Rick Santorum on “dangers” of contraception

By Deborah Kotz, Globe Staff

Last October -- when Rick Santorum was trailing badly in the polls -- he sat down with a reporter from an Evangelical blog called Caffeinated Thoughts to discuss, among other things, his views on contraception. It turns out, he’s very much against it, apparently even for married couples, and would reverse any government policies that mandate contraception coverage if he became president.

He told ABC’s Jake Tapper last month that states should have the right to ban contraception. Should they also have the right to ban Viagra?

After all, Santorum said he believes sex should be for the purpose of procreation, as well as pleasure, and senior couples who are having sex certainly aren’t thinking along those lines.

While Santorum is entitled to his beliefs, I’m trying to discern how he rationalizes adopting governmental policies that pretty much go against the practices of the vast majority of Americans.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, the typical woman in this country wants two children, which means using contraception for three decades to achieve this goal. Some 99 percent of women ages 15 to 44 who have had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method, and 62 percent are currently using a method.

Start watching the video above at 17:55 and let me know if you agree with Santorum’s positions on contraception. Here’s an excerpt below.

One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, “Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.”

It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also [inaudible], but also procreative. That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act. And if you can take one part out that’s not for purposes of procreation, that’s not one of the reasons, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women, so why can’t you take other parts of that out? And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure.