WASHINGTON, DC—An alarming number of Republican politicians have all but lost their marbles when it comes to the issue of sex, especially gay sex. Surprised? I didn’t think so. This is not to imply, however, that Democrats are more enlightened than their colleagues when it comes to the bare facts; just that the Republicans are on a rick roll.
Wednesday, on the high heels of the now-infamous "all pornography is gay pornography" remark made by Michael Schwartz, chief of staff for Sen. Tom Coburn [R-Okla.], Rep. Steve King [R-Iowa] told a WorldNetDaily radio audience same-sex marriage is “a purely socialist concept in the final analysis.”
The route by which King arrived at his all-inclusive conclusion is rocky, to say the least, and littered with assumptions the size of boulders, but it does provide yet another insight into the mindset of a person who feels compelled to conflate sexual identity and identity politics in order to maintain a consistent ideology of intolerance. It also says a little something about the Congressman’s expectations regarding his audience’s appetite for red meat.
King’s comments came after he was asked to define the impact on Iowa of a state Supreme Court decision that struck down a law restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples. His first point was a common one for opponents of gay marriage: that if same-sex marriage is allowed, all barriers to any type of matrimony will come crashing down as well.
“We haven’t come to grips with this thing very well yet in that there’s not a very good understanding of what same-sex marriage does to the overall institution of marriage itself,” King said. “And we need to carry that argument out, and let’s do that over the next couple of years and get this on the ballot so that Iowa isn’t the only state outside of the northeast that has same-sex marriage within it.
“And I, and I just would extend that rationale and argue this, that if marriage is something other than union between one man and one woman. If it can be, if the argument is that there’s an equal protection law, if there’s a right to same-sex marriage, if that right exists, then that means Rick Santorum was right. The right also exists for any other relationship that one might argue. Then there would exist no ban, no rational foundation to prohibit incest, for example, between father and a son or a daughter or a mother and a son or daughter, for example or brothers and sisters.”
After neatly side-stepping the issue of consent, the congressman drove his real point home with a rhetorical flourish worthy of Dr. Seuss. If incest is okay, group marriages cannot be far behind, which opens the door for the real endgame desired by the sodomites and readers of the New York Times.
“[Group marriage] wouldn’t have to be for reasons of, let me say, love or lust,” he warned. “It could be reasons of profitability or avoiding taxes or accessing benefits. So in the end this is something that has to come with a, if there’s a push for a socialist society, a society where the foundations of individual rights and liberties are undermined and everybody is thrown together, living collectively off of one pot of resources earned by everyone. That is, this is one of the goals they have to go to is same-sex marriage, because it has to plow through marriage in order to get to their goal. They want public affirmation. They want access to public funds and resources. Eventually all those resources will be pooled, because that’s the direction we’re going. And not only is it a radical social idea, it is a purely socialist concept in the final analysis.” [Emphasis added]
The syllogism is quite simple, really. Same-sex marriage leads to incest, which leads to group marriage, which leads to socialism, which is the goal of all those people coming into Iowa to get married. What a brilliant plan. Even the communists were not as organized as these people.
As ridiculous as these notions are, the underlying intent by King is to explain away the results of a recent poll by the Des Moines Register in which 92 percent of the respondents said "gay marriage has brought no real change to their lives."
“I think that there’s been a little bit of a shift, and part of it is because people have not noticed a change around them,” conceded King in the interview, after which he immediately launched into his long discourse on the true motivation behind same-sex marriage.
Only in America.
Legal
- By
