Yesterday, I emailed CB and Bedhead and told them I had a feeling that we were getting a new Pope shortly. CB was all, “Whatever, it can wait” (I’m paraphrasing), meaning that we don’t have to do breaking-news coverage of the new pope if and when it happens. As it turned out, I was right! Just a few hours later, white smoke came billowing out of the special Pope chimney while I was at the gym. An hour later, “Habemus Papum!” The new Pope was announced – Jesuit Archbishop Jorge Mario Bergoglio has become Pope Francis I, the first ever South American Pope. The first Pope from the Americas. The first Latin American Pope. And the first Jesuit Pope, right? I’m not a Catholic, but my Indian father was educated by the Jesuits (in India) and he always spoke highly of the Jesuit sect (honestly, my father was one of the most Catholic Hindus ever). So here are some interesting factoids about the new Pope:

*He was born and raised in Argentina and he’s the archbishop of Buenos Aires. Also: his father was Italian!

*When he was appointed Archbishop of Buenos Aires, he was pretty much told “here’s your palace.” He didn’t want to live in the palace. So he moved to a humble apartment. He takes the bus instead of using a chauffeur-driven car.

*His big causes are poverty and social equality. Some people are even describing him as “wary of capitalism” and he’s publicly used words like “redistribution of wealth”.

*But he isn’t a fan of gay people or gay people getting married. He led a crusade against a proposal that would legalize gay marriage in Argentina. Despite the Church protests, the legislation passed and gay people can totally get married in Argentina, which I totally didn’t know before today. He’s also against gay adoption. He’s very pro-nuclear family. Maybe he’ll shut down the Vatican’s Roman gay bathhouse/club/sauna.

*He might be soft on the Church’s stance on birth control though – apparently he’s said a few times that condoms are good because they stop the spread of disease. Saying that is a surprisingly big deal when you’re an archbishop. Or the Pope.

*He was never a Hitler Youth, thank God.

So, all in all, a mixed bag. I like the fact that they didn’t pick just some European dude this time. And I like that he’s a Jesuit too. Maybe he’ll inject some pragmatism into the Church. But he’s 76 years old – how long will he reign? Realistically?

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Tom Cruise wants everyone to know that he visited with Suri last week in London. Now, there won’t be pictures of the alleged meething — because he’s a very private person (cough) who doesn’t want us to reset our “Suri clocks” on him — but Tom made sure his people spoke to People magazine about how he and Suri spent “four to five” blissful days in each other’s arms. According to People, “they kept such a low profile that nobody really knew she was there.” At this point, we just have to take Tom’s word for it, but it’s strange that Suri was pulled out of school for the trip.

There’s also a new story about how Tom was dismissed from seminary school in the late 1970s, and the details come from one of Tom’s old buddies. He wasn’t exactly kicked out, but he got in trouble for stealing alcohol and was known to sneak out and smoke ciggies like a naughty little boy. We’ve heard about Tom’s previous intention to become a priest, but these additional details about how he was discouraged from returning to school (he lasted two years) after he got in trouble for swiping beer from the Franciscan fathers are quite amusing. Here’s some excerpts about Tom’s brief stint as a seminary student:

Father Ric Schneider on Tom: “Tom was instantly hooked. He as a typical teenager, trying to find his way in life. We would give them an IQ test, and he just about made the cut. The cutoff is 110, and he scored exactly 110.”

BFF Shane Dempler on Tom: “He had a very strong Catholic faith. We went to Mass, spent time in the chapel and enjoyed hearing stories from the priests. We thought the priests had a great lifestyle and we were really interested in priesthood. In truth, we were too young to make that decision.”

Tom and Shane, bad boys: One night, the duo got the bright idea of stealing some liquor from their Franciscan fathers, who were planning a celebration. Dempler sneaked into the room where the liquor was stashed and threw bottle after bottle out the window to Cruise, waiting below. “(I) tossed about six, most broke, but we managed to get a couple and hide them in the nearby woods. The priests didn’t even realize until some of the other boys found out about our plan and snuck into the woods and got drunk. They were caught staggering down the road to the seminary and forced to confess. The school wrote a letter to our parents saying they liked us both, but would prefer if we didn’t return. So we weren’t kicked out, just preferred not to go.”

