Un-Constitutional Non-Sense

Equal Protection


The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America reads, in part:  No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.  The common sense, practical interpretation of this statement is that a law must be applied in identical manners for ALL citizens.

If an American citizen who happens to be ‘white’ were to stand on a street corner of his city and declare his fellow citizens should gather together and kill their neighbors who happen to be ‘black’ he would most assuredly be arrested and charged with any number of crimes including inciting to riot, ‘hate speech’ and others… assuming he was not immediately mobbed and pummeled to death before the police could arrive.  An American citizen who happens to be a Christian doing the same thing railing against Muslims or Jews would likely face similar treatment.

So why does this speech not end in Mr. Malik Shabazz being taken into custody and charged as above?  Why does this speech or this speech not result in Mr. Louis Farrakhan being similarly charged?  Because they are black and can’t possibly be racist?  Why does this interview not result in hate-speech charges against Mr. George Takei?  Because he’s gay and of Japanese descent and can’t possibly racist?

If there is no tolerance for white against black or Hispanic or gay or Muslim or… whatever... hatred, then there should be no tolerance for any hatred against whites or Christians, or men or sexually straight people.  By holding different standards for different people and not protecting ALL people equally, the government encourages resentment and division.

2022  Common Sense Constitution   globbers joomla templates