||"dawnbreak in the west"|
Sunday, October 04, 2015
How to ban a noxious religion
Lawrence Auster once singled out Islam as incompatible with the American way, which it is; and proposed to exclude Islam by name from Constitutional protection. I never did accept this notion as stated, but I hadn't quite gotten to expressing that explicitly (which is mine own fault). So, here we go:
To single out a group for whatever reason is a collective writ of attainder. The Constitution has a ban on attainder, at least for citizens. If we are to have civil-rights at all, that ban is the best in the Western world. It should be a "Forever Clause", like certain parts of the Constitution of Honduras. Therefore, when we get to that other ban on the "religious test for office", I would stick this one asterisk onto it: exclude any candidate for Federal office who supports attainder.
This incidentally also means the Feds won't be able to discriminate on racial grounds. Including outcome-based "affirmative action". There's something for everyone to dislike here! But anyway.
I suggest to whoever it may concern, Herman Cain or Dr Carson or freakin' Stacey Dash or whoever runs next time - that the GOP propose an Amendment based on Auster's proposal but abstracted out. I could give it a shot: religions with a casuistic law-code do not count for the purpose of this Constitution. So a religion would be allowed apodictic statements like "thou shalt not commit adultery" but not "give adulterers 100 lashes". Its priests can say "let us ban abortion" (or "we should spend more on womens' health"), but not "sentence abortionists to five years of labour" (or "impose a 5% tax on gentlemens' clubs").
If we're serious about Constitutional government, and preserving it, that's what has to happen: a forever-clause stamp on "no attainder", and the lifting of protection from religions that happen to look a lot like Islam. (Neo-reactionaries of course won't care. But this post isn't for them.)
On this site
Property of author; All Rights Reserved