Do you support the amendment to ban flag burning

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: sbacpo


I understand what you are saying about it being emotional and making a strong statement but it seems like whenever a flag gets burned, that becomes the story, not why the flag was being burned. I think it's probably the most ineffective form of protest out there.

Flag burning is an emotional issue for almost everyone obviously but none so much as the greatest generation. Those guys watched their brothers die while trying to raise or save the flag on battlefields, ships and submarines throughout the war. You might comment that that's what they were fighting for, the freedom to burn the flag, but none of them feel that way. They think the flag represents the country itself and when you burn or desecrate the flag you are burning and desecrating the country and dishonoring the men who died quite literally for the flag. I am not in favor of the amendment but the feelings I have for that generation and the things they have done for this country is almost enough to make me change my mind.

1. The degree of furor this issue gives rise to indicates that it may be a more effective form of protest than you think.

2. Guys and their brothers who are being fired upon would probably find that their energies are better spent shooting back instead of trying to raise a flag.

 

[sbacpo]

1. The degree of furor this issue gives rise to indicates that it may be a more effective form of protest than you think.

Maybe but without doing a google search tell me when the last time someone burned a flag in this country and what the issue was.


2. Guys and their brothers who are being fired upon would probably find that their energies are better spent shooting back instead of trying to raise a flag.

The next time you talk to one of those guys make sure you tell them how screwed up they were OK. The fact that they were out there risking their lives trying to raise or save the flag should tell you exactly how emotional an issue this is for them.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: NJDevil
Topic Title: Do you support the amendment to ban flag burning

Only if we burn the Constitution, Declaration of Independence etc.

Would be the same thing.

And because of those documents, you have the right to do that very thing. While I think it's "crappy", I don't think it should be limited - i.e. freedom in this country comes in many way, including flag burning.

If they pass it however, I wouldn't notice anyway as I'm not out burning flags.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Jmman
So if flag burning is not a big deal as many here say, why the furor over the koran at gitmo? I say if flag burning is good, crapping on the koran should be good as well......

Cultural issues abound here... The Qu'ran demands the utmost respect in their culture with no exceptions. The American flag commands respect in our culture, but our constitutional right to and national tradition of free speech trumps that.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: NJDevil
Topic Title: Do you support the amendment to ban flag burning

Only if we burn the Constitution, Declaration of Independence etc.

Would be the same thing.

And because of those documents, you have the right to do that very thing. While I think it's "crappy", I don't think it should be limited - i.e. freedom in this country comes in many way, including flag burning.

If they pass it however, I wouldn't notice anyway as I'm not out burning flags.

I think that's what he meant - outlawing flag burning would be like burning the constituion. Unless I misread that..

 

[imported_Condor]

At least the Muslim monsters believe in something. They get mad when their Koran is desecrated. Americnas couldn't even care less about the flag. What a shame!

 

[eilute]

The amendment will merely add unnecessary clutter to the constitution.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: Vic
No. One does not "protect freedom" by legislating it away.

amen brother!

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: Jmman
So if flag burning is not a big deal as many here say, why the furor over the koran at gitmo? I say if flag burning is good, crapping on the koran should be good as well......

because it's done by the state's own stooges. if i go pick up a Qu'ran from a book store and poop on it, then no harm no foul. but if government stooges do it to coerce a confession out of someone who hasn't even been charged with a crime then it starts to become questionable. but for a private citizen who has nothing better to do, then by all means be my guest. I once rolled a joint with a page of the King James Bible. (I was much younger and dumber then.)

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: daveshel
2. Guys and their brothers who are being fired upon would probably find that their energies are better spent shooting back instead of trying to raise a flag.

That was low. Why don't you spit in their face while you're at it. The military has deep rooted traditions that are aimed at getting mere men to fight under incredible duress. Focusing on symbols that represent concpets bigger than themselves is part of how they achieve this. For them, the flag was a symbol, a symbol worth dieing for. I'm not in favor of the amendment bannig flag burning, but you do us no favor by such a stupid and short sighted statement.

 

[sbacpo]

Originally posted by: tss4

Originally posted by: daveshel
2. Guys and their brothers who are being fired upon would probably find that their energies are better spent shooting back instead of trying to raise a flag.

That was low. Why don't you spit in their face while you're at it. The military has deep rooted traditions that are aimed at getting mere men to fight under incredible duress. Focusing on symbols that represent concpets bigger than themselves is part of how they achieve this. For them, the flag was a symbol, a symbol worth dieing for. I'm not in favor of the amendment bannig flag burning, but you do us no favor by such a stupid and short sighted statement.

:thumbsup:

 

[sourceninja]

Section 8k of the Flag Code (see below) states, "The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning."

If my government is making poor decisions to the point where I feel the flag is no longer fitting for display (ie the goverment is making a mockery of what the flag stands for) then it would be fitting to burn it. Its twisting the words, but I could see that as legit.

I personally would never burn a flag. I havn't read all 4 pages of this thread, but I do have some questions.

How many amendments in the constition remove freedoms?

Besides probition (which was repealed) I can not think of any. In my opinion it is not in the spirit of the constitiution to remove freedoms, only to grant them. This is also my objection to marriage amendments.

My second question. How can the first amendment and a amendmetn to restrict a freedom of speach exist at the same time?

Then again, if anything, this should be a states rights issue. People seem to forget this one.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

Technically this goes against a lot of federal law, such as drug crime.

But call it a states rights issue, against the spirit of the Constitution, or a freedom of speach issue, its still a retarded idea. I wonder what the motives are for even suggesting it.

 

[Praetorian7]

I hope congress votes both this and the anti-lynching bills down.

Reason: So i retain my right to lynch whomever burns a flag!

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: judasmachine

Originally posted by: Vic
No. One does not "protect freedom" by legislating it away.

amen brother!

yeah, its a complete waste of time.

 

[ExpertNovice]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
This has been brought up every couple of years for the last 40+ years.
It's an empty 'Feel-Good' lolipop peice of Conservative legislation.
It infringes on "Freedom of Speech" and if passed would be over-ruled as unconstitutional by the Supremes.

However, if a person really want?s to burn the flag - they should wrap themselves up in it before ignition.

As you said, it has been brought up for the past 40+ years, during which the Democrats were in control. Besides, a constitutional amendment requires ratification by the states so it would be up to the people to actually approve it or not. Unfortunately, I heard that 38 states already have flag burning laws. How sad.

I'm against the flag burning on several grounds.
1. Private property. (Unfortunately Communists will disagree with me on this reason.)
2. Freedom of speech. (Liberals will even agree here, because it protects the rude and doesn?t infringe on the right to force ?politically correct? speech)
3. Thought control. (Like the hate crime laws it requires knowledge of intent. Though, in the case of flag burning being recorded by the media intent should actually be easy to prove. I am still against it because it does rely on knowledge of intent.)
4. Current laws already exist. At least I think there are already laws preventing starting fires in public areas. (Again, possibly like hate crime laws, if laws already exist then enforce those rather than creating more.)
5. Nothing legal here. Burning a flag to prove how evil your country is only serves to disprove your point.

Anyone find it ironic that the same people that at least pretend to get angry over the desecration of a symbol of one group get angry that they are not allowed to desecrate the symbol of another group?

 

[rickn]

I vote that you can burn the american flag, but if you do it on American soil, then large MOBS should have immunity when the beat the living crap out of you

 

[azazyel]

"I personally do not believe in burning the flag. It's a personal belief, but I'll tell you something, I think people are overreacting, oh, just a little bit. "Hey buddy, my daddy died for that flag." Well, I bought mine. Sorry. You know they sell them at K-Mart for three bucks, you're in, you're out, brand new flag, no violence was necessary. "Hey buddy, my daddy died in the Korean war for that flag." What a coincidence - my flag was made in Korea! "

Bill Hicks

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: tss4

Originally posted by: daveshel
2. Guys and their brothers who are being fired upon would probably find that their energies are better spent shooting back instead of trying to raise a flag.