Teacher Salvio Russo on Tom: “He was very unremarkable. You would never have thought he’d make it, although he did have a really neat smile.”

[From NY Daily News]

From Tom’s speedy move from Catholicism (where he was apparently very interested in joining the priesthood) to Scientology (where he has enthusiastically risen to the point where many would consider him #2 in charge after David Miscavige) may illustrate a tendency towards religious fanaticism. Tom can’t simply identify himself as Catholic or Scientologist — he has to see himself as the best Catholic or Scientologist. In fact, if he had somehow managed to become a priest and was still in the Catholic faith, you can guarantee that he’d be in Vatican City lobbying for the empty Pope slot as we speak. Scary thought, right?

Here’s some photos of Tom last week on the set of All You Need Is Kill in London. The cameras have been rolling on this movie since November, which feels overly long even for a big-budget action movie. Check out Tom’s combat-boot lifts! He looks slightly winded, no?

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN

If your man asked you to do something incredibly painful for him, would you do it? Would it depend on how pressing an issue it was? I have a couple of tattoos I’m not that fond of, and my husband doesn’t particularly like them. There’s no way I’d get them lasered off for him though, as I’ve heard that’s even more painful, and takes longer, than getting the tattoos themselves – and that hurt like a bitch, let me tell you.

Drew Barrymore does not have this same attitude when it comes to getting her skin burned off to appease her man. Her new husband, Will Kopelmann, is Jewish, and Drew is converting for him. She’s also having her tattoos lasered off, because there’s a rule that you can’t be buried in a Jewish ceremony if you have tattoos. (More on that in a moment.)

Drew Barrymore is deciding to ditch her varied and plentiful body ink because of her husband’s religion, Star magazine is exclusively reporting.

The 38-year-old Charlie’s Angels star is converting to her other half, Will Kopelman’s Jewish faith, but in order for her to be buried in a traditional Jewish cemetery she has to be tattoo-free.

According to Star, Drew recently started undergoing painful laser surgery to erase the six tattoos she got during her wild child years.

They include a bouquet of flowers on her hip, a butterfly on her stomach, a crescent moon on her toe, a cross on her leg and two angels on her lower back.

“Drew also wants to be a Santa Barbara mom, and tattoos clash with that wardrobe,” her pal tells Star.

“She’s growing up and turning conservative.”

[From Radar]

Is this part of the “infinite percent” thing that Drew was going on about in Bazaar this month? She’ll convert to Judiasm, endure infinite pain to make her body a clean slate, take care of the baby on her own, develop a wine brand and mix up her own organic blush in the kitchen sink.

Many years ago I dated a heavily tattooed guy who was raised Jewish. The guy would take out his (visible) piercings and wear long sleeve t-shirts when he saw his dad, because his dad would have freaked out over his son’s body modification due to Jewish laws against tattoos. That’s my only experience with this issue, and I always assumed that it was true that you can’t be buried in a Jewish ceremony if you have tattoos. According to Chabad.org, it’s not universally forbidden for people with tattoos to be buried in Jewish cemeteries, it just depends on the cemetery and how strict they are about it. The Torah forbids tattooing, though, so it sounds like it’s really frowned upon in Judaism.

Getting back to the original question: would you get your tattoos lasered off for your beloved? I’m leaning toward “no,” probably because I’ve never really taken religion seriously. (Former Catholic here. I doubt I would convert for anyone either.)

These photos of Drew in the black and white dress are from Fashion Week last week in NY. Credit: Enrique RC, PacificCoastNews.com. She’s also shown with Will on 1-20-13 in NY. Credit: JD/FameFlynet

Last year, I covered Coco Rocha’s appearance on the cover of Fashion Magazine, which was notable mostly because of Coco’s interview. I didn’t know much about her, so I was surprised to learn that she is a practicing Jehovah’s Witness who, in her own words, “believes in everything the Bible has to say. I’m a Christian first and a model second.”

