It is presumptuous to claim that Santorum is not compassionate towards any one group of people. I understand Santorum to support social legislation that's constitutional and held to the definition of the given term. Marriage is defined as between man and a woman. Civil Union is totally different and does not devalue the institution of marriage as it is rightfully defined. This alumni group should consider approaching their classmate with more class and maturity. As educated Christian adults, the alumni would be more effective by conducting a legitimate discussion about the difference between marriage and civil union. Maybe they would be surprised by Santorum's answer? Maybe this alumni group should try "putting the shoe on the other foot". Did Santorum take away more from his Catholic education at Carmel then this particular alumni group? Is the alumni group rejecting the doctrine of the church? Just because someone defends the institution of marriage doesn't make them a harsh bigot. Let's consider those who value and defend the sacred sacrament as it is defined in the Bible. Civil union legislation would recognize a non-traditional relationship and legally allow the couple to enjoy the same benefits as those who have also received the sacrament of marriage in a church. Effectively, civil union would leave the religion out and respect doctrine. This alumni group needs to reconsider their approach on Friday. Respect others as you would want to be respected. Pray for guidance.

AMEN!

Nick,
Persecution: a program or campaign to exterminate, drive away, or subjugate a people because of their religion, race, or beliefs. Do you believe in rule of law? If we live in a society without rule of law, there is no protection against persecution on one another's liberties. The debate is on developing fair laws which support the first amendment. Please define what you mean by Santorum's "attitude" and why most people of faith don't follow him? If we are talking about the institution of marriage, isn't Santorum correctly defending the religious liberties of those who value the sacrament of marriage? If your agrument is to not persecute gay "marriage", then shouldn't you be advocating a non-religious solution such as civil union as to not "persecute people of religious institutions"? I would be careful about saying that "most people of faith don't believe in Santorum".

Support equality in regards to your final statement, our most pivotal right is the right to freedom of speech. So in fact he can spread his message all he wants. As educated human beings we have the right to not listen to him and move on. Welcome to the US of A. We lose that right than we have nothing. I too do not support Santorum however I do support his right to speak freely and his ability to run for office. I would hope this great country continues to offer that so if I one day choose to run for office, I can.

Mac,
I agree with you. Although, I think the problem lies with insurance benefits and other legal matters that spouses are privileged to under a marriage license, which is where the government comes into play. I think the debate is whether to allow gay couples to legally obtain privileges like those in a traditional marriages. This is where the debate gets fiery. I would hope that those who advocate for gay rights acknowledge the difference between the religious sacrament of marriage and the legal rights for benefits. Civil union by the State, NOT the church, would provide legal rights to benefits and at the same time respect the religious doctrine by not defining it as a "marriage" which is clearly defined in the Bible as a union between a man and a woman. Does it simply come down to a license distinction? State Civil Union License vs a Marriage License?

Santorum follows Catholic teaching? Have you ever heard of the Just War Theory? What part of invading Iran (which Santorum supports) is justified by the Just War Theory? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory)

Santorum is fresh? I am not a Roman Catholic, like the Bishops who completely disagree with Santorum, but I have to agree with the Bishops. When you were little, were attracted to same sex children when you were 6 years old? As a former first grade teacher, we knew who would be gay or not. It is apparently, more difficult for parents to except, which is WHY people didn't understand San Francisco, and why it was important. Being gay is not a choice of 6 year old children, and denying it helps no one.

Patrick,
The radical leaders of Iran want to attack and eliminate all infidels. Anyone who doesn't believe what they believe must die. As a Christian, that is very threatening. Planning to execute "non-believers" is a direct threat and a proclamation of war. Doesn't that meet "Just War Theory"? Doesn't a candidate for the President of the United States have the moral obligation to suggest that he/she would protect their people from viable threats?

Janet,
Which issues do the Catholic Bishops not support Santorum on and why?

7kidchaos,
You are right. Santorum is "fresh" because he speaks for moral values. I often wonder why some are so offended with candidates who openly discuss the importance of moral values? It's quite puzzling really. Why in the world would we not want a candidate who speaks from the heart? This does not mean vigorous debate should be waved.Not everyone can agree on everything all of the time and we must all be willing to work together and compromise. But doesn't a candidate of good merit and strong faith deserve to be at least taken seriously rather than immediately dismissed? Wouldn't it be easier to trust someone who shows strong character than someone we question their personal merit? Yes, it would be refreshing, wouldn't it?!!!