That was low. Why don't you spit in their face while you're at it. The military has deep rooted traditions that are aimed at getting mere men to fight under incredible duress. Focusing on symbols that represent concpets bigger than themselves is part of how they achieve this. For them, the flag was a symbol, a symbol worth dieing for. I'm not in favor of the amendment bannig flag burning, but you do us no favor by such a stupid and short sighted statement.

tradition will get you killed. there is a time and place for it, a combat zone is not one of them.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: azazyel
"I personally do not believe in burning the flag. It's a personal belief, but I'll tell you something, I think people are overreacting, oh, just a little bit. "Hey buddy, my daddy died for that flag." Well, I bought mine. Sorry. You know they sell them at K-Mart for three bucks, you're in, you're out, brand new flag, no violence was necessary. "Hey buddy, my daddy died in the Korean war for that flag." What a coincidence - my flag was made in Korea! "

Bill Hicks

Hehe - I'm gonna have do some research on Mr Hicks. He sounds somewhat humourous.

 

[imported_tss4]

Originally posted by: judasmachine

Originally posted by: tss4

Originally posted by: daveshel
2. Guys and their brothers who are being fired upon would probably find that their energies are better spent shooting back instead of trying to raise a flag.

That was low. Why don't you spit in their face while you're at it. The military has deep rooted traditions that are aimed at getting mere men to fight under incredible duress. Focusing on symbols that represent concpets bigger than themselves is part of how they achieve this. For them, the flag was a symbol, a symbol worth dieing for. I'm not in favor of the amendment bannig flag burning, but you do us no favor by such a stupid and short sighted statement.

tradition will get you killed. there is a time and place for it, a combat zone is not one of them.

You should have read what I wrote instead of blindly defending an ignorant statement. If you cant get people to believe in something more than themselves (and symbols such as the flag make an effetive tool for this) then they will NOT be willing to lay down their lives. In war, soldiers have to do things that are not in their own personal best interest, but serve the interest of the army. Rallying behind a flag and what it means is one of the ways you accomplish this. So yes, tradition might get you killed, but it'll save the lives of others.

Again, I think banning flag burning is a direct violation of free speach, but these ignorant statements are just hurting our case.

 

[azazyel]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: azazyel
"I personally do not believe in burning the flag. It's a personal belief, but I'll tell you something, I think people are overreacting, oh, just a little bit. "Hey buddy, my daddy died for that flag." Well, I bought mine. Sorry. You know they sell them at K-Mart for three bucks, you're in, you're out, brand new flag, no violence was necessary. "Hey buddy, my daddy died in the Korean war for that flag." What a coincidence - my flag was made in Korea! "

Bill Hicks

Hehe - I'm gonna have do some research on Mr Hicks. He sounds somewhat humourous.

He's a rather unknown but at the same time extremely famous comedian.


http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Hicks

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: ExpertNovice

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
This has been brought up every couple of years for the last 40+ years.
It's an empty 'Feel-Good' lolipop peice of Conservative legislation.
It infringes on "Freedom of Speech" and if passed would be over-ruled as unconstitutional by the Supremes.

However, if a person really want?s to burn the flag - they should wrap themselves up in it before ignition.

As you said, it has been brought up for the past 40+ years, during which the Democrats were in control. Besides, a constitutional amendment requires ratification by the states so it would be up to the people to actually approve it or not. Unfortunately, I heard that 38 states already have flag burning laws. How sad.

I'm against the flag burning on several grounds.
1. Private property. (Unfortunately Communists will disagree with me on this reason.)
2. Freedom of speech. (Liberals will even agree here, because it protects the rude and doesn?t infringe on the right to force ?politically correct? speech)
3. Thought control. (Like the hate crime laws it requires knowledge of intent. Though, in the case of flag burning being recorded by the media intent should actually be easy to prove. I am still against it because it does rely on knowledge of intent.)
4. Current laws already exist. At least I think there are already laws preventing starting fires in public areas. (Again, possibly like hate crime laws, if laws already exist then enforce those rather than creating more.)
5. Nothing legal here. Burning a flag to prove how evil your country is only serves to disprove your point.

