home
RSS
April 10th, 2012
04:33 PM ET

With Santorum suspending campaign, some religious conservatives wonder how to proceed

By Dan Gilgoff, CNN.com Religion Editor

(CNN) - Evangelical activist Michael Farris was not exactly surprised that Rick Santorum suspended his campaign on Tuesday. But that doesn’t mean that Farris, a longtime political organizer, knows what he’s supposed to do now.

“Right now my choice is to sit on my hands and do nothing or to actively try to find some alternative” to Mitt Romney, Farris said in an interview shortly after Santorum's announcement.

“Some of us just have a hard time supporting a person who said he was going to be more liberal on gay rights than Ted Kennedy,” said Farris, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association, referring to remarks Romney made in a 1994 letter.

Farris’ reaction is a stark emblem of the disappointment among religious conservatives over Santorum's announcement, and a reminder that Romney’s enthusiasm deficit among the conservative evangelicals who form the GOP’s base hasn’t gone away.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

“There are two kinds of disappointment today,” said John Green, a religion and politics expert at the University of Akron. “One is felt by people who care a great deal about social issues, especially white evangelicals, who are uncomfortable with Mitt Romney.”

“And there’s another group who really liked Santorum,” Green continued, “and were quite excited about him not only because of the social issues but because they saw him as representing this positive role for faith and values in a society.”

The conservative and largely evangelical Family Research Council said in an email to supporters Tuesday night that Santorum's announcement "was clearly disappointing news for those looking for a nominee who understands and articulates the connection between the social and fiscal challenges facing America."

"His historical run for President achieved remarkable success because his campaign was based not on money spent, but on the pro-life, pro-marriage, pro-freedom message he carried," the Family Research Council email blast said.

Religious conservatives were the key to Santorum’s unlikely rise as a serious presidential candidate. Conservative evangelicals and Catholics were drawn to Santorum as much for his personal story – he is a conservative Catholic and homeschooling dad of seven – as for his outspoken advocacy against abortion rights and same-sex marriage as a U.S. senator.

While polls showed him at the back of a seven-person pack just weeks before January’s first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses, Santorum won a plurality of Iowa evangelicals, who accounted for nearly 60% of the electorate. That support laid the foundation for a first place Iowa finish.

After Santorum’s primary loss in New Hampshire to Mitt Romney - and days before Santorum would lose to Newt Gingrich in South Carolina - conservative religious activists convened in Texas and congealed behind the former Pennsylvania senator.

With strong evangelical support, Santorum went on to win primaries and caucuses in 11 states, even as Romney racked up more than twice as many delegates.

Not all conservative religious activists are as dead-set against Romney as Farris, who is also chancellor at Patrick Henry College, a school for homeschooled youth.

“Barack Obama will unite conservatives and people of faith more so than any single Republican candidate can hope to do,” said Mat Staver, an evangelical Christian who leads the conservative legal group Liberty Counsel.

But Staver said Romney would have to work hard to excite social conservatives.

“He’s going to have to make some intentional steps to reach out to evangelicals and religious conservatives,” said Staver. “It would be a mistake to assume he has every vote from evangelicals and religious conservatives locked up.”

At the moment, plenty of other conservative activists say they’re still in wait-and-see mode about the primary season.

“It’s very likely that he’ll end up the nominee, but he’s not he nominee yet,” said Steve Scheffler, president or the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, about Romney. “He was never my first choice, but I’ll support him because the alternative is something we can’t live with.

“But I’m not ready to throw my support to him yet,” Scheffler said.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: 2012 Election • Politics • Rick Santorum

soundoff (1,591 Responses)
  1. seyedibar

    Its funny to see how many people laugh at Romney's belief in magic Jesus in America... as if it's any more preposterous to believe in than magic Jesus in Jerusalem.
    For me, I'll be voting for the intelligent black man who's only pretending to believe in magic and ghosts.

    April 11, 2012 at 12:52 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      Amen to that!

      April 11, 2012 at 12:55 pm |
    • NorthropP61

      Santorum supporters will fall in line behind Romney, no matter what their view of his faith and his moderate politics. The GOP would never have let Santorum get the nomination because they knew the majority of US citizens considered him - let's face it - nuttier than a pecan tree.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:05 pm |
    • Garuu Popka

      I move that motion :v

      April 11, 2012 at 1:05 pm |
  2. MarkinFL

    Its quite obvious what will happen. 99% of social conservatives will hold their breaths and vote for the psuedo-conservative (as long as it gets him elected) flip-flopping Mormon since he is white and Republican ( at least in name). They really have no choice since Obama in office seems to cause them physical pain and unendurable mental duress.
    If Romney is smart, he will swing back to the middle after he gets the nomination, because no matter how much the right wing-nuts gnash there teeth over it, they will vote for him no matter how moderate he becomes and he MUST win the middle to win the race. That is his best option.

    April 11, 2012 at 12:50 pm |
  3. Cheryl Jefferies

    Answer is quite easy (at least for THIS Conservative Christan Catholic Republican woman): vote for Mitt and beat the political daylights out of that lying Marxist sitting in the Oval Office right now. So, what's to wonder about???? 🙂 🙂 🙂

    April 11, 2012 at 12:45 pm |
    • Karaya

      Do you really think Obama is Marxist?!... Are all "Conservative Christan Catholic Republican woman" such eh-h.. uneducated or just you?

      April 11, 2012 at 12:50 pm |
    • MarkinFL

      The ignorance appears to be deep and wide. Deep and Wide.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:51 pm |
    • Brad

      Your ignorance is why this country cannot have nice things!

      April 11, 2012 at 12:53 pm |
    • I Hate Hypocritical Christians Like You

      My, that's not very Christian of you. Then again – that's typical of Christians nowadays. Hateful, lying, deluded nutwhacks that should NOT be allowed to make any decisions for the rest of the country.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:55 pm |
    • Primewonk

      Your Jesus was the biggest liberal ever. Can you explain to the board the origin of the phrase, "bleeding heart liberal"?

      For some reason, you wack-job nutter fundiots (fundamentalist îdiots) have this perverted view of your Christ as a cross between Chuck Heston and Arnold Schwartzenegger, with the 10 commandments in one arm and an Uzi in the other.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:12 pm |
    • NorthropP61

      How do you justify Jesus' not charging for handing out free food and healthy care with the conservative Republican's cold-heartedness toward the poor? Didn't he look like a socialist to you lot? "Whatever you do not do to the least of these...."? Guess that "everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" holds no terrors for hypocrites.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:13 pm |
  4. Mike

    The religious need to follow the will of their leader Rabbi Jesus and be the liberal that got him crucified.

    April 11, 2012 at 12:42 pm |
  5. Atheism is not healthy for children and other living things

    Prayer changes things .

    April 11, 2012 at 12:23 pm |
    • Garuu Popka

      This is the only time i agree with this guy

      I prayed that Santorum quit

      April 11, 2012 at 12:51 pm |
    • richunix

      Atheism is not a religion nor is it a belief.

      Stephen F Roberts: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

      April 11, 2012 at 12:56 pm |
    • Brad

      No, hard work changes things. Not blind faith and apathy. How come prayer hasn't helped millions of starving Africans? How come there are still hate crimes? Why do I not have perfect eyesight?

      April 11, 2012 at 12:57 pm |
    • I Hate Hypocritical Christians Like You

      I prayed to Holy Jeebus to make me intelligent and not be a deluded nutwhack Christian hypocrite – and he granted my wish: I'm now an atheist.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:58 pm |
  6. tim roach

    i think that this is the greatest thing that could've happened. niether one of these guys is going to try and use religion as a platform." thank you jesus". now we can finally get down to the real issues like, education, jobs, housing, medical, gasoline prices, need i go on. religion has no place in politics, it only muddies the waters. i would really just like to see an election based on real issues, because we have plenty of them...

    April 11, 2012 at 12:14 pm |
  7. Nii

    RAINER
    I don't think its appropriate 4 u 2 seek 2 discredit another's doctrine n ritual relative 2 urs. De many religious n non-religious persuasions have their own reasons 4 existing. Urs is 2 prove by exemplary behaviour that urs will help mankind. Don't shoot others down 2 make urs look good.

    April 11, 2012 at 11:24 am |
    • jimtanker

      U r write. They r all fake anyways.

      April 11, 2012 at 11:30 am |
    • Nii

      JIIMTANKER
      Don't put words into my mouth. All I am saying is that even Atheism seeks someway somehow to make men ethical and emotionally mature. If this is fulfilled then thats all that matters even to God. I don't care much for religion/non-religion fights.

