← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Gabrielle
Thread ID: 18768 | Posts: 54 | Started: 2005-06-22
2005-06-22 21:52 | User Profile
WASHINGTON - The House on Wednesday approved a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power to ban desecration of the American flag, a measure rejected twice by the Senate in the past decade but expected to get a closer vote this year.
By a 286-130 vote ââ¬â eight more than needed ââ¬â House members approved the amendment by the required two-thirds majority after a debate over whether such a ban would run afoul of the Constitution's free-speech protections.
If approved by a similar two-thirds majority in the Senate, the amendment would then move to the states for ratification. It would have to be approved by three-fourths, or 38, of the 50 state legislatures to become the 28th amendment to the Constitution.
Sixty-three senators, four short of two-thirds needed, voted for the amendment in 1995 and again in 2000. With Republicans increasing their majority in last fall's election, activists on both sides of the issue said the amendment has its pass chance ever of passing this year. But a rough count by The Associated Press shows 34 ââ¬â one more than needed to defeat it ââ¬â either as having voted against the amendment in the past or committed publicly to opposing it.
Supporters said the measure reflected patriotism that deepened after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and they accused detractors of being out of touch with public sentiment.
"Ask the men and women who stood on top of the (World) Trade Center," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass this amendment."
But Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said, "If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag represents."
The measure was designed to overturn a 1989 decision by the Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 that flag burning was a protected free-speech right. That ruling threw out a 1968 federal statute and flag-protection laws in 48 states. The law was a response to anti-Vietnam war protesters setting fire to the American flag at their demonstrations.
The proposed one-line amendment to the Constitution reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." For the language to be added to the Constitution, it must be approved not only by two-thirds of each chamber but also by 38 states within seven years.
Each time the proposed amendment has come to the House floor, it has reached the required two-thirds majority. But the measure has always died in the Senate, falling short of the 67 votes needed.
But last year's elections gave Republicans a four-seat pickup in the Senate, and now proponents and critics alike say the amendment stands within a vote or two of reaching the two-thirds requirement in that chamber.
By most counts, 65 current senators have voted for or said they intend to support the amendment, two shy of the crucial tally. More than a quarter of current senators were not members of that chamber during the last vote.
The Senate is expected to consider the measure after the July 4th holiday.
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050622/ap_on_go_co/flag_burning[/url]
2005-06-22 22:14 | User Profile
Any member of Congress who votes in favor of such an amendment is an enemy of the Bill of Rights and a traitor. To burn a US flag is to make a symbolic political statement. Never mind if we agree with it or not; the purpose of the First Amendment isn't to protect only expression with which the majority agrees. And the First Amendment, like the rest of the Bill of Rights, was meant to be non-negotiable and NOT subject to the vicissitudes of popular opinion.
If burning the US flag isn't already justified, then it most certainly WILL be as soon as an anti-desecration amendment is passed. As soon as flag-burning is outlawed, the US flag will finally be a symbol of nothing but hypocrisy. It will be the standard of a land of cowardly little worms who preach about "freedom" while doing nothing to preserve it.
:furious:
2005-06-22 22:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Any member of Congress who votes in favor of such an amendment is an enemy of the Bill of Rights and a traitor. To burn a US flag is to make a symbolic political statement. Never mind if we agree with it or not; the purpose of the First Amendment isn't to protect only expression with which the majority agrees. And the First Amendment, like the rest of the Bill of Rights, was meant to be non-negotiable and NOT subject to the vicissitudes of popular opinion.
If burning the US flag isn't already justified, then it most certainly WILL be as soon as an anti-desecration amendment is passed. As soon as flag-burning is outlawed, the US flag will finally be a symbol of nothing but hypocrisy. It will be the standard of a land of cowardly little worms who preach about "freedom" while doing nothing to preserve it.
:furious:[/QUOTE]
Only a traitor would burn the beloved symbol of our Country.
2005-06-22 22:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]Only a traitor would burn the beloved symbol of Country.[/QUOTE]No, only a traitor considers the symbol more important than one of the key principles the symbol is supposed to stand for.
If they pass that amendment, then I will wipe my ass with the American flag, as it will have become a symbol of detestable hypocrisy.
2005-06-22 22:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]No, only a traitor considers the symbol more important than one of the key principles the symbol is supposed to stand for.
If they pass that amendment, then I will wipe my ass with the American flag, as it will have become a symbol of detestable hypocrisy.[/QUOTE]
I am amused that you consider yourself an American. You are a traitor! :bash:
2005-06-22 22:43 | User Profile
In my front yard I have a 2X4 sign that consist of an American flag but where the stars should be at it has the Star of David and going into it there is a knife and it says "NO USRael" :angry: :angry: :angry:
At the rate that this country is going it looks to me that the one in my yard will be the flag of the future, may I be dead by then.
