..its become quite common
I never thought I would see so many otherwise rational people cheerfully ignore the Constitution.
Free Republic is a very different place than it was in the 1990s when freepers distrusted the state and upheld individual liberty.
At a deeper level, the question still remains..."what do you do with a religion that (in and of itself) inherently violates and teaches it adherents to violate the 1st Amendment to the Constitution.
I've found that to be par for the course on this site honestly. Sometimes I'm both amazed and terrified of the short sightedness of some "conservatives" on here. It seems many people on here are all for freedom and liberty as long as it jives with their worldview, otherwise they want you banned, outlawed, censored or killed. Just like the terrorists.
The way to do it does not have to go against the Constitution. Banning incitement to violence is logical. Sedition laws are on the books (if someone swears an oath to the United States, and later is found to foment a revolt to destroy our government for the purpose of instituting Sharia, shouldn't we have a problem with that and be able to stop him as he clearly misrepresented himself to become a citizen?).
"I never thought I would see so many otherwise rational people cheerfully ignore the Constitution."
This is a "religion" that is out to destroy YOU.
Perhaps you should become more "rational".
If Islam is a religion, so is Nazism.
..its become quite common
Neither did I.
Nor in my worst nightmare did I Imagine I'd be one of them.
Until 9/11.
You might try coming up to present time.
Also re: your tag line, Calamari for all...
The Constitution is not a suicide pact and radical Islam is no more a religion than Communism or Naziism. When a religion becomes a front for an organization dedicated to the violent overthrow of the Constitution and the United States, then it ceases to be a religion as defined in the first amendment.
These people have one deep religious belief, they believe that Allah wants them to kill you and me.
Not at all! The error in the author's article is his constant reference to a hate cult as a religion. Once the lie of religion as it applies to the hate cult is removed then there is no conflict with the 1st amendment.
Wrapped in a phony religion claim, they see no problem in killing or converting all of us. If you do not see that as a clear death threat and something not protected by the 1st amendement then we have a major problem.
I notice all the mudslime apologist are not mentioning the huge throngs of the alleged moderates jumping up and down like the savages they are all in protest over a truthful cartoon.
Where were all these alleged moderates after 40+ years of terrorist attacks? I did not see them in the streets but I sure did see a bunch of skunk anus maggots acting like they had just been brought out of the darkest jungle.
Come on mudslime apologist, where are all the fricken moderates you keep telling us exist?
Islamites will be the first to short you on your Constitutional liberties.
I never thought I'd see so many supposedly rational people allow a violent hate group determined to destroy you, your way of life and your constitution use it as a shield to protect their jihad.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact.
For instance, Findlaw defines "assault/battery" this way:
Assault/Battery In most states, an assault/battery is committed when one person 1) tries to or does physically strike another, or 2) acts in a threatening manner to put another in fear of immediate harm. Many states declare that a more serious or "aggravated" assault/battery occurs when one 1) tries to or does cause severe injury to another, or 2) causes injury through use of a deadly weapon. Historically, laws treated the threat of physical injury as "assault", and the completed act of physical contact or offensive touching as "battery," but many states no longer differentiate between the two.
So anyone who publicly states that he is going to "behead the person who insulted the Prophet" should be taken seriously and locked up for assault.
In the US we are not (yet?) in the position of the Europeans where 12 and 13 year old girls are kidnapped and sent back to Pakistan to be married to their cousins. But our laws would (and should) prevent this from ever happening here.
Same thing with schooling females. And spousal abuse laws should apply whatever the religion of the person doing it.
We have the laws in place, but judging by the Europeans, it is the enforcement of the laws that is in question.
Unfortunately, many people who wrap themselves in a holier than thou pose have no problem shredding the Constitution under "certain" circumstances. Then again, without them it might not be crystal clear what a phony person is.
What's the alternative for Islam? A time out? Well, it looks as if Iran is about to get a time out.
I never thought I would see so many otherwise rational people cheerfully ignore the Constitution.
As for it's pertaining to Islam - Shouldn't the Mafia have the same rights? We can and will get Islam on RICO - sooner or later.
I don't believe it is Cheerfulness.
More like White Hot Fury!
Can you remember the WTC on 9/11?