I found this interesting analysis by a chap named Thurman Boyd Hayes who states that Terry Jones’ proposed Koran bonfire is NOT protected by the 1st Amendment.
I think he’s wrong. The following is my response (which was also posted on the source site).
Mr. Hayes’ well-thought-out legal argument against Terry Jones’ shenanigans decries politicians and other “clueless onlookers” for not realizing that “Koran” burning is NOT protected under the 1st Amendment.
But there is a flaw that Mr. Hayes did not acknowledge. The pursuit of a legal solution that would acknowledge Jones’ actions as knowingly incendiary to Muslims the world over is, in effect, formally labeling Islam as a “violent religion.” The bottom line is that it’s simply a PR debacle to travel down this road. It’s much easier to issue warnings and public denouncements of Jones’ proposed actions than to go on record saying that there is a disproportionately large number of Muslims in the world who readily (eagerly) engage in violent acts against “infidels” over things that most civilized people may find distasteful, but would ultimately handle in a non-violent manner.
I blame the media for even giving Jones a forum to stir this up to begin with. Tell me, Mr. Hayes, why should they not also be held responsible for their part in this manufactured crisis? Do they get to hide behind the 1st Amendment? It seems to me there is a slippery slope here…



