A citizen who is unhappy about a recent decision of his city council stood in front of city hall and gave an extemporaneous speech belittling each member of the city council. During the diatribe, the citizen made the following statement: "If there is a God, the city council members will surely burn in hell forever." A state statute, enacted in 1898, prohibited "the public utterance of any blasphemy or sacrilege," and provided criminal penalties for its violation. On hearing the citizen's utterances, a police officer arrested him for violating the 1898 statute. The local district attorney decided to proceed with prosecution of the case, only the third recorded such prosecution in the state's history. Which of the following arguments would NOT be helpful for the citizen's defense? Group of answer choices Application of the statute to the citizen infringes his freedom of speech in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The statute violates the Fourteenth Amendment because it is vague. Application of the statute to the citizen denies him equal protection of the law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The statute violates the Fourteenth Amendment because it is an establishment of religion