Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Supreme Court Ruling Makes Islam More Important Than The 2nd Amendment

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Muslim woman who sued Abercrombie & Fitch on the basis of discrimination because they denied her a job because she refused the dress code banning head scarves while at work.

First of all, I wonder if the court would rule in the same way if the girl in question was a Christian and was denied a job because she refused to remove a cross from around her neck.

But I digress.  Let’s just focus on the 8-1 decision by the Supreme Court to award damages to Samantha Elauf.  Of course the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is thrilled because this is a feather in their cap after they sued on behalf of Elauf.

I’m going to forgo equating the hijab with saggy pants, tattered jeans or wrinkled shirts.  I will accept that the hijab is not a fashion choice but a religious observance and as such should be protected under the First Amendment along with yamaka’s and crosses.

That is seemingly the basis on which the Supreme Court made their ruling.  A violation of Elauf’s First Amendment rights.

Elauf herself even echoes this sentiment in a statement released after the ruling:

“Observance of my faith should not have prevented me from getting a job. I am glad that I stood up for my rights, and happy that the EEOC was there for me and took my complaint to the courts.”

That’s a very good point Ms. Elauf.

And it is EXACTLY that point that I have such a problem with.  You see, I, along with 300 milllion other Americans have the right to keep and BEAR arms.  As such, according to the ruling on Monday, any store, business, municipality or state that tries to infringe upon that right is discriminating against me.

By this ruling, the Supreme Court has set a precedence that says businesses cannot violate constitutional rights regardless of what rules or procedures they have established.

If Abercrombie & Fitch have to pay Elauf $20,000 because they wouldn’t hire her, how much am I owed for being kicked out of coffee shop or a book store for being a gun owner?

My observance and practicing of my 2nd Amendment rights are no less valid or important than Ms. Elauf wearing her head scarf and as such MUST be afforded the same protections by the Supreme Court.

But it is in this way that half the Justices have proven themselves to be Supreme hypocrites.  Of the 8 justices who voted in favor of Elauf’s claim, 4 have voted against the 2nd Amendment time and time again.

Justices Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Breyer are all for voting for Muslim rights via the First Amendment but turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the equal argument for the 2nd Amendment.

Because I am pretty sure that it is still completely legal to refuse to hire someone because they own and carry a gun.  Just as it legal to bar people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights in your business.

These Justices are betraying their oath, choosing Muslim Rights over the 2nd Amendment and are making a mockery of the Judicial System.

They should be ashamed.  But since they are rabidly liberal, shame has died long ago in their hearts.as

  • RightStuff

    Shariah law has a foothold now. It is difficult for people of good will to fight the dialectic pushed by the Muslims. We will continue to bow down to the savages in small but certain steps. We are already questioning our right to free speech because of the religion of peace. Mustn’t say anything naughty about Muhammad, or for heaven’s sake, depict him in our artwork, you know.

    • Made_in_the_USA

      They also have a tribunal in the Dallas area for muslim civil disputes. Don’t know if anything’s been done about that issue, but it sure seems muslims will stop at nothing. They are using our Constitutional laws to eliminate our Constitutional rights, and ultimately, the Constitution itself. Now, any muslim woman can sue any company for anything she deems unacceptable with shariah-based laws, and our courts will be forced, by this precedent, to back her up.

      • bluff bunny

        Are the stores also required to allow her time off to pray? And a place to wash her feet, before she prays?
        Funny the Christian God can hear your prayers, anywhere, anytime…..theirs makes you follow a schedule.

  • shamu9

    To Hell with the Rag-Heads!! Give Them what they give us, Nothing but TROUBLE!

    • bluff bunny

      We should just REFUSE to be ‘served’ by these bag-wearing creeps! If they try to ‘serve’ you in a retail place….just walk away and find a different sales person.
      Don’t encourage them by accepting them.

  • Lance H

    Hmm, great point. I hadn’t thought of it like this. Unfortunately with the ruling cabal being what it is, don’t expect traction with this argument.

  • GRAMPA

    Our government needs a reason to impose martial law. The people of this nation will not stand for it and the government realizes this. The answer to themselves at least is to get the citizens to demand it. This will only happen by using something so foreign to the American way of life that they will not hesitate to demand it. So what is the most Aborrant thing that Americans will not put up with? Shariea law and the muslem demands that we follow their laws. With enough riots that will occur the people will demand action. Now our government will have the way to impose martial law without too much resistance. If I am wrong, tell me how?
    Grampa

    • USAForever48

      I think you’re absolutely right, Grampa. We will fight them tooth and nail and to the death if they try to impose sharia law here. It ain’t gonna flyu because we won’t have it! The only laws I follow are the laws of Almighty God and the Constitution. That’s it. Best wishes to you, Grampa!!!!!

  • volksnut

    they are rabidly liberal which is exactly why they should be removed from their posts as they are not fit to carry out their sworn duties impartially – But that’s precisely what their “boss” does – tries to ” game ” the system whenever wherever he can.Another case in point his purging of the vast majority of our militaries top leadership – for his own as well as his handlers – end run to destroy this country as we know it.

