Asshat JD Hayworth

Classic Republican logic: not having an example is no reason to not do anything. Triple negative.

"You see, the Massachusetts Supreme Court, when it started this move toward same-sex marriage, actually defined marriage -- now get this -- it defined marriage as simply, 'the establishment of intimacy.' Now how dangerous is that? I mean, I don't mean to be absurd about it, but I guess I can make the point of absurdity with an absurd point -- I guess that would mean if you really had affection for your horse, I guess you could marry your horse. It's just the wrong way to go, and the only way to protect the institution of marriage is with that federal marriage amendment that I support," - Senate candidate JD Hayworth.

Cherry pick one line from a law, come up with an out of context example that will never, ever happen whatsoever, then use that asinine extremely fictitious example as the basis for why you need a more extreme law to prohibit it.

Men will never marry horses, but because they never will, I need an amendment to the Constitution to stop it.