Andrew Sullivan links to this post by Paul Cella, where Cella, in an aside, suggests that the sedition laws be expanded to cover those who advocate the promotion of Sharia laws. His argument appears to be that the implementation of Sharia as a set of religious laws would be incompatible with a republican form of government.
So the question is does his new sedition law apply to this guy, who equates democracy to terrorism; advocates the implementation of biblical law, and the succession of Texas from the Union? By the way this guy is running in Texas for Senator and previously ran for governor in 2006. As I previously commented, in 2006 he got 7.6% of the Republican primary votes. Should those 49,626 Republicans also be charged with sedition?
To be clear, I don't think sedition laws should apply to these people. If free speech means anything it must include advocacy of changes in government including changes in the constitution. But if we are going to talk about sedition applying to people advocating religious law, the ones advocating Mosaic law are much more widespread than those advocating Sharia.