If the first amendment were treated like some politicians treat the second . . .
To speak out publicly, you would need to pass a political competence examination, both written and orally. Then you would need to have a thorough background check, fingerprinting and pay a registration fee. If approved, you would have a waiting period of 10 days or more before you can express yourself.
Once you are approved for public expression, you may select only approved topics from a Department of Justice list. You will be restricted to only one political speech or blog post in any thirty-day period. Regardless of whether you have properly followed the process before, you will have to subsequently repeat the entire process each time you wish to express yourself.
Any electronic medium (computer, wireless device, etc.) by which you express yourself will have to be on another approved list and be registered with the DOJ. A fee will be required for each device registration.
You will not be allowed to speak out within earshot of certain places like schools, parks, hospitals, town halls or shopping centers. Your electronic publications will not be allowed behind the firewalls at these locations.
Of course, if you have spoken out without following the process, your rights will be permanently suspended. You need not apply again.
Oh, and if you expect to be able to attend a spoken or electronic expression show to make your views known, forget about it. The expression show loophole will have long been closed.
With all of the preceding in mind, does it make any sense at all to treat any component of the bill of rights any differently than the others? Think about it.