Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

Rand Paul: I Didn’t Think Obama’s Marriage Views “Could Get Any Gayer”

Everyone from Conan O’Brien to Cuban president Raul Castro’s daughter has been weighing in on President Obama’s announcement that he supports marriage equality. The oddest one to date comes from U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY): “Call me cynical, but I wasn’t sure his views on marriage could get any gayer.”

We’re sure he meant “gay” like lame or bad.

Speaking to the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition, Paul—the son of still-running presidential candidate Ron Paul said he balked at the President’s invocation of the Bible. (Rand’s comments on Obama begin at the 5:00 mark):

“It did kind of bother me though that he used the justification for it in a biblical reference,” he continued to more laughter. “He said the biblical golden rule caused him to be for gay marriage. And I’m like what version of the Bible is he reading?…I don’t know what version he’s getting it from. Now that doesn’t mean we need to be harsh and mean and hate people… But that doesn’t mean that we have to go ahead and give up our traditions. We’ve got 6,000 years of tradition.”

Right, traditions. Like slavery, stoning, child endangerment and genocide.

On:           May 13, 2012
Tagged: , , ,
    • v

      Yes, the snickers that greeted his comment. Echoes of Mitt’s teen aged bullying, atta girl, small minds amused by their own bigotry. They are entering the twilight years of their infuence but don’t realize it.

      May 13, 2012 at 7:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Codswallop

      …and in late-breaking news, Rand Paul is a piece of shit. Oh, wait a minute. We already knew that.

      May 13, 2012 at 8:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • desdemona

      Right Queerty. This idiot Paul reads the bible and loves the parts where it condemns and gives rules to live by or be killed- Obama and the gay marriage supporters read the bible and see the truth behind it all- Christ’s O.G. Message was about nothing but LOVE.

      May 13, 2012 at 10:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • R.A.

      All those gay libertarians must be terribly disappointed.

      May 14, 2012 at 3:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • me

      Ron Paul’s evil spawn is just that deceased troll Jerry Falwell’s 1990s “Moral Majority” in drag trying to pass itself off as the modern Tea Party and its KKK followers.

      May 14, 2012 at 7:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Adam

      If anti-gay politicians insist that the only legitimate institutions stem from 6,000 years ago, shouldn’t they all be polytheists, all speak Sumerian, and reject all technology that has emerged since the Bronze age?

      May 14, 2012 at 9:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert in NYC

      Last time I checked, civil marriage is a recent phenomenon, the last time that marriage was redefined. Marriage has existed in varying forms long before the abrahamic cults came along and changed it. Allowing gay couples doesn’t redefine it. All it does is expand it to include a group of people, nothing more.

      May 14, 2012 at 10:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thomathy

      So, Rand Paul is a Young Earther? From my perspective, being Canadian and emphatically not American, it is highly amusing that not only do hateful bigots get national attention and the chance to influence policy (or make it, in some cases), the hateful bigots are also stupid, religious ideologues. Of course, it’s highly amusing in that gut-wrenching, nauseating sort of way, not in the side-splitting laughter way. Well, at least the bigoted part, anyhow; I openly laugh at the stupid, religious ideologue part.

      May 14, 2012 at 11:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jakey

      Ugh, does one of these dopes ever research the points they’re about to bring up, or what? Marriage was not the same six thousand years ago as it is today. It wasn’t even the same one hundred fifty years ago in our own country. All of this marriage “tradition” stuff is a complete fantasy; historically it’s changed along with everything else.

      May 14, 2012 at 2:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • LandStander

      @Jakey: Yeah it makes me mad too. All the time I hear “traditional marriage” as the argument on the news media, but not a single one of those pundits every says “wait, what? traditional marriage was one man and one woman? Uhhhh, more like one man and however many women he wanted as his property….”

      May 14, 2012 at 5:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.