Well, Coco is still talking about her faith, probably because she’s promoting The Face, which starts in February on Oxygen – and these photos of Coco are from the NBC Winter Press Tour last week too. In the new issue of Du Jour Magazine, Coco discussed how difficult it is and how solitary she feels being the Jehovah’s Witness around:

Model Coco Rocha talks about the challenges of being a devout Jehovah’s Witness in the new issue of Du Jour.

“There aren’t many Witnesses who are in the public eye. I can’t even name any,” says Rocha. “So, yeah, it’s hard sometimes when you’re here alone. You’re not there with someone who can hold your hand and say we’ll do this together.”

Rocha still goes door to door every few months to spread her faith.

She notes, “Some people think we’re a pushy religion, but if you’re not interested, just say so.”

[From Page Six]

I can’t remember the last time a Jehovah’s Witness came to my door – it’s been years! I don’t mind them at all, but I live in a super-churchy area. I’m more likely to get Baptist preachers or Mormons knocking on my door, trying to convert me. I swear, I once answered my door half-naked (I was about to get into the shower when I heard the knock) and the Baptist preacher at my door really thought he was going to save my soul, like he had me on the hook or something. What would you do if Coco Rocha came to your door? I would probably invite her in and try to feed her.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Please don’t yell “WHO?” at me. Coco Rocha is one of the most well-known models working today. She has a mini-Linda Evangelista vibe, mostly because her hair is always changing and she really is a chameleon, a shape-shifter who looks radically different from photo shoot to photo shoot. Now, although I knew who she was on sight, I never really knew that much about her personal life. She’s 24 years old, she’s Canadian and she married her first and current husband in 2010 (When she was 22?? Damn). And now that I’ve read some excerpts from Coco’s FASHION Mag interview (she cover the Winter issue of the Canadian magazine), I know even more about her – like, she’s a practicing Jehovah’s Witness and she believes everything in the Bible. Wow. I really didn’t know they let girls like that into the heathen-y fashion industry.

At age 22, model Coco Rocha married her interior designer boyfriend James Cronan. Now, the 24-year-old Jehovah’s Witness has revealed she would love to start a family, but sees it as ‘unfair’ right now.

While Miss Rocha, who is joining Naomi Campbell on the new reality competition for up-and-coming models called The Face, is a vocal advocate of model’s labor rights, she rarely speaks about her own personal life. But for the latest issue of FASHION magazine, the supermodel spoke about her career, religious beliefs and future family plans.

She said: ‘At the beginning of my career there were photos and moments I wish I wasn’t a part of but I didn’t realize I could say “no.” Now I know that. I grew up – and still am – a practising Jehovah’s Witness and believe in everything the Bible has to say. I’m a Christian first and a model second.’

She revealed that while children are on her agenda, she believes her hectic career stands in the way of starting a family just yet.

‘Right now it would be unfair to have a kid in the mess of all my life,’ she said. ‘But when my work is done, I would love to have kids with James.’

On her new role as a mentor on the upcoming reality series, The Face, also starring Karolina Kurkova, she said: ‘It’s fascinating having three different mentors on the show – Naomi being the generation of the original supermodel Trinity, Karolina being part of the whole Victoria’s Secret world and me, who’s known for edgy editorial.’

Miss Rocha, who regularly speaks out against the demand for models to be size zero, pose topless and have the ‘anorexic look,’ as she was once advised, added the importance of sticking up for yourself in fashion.

‘It’s important for every model to have a voice. When I started modelling, people said to me, “You’re going to have to throw away your beliefs in order to be a successful model.” But I didn’t.’

The red-head beauty started her modeling career in 2004, after signing with Supreme in New York and this April she became the first high fashion model to have more than 1 million followers on the social media platform Google+.

In spring she starred in a campaign for Banana Republic’s upcoming collaboration with designer label Trina Turk. She has also previously modelled for brands including Longchamp, Louis Vuitton, Christian Lacroix, and Emanuel Ungaro.

