Posted on 11/07/2009 10:14:13 PM PST by USALiberty
Is Islam worthy of First Amendment protection? I think it might be time for a Constitutional amendment. Such an amendment would not necessarily have to ban the practice of Islam in the U.S. But certainly, it seems to be time to carve out an exception to the First Amendment so that Islam can be restricted.
What better place to get the ball rolling than right here on Free Republic?
Am I off base here? Thoughts?
Welcome to FR.
Didnt Clinton do that at WACO!
Yes.
Wonder how long it took that troll to find that name. Pretty clever.
ping
It is worthy: it is both a religion and a talking/writing point.
What we need to get rid of is self imposed political correctness.
Impossibly long shot. You need a 2/3 vote of each House Chamber and 3/4ths of all State legislatures to ratify this. Remember, it was impossible to get a 2/3 vote in the Senate to secure an amendment to ban flag desecration!
ditto
Times have changed.
Sometimes I wonder whether Islam is a religion or an idiology. Islam certainly doesn’t restrict itself to spiritual matters.
But how do you overcome the political correctness without somebody invoking (and, rightfully so as things stand now) the Constitutional status of Islam as a religion?
Many people here seem to think Islam is an anti-Western ideology that seeks to destroy us. Yet, legally, we treat Islam as we treat Baptists.
Not to mention the infringements of natural rights this would entail, think about the precedent (there’s a lot of talk of Fox News not being a legitimate news source...). The 1st Amendment exists for a reason.
I think it’s worth discussing. But yes, we’d have to think though the consequences. That’s why I have suggested that a legal scholar be tasked with drafting any proposed amendment.
1st Islam then will go for you.
Exactly.
People should have the right to worship who or what they want in the way they want or not worship at all if they so choose. But they can't bump up against other people's rights.
You can be a Satanist in this country if you're that stupid, but you can't sacrifice a child or someone else's chicken.
Citizens have a right to weigh character issues, like choice of religions, when voting. Therefore Romney's mormonism and Obama's links to Islam are both fair game in political battles.
Government should have the ability to limit religions deemed at risk from certain sensitive positions. We don't want Satanists or activist pedofiles in charge of school children. And we should exclude Muslims from active military duty during a time of war with Muslims. In World War II we wouldn't have thought of putting a Japanese immigrant or descendant in battle with the rest of our soldiers.
In fact we interned them across the country. Internment might have been extreme, but we have swung to the other extreme where we refuse to recognize inherent risks at putting people in military positions that have an affinity with those we are at war with.
You start asking that question and it won't stop with Islam.
How about when the question is applied to:
Christianity in general
Baptists (what might Regular Baptists, Southern Baptists, Primitive Baptists say about each other?)
Catholics
Mormons
Jews
Conservatism
What about when, once this question is asked, similar questions are raised about the whether or not the protection of the other Amendments should apply to whomever?
Pretty much because Republicans are afraid to say or do anything in opposition to PC.
Democrats sure won’t.
If the GOP won’t, it won’t change.
Unless of course, the GOP is swept aside by some new entity. Because of their spinelessness.
Yes it deserves 1st amendment protections, and I deserve 1st amendment protection in roundly denouncing it. The 1st amendment exists for a reason. Don’t screw with it.
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.