Answering Concerns Over Santorum's Not-So-Conservative Ways

By Douglas V. Gibbs

In J.J. Jackson's recent piece here on Political Pistachio about Santorum's liberal streak, a reader felt the article made no sense. I am assuming the reader does not fully grasp the real political difference between liberals and conservatives.  For example, on social issues, is the difference truly the stance on the issues themselves, or does it also include the application of those positions in the government model?

The following is my answer to the reader's concerns:

"Kelsey, I think you are missing the point. It is not about where he stands on the social issues, but how he proposes to advance those ideas.  From a Constitutional perspective, the social issues are State issues, and working to advance his ideas using the federal government is essentially using a liberal model. For example, though I agree with what the Defense of Marriage Act is trying to do from a social conservative point of view, the issue of marriage is a State issue, and so the legislation is unconstitutional.  DADT, however, falls under Article I, Section 8 where it says the Congress sets the rules for the military, and so the fight over that is completely within the realm of Constitutionality.

"If you think that the federal government should have a say over marriage, then an amendment to the Constitution granting that authority should be proposed and ratified. But, you have to take the good with the bad. If you give the federal government the authority to keep marriage between a man and a women, then you also give them the authority to do the opposite with marriage.

"Personally, the issue should have no governmental influence, and should remain in the realm of the church. But, that is just me.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary