Washington Post Calls for Sharia Over the First Amendment

The media, particularly the New York Times and the Washington Post, have waged an extended campaign against freedom of speech with a push to censor social media and with pieces claiming, as a recent New York Times op-ed did, that free speech is killing us.

The latest entry in the media's Jihad against the First Amendment comes from the Washington Post, courtesy of Time cretin, Richard Stengel.

Stengel bizarrely insists that our freedom of speech should match the values of the Islamic dictatorships he was in contact with.

Even the most sophisticated Arab diplomats that I dealt with did not understand why the First Amendment allows someone to burn a Koran. Why, they asked me, would you ever want to protect that? It’s a fair question. Yes, the First Amendment protects the “thought that we hate,” but it should not protect hateful speech that can cause violence by one group against another.

It's a fair question why America doesn't have blasphemy laws?

That is why Muslim countries ban burning the Koran. Not because they oppose 'hate'. But because they are theocracies.

Richard Stengel and the Washington Post believe we should comply with theocratic sharia laws under the guise of fighting hate.

But what about a law banning flag burning? You know, the very thing the media vocally opposed.

Isn't that hateful speech that can cause violence?

What about Rep. Omar engaging in anti-Semitic hate speech?

What about anti-police protests that call the police foul names? 

What about Washington Post pieces that hatefully call America a racist country that has no right to exist?

Ah, but hate speech only applies to speech that the Left hates. That's what their hate speech codes have in common with Sharia law. They protect the power of a totalitarian elite.

Share