2005-06-22 22:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]I am amused that you consider yourself an American. You are a traitor! :bash:[/QUOTE]To a true American, the Constitution means everything and the flag is merely a symbol. To outlaw flag-burning or any other form of political expression is to metaphorically burn the Constitution. THAT's treason.
The traitor is YOU if you support infringing on the First Amendment. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. You have chosen to take the safe view of the herd, but you're simply wrong, and any intelligent, principled, TRUE American can see it. Too bad there are so few of us left.
2005-06-22 22:46 | User Profile
The flag banning amendment is a congressional symbol of loyalty to America. It's a symbol in lieu of substance. While they're waving the American flag, they're serving the Israeli flag.
2005-06-22 22:51 | User Profile
Not only that, but as soon as a precedent is set by the restriction of expression via flag-burning, the door will be opened to all kinds of other restrictions on speech. "We need to outlaw speech that makes fun of our president, since he's a symbol of our country, too!" Mark my words: that sort of thing will come next. If one form of speech that a lot of people find offensive can be outlawed, then so can any other. Goodbye First Amendment. :furious:
2005-06-22 23:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]To a true American, the Constitution means everything and the flag is merely a symbol. To outlaw flag-burning or any other form of political expression is to metaphorically burn the Constitution. THAT's treason.
The traitor is YOU if you support infringing on the First Amendment. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. You have chosen to take the safe view of the herd, but you're simply wrong, and any intelligent, principled, TRUE American can see it. Too bad there are so few of us left.[/QUOTE]
How is burning our beloved country's symbol "speech"? The Constitution provides for the following:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Burning the flag is not an establishment of religion; it is not free SPEECH or PRESS; nor is it peaceably assembling. So how, exactly, is burning the sacred symbol of our country, for which the blood of patriots has been spilled, protected by the Constitution? "Political expression" does not excuse desecrating a symbol that real patriots, men far better than any of the unpatriotic, sissified, truly pathetic flag-burners and the like, died to preserve and protect. Do you think the men who fought and died during the American Revolution, or whatever war you choose, would like to know that there were not only American citizens vile and low enough to desecrate the American flag, but also people who justify them as being wholly within their rights, blablabla, to do so? People should have enough respect for America, and for the Flag that is the symbol of it, to be so vile. Burning a flag, or desecrating it in any other way ââ¬â or protecting/advocating the desecration of the flag ââ¬â is not only wrong, it is down right un-American and treasonous.
2005-06-22 23:08 | User Profile
Gabrielle, that is simply moronic. "Speech" does not only refer to spoken words. It refers to any form of expression. No one has ever disputed that in the history of this nation.
When you outlaw flag-burning, you violate the Bill of Rights and one of the very principles this nation was founded upon. If this Amendment is passed, then it will perhaps be the final nail in America's coffin. The Constitution will be completely dead and buried.
I don't expect someone of your "Republican-good, Democrat-bad" mentality to understand this, but it's all true just the same.
By the way: It takes MUCH more courage to go out in public and burn a flag than to go out in public and wave a flag while yelling, "God bless the USA!" In fact, it takes no courage at all to do the latter. It takes LOTS of courage to be a dissident, always and everywhere. The sissies are the people who go along with the herd for the sake of their own comfort. The ones who stand up for what they believe is right no matter how much abuse is heaped upon them are the truly courageous ones. That is a fact.
2005-06-22 23:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Gabrielle, that is simply moronic. "Speech" does not only refer to spoken words. It refers to any form of expression. No one has ever disputed that in the history of this nation.
When you outlaw flag-burning, you violate the Bill of Rights and one of the very principles this nation was founded upon. If this Amendment is passed, then it will perhaps be the final nail in America's coffin. The Constitution will be completely dead and buried.
I don't expect someone of your "Republican-good, Democrat-bad" mentality to understand this, but it's all true just the same.
By the way: It takes MUCH more courage to go out in public and burn a flag than to go out in public and wave a flag while yelling, "God bless the USA!" In fact, it takes no courage at all to do the latter. It takes LOTS of courage to be a dissident, always and everywhere. The sissies are the people who go along with the herd for the sake of their own comfort. The ones who stand up for what they believe is right no matter how much abuse is heaped upon them are the truly courageous ones. That is a fact.[/QUOTE]
Angler, you sound like the rats during the so-called French Revolution. If you are so perverted that you cannot tell the difference between freedom of speech and burning the symbol of your nation, then you are one treasonous anti Christ swine. :mad:
2005-06-22 23:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]Angler, you sound like the rats during the so-called French Revolution. If you are so perverted that you cannot tell the difference between freedom of speech and burning the symbol of your nation, then you are one treasonous anti Christ swine. :mad:[/QUOTE]There is no difference. Burning the symbol of a nation is just another form of political speech. It doesn't harm anyone's person or property.
