J.D. Hayworth Compares Gay Marriage To Bestiality

J.D. Hayworth radio interview on WORL in Orlando, FL.

3/14/10

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• J.D.
• Hayworth
• Gay
• Marriage
• Bestality

[gretakroger]

great talent .. very entertaining .. thanks

[leeejack]

fuck wit

[notthecheatr]

Even if it could somehow be construed that this law applies to animals as well as to humans (yiffing time!) this problem is easily fixed: make it "the establishment of intimacy between two consenting adults." Problem solved.

Of course, he's not really concerned about people marrying their horses, or for, that matter, their adorable calico house cats named Bluebells. This is just an irrelevant distraction, a red herring to the simple fact that the esteemed Mr. Hayworth is against gay rights.

[Iconoclastocles]

@realnarutoboy - So gay folks are required to pay taxes, obey all the laws you or I must obey, and are also granted through the Constitution all the rights we have.

Marriage is a legal institution. If religious folks in our country want to claim it, then our government should get out of the marriage business and simply classify everything as a "civil union." Then we should grant access to that right to all citizens in all states.

[Iconoclastocles]

@realnarutoboy - I didn't argue that any laws couldn't be changed, just that there is no legal framework for animals to be granted rights like marriage because they are not legally defined in a way where the rights of citizens can be applied to them. Surely that's not too hard to understand.

However this is not the case for gay people in the United States who are citizens. They have always had the protections of the law, and obligations, that other citizens have.

[Iconoclastocles]

@realnarutoboy - there are two separate arguments: one for gay marriage and another against bestial marriage.

Marriage isn't simply people loving each other: anyone can have that already. It's the union of civil legal obligations that results also in other benefits like tax breaks.

My point is this: animals are not legally recognized as citizens, so they don't have the same benefits and obligations as humans. Taxes, licenses, and owning property are examples to demonstrate this.

[realnarutoboy]

@Iconoclastocles

Gays at one point in time weren't given the same legal rights. You can't use the law as a defense in an argument largely about CHANGING the law (accepting/legalizing gay marriage). And what does paying taxes have to do with someone loving someone else enough to want to marry that person/thing?

[Iconoclastocles]

@realnarutoboy - Animals aren't granted the legal rights we have, and don't have legal obligations either (like paying taxes). An animal's inability to own property or obtain a license for themselves would preclude their participation in a legal institution such as marriage. I would deny people marrying animals because it can't make legal sense.

Same sex marriage however can and does make legal sense - 2 consenting adults entering a civil union of shared benefits and obligation (taxes).

[MidwestN8TV]

JD Hayworth = loser!

[realnarutoboy]

@Blairtim69

By the way, did you notice the "zoophile" who posted below? How dare you deny people like him or her the right to marry the animal, or animals, they love. You're a bigot!