Replies

"but no one wants to admit that they would feel the other way if a Wiccan or Muslim was inviting people to convert while you were just waiting to catch a photo of your son getting his diploma."

Why should they? Are Wiccans, Satanists or Sun worshippers a majority of the public? Did they found this govt? Was it there religion that provided for our Bill of Rights and constitution? We (America) are under no obligation to subjugate the will of the majority with the concerns of the few. Perhaps she could of done it elsewhere but she didnt - freedom of speech should not be seen as a personal offense if it is not intended as such. Otherwise the slippery slope will take us to banning speeches altogher, or worse.

but no one wants to admit that they would feel the other way if a Wiccan or Muslim was inviting people to convert while you were just waiting to catch a photo of your son getting his diploma."...Why should they? Are Wiccans, Satanists or Sun worshippers a majority of the public? Did they found this govt? Was it there religion that provided for our Bill of Rights and constitution? We (America) are under no obligation to subjugate the will of the majority with the concerns of the few. Perhaps she could of done it elsewhere but she didnt - freedom of speech should not be seen as a personal offense if it is not intended as such. Otherwise the slippery slope will take us to banning speeches altogher, or worse.

You seem to be taking the issue in a different direction, rather the subjugation of minorities.

If the issue is the First Amendment a Muslim girl has the same right to make a call for Shahadah as this girl does to make an altar call. Either both are appropriate, or neither are. Majority status is irrelevant.

Why should they? Are Wiccans, Satanists or Sun worshippers a majority of the public? Did they found this govt? Was it there religion that provided for our Bill of Rights and constitution? We (America) are under no obligation to subjugate the will of the majority with the concerns of the few. Perhaps she could of done it elsewhere but she didnt - freedom of speech should not be seen as a personal offense if it is not intended as such. Otherwise the slippery slope will take us to banning speeches altogher, or worse.

Thanks, that tells me all I need to know. You're the majority and you'll do whatever the hell you want.

This is why the idea of a republican form of gov't protecting the rights of all equally was a novel development in mankind's history. Cause those who understand it are few.