      April 11, 2012 at 11:55 am |
    • Primewonk

      Nii – we can't put words in your mouth, because real words are not coming out of your mouth. R 4 U C???

      Sorry, but most of us who have at least 10 functioning neurons don't speak 13 year old sqee fangirl.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:39 pm |
    • Brad

      Nii, it is hard for anyone to take you seriously when your comments are nothing but incoherent ramblings. Research your stuff, fix your grammar and then get back to us.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:47 pm |
    • Garuu Popka

      Hay a11 ya11 leve mah grl a10n3

      $H3 ju$t $trt3D pr3-k

      April 11, 2012 at 12:54 pm |
  8. Nii

    FACEPALM
    The periodic timeline used 2 discredit Jesus is funny. When Christ was asked about de sack of Jerusalem he predicted it wud be in his generation. Then it turned 2 de end of his Age. The last line is what people translate as "within a generation it will end". It is "then this Age will end".

    April 11, 2012 at 11:12 am |
  9. Rainer Braendlein

    There is nearly no difference, spiritually seen, between a Catholic presidential contender and a Mormon one. Both are sinners, because their alleged faith is worthless.

    Up to around 600 years after Christ the Roman Catholic Church was a real Christian Church and people could find health there for their soul and for their body. Gregory the Great (Gregory I) was the last good bishop of Rome or Italy. He refused to accept the ti-tle "Bishop of all Bishops", but wanted to remain merely Bishop of Italy. After Gregory I bad bishops, which were hungry for power, honor and money, assumed rule over the Catholic Church, and thus she corrupted in the course of time. Now she has reached such a state of perdition that her priests molest guiltless children. How shall such a "Church" confer health to its members? Real health means righteousness in daily life.

    Secondly, the Mormons believe that God had had se-xual intercourse with Mary, to beget Jesus. Alone this is enough, to condemn them as a horrifying cult.

    What we need, is a new Reformation. We need an international council of the Christian Churches, which is free and not predetermined by a lousy pope. Such a free council, where bishops, pastors, priests and laymen could discuss freely, would be led by the Holy Spirit and the outcome would be the clear will of the Lord, the Eternal God.

    People need to realize again the meaning of sacramental baptism (sacramental baptism was not invented by the lousy pope, but be Jesus Christ himself). Baptism is the rebirth by Water and Spirit. At baptism a man, which feels sinful and hopes to get deliverance by Jesus, realy gets connected with the Godhead, which delivers him or sets him free. After baptism a sinner is "in Christ" and can overcome his sinful body by Christ's help. It is equal to say that at baptism one receives the Holy Spirit, and by his power he can overcome the lust of his flesh (body). Object of faith and baptism is Christ's death and resurrection. He has borne our sins on the cross and has resurrected for our justification.

    By baptism one gets metaphysical connected with Christ's atonement and thus becomes able to live a life of practical righteousness, which will certainly be appreciated by human observers.

    One more argument against the Mormons:

    The Mormons are a dangerous cult. Good night America, if Romney becomes president.

    The Mormons are no Christian Church. This is easy to prove. The founder of the LDS, Joseph Smith, once had a vision, the socalled First Vision, where "God" told him that he would not be allowed to join any of the current churches of his time. This, of course, was actually demonic.

    A true Christian Church will always be connected with the Early Church, which was founded by Jesus. Out of the Early Church emerged the Byzantine Church, the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches. Regretably the Catholic Church has turned apostate by papacy. The Protestant Churches meanwhile have entered a state of crisis, because they ordain gays priest and pastors and preach the gospel of the cheap grace.

    Nevertheless the Protestant Churches can trace back their roots to the Early Church, which was founded by Jesus. Hence, we need no new church, like Smith falsely assumed, but a Reformation of the existing Protestant and Orthodox Churches (the Orthodox Churches emerged directly from the Byzantine Church).

    April 11, 2012 at 10:42 am |
    • Madtown

      he would not be allowed to join any of the current churches of his time. This, of course, was actually demonic.
      ------
      Says who?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:59 am |
    • Rainy Braindead

      Yucky Mormons! My cult is better than their cult!

      April 11, 2012 at 11:03 am |
    • MarkinFL

      I just love that the right wing must choose between a Mormon and a black man. No matter how it works out, there is entertainment value.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:54 pm |
    • richunix

      Do you believe in Unicons?