[From The Mail]

Obviously, she can be whatever religion she wants to be, I don’t have a problem with that and it’s her business. I’m just surprised that she talking about it in a fashion magazine, and I’m surprised by her wording while answering the question about her religion. Is “believing in everything the Bible has to say” different than saying “I believe the Bible is the literal word of God”? Because I know a lot of fundamentalist Christians who have to admit that some parts of the Bible are less “literal” than others. Anyway, this just surprised me – I didn’t know that the fashion industry had a conservative Jehovah’s Witness supermodel in their ranks.

Photos courtesy of Fashion Mag.

GQ has multiple covers for the October issue – a few days ago, I covered Denzel Washington’s cover and profile, and now here is Javier Bardem. Javi is promoting his work in Skyfall, the latest James Bond film, which will be out… let’s see… November 9th!! I can’t wait for it. It looks like a really, really great Bond film. The bar was set pretty low with Quantum of Solace, though. Would you like to see the latest trailer? We’ve seen most of it before, but they recut it for the international trailer, I guess. Here you go:

Javi is SO good at playing creepy. All you really have to do is put an awful wig on him, though. And all of sudden he goes from “hot Spanish dude” to “OMG serial killer”. Anyway, here are some highlights from Javi’s GQ interview. I didn’t know he was an atheist!

Javier Bardem on being in touch with his feminine side: “I was raised not to be afraid to show emotion or imagination…. I have a man and a woman in the same body; I have the male and female values in the same body. ‘Be a man’—what do you mean by that?”

On his performances and characters: “The fact that I like to make characters doesn’t mean that I like to watch my characters being made, my performance. I can’t even watch that f–king nose, that f–king voice, those ridiculous eyes. I can’t handle that. But when I’m doing it, I don’t see my nose or hear my voice; it’s like there’s something stronger, bigger than that. And I need to express it.”

He’s an atheist: “I’ve always said I don’t believe in God, I believe in Al Pacino.”

On how to persevere through tough criticism: “It’s the actor’s insecurity: One day you’re liked and the next it’s ah, nah, not that guy. My mom told me, ‘Just keep doing your job.’ You get something gold, thank you. You suck, thank you. You keep on moving.”

On being appreciative for what he has in life: “I’m happily married. I breathe and stay in peace. I truly thank whoever’s up there for giving me the opportunity to be loved.”

On the Spanish economy: “Many people I love and adore, who belong to my life, are going through a very horrible situation. The government raised taxes on paper and pencils. That’s f–king crazy. The middle and working classes are paying the debt that the financial markets created. A quarter of Spaniards are unemployed. One in ten families are completely out of work: It’s f–king dark, it’s brutal.”

On his political activism: “I’ve always belonged to the street, and I always will. It’s in my DNA. I don’t think about it. I’m really proud of this country: People say what they feel, until they’re heard.”

[From GQ]

The GQ piece also brings up some of Javi’s previous quotes about the Catholic Church, and it’s clear that he’s really not the biggest fan. He seems like a die-hard social liberal – pro-gay, pro-social equality, pro-feminism, etc. He also talks a lot about his childhood and stuff, which I just skimmed over – you can read the full piece here.

I LOVE this photo of him. He looks gorgeous here:

Photos courtesy of GQ/Nathaniel Goldberg.

When I first glanced through this story in the Enquirer, I was like, “Eh, yeah right.” But the story is actually based on a factual event – Brad Pitt’s mother, Jane Pitt, bought a Bible for Angelina Jolie. Both The Enquirer and In Touch Weekly spoke to a salesclerk at a Springfield, Missouri Christian bookstore, and the salesman confirms that Jane did in fact buy a Bible, and she had it embossed with “Angelina Jolie”. Obviously, Jane Pitt is trying to bring her devilish, villainess of a future daughter-in-law IN LINE. While we now know that Jane Pitt is something of a fire-breathing conservative, I’m still having problems making the leap from “Jane Pitt is a conservative Christian lady who buys Bibles for her son’s bisexual baby-mama” to “Obviously, Jane hates Angelina and the feeling is mutual.”

Brad Pitt’s God-fearing mother Jane has ratcheted up the battle with Angelina Jolie by buying Jolie an engraved Bible as a wedding present, say sources.

