Quote:
Originally posted by NotFromHere
You're right. It is confusing. It sounds like he's saying that he is afraid that the zone of privacy is being encroached upon - in the same breath he wants the zone of privacy eliminated but just for homosexuals. If he's going after criminal activity in the home...what will become of my meth lab?
|
The argument that expanding the right to privacy will invite incest, meth labs, bestiality, etc.. is the same bullshit "states' rights" argument used by the anti-affirm action crowd. Neither group can come right out and say "Goddmanit, I don't like losing my spot in line to coloreds" or "Faggots offend me conservative Christian sensibilities," so they couch the argument in the classic Chicken Little "slipper slope" argument.
I love it when folks like Pat Robertson accidentally say what folks like Frist really mean but torture semantics to avoid. It always struck me as funny that republicans chided Santorum for saying in plain English exactly what most of them believe.
We will see the Jesus Nazis whipsawed in the next congressional election. They've pushed for too much too soon.
S(thankfully, pigs get slaughtered)D
