Dearborn, Michigan, USA, Police: Enforce Sharia against the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution


Tom Usher wrote or added | The Constitutionally guaranteed rights of these people were violated and subjugated to a religious tenet of Islam that is anti-US Bill of Rights.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble...."

Every aspect of the First Amendment to the US Constitution, except for the very last bit ("and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"), was violated by the City of Dearborn, Michigan, USA, and its possible off-duty, moonlighting officers.

This should not be happening anywhere in the US. The Islamic community should shut this down themselves ASAP before there is a legitimate backlash.

It is a religious requirement of Christians to proselytize. The area of the Bill of Rights dealing with religion was developed largely with Christian history in mind. Christianity in name had been used as an abusive instrument of the state. While the idea was to prevent that in future, it was also memorialized for good reason that Christians would not be persecuted in future by the state, which persecution had also all too often occurred.

I know that the First Amendment was and is a mere Band-Aid on the problem cutting both ways, but to begin to elevate Sharia over Christianity or any other religion or ideology where all other things are taken as equal doesn't bode well for atheists or anyone else who is not a Muslim of the particular strain supporting this "law" in Dearborn. Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett, and Harris would have been subjected to exactly the same treatment. Think about it.

It would not be right to stop Muslims from handing out religious tracts or for atheists not to be able to handout their info either in front of a Christian church or festival. It might not be good taste, but it shouldn't be prohibited anywhere in this nation.

By the way, in looking over the Answering Muslims website, I see that the festival in question was not a Muslim or religious festival but rather a secular, Arab cultural festival. It was supposed to be open to people of all faiths or none, not that any of that should make a difference. It shouldn't. The Christian believers were not even in the festival when they were arrested for handing out the Gospel of John, as they are required to spread the Word and so many Arabs and Muslims have never even been allowed to read the Gospels to decide for themselves whether Mohammed spoke correctly of Jesus, which he did not.

I am against any Muslims denying any right to distribute or to read the Gospels or the New Testament anywhere on the planet. I am speaking here about public property and also allowing all other religions equal rights in this regard. There are, of course, limits that apply to all religions (but equally). There ought be no favoritism that coerces. Let the best ideas prevail without being censored. Let each religion have an equal opportunity to defend and to promote its positions. Let the people expect religions to answer "challenges" of other religions and to not duck, dodge, and obfuscate. Then let the individuals and groups decide but not persecute. Let them have their rights of private assembly too and to exclude from those whom they will.

Shame on Dearborn, Michigan.

Tom Usher

About Tom Usher

Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.