« Minneapolis Airport Terminal Evacuated On Possible Bomb Threat | Main | CQ On ... CBS? »
I like Rick Santorum. I really do. Unfortunately, the Pennsylvania Senator has a habit of talking without thinking about the consequences of his rhetoric. Earlier this year, he broke Godwin's Law and used Hitler for an analogy in reference to the Democrats and the judicial-nomination filibusters -- an analogy that actually made logical sense but was politically foolish. In his latest faux pas, he doesn't even have logic on his side:
What drew the concentrated ire of the Bay State's congressional delegation was Santorum's decision this week to repeat his three-year-old comment that liberalism was at the root of the scandal over child sex abuse in the church.
"Priests, like all of us, are affected by culture," Santorum wrote in a July 12, 2002 article for the Web site Catholic Online. "When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm."
Since Santorum wrote those words, the scandal has spread from Boston to almost every diocese in the country, has forced three bishops to declare bankruptcy and has cost the church close to $1 billion. In a study for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the John Jay College of Criminal Justice reported last year that 4,392 priests had been accused since 1950 of abusing more than 10,600 children.
Asked by the Boston Globe this week whether he stood by his remark, Santorum said he did. "I was just saying that there's an attitude that is very open to sexual freedom that is more predominant" in Boston, the Globe quoted him as saying Tuesday.
As a Catholic and a conservative, nothing would please me more than if we could blame the sexual-abuse scandals of the Church on a permissive society. Unfortunately, it simply isn't true. Pedophilia has nothing to do with liberal sexual mores. The sexual abuse of children involves illnesses without cures, and the scandals have to do with a church hierarchy that refused to recognize that and keep sick priests away from vulnerable boys and girls.
Normally I would rather eat raw squid with mushrooms and beets than agree with Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. Neither of these men conducted themselves with much honor during their political careers. Both owe so many apologies to so many people that hearing them call for someone else to apologize almost makes me spit out my beverage over my laptop screen.
In this case, however, they're right.
As the Post notes, Boston's diocese did not have the worst track record in the US, although it probably got the most press. Plenty of sexual abuse occurred in other areas of the country, even those more conservative than in wild and wooly Boston. The problem for Beantown wasn't a liberal attitude towards sex; it was the leadership of the diocese that apparently turned a blind eye towards the problem. It also wasn't a strictly Catholic problem either, as people discovered other clergy had abused children in the past and present.
It is unfair in the extreme of Santorum to blame the scandals on the community of Boston, a community that indeed was victimized by the pedophiliacs and those who hid their crimes. Santorum's remarks attempt to turn the blame away from the criminals and onto the victims. Those remarks were wrong three years ago, and he should have known better than to repeat them now. His spokesman, Robert Traynham, should also have known better than to keep digging the hole by blaming Harvard University for the sins of the Catholic priests and other clergy.
Bottom line: Conservatives don't blame society for the actions of individuals. Crimes are the responsibility of the criminals themselves.
Senator Santorum owes Boston and Massachusetts an apology.
UPDATE: ScottM asks a couple of good questions in the comments:
But you can't possibly believe that people's choices are not influenced by what society tells them about right and wrong. Morality is largely learned.
Is the rise in other crimes, unwed pregnancy, divorce, STDs, and all the other lovely panoply of modern life also in no way traceable to the breakdown of societal morality? Does society get a special pass on child abuse alone?
The rise in crimes as a societal issue came from a number of public policy decisions, including lenient sentencing, ignorance of recidivism (i.e., when we started locking up repeaters, crime went down), and a lack of resources for enforcement that still exists today. Look at what happened in New York when Rudy Giuliani decided to start enforcing all the laws, even the so-called nuisance laws. Crime dropped across the board. Does that mean crime needs a societal approach? Yes, but it doesn't mean New York encouraged people to commit crimes, which is what Santorum implied in his arguments about sexual abuse in Boston.
Also, no one knows how far back this abuse goes. Some of the victims have come out from as far back as thirty years ago. We know about more cases now, but that doesn't mean, unfortunately, that this indicates an increase from ten, twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty years ago.
As far as unwed motherhood, STDs, and divorce, none of these are crimes and involve personal choices made by the people involved. Do they indicate a lowering of moral values in society? Sure. But that doesn't make me responsible for someone getting a divorce, unless it's the First Mate. Moral choices are individual choices. Blaming these on Boston or Massachusetts (or San Francisco, or New York) makes no sense whatsoever. Where public policy impacts these choices, we need to work to make sure that it supports the most constructive and morally strong position possible, but in the end, the criminal remains responsible for his/her crimes, and not the community they victimize.
