A Maryville man brought one of America’s longest-running constitutional debates to a close Thursday evening, posting a 900-word analysis of the First Amendment to the Maryville Speaks Out! Facebook group and turning off commenting before anyone could respond.
The post, which drew 77 likes and two angry reactions that could go no further, argued that the amendment does not prohibit acknowledging religion, citing a 2005 Supreme Court case, the Federalist Papers, and common sense.
“People love to argue, but you can’t argue with research,” explained Darrell Whitt, 58, reached at his home off Sevierville Road. “Especially when the reply button is gone. I checked everything. Forty-five minutes, minimum.”
Legal scholars conceded the maneuver was airtight. “The Constitution provides no mechanism for responding to a man who cannot be replied to,” said Carol Stinnett, a professor at the University of Tennessee College of Law. “Hamilton never faced this. The debate is, in the legal sense, over.”
Historians note the tactic has deep constitutional roots, as the Founders themselves argued primarily through pamphlets, which scholars describe as posts with the comments turned off.
One dissenter reportedly typed a lengthy rebuttal into his phone’s Notes app and posted a screenshot of it to a different group, where members liked it without reading it.
The post remains undefeated.