Umm, both your and Westboro’s wacko pronouncements in the public square (such as, for example, this very tweet) invoke God’s name on a regular basis. They got sued for it; you didn’t. It appears their liberty to be religious in public is more in danger than yours is.
First Amendment and irony comprehension fail. But you have to love someone who complains that they’re not allowed to do something as they’re doing it.
The fallacy being applied by this particular politician is….. *drumroll*….. equivocation, combined with a bit of false analogy. First of all, simply invoking God’s name in the public square hasn’t gotten either the WBC or Sarah Palin in any kind of trouble. In fact, doing so is pretty much a requirement for both churches and conservative politicians alike, hmm? Oh, I’m sorry– “church,” in scare quotes, says the woman whose own church invited a witch hunter to come and bless her. Second, for Sarah Palin the word “can’t” means that somebody, somewhere, will have a negative opinion of her for doing something. For Westboro, regardless of how you might view their beliefs and practices, it means they might be out $5 million. A tiny bit of a difference, there? Perhaps.