Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) primary challenger, former Arizona congressman J.D. Hayworth, warned this past weekend that the same-sex marriage decision handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Court is so loose in its logic and wording that it could lead to a man marrying his horse. Appearing on Orlando, Fla. radio station WORL on Sunday, the Arizona conservative had what could be described as a Rick Santorum "man on dog" moment. "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,'" Hayworth said. "Now how dangerous is that? 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 -- I guess that would mean if you really had affection for your horse, I guess you could marry your horse. It's just the wrong way to go, and the only way to protect the institution of marriage is with that federal marriage amendment that I support." The clip, which was forwarded to the Huffington Post by a Republican source, is a deliberate over-interpretation of the Massachusetts law, which in addition to not prompting man-steed nuptials has actually helped chip away at the state's divorce rate. Indeed, Hayworth, who favors a federal amendment that would limit marriage to one man and one woman, could harm his image with these remarks. Nearly seven years ago, then-senator Rick Santorum (R-Penn.) was asked a rather benign question about homosexuality during an interview with USA Today, and offered a response that has gone down in the annals of political head-turners. "In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality," Santorum said. "That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be."
warned this past weekend that the same-sex marriage decision handed down by the Massachusetts Supreme Court is so loose in its logic and wording that it could lead to a man marrying his horse. -------------------------------- The wording was probably intentional.
McCain's wife, loudmouth daughter and presidential campaign manager all came out in favor of homo "marriage." It's safe bet that is McCain's private opinion too, but he doesn't have the honesty to state it. Rather than try to parse Hayworth's statements, why doesn't McCain address the issue honestly so republican voters know who stands where and let them decide? If they want a pro gay marriage candidate, McCain's their man. If they want a tax raiser and pro amnesty candidate, again vote McCain. If they want someone who worked with democrats to block conservative judical appointments, vote McCain. If they want a guy who thought Obama was a fine candidate in the mainstream and who canned campaign workers who disagreed, then again, McCain is the obvious choice. And if they want someone who made a mockery of his supposed principles by supporting the serial bailouts, then McCain by all means.
Its not even the fact that people would marry their horse or dog because they really love it...people would marry their dog, then get the extra standard deduction for being married on their taxes. Not to mention if the dog has like 6 puppies, you get an EIC credit for 6 children. A single guy who makes 30k per year and has to PAY taxes, could just marry his dog, claim his puppies as dependants and get like $5,000 cash back. Not to mention the people on welfare getting extra cash for their "kids" or extra food stamps, ect.
aaa - amazingly commentary. peil - that was pretty good too. But let explain for the liberals who do not understand logic. Law professors call a slippery slope argument. If two man can get married . Why not a man and two women or 20 women or a man and his horse. its called arguing to the absurd. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum and with the case of gay marriage... it is a very effective argument. Which is why the CA supreme court covered its logical butt by saying one way to deal with this issue is to have states stop sanctioning marriage.
I thought it was the Former Senator Sanatorium(as Ross Perot called him) from Pennsylvania who was hot on the "Man on Dog," theory. I swear these GOP's types need to be watched and watched most carefully ...and if they exhibit one furtive move then straight to Gitmo with them.