Santorum is already being attacked by his own crowds:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/santorum-met-by-large-nh-crowds-not-all-supportive/

DC - i would say the problem is that Ron Paul is so far behind in so many key states. I see that you argue that maybe RP will draw the defects from the other candidates who drop out but I just don't see that happening. We'll see as we move forward in the primary season.

Yeah it is impossible predict with certainty what will happen. Which is why it will be very interesting to see how it all plays out.

ugly:

Here is a quote from Justice Kennedy in the case Lawrence v. Texas, that struck down sodomy laws in their written form at the time:

"The present case does not involve minors. It does not involve persons who might be injured or coerced or who are situated in relationships where consent might not easily be refused. It does not involve public conduct or prostitution. It does not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

In ordinary-speak, the decison said that states retained their power over sexual conduct over anything not specificually struck down by the decision, and further restrictions on state power would have to be litigated in later cases when they come before the Court.

>the decison said that states retained their power over sexual conduct over anything not specificually struck down by the decision

You're reading too much into it. Who says they have the power to begin with? It just says they are deciding one case and not commenting on anything else. In fact the courts have routinely said that their must be a public interest in regulating behavior, such as health or safety, and states can't just regular for the heck of it.

They have the power because they had it when they became independent states. The states inherited all the powers that the king had, and inherited the legitimate restrictions on the king's power. The Declaration of Independence has legal significance in two areas: it formalized the states' inheritence of all powers appropriate to states, and it listed the states grievances against the king which in turn can be used as a basis of grievances against state power when they assumed the power of the king.

Just face it. The only limitation that Lawrence brought about was private consensual same sex behavior between unrelated adults. And the court did not find that anal intercourese was a "fundamental" right. So the court used the "rational basis" test that the state was unable to meet in this case.

Yet Ron Paul is the dangerous one... Dude your country sounds f'ing scary Skrum.

Santorum just got booed at his town hall. Watch how he tries to talk down this girl. She has a hard time explaining her views; and he tries to belittle her; even though she is right.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/santorum-marriage-gay-booed-college-concord-15301611?tab=9482931&section=4765066

damn that girl had him nailed, but then let him turn her around. when he started down the whole "then what about three people" route, then she should've immediately said, no hats wrong, marriage should be between two, whatever their sexes are. then he would've been forced to take a stance on whether man/man is diff from man/woman.

She should have already worked out an argument as to why to stop at two. Not much help from the Bible there. The Bible does not explicity prohibit polygamy, but it's pretty clear about homosexuality. It would be easier to defend polygamy, so why should she have objected to it?