What Constitution are they talking about?
Tea Party enthusiasts, and others like them, love to hold up the Constitution as their rallying point. They constantly say their political opponents aren’t following the Constitution and they view themselves as authorities.
Well, they are hardly authorities, and sometimes I wonder what Constitution they’re even talking about.
Sarah Palin is a good example of constitutional ignorance. Although she called for White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to be fired when he used the word “retard” a few months ago, she came out in support of Dr. Laura who was criticized for using the N word 11 times on her national radio show. Palin says Dr. Laura’s First Amendment right of free speech was violated by “constitutional obstructionists.”
That’s nonsense. No one said Dr. Laura couldn’t say that word; they just said it was in really bad taste, and no one said her radio show should end – except Dr. Laura herself.
Then, there’s the example of completely ignoring the Constitution to fit your politics; in other words, the attempt to deny Muslims their right to build an Islamic cultural center and mosque near Ground Zero.
All Americans are guaranteed the right to practice their religion under the First Amendment. Muslims have religious rights equal to all other religions, but you would never know it to hear the anger expressed towards their proposal to build this center.
Islam is one of the great religions of the world but, sadly, radical Islamic terrorists twist it beyond recognition in order to promote their hateful and violent agenda. It is neither fair nor logical to hold other Muslims accountable for the vicious acts of these terrorists. Islam, Christianity and Judaism all have the same roots in religious history and all three have had their share of hate mongers in the name of religion.
And all three have heroes currently serving in our military in Afghanistan and Iraq. How must our Muslim soldiers, as many as 15,000 of them, feel about the controversy, and about the vicious, hateful things being said about Muslims?
Perhaps the saddest statement in this hysteria came from Newt Gingrich on Fox News when he said the mosque is as bad as a Nazi sign being placed next to the Holocaust Museum. What an insult to compare a murderous political party to a religion practiced by millions of people around the world!
By pandering to the Tea Party, Gingrich makes a mockery of America’s reputation as a nation of religious freedom, and may have greatly damaged our efforts to build good relationships with nations of the Middle East.
Citing the Constitution while denying civil rights to citizens of the United States is the height of hypocrisy, but it’s been done to African Americans, women, the disabled, gays and lesbians and other groups. At various times in our history someone has decided these groups don’t meet their standards for citizenship or religious purity.
They conveniently ignore the teachings of Jesus to justify their hatred of those different from themselves, and they conveniently ignore the tenets of the Constitution, as well.
One of the most amazing examples of using the Constitution to promote one’s own agenda is this new idea of changing the 14th Amendment to deny citizenship to any child born in the United States.
The 14th Amendment was popular as long as it applied to children born of parents from Europe, but now that babies born to Mexican illegal immigrants have become the target, all of a sudden Republicans want to change the Constitution. The fact is, being born in the United States does not guarantee immediate citizenship. They have to wait until age 21 and be earning 125 percent of the U.S. poverty rate before they may even apply.
Only 4,000 children born of non-citizens become naturalized citizens per year.
So many people who reference the Constitution really know little or nothing about it. They are always talking about wanting judges who are strict constructionists of the Constitution, but what they really want are judges who will support their views.
Their idea of the Constitution is that it’s their personal document to interpret any way they wish.
