No, my point was that Hawai`i's on-going challenge to the Muslim ban is SOP for this republican democracy, and that your post implied a tyranny of the majority argument, as if the SOP isn't useful.   Your tyranny of the majority argument seems to fly in the face of your statement that the "founders did create a stable political system of governance."  If you believe this, then why do you oppose one of its SOP's?  Don't you have faith in the legal system, at least in the long run?

I'm not sure what led you to express disdain for the founders' First Amendment wisdom.  Your logic appears to be based on fear, rather than respect for republican democracy, or the issue we were discussing.  Is your idea of a free press one where you agree with everything that's written?  Do you fail to understand that that is precisely what the founders were hoping to forestall when they established a free press?