Your problem is that you think the symbol of freedom is more important than the freedom itself. You think that the freedom should be sacrificed in order to protect the symbol. You think the symbol is more important than what the symbol is supposed to stand for!
Your sort of idiocy is precisely why America is dying, if not dead. The only thing left of the Founders' America is the geographical land and masses of asses to populate it.
2005-06-22 23:54 | User Profile
Here's an essay from several years ago written by one of the few US politicians who doesn't deserve to be hanged: Ron Paul.
June 28, 1999
Flag Amendment is a reckless solution Loyalty must be to constitutional principles, not symbol of it
Loyalty and conviction are admirable traits, but when misplaced both can lead to serious problems.
More than a decade ago, an obnoxious man in Dallas decided to perform an ugly act: the desecration of an American flag in public. His action violated a little-known state law prohibiting desecration of the flag. He was tried in state court and found guilty.
As always seems to be the case, though, the federal government intervened. After winding through the federal system, the Supreme Court -- in direct contradiction to the Constitution's 10th Amendment -- finally ruled against the state law.
Since then Congress has twice tried to overturn more than 213 years of history and legal tradition by making flag desecration a federal crime. Just as surely as the Court was wrong in its disregard for the Tenth Amendment by improperly assigning the restrictions of the First Amendment to the states, so are attempts to federally restrict the odious (and very rare) practice of Americans desecrating the flag.
After all, the First Amendment clearly states that it is Congress that may "make no laws" and is prohibited from "abridging" the freedom of speech and expression. While some may not like it, under our Constitution state governments are free to restrict speech, expression, the press and even religious activities. The states are restrained, in our federal system, by their own constitutions and electorate.
This system has served us well for more than two centuries. After all, our founding fathers correctly recognized that the federal government should be severely limited, and especially in matters of expression. They revolted against a government that prevented them from voicing their politically unpopular views regarding taxation, liberty and property rights. As a result, the founders wanted to ensure that a future monolithic federal government would not exist, and that no federal government of the United States would ever be able to restrict what government officials might find obnoxious, unpopular or unpatriotic. After all, the great patriots of our nation -- George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Benjamin Franklin -- were all considered disloyal pests by the British government.
Too often in this debate, the issue of patriotism is misplaced. This is well addressed by Keith Kruel, an Army veteran and a past national commander of the American Legion. He has said that, "Our nation was not founded on devotion to symbolic idols, but on principles, beliefs and ideals expressed in the Constitution and its Bill of Rights. American veterans who have protected our banner in battle have not done so to protect a 'golden calf.' ââ¬Â¦A patriot cannot be created by legislation."
Our nation would be far better served that if instead of loyalty to an object -- what Mr. Kruel calls the "golden calf" -- we had more Members of Congress who were loyal to the Constitution and principles of liberty. If more people demonstrated a strong conviction to the Tenth Amendment, rather than creating even more federal powers, this issue would be far better handled.
For more than two centuries, it was the states that correctly handled the issue of flag desecration in a manner consistent with the principle of federalism. When the federal courts improperly intervened, many people understandably sought a solution to a very emotional issue. But the proposed solution to enlarge the federal government and tread down the path of restricting unpopular political expression, is incorrect, and even frightening.
The correct solution is to reassert the 10th Amendment. The states should be unshackled from unconstitutional federal restrictions.
As a proud Air Force veteran, my stomach turns when I think of those who defile our flag. But I grow even more nauseous, though, at the thought of those who would defile our precious constitutional traditions and liberties.
Loyalty to individual liberty, combined with a conviction to uphold the Constitution, is the best of what our flag can represent.
Source: [url]http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst99/tst062899.htm[/url]
Ron Paul understands. How many other so-called "Americans" do? "Land of the Free," my ass. Hardly anyone in this country cares about real freedom anymore.
*** Edit: There is one point in this essay about which I disagree with Dr. Paul. It's this one:
While some may not like it, under our Constitution state governments are free to restrict speech, expression, the press and even religious activities. The states are restrained, in our federal system, by their own constitutions and electorate. This is actually wrong. If the rights protected by the federal Constitution are considered inalienable, then those same rights *must * be inalienable by state standards as well. If free speech (or gun rights, etc.) are inalienable rights, then NO government at ANY level has the right to infringe upon them. Thus, while the powers of the federal government were certainly meant to be limited, the Bill of Rights is the highest law of the land and trumps ALL legislation to the contrary.
2005-06-22 23:59 | User Profile
[QUOTE]
Supporters said the measure reflected patriotism that deepened after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and they accused detractors of being out of touch with public sentiment.
