Last weekend, Rick Santorum offered his latest nugget of wisdom. He made a variety of statements, which included the fact that he does not "believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute."

On "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," an ABC News Sunday morning political talk show, Santorum made another rather bold assertion. He asked, "What kind of country do we live in that says only people of non-faith can come into the public square and make their case?...That makes me throw up."

One does not need to look hard to realize the absurdity of his claims. While the Constitution forbids any religious test for holding office, the American public holds its candidates to a de facto religious test anyway. Every president in the modern era has paraded his Christianity around, while proclaiming that faith has been a guiding factor in his life.

On the other hand, there has been a lack of nonreligious participants in the public discourse. Now, perhaps there are those who proclaim a public love of God for political sake, but in private have abandoned their "faith" in religion. However, to do so publicly would be to commit political suicide. So no, Mr. Santorum, we don't live in that kind of country—you can save your vomit for the other things that upset you.

Yes, writing a column attacking Rick Santorum's idiotic statements is almost too easy.

I do not wish to crack jokes at the sake of such a simple-minded man, but if Mr. Santorum actually believes that he should be considered for the presidency, then I propose we actually begin taking his assertions seriously, and explore the basis for these outrageously stupid statements. This man could be leading our country, a thought that horrifies me and should horrify you.

This is a man who has openly said that he has no problem with homosexuality, but rather, that he only has a problem with homosexual acts, or with homosexual marriage, which to him are equitable to bestiality. Excuse me? This statement not only makes no sense, but it also highlights extraordinary bigotry, and in the 21st century, our proper response should be to dismiss Santorum like we would if he were this explicitly racist.

By comparing homosexual sex acts to acts of bestiality, Santorum is showing us exactly the kind of person he is. First of all, he is obsessed with sexual issues to a degree that is rather unparalleled among modern politicians. He believes that sex outside of an attempt to produce children is fundamentally immoral, and he talks about the need to restore sexual morality in America remarkably often. I will not go so far as to suggest that this is to some degree a manifestation of his own self-repression (as Shakespeare's King Lear says: "Why dost thou lash that whore? Strip thine own back. / Thou hotly lust'st to use her in that kind / For which thou whipp'st her"), but his obsession with all things sexual does raise this question.

His incredibly backward stances on issues like women's rights (which seem to be, in his view, only rights to be subservient to their husbands and to God's will), abortion, birth control, and gay rights are sufficient to show that Santorum is a reactionary.

He seems to desire to impose his Christian doctrine on Americans and turn the government into an instrument to create a theocratic state dominated by perverted religious dogma. He already sees the government as able to exist only in accordance with some theology, as was clear when he declared that Obama governed by the "wrong theology."

What about Americans who believe the government ought not be ruled by any theology, and who believe moral ideas of right and wrong come from a source other than the Bible—or from no ancient code at all? These Americans are not able to attain the presidency. Many barriers have been broken in politics, and many more will be in the near future, but Mr. Santorum need not fear, because the possibility of an openly atheist president is likely to be among the last barriers broken.

Of course, there are many moral people of faith. There are also, however, many, such as Santorum, who are deeply immoral people on account of their faith, and there are many moral people who adhere to no religion at all.

That Santorum does not openly advocate for the First Amendment, that he will so quickly rip down Jefferson's cherished wall between the church and the state, and that he openly admits (and then retracts) the idea that such a wall is literally sickening to him, ultimately puts him closer in line with the theocratic leaders of Iran than those who fought for religious freedom during our nation's founding.

Mr. Santorum is dangerous, and he should be booed off of his political stump.

We must protect the rights of Americans to make their own choices and to have their own religious opinions.

This is not a mere political fight between two rival and equally valid positions. No, the battle between Santorum and rational Americans is a battle that must end in the political humiliation of the presidential candidate. His legacy should be as a reactionary mocked by the Google results for his name and not as a legitimate candidate for the presidency.

Therefore, it is our responsibility as Americans to treat him as the person he is, a sex-obsessed bigot who intends to impose Christian law on Americans. He should be rejected from any stage on which he spews his idiotic statements, and I can only hope he is removed from the political sphere as soon as possible.

Sean McElroy is a member of the Class of 2012.