Oh my, yes.
From Rick Santorum’s Wikipedia entry:
A controversy arose following Santorum’s statements about homosexuality in an interview with the Associated Press that was published on April 20, 2003. In response to a question about how to prevent sexual abuse of children by priests, Santorum said the priests were engaged in “a basic homosexual relationship”, and went on to say that he had “[…] no problem with homosexuality. I have a problem with homosexual acts”; that the right to privacy, as detailed in Griswold v. Connecticut, “doesn’t exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution”; that, “whether it’s polygamy, whether it’s adultery, whether it’s sodomy, all of those things are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family”; and that sodomy laws properly exist to prevent acts that “undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family”. When the Associated Press reporter asked whether homosexuals should not then engage in homosexual acts, Santorum replied, “Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that’s what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality”.
Rick Santorum is guilty of hate speech. In a perfect world, Dan Savage would have addressed Santorum’s ignorance and bigotry in a loving, Gandhi-esque fashion, but I give Savage credit for creativity and effectiveness. His Google bombing campaign might be juvenile and vengeful in tone, but he’s fighting speech with speech in an exceptionally clever way, and has drawn a lot of attention to a worthy cause. What’s more moral than protesting hate speech nonviolently?
Santorum is a high-profile voice for one of America’s last widely acceptable forms of institutionalized bigotry. His hate speech has real-world consequences. Two days ago, a fourteen-year-old who made an “It Gets Better” video committed suicide after being bullied for being gay. Rick Santorum is in part to blame for the atmosphere of hate that gay kids have to live with. If the worst thing that happens to him is being made fun of on the internet, well, that sounds pretty just to me.
I’m not sure how I feel about this.
On one side, I feel that “Spreading Santorum” is petty and unproductive. It doesn’t help win over any anti-gay people; it just makes them dig in their heels (and gives liberals a cheap laugh).
On the other hand, one of my biggest complaints about the Democratic Party (as a Democrat myself, just to be clear) is that they let Republicans walk all over them verbally. Just look at swift boating in 2004 (or a thousand other examples). If someone threatens your way of life, what are you supposed to do, give him a high five? Savage just may be one of the only sane liberal icons.
In fact, a good analogy for me would be my foot fetish – I’ve never been discriminated against (and likely never will be), but I at least know what it’s like to be in a sexual minority seen as “weird” by most. If Santorum ever comes out against the foot, calling people like me an “affront to God” and all that crap, you can be sure I won’t be calling for respectful dialogue.
Having written this comment, I’ve gone from undecided to agreeing with you. Good article.
I’m tired of the left being a bunch of doormats too. You’re right that Savage’s campaign isn’t going to change any minds, but hopefully it’s rousing otherwise passive and neutral people into taking a stand. Dan Savage is a comedian, a really funny one; it’s not his job to be mature and reasonable. Hopefully there are some non-homophobic Baptist preachers and Catholic priests out there fighting the good fight slowly and patiently from the inside.
I”m confused as to when he says anything actually negative about homosexuals. Remember when he said “That’s not to pick on homosexuality.”? Just because he thinks it’s unhealthy or antithetical to marriage doesn’t mean he hates homosexuals and promotes violence against them. People may use his opinions to fuel their own fire, but that doesn’t mean he thinks homosexuals are subhuman.
Santorum’s disclaimer that he’s “not picking on homosexuality” is disingenuous. He draws an equivalency between “basic homosexual relationships” and the molestation of children by priests. Seizing on the fact that the priests were gay pedophile rapists is like seizing on their being left-handed pedophile rapists. Also, saying he “has a problem with homosexual acts” directly contradicts his statement about “not picking on homosexuality.” He draws a moral equivalency between adultery and gay sex. He says that gay sex is “antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.” He says that gay sex “undermines the basic tenets of our society.” He then suggests that homosexuality, pedophilia and bestiality are all “one thing.” That is hate speech.