Bloomberg says the 1st amendment is for everyone. What about the 2nd?

Mayor Bloomberg has taken moral relativism to a whole new level when it comes to the First Amendment and the role of government. This week the mayor bizarrely defended one Florida pastor's call to burn Korans on the ninth anniversary of 9/11 in a blatant act of retaliation and revenge against Muslims.

"I happen to think that it is distasteful. I don't think he would like it if somebody burnt a book that in his religion he thinks is holy ... but the First Amendment protects everybody," Bloomberg said.
-----------------

Why would he think that the first protects everybody, but the 2nd does not?

Mayor Bloomberg is dead right on the Koran issue. The pastor has the right to burn all the Korans he wants.

But, he shouldn't. And, the American people should loudly voice that opinion in the hope that he does not. The burning would be despicable and should be denounced by all people who strive to be moral.

The city where his church is located is rightly not helping him in this effort by not issuing him the permits that would be required to do the burning using a bonfire.

Mayor Bloomberg and the City of New York are dead wrong on the issue of guns.

First, let me state that I personally do not support any individual burning anything that another individual believes is holy or important.

Second, despite no. 1, I also recognize and respect an individual's right to expression - be it speech, art, protest action, or yes, burning of books - holy or not.

But here's my observation: It seems that when somebody, anybody, burns the Bible, or burns or trample the US Flag, or anything that represents America, most Americans don't lift a finger.

And yet here is one American who is exercising his right and suddenly, it seems the whole nation is against him.

Hey, correct me if I am wrong.

0.02.

Bloomberg does not support the Second Amendment because like most anti types, he believes that the Bill of Rights is a Buffet of Rights. That he can pick and choose those which he supports and believes in while discarding those he detests. What these people don't seem to understand is that the Bill of Rights is a package deal and all must be accepted and support by Americans. There is no "I like this one, but I'm uncomfortable with that one". When you start to pick the Bill of Rights apart, the foundation of the structure will eventually collapse.

Anyone think that is not happening now?