Some religions are just more equal than others

While researching the last post I found a noxious lil' blog called "The Big Picture" (no, no link); when the first thing I see, other than a Pajamas Media logo, is an adoring post lauding Wal-Mart's (ptui! ptui!) "courage" in planning to "Open Stores in Struggling Urban Neighborhoods" (yeah, that's courageous - or maybe they saw a section of the population they hadn't exploited yet? And really cheap rents, to boot), well, you know it's going to be a tough ride.

So anyway, Mr. Picture is all het up about an Islamic "enclave" in Arkansas and how it's inevitably going to lead to a bunch of rabid IslamoMarxiCommuNaziLibmaFascists leavin' footie-prints all over his nice, clean country:

While the imam, Aquil Hamidullah, says his goal is to create "a clean community, free of alcohol, drugs, and free of gangs," the implications for U.S. jurisprudence of this and other internal enclaves are greater: while the Little Rock enclave might prevent the sale of alcohol, can it punish possession and in what manner? Can it force all women, be they residents or visitors, to don Islamic hijab (headscarf)? Such enclaves raise the fundamental questions of when, how, and to what extent religious practice may supersede the U.S. Constitution.

One wonders if he'd have the same problem with, oh, say, these guys:

"ChristianExodus.org seeks a return to constitutionally limited government founded upon Christian principles, and has decided that the best strategy for achieving this goal is to reform the local and state governments. To accomplish this reform, we will relocate thousands of Christian constitutionalists to one particular sovereign State (South Carolina) so that our numbers will make an effective difference in electoral politics," the Web site says.

Any bets?