Greg Sargent reported today that during an interview with Beliefnet, Mike Huckabee was asked about his comments that the Constitution should be amended to meet "God's standards." The questioner noted that many would find that to be a "dangerous undertaking." Here was Huckabee's response:
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.
As Sargent correctly noted, Huckabee was clearly equating gay marriage with bestiality. This is Rick Santorum territory. I have a feeling this won't get any traction, but these are the kinds of things that could, and better, get attention should Huckabee make it to the general election.
3 comments:
I used to be a Huckabee fan,(mostly because he has a fun name) but this is totally absurd. He's gone off the deep end.
Good, I was hoping you would post something about this. He is f-ing ridiculous.
He has no clue. He doesn't understand the Equal Protection argument made in favor of gay marriage. The idea is that gay people are a class of people who have been the subject to invidious discrimination and therefore a law making marriage legal would address the history of discrimination. I'd like to see him argue that practicians of bestiality have suffered decades of invidious discrimination in the same way gay people have.
Post a Comment