I just love hearing the U. S. Constitution invoked to protect a whole litany of questionable activities.

There’s the most onerous — abortion on demand — which is in the news again because of the nomination of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court. One would think, from listening to the talk shows or reading the paper, that there is no issue more important to the nation than protecting abortion rights. In fact, one would think there is only one qualification for sitting on the high court: whether one agrees to uphold Roe v. Wade. But I digress. Abortion only became a “right” after a 1973 Supreme Court invented its protection in the Constitution, overruling the legislatures of all 50 states. Whether you think abortion is right or not, the idea that the Constitution protects your right to get one is the fabrication of an activist court. As one dissenter in that decision noted: “To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment.”

And now, in an unrelated case except for its appeal to the Constitution, comes Mulligan’s tavern which sued the city of Peoria for their “right” to hold wet t-shirt contests. According to the Journal Star article on the case, the ordinance itself says, “It is neither the intent nor effect of this ordinance to restrict or deny access by adults to semi-nude conduct protected by the First Amendment.” The article further reports:

Mulligan’s, located across Sterling Avenue from Northwoods Mall, sued the city in 2003, after being told it couldn’t hold the contests or have male dancers because it didn’t have an adult business license. In the suit, Mulligan’s officials maintained the liquor ordinance impinged on their right to free speech and expression.

Free speech! Ah yes, this is exactly what James Madison had in mind when he penned those words, “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.” He had been trying for years to get a wet-corset contest going down at the Indian King Tavern, but was stymied by the insidious New Jersey decency laws. And who could forget Patrick Henry’s famous speech in which he defiantly proclaimed, “Give me nudity or give me death!” Ha ha ha.

Seriously, though, is running around half naked in a public establishment really what free speech is all about? Is this all that freedom means to Americans today? Is this the kind of freedom our soldiers in Iraq and Afganistan are fighting to protect? I think it’s kind of insulting to the people who died for this country over the last 230 years or so that we think we’re oppressed when we have to get a license to have nude (or “semi-nude”) girls compete in a boob contest. Don’t you think that demeans the Constitution a bit?

There is so much good that can be done with our liberty. In fact, that used to be the understanding of liberty — the freedom to be the best people we could be, the freedom to act in accordance with the better angels of our nature. Not as a justification for prurience. And I can’t help but think of the person who really needs justice who had to wait another day or week while this frivolous case was being heard.

Mulligan’s will get its wet t-shirt contests and, according to the paper, “in the neighborhood of $200,000” from the city (read: us taxpayers) for supposed lost revenues. It’s a lucrative victory for Mulligan’s, but a dubious one for the First Amendment.