Remember the great struggle to end discrimination against shoplifters?  And all the parallels that struggle had with the civil rights movement?

No?

How about the long battle to make domestic abuse a form of free speech before the law, equal in legal stature to the fight to bring women the right to vote?

Not that, either?

Of course not.  They’re both completely absurd.

Equating a crime – shoplifting, domestic abuse – with bringing the rights in our Constitution to people who, as law-abiding citizens, deserve them profanes logic and, worse, devalues the rights.

Any rational person knows this.

Which is why the media seem to be trying to make the irrational seem rational.  As in this AP piece, carried on MPR, on Alabama’s new immigraiton law, titled “Alabama immigration battle recalls past civil rights turbulence”.

Alabama was well-suited to be the nation’s civil rights battleground because of its harsh segregation laws, large black population, and the presence of a charismatic young minister named Martin Luther King Jr., who led a boycott of segregated buses in 1955.

Opponents say the new law’s schools provision conjures images of Gov. George Wallace’s stand in the schoolhouse door to block integration.

But only if you’re an idiot.

Because black children – and their parents – were American citizens, endowed by their creator with the same rights as their white neighbors, notwithstanding George Wallace.

But illegal aliens are violating the law by being here.  And to treat their presence in this country as a right devalues that right, and undercuts our sovereignty as a nation.

And stating it any other way – like, comparing a crime to a right – is no better than lumping domestic abuse in with women’s suffrage.