  • ineedtruth

    This would be a good time for someone to carry their firearm to work. They could use the Supreme Court ruling to justify their actions. When they are fired, take it to the supreme court and use their ruling to win.

    • Paul Wolf

      So, if local CT Bolshevik and Obama lover Malloy banned AR-15 and standard capacity magazines larger than 10 rounds, I should demand from the Supreme Court ruling that will null and void all anti freedom, anti 2nd Amendment “laws”?! Which BTW they made retroactive. Lex retro non agit… Apparently many idiots chosen by other idiots do not know that LAW CANNOT BE RETROACTIVE!

  • luciteehee

    Ask yourself ONE question and you’ll find the answer to Americas biggest threats: As if we didn’t KNOW: Would THIS issue, (along with MANY other invasive, divisive, and unconstitutional ones) have EVER been a factor for our Supreme Court to decide B.O.? IE: Before 0’Bama? Even WORSE, was the Supreme Court also intimidated and threatened to comply with ALL E.O. Laws? Due to information secretly “shared” by the “sitting snitch”, with the “Eyes and Ears” Tsar’s? That there were misgivings about the pressure exerted on them? Which required “folding” like a newspaper tent during a tornado?

  • MikeS

    That ruling is wrong. The SCOTUS has made a mistake.

  • tom cook

    Hopefully one of her filthy mus brethren will take her dirty mus head off.

  • You imbeciles in USA, you voted for satan as your CC, and you aint seen nothing yet!!!

    The order will be coming soon to have your kids FGMd and forced to wear fkn bin bags!!! It’s happening in the UK, and like you, we cowardly fkn brits are to afraid to see our politicians and throw them in a fkn furnace!!! TRAITOROUS SCUMKUNTZE!!!

  • martianpoet

    hmm. last I looked, the Supreme Court does not create law, they just review what they accept to review and voice OPINION as to the Constitutionality of the case. Unless I completely missed the training, Congress creates the laws. You should be able to extend the logic of this decision to those poor Christian bakers whose rights not to participate in a same sex wedding due to it being against THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS were trashed and they are in effect now out of business. The US is just duplicating all the stupid “PC” arguments as did Europe, Scandinavia and the UK. After witnessing the destruction over there, you would think we would stop importing muslims and their attendant deathly problems to the USA. Instead, we “elect” a communist/socialist/progressive/islamist as “Commander in Chief” with access to all and an obvious design to destroy our republican system of government and replace it with Shariah. I hate to see the bloodshed that is about to hit the ostrich like ignorant US Citizens. 9/11, Boston marathon and other actions will pale in the light of what has been allowed to accumulate with a porous border, executive order handcuffing of our country’s protectors, and massive importation and taxpayer support for islamists who are on the same mission as the other jihadists committing heinous acts around the world. Instead of trashing Pamela Geller, you may wish to consider her as the modern version of Paul Revere — except she’s a helluva lot braver.

    • Propaganda division of Bull Shit Not News is an embarrassment to the news reporting industry…and as bad as the bait they sell.

  • A fucking agenda driven blog posing as “news” is vile and disgusting. Lying to promote emotional bias makes _conservativebyte.com_ a useless propaganda rag.
    Here is the truth:
    “Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Muslim woman who sued Abercrombie & Fitch on the basis of discrimination because they denied her a job because she refused the dress code banning head scarves while at work.”
    Well, that is discrimination law as applied to every minority in the fucking country .
    If it had been a gay man denied on the basis of his “obviously gay demeanor”, favorable ruling.
    A breast feeding woman…favorable
    Jewish dreadburns…favorable.
    https://plus.google.com/+UndeadKilla/posts/XnifyrMjwnh

    • martianpoet

      This is part of a bigger problem in trying to enforce religious freedom for some and not others — If it is against someone’s religion to participate in a same gender marriage ceremony, why are those people DENIED their religious freedom. Were there no other bakeries for the couple to contract with?? I would be in big trouble with this leftist court’s opinions if muslims came to me for a job and wanted “religious freedom” extended to them. I have no way of knowing if a muslim is ignoring the tenets of Qu’uran purposely because that muslim is a “moderate” (??????) or if they are practising their religion’s encouragement of lying, cheating, deceiving infidels until the time to make them the offer by the muslim choosing one of the “standard” 3 decisions– convert, be subjugated and pay jiizah, or kill the infidel — beheading is favored and no discrimination — man, woman or child. I would probably have to find some other acceptable reason not to hire them (which is what Abercrombie and Fitch failed to realize they needed to do).

    • Freedom?

      So is discriminating against a person wanting to exercise their RIGHT to bear arms.

      What’s your point?

  • TMO16

    EXCELLENT POINT!! We must point to this case to defen d ALL our other rights!

  • Pingback: Supreme Court Decides Islam is More Important than the 2nd Amendment | No Lapdog Media()

  • Pingback: Supreme Court Ruling Gives Greater Protection to Islam Than Gun Owners | Guns in the News()

Send this to friend