      Stephen F Roberts: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”

      April 11, 2012 at 12:59 pm |
    • Deli Delight

      Mark in FL, "I just love that the right wing must choose between a Mormon and a black man. No matter how it works out, there is entertainment value."

      Yep - an irony sandwich on "wry" bread.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:02 pm |
  10. Alger Dave

    Romney has done little to give evangelicals a reason to vote for him in the fall. Most are now saying they'll likely not support Romney in the fall but will turn their organizations and money towards congressional races. That's good to hear, because a loss by Romney could 'coat-tail' a bunch of conservatives out of the house and senate (and state races). More importantly, this race will be a chance (the second in 4 years) for evangelicals to send a message to the GOP – you cannot take our votes for granted! Either present a candidate who shares our values, or at least float one who's moderately trustworthy. Romney is neither, as far as we can tell.

    April 11, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • *facepalm*

      I hope that a GOP split occurs and that this country finally gets to a political system that has more than two consequential parties.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:41 am |
    • Primewonk

      The trouble is that the fundiots (fundamentalist îdiots) and the tea baggers are batshît crazy. True conservatives haven't been represented by the Republican party since Reagan went courting the (un)Moral Majority. They have been hijacked by the religious nutters.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:54 am |
    • William Demuth

      Perhaps he should bugger an altar boy during the next big NASCAR race?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:58 am |
    • closet atheist

      @ *facepalm* ~~ Ramen!! Not sure where you stand exactly.... but what the F is up with this wacky system where our likely choices for prez are between a VERY leftist, populist liberal and crazy christian nutbags. If there was a fiscally conservative / socially moderate party that could get itself taken seriously, it would likely clean house.

      April 11, 2012 at 11:34 am |
    • c

      "float one who's moderately trustworthy" when you put it like that Alger ;it makes one wonder is you are a true Christian conservative- who doesn't mind sacrificing your values to get what you want. That's called politics; not religion. Read the Book of Morman lately.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:14 pm |
  11. Scott

    So... I guess God's pics are all out. I wouldn't trust him in Vegas...

    April 11, 2012 at 10:35 am |
    • *facepalm*

      Yeah, Mr I-don't-know-when-the-end-is-coming-but-it-will-definitely-be-before-this-generation-passes is usually pretty bad at predicting the future.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • William Demuth

      Actually, if Allah is God, then what we are seeing makes perfect sense.

      April 11, 2012 at 11:01 am |
  12. lll

    Santorum said his god told him to run. What does this mean? Is Santorum turning his back on his god's wishes? Did his god change his mind?

    Or was it all delusion from the beginning?

    April 11, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • *facepalm*

      Or perhaps god has a sick sense of humor – he wanted Ricky to run knowing that he would fall flat on his face.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:34 am |
    • Ronald Reganzo

      Do you have first hand knowledge of that yet or are you still promoting your opinion as fact?

      April 11, 2012 at 12:24 pm |
    • Joe

      God wanted Santorum to run as God wants Obama to win.

      April 11, 2012 at 1:07 pm |
  13. JDinTexas

    Hypocrits. As I recall, the pastor of a large Baptist Church in Dallas said, when endorsing Perry over Romney, that it was the "duty of Christians to vote for a Christian." His sentiments were immediately echoed by others in the Evangelical community. Well now, I think evangelicals are now required to vote for President Obama.

    April 11, 2012 at 10:18 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      So you heard one Baptist pastor speak to his own church and you feel that all of the Evangelicals feel exactly the same as he does.

      You know, when Herman Cain dropped out, many of my African American friends told me that now I have no choice but to vote for Obama. In what world do you folks live in that everyone is that monolithic?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    • sam stone

      "In what world do you folks live in that everyone is that monolithic?"

      Don't know. Ask Rainer with his "all men are sinners" schtick

      April 11, 2012 at 10:35 am |
    • Mike

      Do what Rabbi Jesus would want you to do.

      April 11, 2012 at 12:43 pm |
    • c

      He really meant white christians

      April 11, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
  14. Vince

    Those who think religion and government should go hand in hand, should move to a place where they do go hand in hand....like Iran.

    April 11, 2012 at 10:11 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      Hmm, or Israel ...and those who do not want to see Government and Faith hand in hand can move away to Denmark.

      Everyone go home ..... give the lands back to the Native Americans. 🙂

      April 11, 2012 at 10:33 am |
    • William Demuth

      Mark

      You are correct Israel is a Theocracy.

      We just need to stop that depravity from catching on here.