[/QUOTE]It is scary that they would use 9/11 to get a point across about why it is wrong to burn the flag. Thinking of things that came after September 11th, the Patriot act,etc That is, in itself, one more thing that proves the way in which the country is heading. How long will it be for example, before someone is branded a traitor and arrested,etc just for speaking against present and future wars in the name of the "war on terror?" Paranoid? Maybe, or maybe not.
2005-06-23 00:32 | User Profile
Angler,
I'm proud of our House. They are even more patriotic than the guys who made up the Congress of 1776. These modern day giants truly know what is important and will save us all. Forget about the immivasion, the unfair "free" trade bills and the Israeli spy scandal. Those things are minor compared to this legislation.
This is nothing but an attempt to play up the the tub thumping flag waving crowd that in all probability knows next to nothing about the flag's history. This is the crowd that thinks real patriotism is putting a flag display on ones car until it is frayed and tattered. Yep, it is good to see that the House has such a strong sense of priorities here.
Oh yeah, before I forget. Which flag do they want to prohibit the burning of? The US or is it the Israeli? Most of these people seem to think they are one and the same.
2005-06-23 00:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Oh yeah, before I forget. Which flag do they want to prohibit the burning of? The US or is it the Israeli? Most of these people seem to think they are one and the same.[/QUOTE]Yeah, really. And hell, the two flags almost might as well be the same at this point. I mean, it's perfectly okay to invade and occupy another country on behalf of Israel -- a nation that routinely spies on the US, manipulates its foreign policy, and once even attacked US sailors in cold blood -- but anyone who fails to worship the flag as a cloth god is unpatriotic and totally unworthy of those fine men and women of Congress who still refuse to investigate the USS Liberty attack.
2005-06-23 02:01 | User Profile
God forbid that in todays America you should symbolicly destroy the flag, while at the same time our elected servants literally use the Constitution and Declaration of Independance to wipe their arses!
:wallbash: :wallbash:
2005-06-23 04:44 | User Profile
It'll never become law. The Senate is already lined up against it.
2005-06-23 04:53 | User Profile
Whether the bill passes or not is really unimportant. Flag burning as "protected free speech"(which really means little today, anyway) is only one small thing in a much bigger picture.
2005-06-23 07:45 | User Profile
Might as well burn the rag, it is not the White races country no more, it is the holding of the capitalist bosses and there paided whores and every turd worlder who wants to show up. All screwing the White Working classes to doom and in the end the whole itself. That is the flag that flies over the house of treason, and is the symbol of the traitiors in power who have pressed there heel into the necks of there own country folk since around the time of the civil war[second revolution.] And today just sells them to doom for there 30 pieces of silver.
That flag is just a big corperate logo, that the mass have been trained to salvate too. Just the ringing of the bell for the programmed masses.
2005-06-23 09:06 | User Profile
I'd prefer to see an amendment banning gratuitous use of the American flag.
2005-06-23 12:26 | User Profile
**Freedom! Equality! Brotherhood! **
"Weak minded liberals might argue that burning the flag is a form of free speech, but this is so much nonsense. There have always been bounds on free speech. The best known example is that it is illegal to shout fire in a crowded theatre. It is also illegal to libel people with unproven allegations.
Those who burn the Stars & Stripes are guilty of the equivalent of both these acts. It is irresponsible to wantonly incinerate something that stands for freedom in a very real sense - and can give quite the wrong impression. This is the equivalent of shouting fire in a place you know fine well is safe from conflageration. Also, it is an act of heinous libel. How can one defend attacking the basis of our free speech, the flag, and accusing it of gross acts without proof? The flag stands for free speech and equality of men. It is a symbol, and as such can never be wrong. To burn it, then, is an act of libel - one is libelling universal truths, rights and principles with terrible actions. That flag can never commit these acts - it is impossible.
The flag is much more than this though. The flag is the nation incarnate. To burn the flag is to burn one's family, one's leaders, one's people. Anyone who can even contemplate such an act is surely barbarous and mad. When America was founded by Thomas Jefferson, he rightfull saw that Americans should have the freedom to defend their flag. The Supreme Court, whupping boys of the liberal elite, overuled this in 1989. Never such treachery has been commited on American soil. "
2005-06-23 12:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Angler,
I'm proud of our House. They are even more patriotic than the guys who made up the Congress of 1776. These modern day giants truly know what is important and will save us all. Forget about the immivasion, the unfair "free" trade bills and the Israeli spy scandal. Those things are minor compared to this legislation.
This is nothing but an attempt to play up the the tub thumping flag waving crowd that in all probability knows next to nothing about the flag's history. This is the crowd that thinks real patriotism is putting a flag display on ones car until it is frayed and tattered. Yep, it is good to see that the House has such a strong sense of priorities here.
