In this video, Santorum asks for evidence that same sex marriage and the marginalization of those who oppose gay equality as bigots are good things that should be happening. He is indignant that anyone could dare call a position held by the Roman Catholic Church and held for “2,000 years” could be called bigoted. Because, you know, bigoted ideas don’t live older than 30 years or something—everybody knows that.
When the student cites the famous 1973 judgment of the American Psychiatric Association, the United States’ main professional psychiatrists’ organization, favoring declassifying homosexuality as a disorder, she appeals to people with qualified (even if fallible) expertise on disorders, which obviously has at least more expertise than a religious organization committed to dogmatically enshrining ancient and medieval misunderstandings of the world in belief and law—Santorum dismisses the APA as just “a group of people who agree with each other”. They’re just a group of people who see things the same way, but that is proof of nothing about the rightness of their position. But the “2,000 years” of the Catholic Church consensus based on nothing resembling facts and on contestable interpretations of teleology is cited as though an unimpeachable authority.
It is absurd. In the posts below I actually have given the kinds of arguments in favor of the moral goodness of homosexual love and the rightness of promoting gays fully realizing sexual and loving relationships with each other. Like Catholics, I am even a teleologist of a sort when it comes to values and ethics—in that I think it is true and valuable to think in terms of natural functions but not in the sense of thinking these functions were given to things purposefully from an intelligent designer. And yet, I think a serious, nuanced, naturalistic, morally pluralistic teleological investigation vindicates the necessity of encouraging gay people to love and have sex as they are naturally inclined.
My main arguments to these effects can be found in the following posts:
An Argument For Gay Marriage And Against Traditionalism (my 6,000 word long, fullest single treatment of the subject)
And Santorum, wildly exaggerating, argues in the video that the normalization of homosexual relationships would destroy faith. If only it could! But while it is a blow against one faith-based (i.e., willfully prejudicial) belief, it is not going to destroy faith-based religions. Rather, it will allow the millions of faithful gay people to be recognized as the people of faith they are, weaken the public perception of the strength of the case against faith (since the faithful will less and less be abusively discriminatory against gays and so and so expose faith less as the blind, potentially destructive prejudice it really is), and it will free many people who presently are repulsed by faith because of its obviously prejudicial character to come back to it in the more “benign” matters.
But, nonetheless, Santorum wants to know if there is anyone willing to make the argument that faith should be undermined. I for one am: See Disambiguating Faith: How Faith Poisons Religion, and the rest of my Disambiguating Faith series while you are at it.