Santorum: Accommodation Should Have Been Made for Kim Davis

September 9, 2015

by The Pulse 2016


Rick Santorum appeared on Fox News yesterday, where he discussed the ongoing controversy surrounding Kentucky clerk Kim Davis:

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: So, should she have gone to jail?

RICK SANTORUM: No. You had the mayor of San Francisco violating the law several years ago issuing marriage certificates; he didn’t go to jail. You’ve had county clerks refusing to issue gun permits; they don’t go to jail. Why —

VAN SUSTEREN: Okay, so where do we draw the line? Tonight if I drive home and if I speed, should I have to pay a speeding ticket? I mean, at what point do we — when is a law the law?

SANTORUM: As I’ve said many times, we need to have accommodations here for people of faith. There are laws in place right now called Religious Freedom Restoration Acts. Do they cover this specific situation? No, they don’t — that’s why I called for, as soon as this law passed, for the president to issue an executive order that lines up with something called the First Amendment Defense Act, which allows for governmental officials who have conscience issues with this to be able have some abilities —

VAN SUSTEREN: So she should step aside and let a deputy do this one, that would work?

SANTORUM: There should be some accommodation made for people of faith. This is a very serious religious matter. This is not just something on the verge — it’s the equivalent of saying to a doctor, ‘You have to perform an abortion.’ There’s Roe v. Wade¬†and people have the right under that decision to have an abortion, but we don’t force doctors to perform abortions. Here we have a situation, because this is a governmental function, we’re gonna be forcing people to violate their very deeply held religious beliefs. I mean, this is not just a small matter when it comes to, particularly, the Christian faith, the Muslim faith, and others — this is a major matter and it should be accommodated.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, you know what’s so frustrating about this — I mean, we look at all the people out there and people have been very passionate on both sides — this is an easy fix. So if she sort of steps aside for those that violate her religious conviction and give it to a deputy and have them — then she doesn’t go to jail, she doesn’t have to sign it, and comply with the law, and the gay couple can get married. I mean, that’s a — right? Would you make a problem with that?

SANTORUM: There’s a short-term issue and a long-term issue. The short-term issue is, we need to find accommodation. And so I would agree, that we need to pass a law — First Amendment Defense Act is introduced in Congress, the president could do it by executive order if he wanted to, because it just applies to federal employees — but we should pass that. Every state should pass a similar piece of legislation to deal with their state employees. And then you can deal with this situation. There’s the broader issue, which is more fundamental, and you’re a lawyer, you know this, which is if the Supreme Court acts unconstitutionally, what is the recourse for the rest of America? And I believe — and so did Justice Roberts, Justice Scalia, and others — the Supreme Court went beyond its constitutional authority in establishing this right to same-sex marriage. Are we just stuck with it, and we have no alternatives? Or do checks and balances mean something?

VAN SUSTEREN: I don’t know, my thought is, if we’re gonna have laws, and right now, she should have followed the law. That’s the first thing. And I realize she should have — there should be some sort of escape hatch, accommodation, we should have, but we don’t have that right now. Same thing, you shouldn’t have a server in your basement if you’re not supposed to have a server in the basement, don’t have a server in the basement. If you can’t be here legally in the country, you can’t be here legally in the country. It seems like we have a lot of pick and choose laws right now.

SANTORUM: Now, wait a minute. The Supreme Court just inserted themselves in this, and forced themselves on many states, including Kentucky —

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, so accommodate it!

SANTORUM: Well, exactly! So you can’t say it’s the same thing as Hillary Clinton. I mean, those laws have been there for a long, long time. And she knew full well what she was doing.

VAN SUSTEREN: There could have been a quick accommodation for this too.

SANTORUM: There could. I agree with you. On that I agree with you.

VAN SUSTEREN: We don’t have to push it into this. There could have been a quick accommodation —

SANTORUM: And there wasn’t. There wasn’t by the court, there wasn’t by the government. The governor could’ve dealt with this, the president could’ve dealt with this. No one dealt with this, and that’s why — and by the way, I don’t see anybody in the federal level — the president’s not gonna provide any accommodations. This is gonna be a serious issue. This isn’t gonna be the only time we run into this situation.


Archive: The Pulse 2016