Oh yeah, before I forget. Which flag do they want to prohibit the burning of? The US or is it the Israeli? Most of these people seem to think they are one and the same.[/QUOTE]
I am very disappointed in you, Sertorius.
2005-06-23 12:47 | User Profile
This sounds very much like something Lincoln would have done.
This is a very sticky situation, but even if i was proud of everything the federal government did, i would not want to outlaw burning its flag. Even by negros, muslims, homos or any other group i didnt agree with. Waving a flag doesnt make you a patriot.
These days however, Im more upset if i see negros burning Confederate flags rather than the US flag. Even then, i dont want the burning of Confederate flags made "illegal", as if that would happen any time soon. However, i would not object to locals denying those burning the flags any type of service and others following them around with signs to point out who they are. I would also not be suprised if some of the flag burners get "roughed up".
2005-06-23 12:52 | User Profile
The symbolic power of the flag far exceeds its physical importance. I have no respect for people who use the flag to further a neocon, anti-American agenda and then wrap themselves in it with this type of knee-jerk legislation. The true danger to the flag isn't in some wacko who wants to burn it, but in the dictators in Washington who want to desecrate it.
2005-06-23 12:59 | User Profile
Gabrielle - Think of the time of the founding fathers and just before the war of 1776. Who would be more apt to outlaw the burning of the union jack (the current flag at the time), the American patriots, or the American loyalists ?
Which side, take ye ?
2005-06-23 13:02 | User Profile
The anti Christ left is behind this flag burning business. And once again, you guys fall for it! How can you guys be so easy?
**The flag is much more than this though. The flag is the nation incarnate. To burn the flag is to burn one's family, one's leaders, one's people. Anyone who can even contemplate such an act is surely barbarous and mad. When America was founded by Thomas Jefferson, he rightfull saw that Americans should have the freedom to defend their flag. The Supreme Court, whupping boys of the liberal elite, overuled this in 1989. Never such treachery has been commited on American soil. **
2005-06-23 13:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=JoseyWales]Gabrielle - Think of the time of the founding fathers and just before the war of 1776. Who would be more apt to outlaw the burning of the union jack (the current flag at the time), the American patriots, or the American loyalists ?
Which side, take ye ?[/QUOTE]
I would be against burning the union jack. But then again, I would have fought with the South during the War Between the States.
2005-06-23 13:08 | User Profile
Gabrielle,
See Brian's post above. He reflects my views completely on this. If there were truth in advertising the flag they really represent whether, they know it or not is the Israeli flag. Hiding behind the U.S. flag doesn't change that for one minute.
2005-06-23 13:18 | User Profile
Great comments by Brian. Reminds me of the following:
[B]Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. William Samuel Johnson[/B]
[url]http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/williamsam195767.html[/url]
2005-06-23 16:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]The anti Christ left is behind this flag burning business. And once again, you guys fall for it! How can you guys be so easy? [/QUOTE] There you go again Gabby. I understand what the left is all about and my position on flag burning is in no way affected by their sinister agenda. In order for there to be a crime, there must be a victim: who is the victim in flag burning Gabby? Certainly you and I don't have standing if we are disappointed that some leftists would seek to engage in this behavior. But, then again, zealots like yourself always seek to expand government authority into the realm of victimless crimes. While I oppose flag burning, homosexuality, drug use, alcohol abuse, etc., the mere fact that they occur in the privacy of people's homes is not my business. The true agenda of America is freedom, Gabby, and if you don't get that, you're missing the real point here.
2005-06-23 16:45 | User Profile
Openly Fascist states love to elevate it's symbols to divine status and curse all dissidents. The US is a Fascist state and represents nothing divine and fair any longer, therefore it's citizens must be coerced to accept it's divine symbols. The Founding Fathers certainly knew that and that's why they said "no laws" abrigding free speech.
Get over it Gabby.
2005-06-23 16:48 | User Profile
[QUOTE=xmetalhead]Openly Fascist states love to elevate it's symbols to divine status and curse all dissidents. The US is a Fascist state and represents nothing divine and fair any longer, therefore it's citizens must be coerced to accept it's divine symbols. The Founding Fathers certainly knew that and that's why they said "no laws" abrigding free speech.
Get over it Gabby.[/QUOTE] Last time I looked, the public approval rating for Congress was in the 30% range. Could there be a coincidence here?
2005-06-23 16:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Brian Hassett]Last time I looked, the public approval rating for Congress was in the 30% range. Could there be a coincidence here?[/QUOTE]
Of course. Along with a dismal approval rating for Our Dear and Holy Emperor George Bush and the Unwashed Masses' growing disgust for the US Unholy Debacle of Death in Iraq, the Congress must react to silence the uppity subjects in this country. The US flag is now equal to the Holy Bible.
2005-06-23 17:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Any member of Congress who votes in favor of such an amendment is an enemy of the Bill of Rights and a traitor. To burn a US flag is to make a symbolic political statement. Never mind if we agree with it or not; the purpose of the First Amendment isn't to protect only expression with which the majority agrees. :furious:[/QUOTE] If you buy your own flag and you want to burn it as a political protest, OK, have at it.
If someone wants to take my flag and burn it, there will be trouble. I agree with your sentiments.
2005-06-23 18:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=xmetalhead] The US flag is now equal to the Holy Bible.[/QUOTE] Very true. Even looking over some of the posts in this thread, you can see that sentiment:
[QUOTE] The flag stands for free speech and equality of men. It is a symbol, and as such can never be wrong [/QUOTE]
2005-06-23 18:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]Freedom! Equality! Brotherhood! Did you purposefully give your post a title reflecting the slogan of the French Revolution? If not, it is a beautiful piece of irony that shows your statist idolatry for what it is.
[quote=Gabriell]...The flag stands for free speech and equality of men. It is a symbol, and as such can never be wrong. To burn it, then, is an act of libel - one is libelling universal truths, rights and principles with terrible actions. That flag can never commit these acts - it is impossible. [/QUOTE] Actually, no, the flag does not stand for free speech and the equality of men. It stands for the American state, that is, it represents a specific polity existing at a specific point in time. To claim that the flag represents 'universal truths' and that disrespecting the flag is disrespecting truth itself is simply Jacobin lunacy.
2005-06-23 18:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]Freedom! Equality! Brotherhood! ** LOL! What's this supposed to mean? You're the one who opposes freedom, remember? You think flags have more rights than people do.
"Weak minded liberals might argue that burning the flag is a form of free speech, but this is so much nonsense. There have always been bounds on free speech. The best known example is that it is illegal to shout
firein a crowded theatre. It is also illegal to libel people with unproven allegations. Apples and oranges. Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater puts people in physical danger. Libel is not a criminal issue, but a civil one -- and truth is an absolute defense against it.Those who burn the Stars & Stripes are guilty of the equivalent of both these acts. It is irresponsible to wantonly incinerate something that stands for freedom in a very real sense - and can give quite the wrong impression. This is the equivalent of shouting
firein a place you know fine well is safe from conflageration. Also, it is an act of heinous libel. How can one defend attacking the basis of our free speech, the flag, and accusing it of gross acts without proof? The flag stands for free speech and equality of men. It is a symbol, and as such can never be wrong. To burn it, then, is an act of libel - one is libelling universal truths, rights and principles with terrible actions. That flag can never commit these acts - it is impossible. This is sheer psychosis. Again, you are saying that a symbol -- a piece of cloth that can be bought at any store -- is more important than the freedom to express dissent. And how will the flag stand for freedom if there's no freedom of political expression?
Again: Your "shouting fire" and "libel" examples are rubbish. Doing those things involves harming people. Burning a flag harms no one -- unless you think that it should be outlawed because it greatly offends people. But saying bad things about Jews and blacks also greatly offends people! Do you think that should also be illegal? Now who's the "liberal"?
The flag is much more than this though. The flag is the nation incarnate. To burn the flag is to burn one's family, one's leaders, one's people. Absolutely preposterous, insane, and delusional. Burning a flag is burning a piece of cloth. Burning 100,000 flags in a giant furnace does not harm one hair on the head of any member of my family. Neither does it harm our "leaders" (unfortunately) or anyone else.
By the way: I don't have any "leaders." I am paid to listen to my boss at work and I have no problem with taking advice from people, but in the final analysis, my only leader is myself.
Anyone who can even contemplate such an act is surely barbarous and mad. When America was founded by Thomas Jefferson, he rightfull saw that Americans should have the freedom to defend their flag. The Supreme Court, whupping boys of the liberal elite, overuled this in 1989. Never such treachery has been commited on American soil. "[/QUOTE]If you think Thomas Jefferson would have approved of a law against flag-burning, then it's you who is mad.
A nation is defined by the principles it stands for, not by a symbol of...whatever. I laugh at those fools who pay solemn reverence to a cloth idol! And I grind my teeth in disgust at those who burn what's left of the one and only Bill of Rights in order to protect one of countless identical $14.95 flags that were made in China!
2005-06-23 19:39 | User Profile
Angler brings up a potent point. After 9/11 Americans couldn't even find flags to show solidarity with the victims of that attack; most flags are made in Asia and it took a long time for the orders to make it stateside. Congress should spend more time dealing with trade deficits and lost manufacturing jobs before dealing with symbolism.