Anyone find it ironic that the same people that at least pretend to get angry over the desecration of a symbol of one group get angry that they are not allowed to desecrate the symbol of another group?

i pretty much agree. but again, a complete waste of time. your ending is suggesting the koran? if so, i think somoene already pointed out that government-employed individuals, operatering on "company time" in a supposedly controlled environment is quite different than private citizens expressing themselves.
edit:

and i actually believe its something like 48 states that have varying degrees of crime attached to the act of flag-burning. probably falling under the categories you mention of burning things in general. i know its illegal in my home state. i think the two odd men out are alaska and wyoming...but thats just because they dont have anything specifically related to flags...im sure if pressed, they could throw something at someone they wanted to.

 

[cquark]

As the amendment protects against any flag desecration, this amendment will have many unforseen consequences. How about all the various types of merchandise that have flags on them? Here's how one person dealt with the dangers of owning a credit card with a flag on it. From http://www.discourse.net/archives/2005/...lag_desecration_in_every_day_life.html

We got new credit cards in the mail. Unlike the old ones, which were very neutral, a sort of bluish with some lines on it ? and noted a tie-in to a frequent flier program ? the new ones instead sport a loud rendition of a portion of a rippling American flag. It is not a nice picture. It looks like a cheap political mailing (and the absence of the tie-in raises the specter that the bank is contemplating ending its role as generator of volume frequent flier miles).

I want to call to complain. My spouse, who is not a US citizen and thus more in fear of Big Brother, argues that it is not wise to call anyone to complain about an American flag.

Thus, today?s consumer ? financial services provider interaction

Recorded voice: Welcome to {mega card}. To utilize our automated sevices press or say one?.please touchtone or say your sixteen digit account number NOW.

[Lots of beeps] Thank you. Press one for?

[Frantic repeated pressing of the ?0? key]

Female voice: Welcome to {mega card}. May I have the name on the card please? Thank you. What is your middle initial? What is your code word? No, that?s not it. Yes, that?s it, thank you. How can I help you?

Me: We received our new credit cards today. They have a picture of the American flag on them. I don?t think this is an appropriate use of the American flag. The card will get dirty, it will have stuff run over it, this will amount to flag desecration. It?s not right.

Female voice (afer slight delay) : would you like to speak to a supervisor and see what he can do for you?

[minute wait, listening to hold muzak]

Female voice: I have an account executive ready to speak to you.

Male voice: Hello, this is John, what is the problem?

Me: We received our new credit cards today. They have a picture of the American flag on them. I don?t think this is an appropriate use of the American flag. The card will get dirty, it will have stuff run over it, it?s a form of flag desecration. Can I have one that wouldn?t be so offensive?

John: Let me put you on hold.

[Delay of under a minute]

John: We?ll address that for you.

Me: What does that mean?

John: We?ll get you a new card without the flag picture on it.

Me: Thank you. [Sudden inspiration.] One other thing. How do I dispose of this card? Normally I?d cut it up, but I don?t want to do that.

John: (after minuscule pause) You could put it in a safe or other secure location.

Me: If I had a safe. Right. Thank you.
John: Goodbye.

 

[Orsorum]

Of course not, what kind of idiot stands in favor of such a stance?

 

[beyoku]

I think people should be able to burn it, what really is freedom? Should the people protesting the Govt or IRAN be able to Burn the Koran? Should they go to jail for that? What are we fighting for in IRAQ? Freedom to do things like this? Im sure we would see it as a step in the RIGHT dircetion if a "Muslim Country" allowed its citizen to Burn a copy of the Koran - which is only a book compared to a flag. With a comparison like this, how do we want to be seen in our representation of "freedom" Should pepple in Muslim countries be able to burn a copy of a Koran?