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

I recognize the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution covers a lot of ground—freedom of religion, speech, press and assembly—but it seems pretty plain to me. And I’m an under-educated ex-drunk, who barely got out of Tuscaloosa High School. That begs the question, are the Republican critics of President Obama (and Democrat Harry Reid) stupid? Or will they say anything to win elections?

The issue, of course, is the controversy brewing over the location of an Islamic Mosque in close proximity to the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers. It is easy for me to understand the bitterness of families of the 2996 victims inside the skyscrapers and the 400 plus responders who died  in the aftermath of the attack. More difficult to understand is the indictment of 1.5 billion Muslims as a result of the action of 19 terrorists. And what really puzzles me is the knee jerk reaction of politicians, who like nothing more than waving the U.S. Constitution when it suits their purposes.

I mentioned an incident in an earlier post in which the in-law of a family member seemingly had a revelation as we sat watching a football game. “I hate Muslims,” he said suddenly. His remark had nothing to do with anything, a complete non sequitur. Being a quick witted guy, I responded, “Looks like the Cowboys are going to win the game.”

Unfortunately, the comment about hating Muslims is heard in many places. Religious intolerance is a world wide epidemic. I’m reasonably certain when old dudes in Hiroshima and Nagasaki sit around the television sets watching Sumo matches, one will say, “I hate Christians.”

Even so, there are numerous Christian churches in the two cities devastated 65 years ago this month on the orders of President Harry Truman, a Southern Baptist and a man who strongly believed in our religious freedom.

“We have gone a long way toward civilization and religious tolerance, and we have a good example in this country,” Truman said in 1960. “Here the many Protestant denominations, the Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church do not seek to destroy one another in physical violence just because they do not interpret every verse of the Bible in exactly the same way. Here we now have the freedom of all religions, and I hope that never again will we have a repetition of religious bigotry, as we have had in certain periods of our own history. There is no room for that kind of foolishness here.”

Out of context, the in-law of my family member—I assume he can read—would probably cite Truman’s words of “not seek to destroy one another in physical violence” as evidence he was not referring to the Islamic religion. However, Truman made no exceptions in 1952 when he proclaimed that “all” religious holidays should be observed in our country.

President Obama echoed Truman’s views on religious freedom last week when he commented on the Islamic Mosque proposed for lower Manhattan. “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable,” Obama said. “The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

Outrageous! An outburst of pure Americanism. For wing-nuts, “Hussein O’s” religious tolerance is added evidence he is a Muslim. They knew it all the time, but we simply would not listen, nor would the shrinks when they demanded the doctors unstrap their straight-jackets. I say set the loonies free and use the restraints to bridle Republican politicians (and Harry Reid). And save a few for the talk show hosts and right-wing pundits. 

Sadly, though, there will not be enough straight-jackets to defend against the epidemic of viral e-mails that will flood the Internet  in coming days. And a few acquaintances will ask my opinion of Obama’s radical interpretation of the Constitution. Instead of offering my response, I can cite Washington Post columnist and former George W. Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson, who wrote today:

A president does not merely have opinions; he has duties to the Constitution and to the citizens he serves — including millions of Muslim citizens. His primary concern is not the sifting of sensitivities but the protection of the American people and the vindication of their rights.

By this standard, Obama had no choice but the general path he took. No president, of any party or ideology, could tell millions of Americans that their sacred building desecrates American holy ground. This would understandably be taken as a presidential assault on the deepest beliefs of his fellow citizens. It would be an unprecedented act of sectarianism, alienating an entire faith tradition from the American experiment. If a church or synagogue can be built on a commercial street in Lower Manhattan, declaring a mosque off-limits would officially equate Islam with violence and terrorism. No president would consider making such a statement. And those commentators who urge the president to do so fundamentally misunderstand the presidency itself. 

Maybe Gerson is a closet Democrat. He seems too reasonable to be a Republican.

My memoir, Odyssey of a Derelict Gunslinger, is available at amazon.com and independent bookstores. It offers much more than $19.99 worth of laughs. The book is an account of my illustrious (I choose the adjectives) career.