“Jane bought the Good Book a couple of weeks ago to help save Angelina’s soul and bring her closer to God, but it’s turned into a disaster,” revealed an insider.

Kristopher Burnett, a sales clerk at Mardel Christian Bookstore in Springfield, Mo., told The Enquirer that he sold Jane the Bible and prayed with her for Brad and Angelina’s well-being. But after Angie heard about Jane’s prayer, she went crazy! Angelina, who was raised Catholic but adheres to no specific faith, took offense because it implied that she needed saving.

“Angelina was already furious with Jane, so this just added insult to injury,” said the insider.

Said the insider: “Angelina has always felt Jane looked down on her for a bisexual lifestyle, previous drug use and for being ‘the other woman’ in Brad’s marriage to Jennifer Aniston. If Brad doesn’t mediate soon, it’s going to totally sabotage his relationship with Angelina and his family.”

[From The Enquirer, print edition]

In Touch has more details about the Bible too – Jane paid $130 for it, the Bible has black leather binding, and Jane had the “Angelina Jolie” embossing done in “flowing gold script”. And Ol’ Kris Burnett spoke to In Touch too, saying, “We prayed with Brad’s mom and sister over the Bible, asking the Lord to lead the way in Brad and Angelina’s life.” Um… “asking the Lord to lead the way in Brad and Angelina’s life”?? Like the Lord isn’t already in their lives? Presumptuous.

So… does it follow that the gift of a Bible is automatically going to lead to tears, retribution, anguish and, as always, Brad sobbing in the corner? Eh. Brad and Angelina have been together for seven years. Angelina knows Jane is conservative and Christian at this point. I’m of two minds on this, actually – I think there’s a very good chance that Jane has nothing but the best, nicest intentions with this gift, and merely means to give Angelina a nice copy of the Bible, something that can passed down to her children. One the other side, I do think the gift is ripe for some bad interpretations, like Jane is passive-aggressively judging Angelina as a bad mother, as a wanton woman and as a person who presumably has her own faith and her own relationship with God already, but the relationship doesn’t count because NO BIBLE. And while I wouldn’t be upset if I (a theist with no particular belief system) was given a Bible in general, I kind of think a (new) Bible makes for a crappy, cheap wedding gift to give to your future daughter-in-law. It would be one thing if Jane was passing down a family Bible to future generations – but to get her a new one as a wedding gift? I don’t know. It doesn’t seem like the most generous gift (generous of spirit, I mean).

Oh, and the UK tabs are reporting that Angelina is pissed because Jane keeps buying girly, princess-y things for Shiloh. A source claims, “It’s well documented that Shiloh likes to dress like a boy. But Jane still insists on buying her fairy costumes and princess dresses, which Angelina finds very disrespectful.” EH. The source also says, “Brad and Angelina were devastated by Jane’s actions. They have worked hard campaigning for equality, working closely with Barack Obama. Angelina called Jane and told her she believes she’s setting a bad example for the kids.” Even bigger “eh”.

Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I have a friend who went to see Kirk Cameron speak over the weekend at a Christian marriage event in Virginia. (It was not me. You could not pay me to do that.) She said that Cameron made some jokes about his Mike Seaver past, but that he didn’t say anything about gay people at all. She also added that there were protesters outside, which warmed my heart. (I found this article about it also.)

Anyway Kirk is promoting his documentary-style movie, Monumental, which basically proposes that the solution to all of America’s problems is to no longer separate church and state. (I honestly smacked my head after writing that.) As part of that, he’s got to eat crow a little for his earlier statements against homosexuality. As I said in my last story on this, I have no problem with a “hate the sin, love the sinner” approach to gay people. For people who think homosexuality is a sin, it’s cool if they say they don’t agree with being gay but that they have gay friends and love them dearly or whatever. That’s not what Kirk said. He called being gay “unnatural… detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization.” Then later he defended himself by claiming that he’d been “slandered” and “accused of hate speech,” but he didn’t take back anything he said.

In a new interview with The Today Show, Kirk tried to go with the “hate the sin, love the sinner” tactic, since his last approach didn’t really work for him. He also claimed that he was taken out of context and called it “inappropriate and insensitive” to take him at his word.

