« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


Why must our love always be a slippery slope to goat sex?

by Jeremy Hooper

200Px-Hot Rod Huckster 1-1You know, if Huckabee does get the Republican nomination, by election day he may end up breaking some sort of record for anti-gay skeletons found to be living in one's closet. The latest revelatory comment comes from an interview the former Arkansas governor has given to Beliefnet, wherein he likens gay relationships to the love that might exist between a dude, a squirrel, and a tuna:

Q. Is it your goal to bring the Constitution into strict conformity with the Bible? Some people would consider that a kind of dangerous undertaking, particularly given the variety of biblical interpretations.

A. Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic.

Oh yes, we're "radicals." You know, just like those "radicals" who changed marriage from being mostly about doweries or property ownership. Or, perhaps, those who did away with the Biblical concept of levirate marriage. Not to mention those "radicals" who allowed interracial couples to enter into the fray, or those who gave women a voice in the matter. And maybe those that allowed couples to exit a marriage rather than suffer in a loveless or even dangerous legal bond. Radicals all of them!

Gov. Huckabvee: It is makes us "radical" to want to follow in the long line of those who have changed marriage for the better, than all we have to say is: "RADICAL!" But don't you dare imply that because we refuse to accept your 1949 definition of what marriage is or has always been, we are somehow opening the door for women who bump clams with clams to have their unions legally recognized. This brazen fear-mongering is very unbecoming (not to mention un-presidential)!

Mike Huckabee: 'The Lord Truly Gave Me Wisdom' [Beliefnet]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

I'm not sure what goats have to do with gay marriage, I was always under the impression that both parties had to sign a marriage contract and goats can't enter into a contract.

Posted by: PodJumper | Jan 17, 2008 5:03:21 PM

Oh, Huckabee hasn't told you yet, PodJumper? We gays are gonna teach the goats to write so that they can sign the documents necessary to marry us.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jan 17, 2008 5:16:12 PM

I note that to Huckabee and many anti-gay-marriage campaigners, marriage as we know it today does not go back to 1949. The ban on interracial marriage wasn't a serious ban. There cant have been any forced marriages, ever, because marriage to them is free by definition. In their minds, marriage goes back six thousand years to Adam and Eve (There is a large overlap with young-earthers, due to shared fundamentalist influence), when it was created in the exact form in which it exists today, and since then has not been altered in the slightest. Thus, to actually change the definition means to admit that God's Standard is no longer the standard for society - and once thats done, in their view, anything becomes permissable because there is no longer any right or wrong.

Posted by: Suricou Raven | Jan 18, 2008 5:10:23 AM

"Oh, Huckabee hasn't told you yet, PodJumper? We gays are gonna teach the goats to write so that they can sign the documents necessary to marry us."
That's So unrealistic, most animals object to the whole monogamy thing.

Posted by: Emproph | Jan 18, 2008 7:50:13 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails