"…we've bastardized the First Amendment, reinterpreted America's religious history and secularized our society until we ooze skepticism and circumvent religion on every level of public and private life."
I assume that by "bastardizing the First Amendment" he means that we have allowed people like Chuck to feel comfortable enough to make treasonous statements supporting sedition against the USA and not fear for immediate imprisonment (like he would face in 90% of the world) and certain death (like he would face in about 50% of the world?)
It got me thinking, though. What would the First Amendment look like in Chuck's new independent country? First we would have to name this new holy land where freedom of speech means the right to say what doesn't offend the majority. The New Republic of Texas?...Nope. "New" sounds to liberal. Texasstan? I like the nod to religious intolerance, but too "Araby" for us Christians. Texico? Great! However it is already taken by another environmental friendly organization of profiteers and the patriots following Chuck would never question the right of a corporation to do whatever it wanted to do. I guess we will have to settle for "Texsylvania." It is a dusty, desolate land barren of technology and populated by at least one famous bloodsucking member of the undead.
Now, would people be able to say things about Texsylvania like Chuck just said about the U.S.A.? How about this little ditty that Chuck added to the Cannon of Chuck:
"How much more will Americans take? When will enough be enough? And, when that time comes, will our leaders finally listen or will history need to record a second American Revolution? We the people have the authority according to America's Declaration of Independence, which states: That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”
Wow. "Thousands of cell groups?" "A second American Revolution?" What would Texsylvania's future president, Grand Inquisitor Chuck say about someone who said these things about Texsylvania? Would Chuck's "un-bastardized" First Amendment allow folks to argue against, or even about, religion?
(I should clarify that in Texsylvania, I assume that the only state-licensed religion would be Christianity. And I also assume that in Texsylvania, Christianity would mean evangelical beliefs that exclude Catholics and Protestants and maybe even Baptists, although the Baptists have a lot going for them in their hatred of The Gays™.)
I am guessing that in Texsylvania, if you said anything about Texsylvania along the lines of what Chuck just said about the U.S.A., you would be, of course, arrested and charged with speaking against Texsylvania and heresy. "Heresy?" you may ask. I forgot to mention that the NTV (New Texsylvania Version) Bible - the only valid translation of the original Greek by Chuck - makes it clear that to speak against Texsylvania is to speak against Christ God. You may be charged with both counts because the bastardized constitutional concepts of due process (like "lesser included charges") are not needed in Texsylvania.
Your trial would be adjudicated by the pastor of the Evangelical Church of Chuck of Texsylvania. During your inquisition, the truth of your case would simply be revealed to the pastor during a session of worship. Since there is no need for all that back and forth about evidence like they have in the 48 States (Utahzikstan is currently at war with Texsylvania over the blasphemous claims in the NTV bible) the trial would be quick and easy. This achieves the conservative right's goals of saving money and still being able to execute people. After the evidence revealed to the pastor is presented to you by someone who is speaking in tongues, you will be found guilty of sedition and and heresy. Your sentence? If you are lucky, Chuck will just round-kick you in the face.
However, if you were REALLY lucky you would be banished from Texsylvania for life.
UPDATE: After a technical issue and an absence, I have had to re-post all of my old posts. As a result there will be many posts listed as published today, Dec 3, 2009, that were posted sometime earlier in the year, but I do not know the exact date. this post is one of them.
0 comments:
Post a Comment