2005-06-23 19:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]**Did you purposefully give your post a title reflecting the slogan of the French Revolution? If not, it is a beautiful piece of irony that shows your statist idolatry for what it is.
Of course I meant it Sarcastically.
Actually, no, the flag does not stand for free speech and the equality of men. It stands for the American state, that is, it represents a specific polity existing at a specific point in time. To claim that the flag represents 'universal truths' and that disrespecting the flag is disrespecting truth itself is simply Jacobin lunacy.[/QUOTE]
Only a low life scumbag would burn an American flag. Period!
2005-06-23 20:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]Only a low life scumbag would burn an American flag. Period![/QUOTE] I never said otherwise. My point is that the American flag represents a specific state, and one that is not even a true nation, at that. It does not represent universal truth, or beauty, or God, or freedom, or equality. Therefore, burning an American flag is an affront to the American state, not to truth, beauty, liberty, et al. Your Jacobinism comes through in your inability to distinguish between the City of God and the City of Man.
2005-06-23 21:05 | User Profile
"There's the infamous case of the Wisconsin teen-ager who defecated on a U.S. flag and was convicted for trespassing and other offenses. But the charge under the state's flag-desecration law was dropped on free-speech grounds."
**Freedom of speech - First Amendment... I think not! **
"Although the high court twice invalidated state flag laws, 47 states still have statutes, many modeled after the Uniform Flag Law of 1917, that prohibit the desecration of the flag or its use for advertising and publicity purposes.**
Did you catch that... the high court twice invalidated state flag laws...
"1907\Halter v. Nebraska (205 U.S. 34) -- The Supreme Court held that although the flag was a federal creation, the States' had the authority to promulgate flag desecration laws under their general police power to safeguard public safety and welfare. "
"In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested for burning the U.S. flag at the Republican National Convention in Texas. He was charged with violating a Texas law that banned the desecration of the flag in an offensive manner. In the 1989 case of Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court of the United States said that Johnson's burning of the flag was a form of symbolic speech that is protected by the First Amendment. The Court mentioned the importance of protecting free speech, especially speech that is unpopular or offensive to others. It said, "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable."
The Supreme Court justices think they are gods.
2005-06-23 22:31 | User Profile
Not sure you see the pertinent point.
[QUOTE=Gabrielle]"There's the infamous case of the Wisconsin teen-ager who defecated on a U.S. flag and was convicted for trespassing and other offenses. But the charge under the state's flag-desecration law was dropped on free-speech grounds."
**Freedom of speech - First Amendment... I think not! **
"Although the high court twice invalidated state flag laws, 47 states still have statutes, many modeled after the Uniform Flag Law of 1917, that prohibit the desecration of the flag or its use for advertising and publicity purposes.**
Did you catch that... the high court twice invalidated state flag laws...
Yes, STATE laws, which allows three states to NOT have those laws. The proposed Ammendment is a foul pot of filth. I served under those colors, and while I will hold an ass anyone who burns that flag, he has a right to be that big of an ass if he buys his own flag for his own political statement. Of course, if he shows up in my store, his money will be no good, and he'll be welcomed to leave.
"1907\Halter v. Nebraska (205 U.S. 34) -- The Supreme Court held that although the flag was a federal creation, the States' had the authority to promulgate flag desecration laws under their general police power to safeguard public safety and welfare. "
"In 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested for burning the U.S. flag at the Republican National Convention in Texas. He was charged with violating a Texas law that banned the desecration of the flag in an offensive manner. In the 1989 case of Texas v. Johnson, the Supreme Court of the United States said that Johnson's burning of the flag was a form of symbolic speech that is protected by the First Amendment. The Court mentioned the importance of protecting free speech, especially speech that is unpopular or offensive to others. It said, "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." [/QUOTE]
2005-06-24 01:27 | User Profile
Freedom Equality Brotherhood funny slogans, made holy mantra is part of the reason we are in this mess. Did not Jefferson say there should be a revolution every twenty years or so?
This whole sarced rag issue I feel is just another misdirection ploy by the media and Heel, to take the small minds of the sheeple people off of more important issues, that magically just got dropped in the media, like the millions of brown hordes streaming across the border at will, and the blood bath in Iraq.etc The sheeple attention is now turned and they can vent on a system friendly issue, when the nation the symbol stood for is sliently invaded and gutted and turned into a total police state.
2005-06-24 02:31 | User Profile
I remember back in elementary school in Saginaw, Michigan we as third graders viewed film strips on how to deal with the American flag. It should be burned only when it got dirty or torn and was no longer suitable to fly.
People who burn the US flag as a political statement have let the middle east primates' behavior influence them. The Arabs and other primitive groups burn flags. Americans contact their Congressman when they have an issue with government policy.
The filthy bastards in Congress should be promoting an amendment to protect the English language in America.
2005-06-24 02:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Snouter]I remember back in elementary school in Saginaw, Michigan we as third graders viewed film strips on how to deal with the American flag. It should be burned only when it got dirty or torn and was no longer suitable to fly.
People who burn the US flag as a political statement have let the middle east primates' behavior influence them. The Arabs and other primitive groups burn flags. Americans contact their Congressman when they have an issue with government policy.
The filthy bastards in Congress should be promoting an amendment to protect the English language in America.[/QUOTE] Absolutely!
2005-06-24 03:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE]
Americans contact their Congressman when they have an issue with government policy.
[/QUOTE]That only may work if these congressman and other politicians are not, themselves the problem.
[QUOTE] The filthy bastards in Congress should be promoting an amendment to protect the English language in America. [/QUOTE]Very true, but these "filthy bastards" are the people that you say we should turn to when we have an issue with government policy.:tongue:
2005-06-24 03:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Snouter]Americans contact their Congressman when they have an issue with government policy.[/QUOTE]And then, unfortunately, the Congressman ignores them or sends them a generic form letter to make the citizens think somebody cares.
Actually, it is possible to get a Congressman to listen to you -- but only if you're very wealthy or a member of a powerful lobbying organization (like the AIPAC).
Burning a flag makes no difference either, of course. I personally couldn't care less if people burn a flag, but neither do I think it does any good.
This is a bit off-topic, but I really believe that a major overhaul in this nation's political system is needed. Specifically, I think all political campaigns should be publicly funded by tax dollars, with each candidate on the ballot getting an equal amount of money for his campaign. Then there should be NO private campaign donations allowed. That would put all citizens on equal footing in the eyes of politicians. Wealthy lobbying groups like the AIPAC would no longer have any undue sway. They'd no longer be able to buy politicians.
2005-06-24 03:26 | User Profile
As a conservative, I value property and the right to property. This stripping of our property is something a communists, and not a conservative...Government would do.
2005-06-24 03:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Freedom Equality Brotherhood [/QUOTE] The French Revolution is pretty immaterial to the topic here, but I can guarantee that anyone who was alive at the time would have been very sensible to support it during its initial stages. Unless one had a standard of living that was significantly above the norm, or was a Catholic fanatic, I cannot see a rational person not backing the Revolution in its beginning. It is easier to oppose Jacobinism in retrospect, safely away from the tyanny, high costs of living and oppresive taxation while the lay about nobility whiled away the hours getting drunk, gambling, commisioning gaudy Baroque art and giving each other veneral diseases.
[QUOTE]People who burn the US flag as a political statement have let the middle east primates' behavior influence them. The Arabs and other primitive groups burn flags. Americans contact their Congressman when they have an issue with government policy.[/QUOTE] I don't support the ban on principle, but here I do agree with you. There are far more dignified methods of expressing discontent.
2005-06-24 03:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Snouter] People who burn the US flag as a political statement have let the middle east primates' behavior influence them. The Arabs and other primitive groups burn flags. Americans contact their Congressman when they have an issue with government policy. [/QUOTE] Bollocks.
Those of us alive during the Viet Nam war are all too familiar with people setting fire to Old Glory. The effing Arabs are again copycats, as they were with their religion.
I learned the proper disposal of a flag in Boy Scouts.
2005-06-24 15:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=robinder]It is easier to oppose Jacobinism in retrospect, safely away from the tyanny, high costs of living and oppresive taxation while the lay about nobility whiled away the hours getting drunk, gambling, commisioning gaudy Baroque art and giving each other veneral diseases.[/QUOTE] You are safely away from 'tyranny, high costs of living, and oppressive taxation'? Where do you live, exactly?
2005-06-24 16:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angeleyes]Bollocks.
Those of us alive during the Viet Nam war are all too familiar with people setting fire to Old Glory. The effing Arabs are again copycats, as they were with their religion.
I learned the proper disposal of a flag in Boy Scouts.[/QUOTE]
Well Angeleyes in the Middle East I have also seen (in the news) the monkeys Zionists of the state of Israel burning the American flag.
I am proud to say that the peple of Cuba have never burned the American flag because they know that old glory is the flag of the American people and not of the politicians.
To me the flag like the Bible are only objets representing something and it has only the value that you give it.
Come to my home and you will see eleven 4x4 fence posts at the front and each one holding up an American flag and a bigger one in my front porch, but also in the background I have an American flag with the the Star of David where the stars should be and with a knife going into the Star of David and below the words "No USRael".
I am still a Cuban but this is my way of thanking the US for everything that it has giving me (good and bad) in my 53 years of living in this land.