Rand Paul bestiality comment 'sarcasm,' office says
June 27th, 2013
10:24 AM ET
10 months ago

Rand Paul bestiality comment 'sarcasm,' office says

(CNN) – Sen. Rand Paul's criticism of Wednesday's same-sex marriage ruling, which included a rhetorical question about bestiality eventually being made legal, was sarcasm, the Kentucky Republican's office says.

Speaking to conservative radio host Glenn Beck, Paul delved into the question of whether or not lawmakers should imbue legislation with their own morals. Beck set up the statement by wondering whether the court's ruling – which found a key provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional – could logically lead to polygamy becoming legal.

"If you change one variable – man and a woman – to a man and a man and a woman and a woman, you cannot tell me then that you can't logically change the other variable," Beck said. "One man, three women. One woman, four men. Who are you to say that if I am a devout Muslim and I come over here and I have three wives, who are you to say if I am an American citizen that I can't have multiple marriages?"

Paul, a potential 2016 presidential candidate whose supporters include a large number of libertarian-leaning conservatives, said Beck was getting at a larger question of whether laws can include moral designations.

"This is a conundrum, and it gets back to what you were saying …whether or not churches should decide this," Paul said. "And it is difficult, because if we have no laws on this, people take it to one extension further. Does it have to be humans?"

That remark, his office said, wasn't meant to be taken seriously.

"Sarcasm sometimes doesn't translate adequately from radio conversation," his communications director Moira Bagley said. "Sen. Paul did not suggest that striking down DOMA could lead to unusual marriage arrangements. What he was discussing was that having the state recognize marriage without definition could lead to marriages with no basis in reality."

Later in the interview, Paul stressed the economic importance of stable marriages for children.

"I also see that economically, if you don't look at it with any moral periscope, and you say, 'What is it that is the leading cause of poverty in our country?' It's having kids without marriage," Paul said. "That stability of the marriage unit is enormous, and we should not say we're punting on it and marriage can be anything."

Later, in an interview with ABC News, Paul said he thought the Supreme Court ruling on DOMA was appropriate and said the issue should be one left to the states.

As for the growing divide among Republicans on same-sex marriage, Paul said "the party is going to have to agree to disagree on some of these issues."

CNN's Kevin Liptak and Ashley Killough contributed to this report.


Filed under: Rand Paul • Same-sex marriage
soundoff (582 Responses)
  1. gmclenith

    Don't worry Rand, we don't take you seriously.

    June 27, 2013 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  2. yessuh

    'What is it that is the leading cause of poverty in our country?' It's having kids without marriage."

    Well, ya know, if you'd let gay people get married, then when they adopt kids they would have parents that were married.

    June 27, 2013 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  3. Mr. Hanson

    Leftists base their views on feeling, not logic. For instance, in the history of civilization, no one ever considered same-sex coupling “marriage,” yet in the last 17 years since Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act with a large bipartisan majority in Congress, we are now being told that gay marriage is a civil right, just because two people love each other. Logically, that is indefensible. What prevents siblings or polygamists from using the very same arguments? Leftism is built on euphemistic slogans, like “marriage equality,” “gay rights,” “reproductive health” and “climate change” — phrases that blow fog and stimulate emotion, not understanding.

    June 27, 2013 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  4. anony

    Who elects these morons?

    June 27, 2013 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  5. revolting peasant

    I would support civil unions that allowed for polygamous relationships. Why not? As long as all parties have the proper rights and protections. Polygamy was the way of the world back in Biblical days.

    June 27, 2013 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  6. True Libertarian

    I consider myself a fiscal conservative but a social progressive. Where oh where is the candidate for me?

    June 27, 2013 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  7. Dave

    Not ready for prime time.

    June 27, 2013 11:32 am at 11:32 am |
  8. John

    People that call themselves libertarians these days have no idea what it means or what it stands for. It's not the happy-time utopia the Ron Paul's and Alex Jones' make it out to be, and the real world is not nearly as dystopian.

    June 27, 2013 11:32 am at 11:32 am |
  9. Brad

    Bottom line is, if we are free, and it doesn't hurt anyone, why can we not do what we want? We are adults, we each have our own wants and needs, our own morals and beliefs. Do what you believe, and let others do what they believe. On a side note, this whole idea of sin has really just torn the human race apart. Their is no such thing as sin, the belief in sin has led the human race to ignore natural and ok instincts; because of that I believe it has made us angry, aggressive, and stressed.

    June 27, 2013 11:32 am at 11:32 am |
  10. Ken

    Comments here reek of knee-jerk reactionism. Read the article.

    June 27, 2013 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  11. Woody's Hay

    Maybe Rand is hoping that he can get something legally recognized so that he can marry his true love ...

    I see, Obama can't joke about campaigning in 57 states without it being construed as "how stupid he is", and yet Rand Paul makes a comment designed to fan the flames, and it's brushed off as "no big deal, I was making a joke!"

    June 27, 2013 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  12. Sean

    Scott -

    You guys think a relationship between two consenting adults is that same as having sex with animals and we're the "loonies"? Your hero Rand really needs to shut his pie-hole and stop making a fool out of himself. He stands as much of a chance of becoming president as Pauly Shore does.

    June 27, 2013 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  13. Jim g

    His Presidential aspirations are sliding downhill faster and faster every time he talks. You have to be President of all Americans not just your country clubbers. National election will doom him and many like him.

    June 27, 2013 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  14. George

    He's not right, he's just homophobic.

    June 27, 2013 11:34 am at 11:34 am |
  15. Al-NY,NY

    yet another "that's not what I meant" moment from the party of stupid. Keep it up guys. You are just making yourselves out to be more out of touch with every comment

    June 27, 2013 11:34 am at 11:34 am |
  16. B.

    This is a guy the Republicans are putting money on... ?

    Keep it up, the Dems love it!

    June 27, 2013 11:34 am at 11:34 am |
  17. animal human marriage bigots

    liberals are all perverts and go for anything so the a marriage between loving liberals and their loving animals is next up

    June 27, 2013 11:34 am at 11:34 am |
  18. Sniffit

    "when are the republicans going to go after the job shippers,who put half of america on the poverty list"

    As soon as we completely gut the ability of those job shippers to buy the GOP's loyalty by financing their power-trip political campaigns.

    June 27, 2013 11:34 am at 11:34 am |
  19. Really?

    So now that the gays have their special rights, will they finally shut up?

    June 27, 2013 11:34 am at 11:34 am |
  20. bob

    Marriage has nothing to do with children. Straight married couples choose not to have children all the time, and straight unmarried couples and individuals have children all the time with no damage to the child.

    June 27, 2013 11:35 am at 11:35 am |
  21. He meant to say

    He is just remembering the calf he loved so much as a child.

    June 27, 2013 11:35 am at 11:35 am |
  22. Realist

    So make Civil Unions the standard and put church marriages back in the church and out of government. There, nothing more that needs to be "defended" LOL

    June 27, 2013 11:35 am at 11:35 am |
  23. Sniffit

    "Who elects these morons?"

    Bigots.

    Next question.

    June 27, 2013 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
  24. bob baden

    This STUPID argument again. First of all I always thought this guy was gay but that aside, I welcome watching him waste his campaign donors money. Big ol mouthy gay me has a better shot at being elected president than this Darwin Hall of Famer.

    June 27, 2013 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
  25. Realist

    Rand Paul is not conservative, he is a radical

    June 27, 2013 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24