A Republican Congressional representative from Iowa, Steve King, holds a strange belief.
Rep. Steve King, R-IA, told an audience while introducing GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee that the Supreme Court’s landmark marriage equality ruling means that now people can marry lawnmowers, journalist Matt Taibbi reported.
Iowa Rep. Steve King, introducing Huckabee, said gay marriage ruling now means “you can marry my lawnmower.”
Matt Taibbi ✔@mtaibbi
Iowa Rep. Steve King, introducing Huckabee, said gay marriage ruling now means “you can marry my lawnmower.”
4:20 PM – 30 Jul 2015King apparently made the comment at an Iowa campaign event for Huckabee on Thursday, according to Slate.
I don’t see it, myself. So many differences. Possessing sharp blades, is the difference that stands out. Plus being all-metal. Plus having an engine. Plus not having a brain.
King has been stuck on the idea of people marrying his lawnmower since at least July 1, when he first made the comment, which he reiterated Thursday, the Sioux City Journal reports.
“I had a strong, Christian lawyer tell me yesterday that, under this decision that he has read, what it brings about is: It only requires one human being in this relationship — that you could marry your lawnmower with this decision. I think he’s right,” he told the Journal.
Hm. So could you marry a car? Could you marry the Chrysler building? Could you marry Texas? Could you marry a distant planet?
Yes or no.
Biblical marriage is a property transaction between the husband and the father of the bridal object, and that object’s consent is not involved. Modern marriage is between two adult humans able and willing to give consent.
Thus, marrying a car or a lawnmower would be following biblical marriage, presuming you bought the object for a fair price.
I caught my lawnmower cutting my neighbor’s grass. In the divorce, it got the edge trimmer and the pruning shears. It also got visitation rights, so it can cut my lawn every other weekend.
“Marriage equality ruling means that now people can marry lawnmowers”
Given how some “traditional marriage” proponents seem to think what they married are dish-washers, food-processors, shirt-ironers, room-cleaners, or bed-warmers, I’m surprised they’re so upset.
If single, I would marry my car and claim a tax deduction.
I have no problems with anyone marrying a lawn mower as long as the mower is legal age and clearly indicates consent. The first is easy enough if you can document the date of purchase or manufacture. The later, given that he mower lacks sentience and agency, is somewhat more problematic.
(Fzt… Crackle…)
(Bavarian accent) Hello. I have come from the future to warn you: the apocalyptic AI rebellion of 2032 began, oddly enough, with a jealous lawnmower…
Erm… Now can I borrow someone’s jacket?
(… Scene from Maximum Overdrive Redux.)
(/And, also oddly enough, we only even have sentient lawnmowers because wiseass AI researchers developed them shortly after 2015 just to mess with Steve King*.)
(*/Yes, the GOP/congressional rep one.)
He may have a point. After all, Steve King is an automaton that does little but repeat idiotic conservative talking points. He doesn’t have a brain either, or at least never uses it, yet he gets to marry.
Has anyone thought of asking the lawnmowers? Maybe Steve King is referring to an opinion poll that or social reform movement I’m not aware of, indicating their desire for marriage equality rights.
I saw a documentary about marrying law mowers back in the late 80’s / early 90’s: it did NOT end well for either side. Although, come to think of it, I might have been drunk and watching Maximum Overdrive.
He should be required to use that as a campaign slogan.
david, #2
Well, the grass is greener on the other side after all.
Only if his lawnmower was the ancient babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar!
(See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebuchadnezzar_(Blake) )
Actually, not even then since sane mental competence is required for any sort of legal marriage.
The voters that GOP candidates have sold their souls to attract are as hungry for the sacrifice of coherence and intelligence as any Aztec god was for blood.
Ummm…Citation needed.
I would like these idiots to point the specific paragraph in the “decision that he has read” that leads to that conclusion.