<?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/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Is Santorum Too Catholic for Evangelicals and Too Evangelical for Catholics?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:13:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.6</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Sam Osborne		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/#comment-19230</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sam Osborne]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethoughtblogs.com/xblog/?p=1836#comment-19230</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In March of last year the Boston Globe quoted Rick Santorum telling a group of right-wing Catholics that he was “frankly appalled” that America’s first Catholic president, John F. Kennedy, once said “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.”  In characterization, Santorum went further by saying “That was a radical statement,” and did “great damage.”  And Santorum concluded, “We’re seeing how Catholic politicians, following the first Catholic president, have followed his lead, and have divorced faith not just from the public square, but from their own decision-making process.”

Santorum may insist that he is a better Catholic then I am and a better man to be president than John F. Kennedy, but just as freely I view him as a religious bigot that neither speaks for me in matters or conscience nor political affairs.  And further, were he to gain the power of the presidency by successfully painting the people’s consideration with his brand of religious fanaticism, it would do “great damage” to our land.

And frankly, in words of comparative disparagement that Lloyd Bentsen directed at Dan Quayle in their 1988 vice-presidential debate, “Rick Santorum, you’re no John F. Kennedy.”]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In March of last year the Boston Globe quoted Rick Santorum telling a group of right-wing Catholics that he was “frankly appalled” that America’s first Catholic president, John F. Kennedy, once said “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.”  In characterization, Santorum went further by saying “That was a radical statement,” and did “great damage.”  And Santorum concluded, “We’re seeing how Catholic politicians, following the first Catholic president, have followed his lead, and have divorced faith not just from the public square, but from their own decision-making process.”</p>
<p>Santorum may insist that he is a better Catholic then I am and a better man to be president than John F. Kennedy, but just as freely I view him as a religious bigot that neither speaks for me in matters or conscience nor political affairs.  And further, were he to gain the power of the presidency by successfully painting the people’s consideration with his brand of religious fanaticism, it would do “great damage” to our land.</p>
<p>And frankly, in words of comparative disparagement that Lloyd Bentsen directed at Dan Quayle in their 1988 vice-presidential debate, “Rick Santorum, you’re no John F. Kennedy.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Rose		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/#comment-19229</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rose]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:51:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethoughtblogs.com/xblog/?p=1836#comment-19229</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Santorum is more of a Vatican Catholic than a pragmatic American Catholic, in his rhetoric.  Which, naturally he does not listen to himself.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Santorum is more of a Vatican Catholic than a pragmatic American Catholic, in his rhetoric.  Which, naturally he does not listen to himself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Elaine		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/#comment-19228</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Elaine]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethoughtblogs.com/xblog/?p=1836#comment-19228</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The Constitution is ignored or revered at the convenience of the one running for office, in that particular party.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Constitution is ignored or revered at the convenience of the one running for office, in that particular party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: cincinatheist		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/#comment-19227</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cincinatheist]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:45:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethoughtblogs.com/xblog/?p=1836#comment-19227</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Grammar Police alert: The word &#039;to&#039; is used incorrectly twice in this entry&#039;s title. You meant &#039;too.&#039;  I normally try to keep from being a pedantic ass and stay away from calling out grammar and spelling mistakes on the net. But in this case, it tripped me up for a minute because it confounds the meaning.  

That&#039;s all. ;-) Love your posts Greg. Keep &#039;em comin&#039;.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Grammar Police alert: The word &#8216;to&#8217; is used incorrectly twice in this entry&#8217;s title. You meant &#8216;too.&#8217;  I normally try to keep from being a pedantic ass and stay away from calling out grammar and spelling mistakes on the net. But in this case, it tripped me up for a minute because it confounds the meaning.  </p>
<p>That&#8217;s all. 😉 Love your posts Greg. Keep &#8217;em comin&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: BrianX		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/05/is-santorum-to-catholic-for-evangelicals-and-to-evangelical-for-catholics/#comment-19226</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BrianX]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:30:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freethoughtblogs.com/xblog/?p=1836#comment-19226</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Rick Santorum is definitely excessively Catholic though. I bet he&#039;s a total painslut. Hairshirt and everything.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rick Santorum is definitely excessively Catholic though. I bet he&#8217;s a total painslut. Hairshirt and everything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
