Many of us are unpersuaded that the of intensity of the rightwing attacks on anything associated with President Obama – which often seems to be opposition for opposition’s sake – isn’t just another manifestation of plain old-fashioned racism. Nor is it too difficult to make a good a case for this point of view – in spite of the fact that even those members of the hard-core anti-Obama fringe caught in overtly bigoted behavior recoil in offended horror that anyone would suspect them of anything so naughty as racism.

There seems to be one group, though, that the bigots deem it socially acceptable to attack more or less openly. One of the side-effects of the attack on the twin towers is that it has been used to validate overt efforts to discriminate against Muslim Americans. In Missouri we see this manifested in the effort to codify anti-Sharia legislation into law, which, in spite of the serious issues confronting the state, has occupied the doubtful talents of a small cadre of not-as-smart-as-a-fifth-grader types headed by State Rep. Paul Curtman.

Curtman has got a constittional bee in his bonnet – and unfortunately, the buzzing it produces seems to preclude clear thinking on his part.  He seems to think that he is upholding some constitutional principles by forbidding applications of Sharia law. Unfortnately, for his credibility, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of costitution itself would preclude Sharia law – although, arguably, the Free Exercise Clause would preclude efforts to prevent the free application of Sharia principles among Muslims in a fashion analogous to the way that religious Jews now defer to the precepts of Jewish law in marriage contracts, wills, etc. In fact, a [ttp://news.oneindia.in/2010/11/30/federaljudge-rules-against-sharia-law-restrictions-inokl.html permanent injunction was issued against the anti-Sharia legislation in Oklahoma] on the grounds that it violated the Establishment clause by privileging Christianity.

It