"Now, with the defamation of Muhammad reaching the shores of America, I wonder whether the patriotic American Muslim will still have the audacity to claim that he enjoys the right to be a Muslim in America?" Awlaki wrote. "Does he understand that this right includes his duty to fight against those who blaspheme his Prophet?"

Isn't that strange? How is it that someone who grew up with an American education can fail so badly to understand the Bill of Rightsor is it just a dubious assertion?

Any American Muslim alike any American enjoys the privilege of the Bill of Rights. First Amend is in charge here of "His duty to fight against those who blaspheme his Prophet" by protecting the right of every Muslim and everybody else to worship the way they want, "he doesn't have to". It is possible to foresee the consequences of repeated and widely spread blasphemous assertions for any faith in a society somewhere in the world, sometime, on the right without constrain for its followers to freely practice their faith ?

But, any blaspheme even outrageous for any faith in a society enjoying the Bill of Rights cannot have any consequence for the Freedom of Religion part of the Bill and so, protected, explaining why the very same Bill protects the Freedom of Speech allowing precisely that ourageous blaspheme?

Have you ever ask yourself why the Founders made sure Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion are side to side in the First Amend? Do you really think they ignored everything about blaspheme or any of the debates these two freedoms have entertained at all times?