Via Little Green Footballs, through Basil’s Blog, we find that nutbag Rep. John Conyers wants to outlaw religious intolerance against Islam:
I received a large number of comments, and quite a spirited debate, concerning my resolution opposing religious intolerance, including desecration of the Quran. I appreciate all of the comments, both those supporting and opposing my actions. I continue to believe that given recent events, it is worthwhile for the Congress to actually express its support for the freedom of religion. The resolution was drafted to oppose all religious intolerance. To the extent it mentions the Quran and Islam specifically, that is obviously to respond to those who believe our nation would tolerate disrespect of that religion or its holy book. Clearly we should not, at least in my opinion.
You can hit his "blog" if you want to read the rest. But, basically, "JC" forgot this little thing:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (I hope I do not have to mention which Amendment this is :D)
So, JC wants to pass a law respecting the establishment of religion. Perhaps this is a bit out of context, since he doesn’t want Islam to be the national religion (that is his next Bill), but it sure is making Islam official in the USA, isn’t it?
Furthermore, it establishes that people of other religions cannot exercise their ability to try and convert people from Islam to say, Christianity.
To continue on, this would violate the next line about abridging the freedom of speech. 3 for 3.
It is all nice and good that Conyers wants to protect peoples Rights. But people need to show that they deserve those Rights, and it seems to be that a minority of Muslims are showing the same tolerance and respect for other religions.
And, just for reference, were Conyers to submit the same Bill for Christianity, I would say the same things, except for that last line of the previous paragraph. This is not Governments place, as stated by the Constitution. Period.
