The First Amendment

On second thought . . . . .

Part of what I wrote here no longer seems right to me.

The New York Times is not a person, nor is the Catholic Church.

Does the former enjoy the protection of the First Amendment?

Then why not the latter?

If the Times enjoys First Amendment protection, why not other corporations, organizations, or collectivities?

Not just press and speech freedom but free exercise rights?

It is one thing to say individuals are protected by the First Amendment, but quite another to say only individuals are protected.

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, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Not a word of the text justifies such a restriction.

Re Hobby Lobby.

All the same, the amendment is admittedly stupid in a number of ways.

Start with free exercise.

Requiring you to do what your religion forbids is not the same as forbidding you to do what your religion requires.

But the latter is clearly ruled out of bounds.

Congress, anyway, cannot prevent you doing whatever your religion requires, and federal laws that cross your purpose cannot prevail against you.

Peyote and bearded, turbaned soldiers are only the tip of the iceberg.

Genital mutilation, animal and human sacrifice, whatever floats your religious boat.

Jihad, for example, or the killing of blasphemers, unbelievers, and disrespectful daughters.

As to speech and the press, abridging your freedom to pay others to speak or to publish is not abridging your freedom to speak or to publish.

But federal authority can neither prevent nor punish the Times or anyone else publicly or privately speaking or publishing the most dreadful and dangerous secrets, military or otherwise, to anyone, on any occasion.

Federal enforcement of non-disclosure agreements is not permitted, nor federal privacy laws, nor laws prohibiting slander or lies.

Nor may federal authority abridge the right of the 50,000 punk rockers to assemble anywhere of their choosing, any time of their choosing, for as long as they like, for any peaceable purpose.

See what I mean?

Do you really want the constitution seriously adhered to?

Update 7/25.

The common view, of course, is that exercise of religion includes both doing as it prescribes and abstaining from what it forbids. 

So understood, the amendment is even more egregiously lunatic.