“The First Amendment was not written for Muslims....."

Oh please. What's the difference between some white immigrant like Trump, 2nd generation married to a European compared to your random muslim immigrant? You're just nitpicking when you do.

 

Actually, the 1st Amendment protections do not apply to non-citizens in the US. If you protest the US government on US soil, you can be deported. Likewise with the press. If you publish a pamphlet critical of the US government, you can be deported.

This is just false. Some protections can be claimed by non-citizens living in the US, but they are specifically denied many of them, and zero Constitutional rights apply to foreigners living in foreign countries.

 

Jefferson argued that religion had nothing to do with citizenship in the US. & yes, in his time, WASP men of property were the only voters & officeholders. The US could as easily have been cast like the UK - another Protestant nation-state. It would have had a very different history, I'm sure - in that making the World safe for yet another WASPish state hardly has the same ring nor heft of a nation ultimately based on freedom & willing to extend the franchise to everyone who is reasonable.

Yah, Jefferson was a complicated person. He owned slaves, he knew the problems that caused, he fretted over the issue & wanted to free his slaves, but he never had the money. He was brilliant & learned, & yet worried about paying the plantation's bills. He saw far enough into the future to believe that basing the US polity purely upon a Church-based State would be a mistake - & I think that developments in history & in Europe & the World in general have proved him right. Jefferson's (& others' similar) view of the state prevailed in the US, & I think we can all be grateful.

 

Gee, I don't know, a 2nd generation white American isn't likely to blow up an Ariana Grande concert filled with young girls?

 

Pretty much the only reason they didn't was because Maryland was Catholic.

 

It wasn’t written for the Black Americans or the Native Americans either, that’s the trouble when politicians resort to mouthing fine ideals, they need to be taken with a mega pinch of salt.

 

The First Amendment wasn't written for the Black slaves, but certainly the apportionment of Representatives to the House of Representatives was (or @ least for the slave-holding planters), as well as a long history of enforcing property (slave-holding) rights in the courts, the Fugitive Slave Act, & so on. Slavery was made legal as a concession to the Southern states to join the rebellion against the UK & form the US. It's the reason that the Southern states figured prominently in the Legislative, Judicial & Executive branches up until the Civil War (bear in mind that the Executive became powerful only recently).

The Native Peoples have been extended the franchise for some time now. & the colonies & then the US repeatedly negotiated & signed treaties with the Native nations. That kind of transaction indicates some kind of parity between the parties - otherwise, it's mere extortion, a kind of fig leaf of legality placed upon a moribund body. Gilding the lily is the usual term.

I think the US Founding Fathers would be mostly horrified to be called mere politicians. There was a certain amount of self-interest there, but if the documents they emitted were mostly inspirational - rather than a reflection of fact - they @ least gave us targets to aim for.

 

As I said, you're so silly!

 

Your response is just clowneske.

 

Yes, they do.

You might want to go back and study 6th grade civics again, since the Constitution doesn't allow itself to be replaced by Islamic law.

It's only method of change is through Amendments.

 

I don't think Nick Fuentes knows much about the constitution.

 

No they don't.

You really shouldn't lecture people on civics. Islam is protected by the comstitution. It even protects radical extremists (Christian and muslims ) and allows them to spout their beliefs in public, call for the downfall of the US government, and anything else they want to say, as long as they don't incite violence.

 

best this post is moved to the conspiracy theory pew.

 

Mostly true, but foreign nationals not in the US are not constitutionally protected from anything. Calling for the downfall of the US is very doubtful since that is not practicing a bona fide religious belief.

 

I agree, and never suggested otherwise.

Freedom of speech.

 

Sick!

The First Amendment was not written for Christians either. . .it was written for all Americans, no matter what their religion or no religion.

 

Go argue with Pew Research then because you are clearly wrong.

Islam and Sharia are the same thing.

Radical Islam is a call to violence.

 

I'm not wrong, and pew research doesn't show me to be wrong.

no, they aren't. .

So is radical Christianity. RADICAL being the operative word here.

 

As you well know, freedom of speech is far from absolute.

 

Clearly you don't understand graphs. If you can't understand pictures I can't help you.

Clearly you don't understand what Islam is.



Yeah how many people died to radical Christianity last year?

 

true. You aren't allowed to incite violence or a panic. Muslims, or Christians, can stand on their soap box and call for the downfall of the US government all they want. It is protected speech via the first amendment.

 

You want to throw out the US constitution?

 

sorry, the majority of muslims don't want sharia law to replace US law.

alot

 

Baghdad Bob would be proud.

 

ok?
.....