Santorum's comments can be broken down as follows:
a) He believes there is no constitutional prohibition on states' regulating the entire range of sexual behavior.
b) He would support and vote for such prohibitions on a wide range of behavior - including, but not necessarily limited to, homosexual sexual relations.
c) He believes that the post-pubescent male victims of sexual abuse and statutory rape by catholic priests were simply engaging in normal consensual homosexual relationships.
Why has point c) not gotten any attention by the media? Points a) and b) are pretty standard stuff from the theocratic sex-obsessed crowd, if disturbing, while c) is quite horrifying. I mean, if Johnny and Daniel Santorum became the victims of sexual abuse by priests would he decide that they were simply participating in normal consensual homosexual relationships?
Signorile is talking about this now. Go listen!
(Update: Just wanted to add that I'm actually being rather charitable to Ricky. What he actually said was that the priest abuse cases were simply post-pubescent males having relationships with priests. There were of course pre-pubescent victims as well. )
