Jeremy Irons Tries To Clear Up His Whole “Gay Marriage Might Lead To Fathers Marrying Their Sons For Tax Reasons” Argument

April 6, 2013 / Posted by:

Jeremy Irons made it really difficult for me to twist my nipples while watching him in Brideshead Revisited when he said in a chat with HuffPost Live that he’s worried that same-sex marriage will lead to fathers marrying their sons to get out of paying estate taxes. Those words made White Oprah curse Jeremy Irons’ name, because she was planning to marry Lindsay Lohan for that reason alone and he uncovered her scheme!

Jeremy said that he feels like same-sex marriage could “debase” the meaning of marriage and could lead to Kay Jewelers putting out a line of father/son wedding rings. “A kiss begins with INCEST!” But Jeremy says that he isn’t anti-gay and he was just brain farting up a thought during a discussion about same-sex marriage. Jeremy posted an open letter onto his website and tried to clear some shit up.

I am deeply concerned that from my on line discussion with the Huffington Post, it has been understood that I hold a position that is anti gay. This is as far from the truth of me as to say that I believe the earth is flat.

I was taking part in a short discussion around the practical meaning of Marriage, and how that institution might be altered by it becoming available to same-sex partners. Perhaps rather too flippantly I flew the kite of an example of the legal quagmire that might occur if same sex marriage entered the statute books, by raising the possibility of future marriage between same sex family members for tax reasons, (incest being illegal primarily in order to prevent inbreeding, and therefore an irrelevance in non reproductive relationships). Clearly this was a mischievous argument, but nonetheless valid.

I am clearly aware that many gay relationships are more long term, responsible and even healthier in their role of raising children, than their hetero equivalents, and that love often creates the desire to mark itself in a formal way, as Marriage would do. Clearly society should find a way of doing this. I had hoped that even on such a subject as this, where passions run high, the internet was a forum where ideas could be freely discussed without descending into name-calling.

I believe that is what it could be, but it depends on all of us behaving, even behind our aliases, in a humane, intelligent and open way.

“The internet was a forum where ideas could be freely discussed without descending into name-calling….” The fuck kind of internet has he been going on? Calling a trick a name on the internet is like breathing in oxygen in real life.

Jeremy Irons shouldn’t have wasted his time typing out a response when he could’ve been using his time to propose to his son (who looks like this. Yeah, I’d gay marry him all the way.) Jeremy should’ve just let Stephen Colbert respond for him officially, because Stephen Colbert put it best:

Our commenting rules: Don't be racist or bigoted, or post comments like "Who cares?", or have multiple accounts, or repost a comment that was deleted by a mod, or post NSFW pics/videos/GIFs, or go off topic when not in an Open Post, or post paparazzi/event/red carpet pics from photo agencies due to copyright infringement issues. Also, promoting adblockers, your website, or your forum is not allowed. Breaking a rule may result in your Disqus account getting permanently or temporarily banned. New commenters must go through a period of pre-moderation. And some posts may be pre-moderated so it could take a minute for your comment to appear if it's approved. If you have a question or an issue with comments, email: [email protected]

alt="drupal analytics" >