      April 11, 2012 at 11:03 am |
    • Mark from Middle River

      William.... hmm... a small Country surrounded by hostile countries fights them off and is not in current decline.

      ...and ranks number 2 in the world for most educated.

      Yeah William we need to stop such "depravity from catching on here." 🙂

      Source : http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/03/10281909-canada-tops-list-of-the-most-educated-countries

      April 11, 2012 at 11:18 am |
    • tim roach

      amen to that vince

      April 11, 2012 at 12:30 pm |
  15. Rainer Braendlein

    @sam stone

    Natural born sinners, that is, what we are.

    I said that gayness is only one of many sins, which prove our alienation from God. We are natural born sinners. Just think, how angry yet an infant can be. A certain man, called Adam, degenerated voluntarily by abandoning the source of life and we are his descendants, that means we have inherited his degenerated nature, which does works of death, called sins.

    In Romans 1 we can read the following:

    28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

    In the same chapter, some verses before, gayness is mentioned as another sign for alienation from God, the source of life.

    Our sins are a sign for our alienation from God. They are a kind of death and make us suffering from depression, fear, grief, diseases and physical death.

    God offers the gospel. If we want, we can return to God by faith in Jesus. God proved his love for us and his friendly character by delivering his Son for our sins. He also raised him from the dead for our justification.

    April 11, 2012 at 10:06 am |
    • Jay Davis

      I always find it sad when I hear Christians express their view of themselves and fellow man as broken wretched sinners. It is one of the most disgusting doctrines I have ever come across.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:10 am |
    • sam stone

      do you believe that orientation is a choice? yes or no. should not be that hard to answer.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:11 am |
    • sam stone

      jay: you cannot sell the cure until you convince people they have the disease

      April 11, 2012 at 10:12 am |
    • your god is irreducibly complex

      You are so brainwashed that it's beyond funny.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:13 am |
    • sam stone

      "God proved his love for us and his friendly character by delivering his Son for our sins"

      God is the one who established this supposed sin.

      What you describe is more like a thug offering protection.....from himself.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:14 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      @Jay Davis

      You are even right, it is disgusting, but on the other hand it is historical true.

      Look at Nigeria, Syria. What is going on there? Do we live in a peaceful world?

      One man is the wolf for the other man (ho-mo ho-mini lupos est or so). That's the sad reality.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:17 am |
    • sam stone

      So, all men are sinners from birth because Nigeria and Syria are violent places?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:20 am |
    • sam stone

      What you see as a "historical truth", Rainer, others see as an opinion.

      Now, are you going answer my question?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:21 am |
    • Rainer Braendlein

      @sam stone

      Human beings harm each other day by day without measure. That is a clear prove for the reality of sin.

      Or would you call it love, if someone uses an explosive belt?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:23 am |
    • sam stone

      i would not call it love when someone use an explosive belt, or a F-16.

      are you going answer my question, or run like a snivelling little coward?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:28 am |
    • *facepalm*

      Sin does not necessarily require a deity or some divinely imposed moral code depending on the definition of sin used (websters, for instance, has both the colloquial and the hocus-pocus version) So, to that end, I would say that Rainer is correct – sin exists. But Rainer's examples to not necessitate a deity which disconnects his examples from his original argument – making the original argument rather unsubstantiated.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:33 am |
    • Scott

      @ Rainer Braendlein

      Ohh no, people are sinners... So... Who's going to do something about it? Because people have been sinning for centuries, and I don't think your God or uncle jesus has done anything about it. My god, on the other hand, encourages my behavior and behavior of ones who are expressing themselves in a positive way, because my god doesn't hate people because of how they were made... I guess my god is better than your God 🙂

      April 11, 2012 at 10:38 am |
    • Doc Vestibule

      Sin lies only in harming other unnecessarily.
      All other "sin" is invented nonsense – most especially "original sin".

      April 11, 2012 at 10:41 am |
    • Don't be so bovine, Rainy!

      Evil sinful mankind. Our all-knowing God made Adam and Eve, made them exactly as they were, and knowing exactly what that was and knowing what the future would be, God is surprised by something they do. Huh?

      God gets angry at something they do, even though they were as he made them and he knew what would happen. Say what?

      God punishes them, even though they were exactly as he made them and he knew what would happen before he made them. Uh . . . wait a minute . . .

      Then God punishes not just them but all of mankind forever for their one act, which came from how he made them and he must have known would happen.

