“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . .”
The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
I don’t get it. Surely the Founding Fathers did not mean what this says. How could they? Since they were so irresponsible and reckless in their thoughtless musings here, I propose that we rewrite this flawed document to reflect the popular sentiment, which of course is always the best way to determine right and wrong.
And while we’re on the topic, let’s redo the 14th Amendment as well. Honestly, the very notion that we should consider human beings born on American soil as citizens is absurd. There should be some sort of heritage test (in English, of course) and that test ought to be determined by the dominant race – as long as we (you know who you are) are still dominant.
Of course, we better not touch any part of the Constitution that protects our right to “bear arms.” This was as close to holy writ as was ever written. They got that right, and nothing that has happened since in the development of our nation impacts that discussion.
Now don’t get me wrong. I love the Constitution when it serves my causes and convictions: when I can practice my faith unfettered, when my children are considered citizens, and when my gun is strapped to my chest when I walk into Wal-Mart.
So let me fix this mess. Here is what the new First Amendment should say:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof except by Muslims, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Gay Religious Groups and Baptists.”
Let me explain.
EthicsDaily.com’s Featured Resource
Everyone knows that all Muslims are terrorists. Don’t confuse me with the facts here.
And as long as we are excluding groups, Mormons need to go. Right now, they think they are on the conservative pal list, but just wait until we give Mitt Romney and his “Big Love” friends the boot.
Regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses and gay religious groups: If Hitler wouldn’t have them, why should we?
The inclusion of Baptists may be a surprise, but there are just too many of these folks who don’t get it. They advocate for religious liberty, and let’s face it: Baptist folks like Martin Luther King Jr., who believed in the free exercise of religion, need to be silenced. Of course, there are many Baptists who aren’t for religious liberty, but they can just give up the name “Baptist” and carry on without missing a beat.
Frankly, we will have to add more religions to this list. I suggest we vote every year on who is in and out. That way we can know the approved religions and not have to put up with people with whom we disagree.
Like many, I want my country back. So join me as we do away with this silly part of the Constitution and fix it the way my God told me it should be.
Charles McGathy is a retired Navy chaplain and presently serves as a pastor in Madison, N.C.