“I was surprised, frankly, that people were surprised by the things that I’ve said,” he explained. “I have been consistent for 15 years as a Christian. I’m a Bible-believing Christian. What I would have thought was more newsworthy is if I had said something that contradicted the word of God, if I had contradicted my faith.”

So, given his comments, does Cameron, who had also come on the show to discuss his new documentary “Monumental,” actually hate gay people?

Absolutely not,” he said. “I love all people, I hate no one. … When you take a subject and reduce it to something like a four-second soundbite and a check mark on a ballot, I think that that’s inappropriate and insensitive. … To edit it down to that, it certainly didn’t reflect my full heart on the matter.”

Cameron feels that his opinions shouldn’t be interpreted as a trigger for bullying or violence against homosexuals.

“Nobody should mistreat anybody,” he said. “We all have our convictions formed by different things and mine are informed by my faith. They’re formed by the word of God, and I found that to be an anchor for me, a compass and a guide for me. When people start bullying one another and calling each other names for those different convictions, then I think you get into problems.”

[From The Today Show]

As I said before, I read his entire transcript on The Piers Morgan show where he made those original remarks. (And I just re-read them too.) He didn’t say he loved and/or respected everyone, including gay people. He wasn’t taken out of context, he went on at length about his point. His follow-up statement was more of the same. He’s being defensive about this because he has to. At least he’s paying lip service to not mistreating people or bullying them. In Kirk’s mind, he’s the one being persecuted, not the other way around.

You’ve surely heard by now that former Growing Pains child star Kirk Cameron, 41, said a bunch of antiquated crap about homosexuality during an appearance on the Piers Morgan show. Cameron called being gay “unnatural,” “detrimental,” and “destructive,” as if gay people solely existed to destroy society. People were quick to point out how wrong he was, including his former “Growing Pains” costars, Tracey Gold and Alan Thicke. My favorite response comes from Thicke, who tweeted I’m getting him some new books. The Old Testament simply can’t be expected to explain everything.” He later added “I love Kirk but I may have to spank him…’tho not in a gay way!” That’s hysterical!

Now Kirk is defending himself, and he’s not backtracking or apologizing. He sent an indignant e-mail to ABC news saying that it’s all our fault for paying attention to him and calling him out on it, basically. He also tried to pull the “I have gay friends” card. Of course he did. My favorite part of this story is GLAAD’s response, which is at the end and is totally measured and convincing. I imagine someone sighing and rolling their eyes as they wrote it.

Kirk Cameron is fighting back against the “hate speech” he feels he’s endured since calling homosexuality “unnatural,” “detrimental,” and “ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization” during a Friday appearance on “Piers Morgan Tonight” to promote his new film, “Monumental.”

In an email statement released exclusively to ABCNews.com today, Cameron said that when Morgan asked him to share his views on homosexuality, “I spoke as honestly as I could, but some people believe my responses were not loving toward those in the gay community. That is not true. I can assuredly say that it’s my life’s mission to love all people.”

“I should be able to express moral views on social issues,” he said, “especially those that have been the underpinning of Western civilization for 2,000 years — without being slandered, accused of hate speech, and told from those who preach ‘tolerance’ that I need to either bend my beliefs to their moral standards or be silent when I’m in the public square.”
He concluded, “I believe we need to learn how to debate these things with greater love and respect,” and added, “I’ve been encouraged by the support of many friends (including gay friends, incidentally).”

Cameron’s “Growing Pains” co-stars Tracey Gold and Alan Thicke have spoken out against his comments, along with many other celebrities. Over the weekend, GLAAD launched a petition called Tell Kirk Cameron It’s Time to Finally Grow Up. It had more than 5,500 signatures this afternoon.

GLAAD spokesman Herndon Graddick released an email statement to ABCNews.com in response to Cameron’s latest comments: “Saying that gay people are ‘detrimental to civilization’ might be ‘loving’ in Kirk Cameron’s mind, but it’s gay youth and victims of bullying who truly suffer from adults like Cameron who espouse these ideas.”