      Houston, we have a problem. Either God knows a LOT less than he is supposed to, or it was total entrapment followed by the highly unjust act of condemning billions in a massive bit of guilt by association.

      So, is God stupid? Is God cruel and maneuvering and unjust? Very childish?

      This is just senseless, like the account of the creation of Earth, where animals are made first, but then a few lines later animals are made after man, and where water is created long before dry land but then the land is dry because the rain had not come yet.

      Honestly, anyone whose bullshit detector is not going off like crazy in the first few pages of the Bible is just docile and bovine and stupid. The Bible can't get three pages without contradicting itself, and gives an account that shows how flawed and unjust God is in his Adam and Eve scam.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:54 am |
    • tonks1

      Its obvious that you are an evangelical. Did you know that "Adam" means man in Hebrew, and it can mean more than one? Did you know that that story was adapted by Christians from Pagan folklore from the Sumerians? Do your homework. Gensis is a beautiful story of the fact that at someplace in sometime, the world evolved through God's hands as did a soul. It wasn't a particular person, and women weren't made out of clay. We're hardwired to understand and interpret stories, that's how God made us. Too bad so many people don't realize this and use the Bible as a historical and literal timeline. We aren't separate from God, he is here and within us, not sitting on a judgemental throne somewhere. And if more people realized this and their imagery of God came from a more loving and unbiased place, then we as a nation would be a in much better spot!

      April 11, 2012 at 11:21 am |
    • tim roach

      you sound just like charlie browns parents to me...

      April 11, 2012 at 12:34 pm |
    • tim roach

      i guess i must make clear who the comment goes to. so to rainer braendlein, don't you evangelicals ever get tired of sounding like charlie browns parents....

      April 11, 2012 at 12:40 pm |
    • sam stone

      Tim: I think people like Rainy just like to preach. Makes them feel all pious and such. After all, they are cowards and this is their way of dealing with it

      April 11, 2012 at 12:44 pm |
  16. Joseph

    Interesting to hear self-professed "liberals" [who supposedly champion the right of all voices to be heard] parrot the notion: "keep your religion out of politics." O.k. but could we not reply "keep your partisan vision for utopia out of politics" as well? Aren't all ideas protected under the 1st amendment?

    April 11, 2012 at 9:57 am |
    • Jay Davis

      You could reply that but you'd be a fool for conflating religion and ideaology.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:07 am |
    • Joseph

      Pretty sure fools are covered under the 1st amendment too. I say your ideology has no place, you say my religion does not. In America, we're both wrong. Glory be!

      April 11, 2012 at 10:11 am |
    • *facepalm*

      *sigh*

      Yes, candidates are protected under the first amendment from espousing just about whatever views they want. No one is advocating making it illegal for candidates to talk about religion. You could also have a candidate that espouses views that would re-segregate the country. The candidate would be free to say such things. It would also be completely relevant to for others to say that racism has no place in politics. See the difference?

      April 11, 2012 at 10:29 am |
    • myweightinwords

      The difference being, the const.ituion also says that you must keep your religion out of, if not the politics, the law.

      Even if the majority of the population were to suddenly and miraculously unite under lock-step beliefs (even Christianity today is so fractured, that only the barest of tenets are held by all those who claim the label), the const.itution would not allow for that belief system to be codified into law.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:33 am |
  17. Guess what?

    Santorium is an idiot.

    April 11, 2012 at 9:42 am |
    • VanHagar

      Did you stay up all night working on that post?

      April 11, 2012 at 12:30 pm |
  18. reason

    They wonder how to proceed? Here is an idea: keep your religion out of politics!

    April 11, 2012 at 9:38 am |
  19. lll

    When your god asks you to run that is your ace card.

    Santorum should have played that up more. He should have spent less time trying to get votes and more time praying. While he prayed a lot it was obviously not enough. Maybe if he did it like Tebow, more public in front cameras, that sort of thing.

    April 11, 2012 at 9:35 am |
    • *facepalm*

      Maybe god just wanted to humiliate him. You know, put him in his place.

      April 11, 2012 at 10:30 am |
  20. lll

    He was apparently ready to accept it if I had a first hand experience of Santorum's claim, but not from his wife. Meanwhile he will accept things in the Bible, written and heavily modified over time, and which contains mostly folklore. I can only handle so much ignorance.

    April 11, 2012 at 9:32 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.