Here's a little satir I wrote for an assignment in my English class. I only had about 45 minutes to write this so it isn't quite as well thought out as I would have liked:
Congress Applies 2nd Amendment Rules to 1st Amendment
In the wake of recent events Congress has enacted a set of laws that will greatly restrict Americans’ 1st amendment right to free speech. The main event that sparked talks of such a law was the “Innocence of Muslims” movie, parts of which were released on YouTube back in July, 2012. Since the video’s release, there has been much unrest within the Muslim communities and also around the world, as apparently all Muslims believe that it is our duty to not offend anyone’s religion. Hilary Clinton was one of the first cabinet members to insist on the bill, saying that, “I’ve already apologized for our 1st amendment right one time, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to do it again!”
Since the bill has officially taken effect, American’s no longer have the right to free speech. In order to be able to take advantage of this right again, individuals will have to first sign up for a Free Speech Permit (FSP) course where they will learn certain rules about what you can and cannot say and where you can and cannot say them. Upon completion of the course individuals must mail in proof of completion, copies of proper identification, and a $50 check and after approximately 90 days, if all background and mental health checks pass, they will receive their Free Speech Permit.
President held a press conference concerning the bill just yesterday to address any concerns anyone had. The biggest concern among most everyone is whether such a bill is even constitutional and whether or not Congress is allowed to pass such a law. One reporter at the press conference spoke up and asked President Obama directly, “Mr. President, aren’t you concerned about the constitutionality of such a bill?” The President simply responded, “The what?” It appeared as though President Obama did not understand exactly what “constitution” was being referred to. The reporter was quickly reprimanded and reminded by presidential staff that she was not allowed to ask relevant questions that may be hard for the President to answer.
After the conference, Vice President Biden was asked a similar question in which he responded by saying, “Look, back when the Constitution was written, they only had pens and a little paper. There was no way for our forefathers to know that we would have things like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube where people could just say whatever they wanted and within seconds the whole world be able to hear it. There is simply too much at stake these days when you let just anyone be able to say whatever they want to say.”
But although the constitutionality of the new laws is being drawn into question, a lot of individuals are expressing a bit of relief. We walked the streets asking individuals how they felt about the new laws, and although most people didn’t have a clue what we were talking about, there were a few individuals who actually knew that there was a world that was actually going on around them. One woman showed support for the new laws, saying, “I think it will be nice to be able to get on Facebook or Twitter and actually see meaningful and intellectual comments and conversations. That is, if they even survive the hit of having 95% of their users banned from their service.” Another man also seemed to show support for the bill, admitting that he “still hasn’t figured out what the hell those hash-tag things are all about”, and that he hopes they are the first things to go.