“Obviously, Cameron has the right to recite his anti-gay talking points,” Graddick added, “just like fair-minded Americans have the right to tell him that his views are harmful and have no place in modern America.”

How did what he said have anything to do with love and respect? It’s one thing to say something like “I don’t personally believe in homosexuality, but I love and respect everyone.” People wouldn’t really argue with that. It’s quite another to call homosexuality “unnatural, detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization,” as if gay people are scheming villains instead of just normal people living their lives like everyone else. I read the rest of his comments to Morgan, which are available on the transcript, and at no point does he speak respectfully about gay people, so why should he expect that response?

A lot of you have made the comment that Kirk is probably a closet case, which is bolstered by this blind item claiming he trolls for men in parks. I don’t put a lot of faith in blind items but I could believe it. Let’s revisit one comment he made to Piers about what he would tell his child if he came to him and said he was gay. “There’s all sorts of issues that we need to wrestle through in our life. Just because you feel one way doesn’t mean we should act on everything that we feel.” I’m just going to leave it at that.

Kirk is promoting his documentary Monumental, in which he tries to claim that the foundation of America starting when the pilgrims came over is religion and that’s why we need religion in schools and government. His answer to America’s problems is to set us back 400 years when women couldn’t own property and people would have thought indoor plumbing was the devil’s work. The trailer is amusing, because Kirk just looks confused the whole time.

These are actual photos from the Facebook page for Monumental

Yesterday we heard that Michelle Duggar was advising women to let their husbands tell them what to do in all matters and to never talk back to them or question their authori-tay. Here’s a small sample of what she said, and you can re-read our previous story if you missed it. “Husbands are commanded to govern their wives; God works through a man’s decisions… Ask your husband to define your responsibilities; Ask your husband to tell you when you have a resistant spirit; dispel a backbiting tongue by silence.”

Michelle wants a man to tell her what to do in all matters, so it’s not surprising that she and her husband are publicly endorsing a Presidential candidate who feels like he can do the same for the women of America. We’ve seen Michelle and Jim-Bob at events supporting Rick Santorum for President, and she told Radar Online why:

“We want a man that honors God to lead our nation,” Michelle Duggar said about the man she is supporting for the Republican party nomination.

“We have been praying to the Lord that if you want the heart of the voters to turn to Rick Santorum then please do so,” she said.

“We prayed that more people would take a look at him, and more people are getting behind him.”

“He’s a family values candidate with a proven track record. He honors life and stands up for what is right.”

[From Radar Online]

It’s easy to see why Santorum is the Duggars’ choice, since he shares so many of the Duggars’ values on important issues. Although Santorum has supported funding for contraception, he has spoken out against contraception among married couples. He’s also against women working outside the home and is of course anti-abortion. Here are some quotes from Santorum on these three issues

On contraception: it’s ‘dangerous’ even among married couples
Last year Santorum told the Christian blog Caffeinated Thoughts that as president he would warn the nation about “the dangers of contraception” and the permissive culture it encourages. “Many of Christian faith have said, `Well, that’s OK. Contraception is OK,’” he said. “It’s not OK. It’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. … If it’s not for purposes of procreation, then you diminish this very special bond between men and women.” – Huffington Post and Time.com

On women working outside the home
“Many women have told me, and surveys have shown, that they find it easier, more ‘professionally’ gratifying, and certainly more socially affirming, to work outside the home than to give up their careers to take care of their children.”

This is a result, he wrote, of “radical feminism’s misogynistic crusade to make working outside the home the only marker of social value and self-respect.’’ – From Santorum’s book It Takes a Family via Washington Post

On abortion: he would ban and criminalize it
I believe that any doctor that performs an abortion, I would advocate that any doctor that performs an abortion, should be criminally charged for doing so. – Daily Beast

Santorum does believe in abortion when it’s medically necessary to save the life of the mother, although he does not make an exception for rape or incest.

See, he sounds just like the Duggars! No wonder they think he’s the best person to be our next President. I’ll pose a rhetorical question that comes to mind when I hear about the Duggars: what century are we living in?