UPDATE: Here's the relevant passage from Senator Santorum's column, the part that he reconfirmed in his remarks to the Globe recently:
It is startling that those in the media and academia appear most disturbed by this aberrant behavior, since they have zealously promoted moral relativism by sanctioning "private" moral matters such as alternative lifestyles. Priests, like all of us, are affected by culture. When the culture is sick, every element in it becomes infected. While it is no excuse for this scandal, it is no surprise that Boston, a seat of academic, political and cultural liberalism in America, lies at the center of the storm.
Two points in this paragraph make him ripe for criticism. The first, that Santorum find it "startling" that the media and academia criticize the sexual abuse of children, is simply ludicrous. I have my share of skepticism for both institutions, but when did either of these groups enthusiastically support such behavior? Never. Perhaps a few fringe types in both might support NAMBLA and other perverse pedophilia interest groups, but abusing children still remains one of the most widely accepted taboos in our culture across the entire political spectrum. And only those extremists would consider such abuse as an "alternate lifestyle". The second, of course, is singling out Boston and political liberalism as the reasons for the abuse.
Power Line, Hard Starboard, and several readers in the comments think I'm being too harsh on Santorum, while Michelle Malkin, PoliPundit, John Cole, and other commenters agree with me. I will say this: had Santorum exercised some discretion and removed that paragraph from his column, I would have had no problem with the rest of his essay, which I think makes many good points. Let's just make sure we stop making excuses for pedophiliacs and the people who harbor them.Sphere It View blog reactions
TrackBack URL for this entry is
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Santorum Shoots His Mouth Off ... Again:
Tracked on July 14, 2005 8:25 AM
» Too Many Slips Of The Tongue from PoliPundit.com
If Rick Santorum wants to run for President, he is going to have to learn to spend a little more time thinking before engaging his mouth. [Read More]
Tracked on July 14, 2005 8:55 AM
» Calm Down, Cap'n from Hard Starboard
This seems to be the advice that NRO's Kathryn Jean Lopez is offering to CQ's Ed Morrissey over the Rick Santorum/Ted Kennedy spat. Just to review: In a rare personal attack on the Senate floor, Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy accused... [Read More]
Tracked on July 14, 2005 11:34 AM
» Santorum and Holy $#|+ from Weapons of Mass Discussion
"A renewed, united effort of clergy and laity will transform the Church. That this does not already occur belies the greatest systemic failure of the Church in America where so many cradle Catholics have left the Church or go "unchurched" because of ... [Read More]
Tracked on July 14, 2005 12:47 PM
» Santorum vs. Boston from The Unalienable Right
We were going to post about Senator Rick Santorum’s anti-Boston liberalism comments, but thankfully Michelle Malkin did it for us. Uh, what she said… We will add a few thoughts - If Santorum had merely said that in general, liberal va... [Read More]
Tracked on July 14, 2005 2:48 PM
» Santorum is a bigot from W.C. Varones
Many on the right support Santorum as a Senator, and some would support him for President, because of his consistent conservative voting record. But Santorum's kookiness and bigotry reflect poorly on the party that supports him. [Read More]
Tracked on July 14, 2005 8:36 PM
» In defense of Rick Santorum from Danny Carlton (aka Jack Lewis)
Some people just didn't get what Santorum was saying when he blamed Boston's acceptance of immorality as having an influence... [Read More]
Tracked on July 15, 2005 9:06 AM
» Sanity's Radicals Revisited... from My Sandmen
Do you hear me fellow Conservatives? You who have built your own ivory soap boxes from which you now denounce assertions of truth for their political folly. I submit to you that any community that fails to manifest the standards of civilization is gu... [Read More]
Tracked on July 15, 2005 11:14 AM
» Santorum vs. The World from Hennessy's View
I rarely disagree with Michelle Malkin. When I must, I hurt. Liberals seeking something—anything—with which to bash Senator Rick Santorum (RC-PA) have dug up a column he wrote that is older than Ted Kennedy’s favorite whiskey. I... [Read More]
Tracked on July 15, 2005 8:40 PM
My Other Blog!
Comment Moderation Policy - Please Read!
Skin The Site
Des Moines Register
International Herald Tribune
The Weekly Standard
The New Republic
AP News (Yahoo! Headlines)
Guardian Unlimited (UK)
New York Times
Los Angeles Times
- dave on Another National Health Care System Horror Story
- brooklyn on Hillary Not Hsu Happy
- rbj on Hillary Not Hsu Happy
- Robin S on Requiem For A Betrayed Hero
- Ken on Hillary Not Hsu Happy
- Robin S. on Requiem For A Betrayed Hero
- RBMN on Hillary Not Hsu Happy
- NoDonkey on Another National Health Care System Horror Story
- Robin Munn on Fred Thompson Interview Transcript
- filistro on When Exactly Did Art Die?
Proud Ex-Pat Member of the Bear Flag League!