Supreme Court Wantonly Promotes Drug Use

When the Supreme Court ruled yesterday that a public school principal had the right to restrict the free speech of a student in a public setting outside the classroom, it justified its anti-free-speech ruling by claiming a higher priority: preventing the spread of pro-drug messages. You see, said the Supreme Court, the public interest is served by quashing whatever might be possibly interpreted as expressing a pro-drug sentiment, so not only is the right of someone to express that possibly pro-drug sentiment is overruled, but a person expressing a possibly pro-drug sentiment can be punished, too.

A reasonable person would not conclude that the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” really express the notion that, if Jesus returns any day now, we should lend him our water pipe. A reasonable person capable of some reflection would not conclude that the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” are a sincere suggestion that good Christian folk should get high as often as possible if they love their Lord and Savior. No, it’s pretty clear that the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” are akin to the old “Nuke a Godless Communist Gay Baby Seal for Christ” shirts you used to see around campus. Neither one is serious. Neither one is literal. Both are ways of poking fun at overzealous authority figures who try to stuff propriety down everybody else’s throats.

But no — it doesn’t matter any more what a reasonable, thoughtful person would think of some words. Now, thanks to the Supreme Court, if any words can possibly be interpreted as a pro-drug message, even stupidly interpreted as a pro-drug message (as the Supreme Court majority in its infinite stupidity has done), then those words may be quashed and those who express then may be punished, in the service of the 0th Amendment to the Constitution, which Thomas Jefferson apparently penned in invisible ink, stating that freedom of speech is trumped by the War On Drugs.

Now that the Supreme Court has decided the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” are punishable for the sake of our society’s greater purpose of combating possibly pro-drug messages, I’d like to bring something to everybody’s attention. While a lowly student was punished for merely unfurling a banner with the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” in one place on one day, another group of citizens has spread those words far and wide. When the Supreme Court decided to accept the court case of the student, it issued public statements to the media in which it used the words…

No, a reasonable person would not conclude that by doing so, the Supreme Court meant to support drug use. But, as the Supreme Court majority said very clearly in its decision, the intention of the speaker does not matter. What matters is whether it’s possible to interpret the message of the speaker as a pro-drug one. Sure, it’s possible. It’s stupid to do so, but that doesn’t matter, because you’d have to be stupid to think that the message “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” was any kind of a serious attempt to convince people to use drugs in the first place, and stupid is good enough for the Supreme Court. So because it’s possible to interpret the Supreme Court’s repetition of the words …

as an pro-drug act of speech, the Supreme Court should be punished. If anything, the Supreme Court should be punished to a greater degree than the public school student, because they engaged in possible pro-drug speech not just once but four times. In verbal arguments with lawyers, Supreme Court Justices repeated the words…

over and over again. The Supreme Court Majority repeated the words…

over and over yet again in its written opinion. And even the Supreme Court Minority, which was sympathetic to the targeted student, released the words…

in its written opinion. Now that the majority has ruled, the minority’s possibly reckless pro-drug actions cannot be overlooked. Surely the justices of the Supreme Court are aware of how keenly their words are attended to and how often they are repeated by the news media! Thanks to their four-fold utterance of the words…

millions of kiddies nationwide have been exposed to the idea of…

which will have, if you take the Supreme Court majority seriously, the intolerable effect of promoting the growth of new little weed-heads everywhere.

There’s only one destination worthy for the pro-drug Supreme Court now. Free speech, schmee speech! It’s time to lock ‘em up! As the Supreme Court has articulated it, that’s the New American Way.