Posted on 03/15/2010 9:57:33 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
J.D. Hayworth: 'You could marry your horse'
By ANDY BARR | 3/15/10 12:07 PM EDT
Former Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-Ariz.) said Sunday that the expansion of state laws allowing gay marriage could lead to people marrying horses.
Hayworth, during an interview with an Orlando, Fla., radio station explained: "You see, the Massachusetts Supreme Court, when it started this move toward same-sex marriage, actually defined marriage - now get this - it defined marriage as simply, 'the establishment of intimacy.'"
"Now how dangerous is that?" asked Hayworth, who is challenging Sen. John McCain from the right in Arizona's GOP Senate primary.
"I mean, I don't mean to be absurd about it, but I guess I can make the point of absurdity with an absurd point," he continued. "I guess that would mean if you really had affection for your horse, I guess you could marry your horse."
The former Republican congressman then insisted that the "only way" to prevent men from marrying horses is to create a federal marriage amendment. Hayworth noted that he supports such an amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
This is completely rational. When there is no standard for marriage, everything is made “right.”
Gay marriage also legitimizes polygamy and polyandry. Again, once the definition is no longer “between a man and a woman,” what is left is “everything.”
Your lack of argument is “stupid.”
My question is: where does it stop? NAMBLA would like to be next up, with the legalization of adults having sex with and marrying small children.
Those who went to the zoophilia ranch in Washington state weren’t looking to get married. It’s just sex.
Cat lady needs animal polygamy. Otherwise she won’t have adequate medical coverage for all of her lovelies.
The sex positive agenda seeks to end all moral judgements over ALL sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s).
GoAskAlice on Columbia University’s website advises people on their sexual health questions, without moral judgments including those who ask about sex with animals.
Cue Lenny Bruce’s “Psychopathia Sexualis” about a man who got hitched to a horse and how the community reacted.
The Romans set the precedent. They made a horse a Senator. Many of our Senators are parts of horses. Many of our Senators are married. This is no big deal.
Indeed. By what authority does a government make marriage between a man and a woman no longer exclusive, but not inclusive of a gay man marrying an underage boy (as long as the consent of the parents is there, which it will be with some)? Additionally, why can’t one marry more than one woman, since there is now “no standard?” They allow that in England for Muslims right now, and in fact, pay out welfare based on all of the spouses.
Once the door is open, the same argument that led to gay marriage works for just about everything else.
Hi ho!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.