Benefits to repealing the 1st Amendment

[Midnight FM]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

 

[JGalt]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

The Westboro Baptist Church is a tax-exempt church under the 501(c)(3) provision of the Internal Revenue Code, which pretty much means it's legitimate.

I'm just sayin'

 

[scruffy]

If you don't like our Constitution, why don't you leave?

No one's keeping you here.

 

[Midnight FM]

The Westboro Baptist Church is a tax-exempt church under the 501(c)(3) provision of the Internal Revenue Code, which pretty much means it's legitimate.

I'm just sayin'

Right, that's why "freedom of religion" as it's been interpreted is stupid. Any reasonable person can see that something like Westboro Baptist Church isn't a legitimate religion, and if one reads the source texts, such as the Bible or the theology of John Calvin, one can see that they've been bastardized, cherry picked, and misinterpreted.

So it should be perfectly legal and Constitutional to ban cults like WBC, as far as I'm concerned.

We might have been better off if the Framers set clear guidelines for what is and what isn't a legitimate religion under the Constitution, and afforded illegitimate ones no Constitutional protection.

That way, we wouldn't be seeing things like Satanism and WBC just barely manage to fall under the legal definition of Constitutional protection.

 

[drudge X]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

Obama and Biden tried to repeal the First Amendment.

 

[Oddball]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

 

[Midnight FM]

If you don't like our Constitution, why don't you leave?

No one's keeping you here.

The Constitution can be changed.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

Are you trying to piss us off?

 

[Midnight FM]

How about this?

If a religion claims to be "Christian", for example, but ignores 99% of source texts such as the Bible or theological books that it's supposedly based on, it doesn't qualify as a protected religion under the Constitution. (I think the WBC, for example, meets that criteria).

 

[buttercup]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

 

[JGalt]

Right, that's why "freedom of religion" as it's been interpreted is stupid. Any reasonable person can see that something like Westboro Baptist Church isn't a legitimate religion, and if one reads the source texts, such as the Bible or the theology of John Calvin, one can see that they've been bastardized, cherry picked, and misinterpreted.

So it should be perfectly legal and Constitutional to ban cults like WBC, as far as I'm concerned.

You should have brought this up back in '78 when those Jonestown folks swallowed the Kool-Aid. The same folks who followed that guy who rented out his flock to show up in support of Democrat candidates...

"The Peoples Temple was formed by Jim Jones in Indianapolis, Indiana, in 1955.[14] The movement purported to practice what it called "apostolic socialism."[15][16] In doing so, the Temple preached that "those who remained drugged with the opiate of religion had to be brought to enlightenment – socialism."[17][18] Jones had held an interest in Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and Adolf Hitler from a young age, and would later frequently praise Stalin and Vladimir Lenin as heroes.[19] He was also upset with persecution against the Communist Party USA.[20] In the early 1960s, Jones visited Guyana – then a British colony – while on his way to establishing a short-lived Temple mission in Brazil.[21]"

Jonestown - Wikipedia

 

[Concerned American]

I'd be fine with them being banned.

That works real good until it is YOUR religion that some whack job figures is unAmerican. The first amendment is fine just the way it is. The founders had way more on the ball than some interweb, message board whack job.

 

[JGalt]

That works real good until it is YOUR religion that some whack job figures is unAmerican. The first amendment is fine just the way it is. The founders had way more on the ball than some interweb, message board whack job.

I think the religion of liberalism is pretty damned un-American.

Can we get them to shut the **** up and take away all their guns?



I'm joking here.

 

[JWBooth]

Are you trying to piss us off?

JAFT
Just Another ******* Troll
At least three of late, all mindlessly leftards.

 

[Midnight FM]

That works real good until it is YOUR religion that some whack job figures is unAmerican. The first amendment is fine just the way it is. The founders had way more on the ball than some interweb, message board whack job.

That presumes that all religions are created equal.

I'm saying they're not.

 

[JGalt]

JAFT
Just Another ******* Troll
At least three of late, all mindlessly leftards.

Those fags at Reddit and DU probably got tired of trolling each other and decided to come over here.

 

[Concerned American]

I'm saying they're not.

Good thing you don't make the rules. What do you say about Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Mormonism, Islam, Taoism, or any of the native American religions? You should take the advice offered above and stop posting.

 

[Midnight FM]

Good thing you don't make the rules. What do you say about Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Mormonism, Islam, Taoism, or any of the native American religions? You should take the advice offered above and stop posting.

All of those I would consider protected under the law.

Satanism I would not. I also wouldn't consider cults such as WBC or FLDS protected under the law.

 

[Concerned American]

All of those I would consider protected under the law.

Satanism I would not. I also wouldn't consider cults such as WBC or FLDS protected under the law.

If you have protections for the ones you like, you have to afford the same protections for all of the ones that you don't.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Off the top of my head, here are some benefits I can think of:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

This may have been a mistake. I would be fine with legitimate religions such as Christianity being recognized, but not things like Satanism, or cults such as Westboro Baptist Church. I'd be fine with them being banned.

or abridging the freedom of speech

Some "speech" has no redeeming value, and I'd be fine if it wasn't protected. Examples could include expressing hatred of people based on their race or their sex.

While this likely won't happen, I think we shouldn't consider the 1st Amendment sacred, and should be free to question it, just as how many people are questioning the 2nd Amendment in the wake of gun violence.

With respect to religion, it is up to the states to make the decision.

There were state sponsored religions up until the 1830's when the last one was written out of the state constitution.

And these sponsorships were never challenged.

As for satanism, I don't have a problem allowing people to worship as they please. They start putting dogs/cats/people on the alter.....different story.

Regarding speech....I do not believe (and it has been a while since I've read up on this) that free speech was intended for all speech. I do believe it was intended to cover Political Free Speech.

You can't do the whole "fire in a croweded theatre" because people might get hurt. I don't see how that wouldn't apply to porn as well or even the use of foul language in public. It is harmful.

Props for raising the challenge.