&#8221; &#8216;</p>
<p>I also doubt that the Vatican will take issue with the general concerns the letter raises.</p>
<p>Whether the letter represents fairly Santorum&#8217;s and Gingrich&#8217;s &#8216;campaign behaviour&#8217; is a matter for another discussion.  I suspect it does &#8211; at least in part.  Some people (e.g. Santorum/Gingrich supporters) will be pretty peeved about this, but I doubt there will be any meaningful &#8216;reprisals&#8217; against any of the authors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: David M.		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2012/01/20/did-evangelical-support-for-santorum-sink-him-in-south-carolina/#comment-91278</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David M.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 19:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=10953#comment-91278</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not a Catholic myself, but I&#039;ve studied at both St. John&#039;s University (MN) and Catholic University of America (DC). It seems to me there is no single Catholic position on most things. Despite the Vatican&#039;s claim to speak for the Church, Catholics have views that range from the very conservative to the very liberal, theologically as well as politically. Mostly these coexist with one another rather peacefully. Many Catholic leaders are wise about when to speak and when to keep silent. I applaud these leaders for believing it to be the better part of wisdom to speak as they have.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not a Catholic myself, but I&#8217;ve studied at both St. John&#8217;s University (MN) and Catholic University of America (DC). It seems to me there is no single Catholic position on most things. Despite the Vatican&#8217;s claim to speak for the Church, Catholics have views that range from the very conservative to the very liberal, theologically as well as politically. Mostly these coexist with one another rather peacefully. Many Catholic leaders are wise about when to speak and when to keep silent. I applaud these leaders for believing it to be the better part of wisdom to speak as they have.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
