Posted on 06/29/2003 5:51:41 PM PDT by mrobison
They were in response to a question and his response was awkward, IMO.
"I have this fear that this zone of privacy that we all want protected in our own homes is gradually or I'm concerned about the potential for it gradually being encroached upon, where criminal activity within the home would in some way be condoned," Frist told ABC's "This Week."
He is worried about a zone of privacy being encroached upon to the point of condoning crimnal activity?
Doesn't he mean expanded? Otherwise, it makes no sense.
But then, no Senator can really say he's concerned about a zone of privacy in your home being expanded.
"And I'm thinking of whether it's prostitution or illegal commercial drug activity in the home ... to have the courts come in, in this zone of privacy, and begin to define it gives me some concern."
There's that "zone of privacy" again.
Asked whether he supported an amendment that would ban any marriage in the United States except a union of a man and a woman, Frist said: "I absolutely do, of course I do. "I very much feel that marriage is a sacrament, and that sacrament should extend and can extend to that legal entity of a union between what is traditionally in our Western values has been defined as between a man and a woman. So I would support the amendment."
I don't doubt him. However, that is not the same as saying he will put it high on the agenda and lead the fight, which is what he really must do for the Amendment to have a chance.
As far as I know, he's not said anything further since these Sunday comments.
Nor should he. There are too many more important issues in need of attention.
Of course, if concentrating on this amendment distracted Frist & Co. from the task of passing more huge entitlements perhaps I could be persuaded...
The hearings in the House could be interesting if this thing really looks close to passing.
If there's any issue that could cause skeletons in closets to be revealed, this is it.
The "Address" bar says FR, but the content says DU....
BWAAAAHAHAHAHA!!!
Churches refuse to marry non-members of their sect all the time -- and in some cases refuse to marry people on all sorts of grounds (I'll bet you can't find one interracial marriage consecrated in the chapel of Bob Jones University) -- and yet continue to conduct marriage ceremonies for their preferred clients.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.