Or, Bill Frist is an Idiot
“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.”
Putting aside the morality of the issue, this is a misuse of the constitution. We don’t need and shouldn’t add negative
laws to the constitution. Setting aside one glaring example every amendment to the constitution has been added to either guarantee a freedom or to grant some regulatory authority to the Federal government, not
to prohibit something.
What is the exception? Prohibition. What is the one amendment that has been repealed by an additional amendment? Prohibition. It was a failure. This would not only be a failure, in that it would have no effect on homosexuals, but it would be a slippery slope of bans that we need to stay away from. If you need an example, look at nearly any US state constitution. (I would say “any” but I haven’t looked at all of them.) Frist goes on:
“Generally, I think matters such as sodomy should be addressed by the state legislatures,” Frist said. “That’s where those decisions — with the local norms, the local mores — are being able to have their input in reflected.
“And that’s where it should be decided, and not in the courts.”
My first reaction is to say Amen, but this is one of the instances where my knee-jerk is wrong. This is a rights issue — the right to privacy. Frist is also quoted as saying,
“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’s all over the place with this, but what I think he is trying to say is that he doesn’t want the right to privacy to become some sort of protection for criminal activity.
Too bad. Life sucks. Get a helmet.
All rights do this. That is why they are protected rights. The right to privacy is a real right — a Ninth Amendment right, along with the right to reproduce, the right to own property, and the right to hunt game. They are the unenumerated rights, and they are rights so basic that the founders didn’t think that it was necessary to enumerate them, because the couldn’t imagine a government that would violate them but keep the first eight intact.
Of course, they didn’t expect the Constitution to last 200 years, either.