Dear Marty, The First Amendment is Not Optional

Font Size» Large | Small

Not a Fixer-Upper

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH PEOPLE? - A Sharia-like movement is afoot to deprive Muslims of everything from the right to build religious centers to their First Amendment protections. Burning Korans is not the answer to violent Muslim extremism.

The Anti-Mosque That Ain’t a Mosque crowd seems to be going all Sharia on America’s ass. You’d think the possibility – not the certainty mind you – of building a Muslim community center amongst the strip clubs and bars of Manhattan is a worse offense than knocking the WTC down to begin with.

We have idiots closing community centers in Kentucky ostensibly for lack of parking because according to the property owner, Muslims can’t be trusted to adhere to no parking signs. Florida’s Dove World Outreach Center, a violation of truth in advertising laws if there ever was one, is reaching out to Muslims by burning Korans. Now, New Republic editor-in-chief Marty Peretz says Muslims are unworthy of First Amendment protection, presumably regardless of whether they are citizens or not.

Marty the Magnificent Sez…
Says Marty the Magnificent, “…frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims. And among those Muslims led by the Imam Rauf there is hardly one who has raised a fuss about the routine and random bloodshed that defines their brotherhood. So, yes, I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse.”

Gee Marty, my gut – hell, every fiber of my being – tells me you would abuse First Amendment protections too. No, wait! You already have by suggesting the First Amendment is an option like the automatic transmission on your Ford Crown Vic. The same goes for your toxic brethren like the book burning “Doves” and the spreading community of knotheads elsewhere around the country.

Marty, can you not see the irony of exercising your First Amendment rights by saying someone else should be deprived of theirs? Screeching Doves, can you not see the same by the light of your Constitutional bonfire?

Whether Muslims “raise a fuss” is their call, not yours. To speak or not to speak are both protected rights. Besides, my gut also tells me that condemning their “brotherhood” wouldn’t make one iota of difference in your opinion.

The Lonesome Doves and Tim McVey
And Lonesome Doves, would you be burning Bibles if an inbred clan of Timothy McVey wannabes had rammed the WTC? I’m an atheist and I’d be quite happy if someone burned all the holy books, regardless of whatever holier than thou sect dreamt them up.

But wait! No, I wouldn’t! I believe in the First Amendment.

It isn’t optional because I despise you and what you’re saying. It isn’t optional because some lunkhead’s book isn’t as holy as you believe yours is. It isn’t optional because your gut tells you they don’t value human life. It isn’t optional because they are Muslim, Baptist, or Druid nor because some of their members were bat shit crazy and wanted to kill people for things like, gee, I dunno, disrespecting the Koran (see David Petraeus). In this country, people can say what they want and worship or not worship as they see fit – despite cockamamie faux “wars on Christmas” or people being gay in the privacy of their own homes or carbuncles on the ass of humanity who think their shit is infinitely less odoriferous than others are.


…and the day it becomes so is the day we lose the privilege of calling ourselves American.

Enhanced by Zemanta

9 thoughts on “Dear Marty, The First Amendment is Not Optional

  1. Pingback: » Abhorrent Speech is Still Free Speech

  2. Just read that the Quran burning is off! It took quite a chorus of critics to pull off and a “deal” to move the Muslim center away from its currently-planned location (a deal that doesn’t seem to have been made). Anyway, if the pastor’s plan was to gain world-wide notoriety, congratulations, dude!

  3. Seems I share the state with Quran-burners. Bummer!

    Quran-burning is definitely constitutional if flag-burning is but I can’t say I’m for Quran burning any more than I am for flag-burning. ‘Constitutional’ is not synonymous with ‘wise’.

    Anyway, it seems they’re going through with it so let’s hear it for the first amendment! The violence from this will likely make the violence associated with the Muhammad cartoons seem like a boisterous tiddley-winks match. I hope I’m wrong. We’ll see.

  4. Pingback: