CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
It passed the house, now to the senate for 'Checks and Balance'
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 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. The last time the Senate took up the amendment was in 2000, when it failed 63-37.
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 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. The last time the Senate took up the amendment was in 2000, when it failed 63-37.
I don't support the flag burning ammendment because one day the government might piss me off enough so that it might be me out there burning one.
Although I don't agree with flag burning, it shouldn't be a law. Burning is an (obvious) sign of disrespect. I was brought up with the idea that at the very least one should respect someone/thing.
The Boy Scouts and others "retire" worn out flags by burning them
Burning a flag in protest is not ok but wearing a flag boxer shorts or wiping your mouth on a napkin printed with the flag is ok? What about when the US post office puts a cancel mark on a flag stamp. Are we going to read the minds of people now for intent?
Originally posted by: chowderhead
It may not be an exercise in feel-good legislation. It may pass this time.
The Republicans (along with Sen. Feinstein, et al) have always come up just a bit short in the Senate for 2/3 passage. This time however, with the addition of Burr, DeMint, Vitter, Thune, Martinez, Coburn to the Senate, it will be very very close. Burr, Demint Vitter, Thune and Coburn I think all voted for the admendment in the House so I think some replaced Senators who voted no. It may very well pass this time. article
So instead of a energy bill or passing the budget, we get Terri Schiavo law, Nuclear option showdown on fillibusters, Baseball steriods, and flag burning admendments.
It's great to see the Republicans in charge of everything because it's "hard work" to govern.
That's about it in a nutshell.
Right. You'd like to see people who disagree with you burn. And you wouldn't even piss on them while they were burning. Wow. Just wow.
I don't support a ban. I don't agree with the act of flag burning, but banning it smacks of Fascism.
I say NO
I am pretty sure that more flags have been burned to protest anti-flag burning legislation than anything else.
I am pretty sure that more flags have been burned to protest anti-flag burning legislation than anything else.
OrganizedChaos
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2002
- 4,524
- 0
- 0
trivial issues such as this are in no way deserving of an amendment to the oldest functional national constituition in existance
I don't support any ammendment to ban flag burning. At the rate Bush is going, people may need to burn anything they can find just to stay warm.
And Bushies, don't bother...
And Bushies, don't bother...
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......
You can't be serious, but in case you're really that dense...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......
At Gitmo, we are not dealing with anyone's right of free expression on U.S. soil in a free exchange of ideas. We're dealing with American representatives (U.S. troops) dealing with the rights of foreign prisoners to respect for their religious beliefs. We're also dealing with a horrendous public relations nightmare with the entire Islamic world where we're already highly suspect, and we need any real friends we can find.
I'll get back to my original statement -- You can't be serious. :roll:
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Well you'd have think Bush would have to veto this because banning the freedom to burn flags would cut into flag maker profits.
Originally posted by: Harvey
You can't be serious, but in case you're really that dense...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......
At Gitmo, we are not dealing with anyone's right of free expression on U.S. soil in a free exchange of ideas. We're dealing with American representatives (U.S. troops) dealing with the rights of foreign prisoners to respect for their religious beliefs. We're also dealing with a horrendous public relations nightmare with the entire Islamic world where we're already highly suspect, and we need any real friends we can find.
I'll get back to my original statement -- You can't be serious. :roll:
I appreciate the personal attack. I see you really are a staunch advocate of the right to free expression, but it must only apply when someone agrees with you......:roll:
Originally posted by: Jmman
Originally posted by: Harvey
You can't be serious, but in case you're really that dense...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......
At Gitmo, we are not dealing with anyone's right of free expression on U.S. soil in a free exchange of ideas. We're dealing with American representatives (U.S. troops) dealing with the rights of foreign prisoners to respect for their religious beliefs. We're also dealing with a horrendous public relations nightmare with the entire Islamic world where we're already highly suspect, and we need any real friends we can find.
I'll get back to my original statement -- You can't be serious. :roll:
I appreciate the personal attack. I see you really are a staunch advocate of the right to free expression, but it must only apply when someone agrees with you......:roll:
Yes it was really terrible of Harvey for shooting your ass so you couldn't respond.
====================
The flag wouldn't be worth a pledge if you couldn't burn it. Real respect is never forced and those who want to force it know nothing of real respect.
It wasn't intended as a personal attack. I meant it when I said you can't be serious. The rest was hyperbole to make the point.
If you were serious, you have my sympathy.
But it is just a symbol. One of the features of symbols is that we can express our displeasure with the thing they represent without doing actual harm to that thing they represent.
This artificial protection for our symbol of freedom desecrates the freedom the flag stands for; it devalues it as a symbol by diluting the freedom it represents.
The only circomstances under which I would ever even consider burning a flag would be to protest such a stupid waste of legislative energy.
Originally posted by: Harvey
A flag is a symbol, and burning or otherwise damaging it can make a strong statement, but in reality, it is nothing more than fabric. No lives are lost, and nobody is injured by the act, itself.
The fact that doing it communicates strong emotion is all the more reason to allow it as non-violent freedom of expression. The first amendment has never been for wimps, to be honored only when that expression remains within our comfort zone. That is part of its strength and beauty.
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.
Question: (mostly to CsG)
Is this flag-burning legislation worth more of congress' time than a resolution condemning the lynchings of blacks?
I think the democratic senators who will support this legislation need to be defeated in the primaries in 2006.
Is this flag-burning legislation worth more of congress' time than a resolution condemning the lynchings of blacks?
I think the democratic senators who will support this legislation need to be defeated in the primaries in 2006.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter