Wednesday, June 28, 2006

RE: Flag burning

Those "patriotic" democrats can't seem to understand why we would want to protect the symbol of our country. They insist that flag burning, while reprehensible, is very rare so this shouldn't be an issue.

Speaking of rare, how many pregnancies are the result of rape and incest? So then why do democrats (remember, they ignore "rare") insist on making that the focal point of every abortion debate?

NOTE: A google image search of "portland flag burning" gives you THIS. Not all that uncommon in Havana on the Willamette I guess.

23 comments:

BEAR said...

There's so much the lefties don't get....(warning: insufficient bandwidth on algore's internet)....sheesh.

Kaelri said...

Given the choice between defending human rights and defending the symbol of those rights...

BEAR said...

kaelri, you are the poster CHILD for not getting it.

Kaelri said...

Ok. So explain it.

Daniel said...

Can't we do both? I walk and chew gum... usually without incident.

Gullyborg said...

meanwhile, CROSS burning is still against the law...

Kaelri said...

Not in this case. The First Amendment protects the freedom of expression, and not even the exception of "substantial or material interference" (Tinker v. Des Moines) exists. There is zero tangible harm in burning a flag. There is massive potential harm in making the Constitution itself conditional. In my judgment, that's the end of the story.

Mike Mayhem said...

A moron burning a flag does not interfere with my pursuit of happiness. That being said, the proposed legislation is unnecessary.

Daniel said...

Everything but Pavlov's needs are "unnecessary" but that doesn't stop democrats from demanding taxpayer funding for pointless stuff.

And sorry Kaelri, we have "time, place and manner" restrictions on "free speech."

I'm guessing that if I burned a rainbow flag in the middle of a gay pride parade that the same editorial boards, the same liberals, the same democrats who feel that flag burning is protected would be clamoring for my arrest for "hate."

Kaelri said...

"I'm guessing that if I burned a rainbow flag in the middle of a gay pride parade that the same editorial boards, the same liberals, the same democrats who feel that flag burning is protected would be clamoring for my arrest for 'hate.'"

Not this one. Though you would certainly be accused of an act of hate, and I doubt you could refute that to anyone's satisfaction.

"And sorry Kaelri, we have 'time, place and manner' restrictions on 'free speech.'"

The Constitution, simply put, does not.

HMIL said...

From what I've seen over the course of my life, conservatives (and some libertarians) seem to revere the American flag as the symbol of all that our forebears fought and died for, sacrificed for, took chances to emmigrate to, the possibilities that their lives could take. For us it is almost a mystical, spiritual part of what makes America "America".

For liberals ... it's a potential poncho or fabric for a bikini or a do-rag.

Daniel said...

The constitution does not but court rulings have said that we do. Yell "fire" in a crowded theater and see if that is considered "free speech."

Or for that matter donate $9,000 to a Senatorial candidate during election time.

Bobkatt said...

Kaelri-I have to agree with you on principle. However, I also believe there are certain situations where restrictions should apply. First, if the flag is not your personal property. Second, if the act is used to incite a violent action or riot. That said, I am totally against amending the constitution for this or most any situation that are offered up again and again by legislators that are incapable of dealing with real problems facing us.
The main problem I have with Liberals are their inconsistancies.
Please explain how you can say There is zero tangible harm in burning a flag. then in your next post say that if Daniel burned a rainbow flag he would be accused of hate. Is hate not harmful? If it isn't, then what's with all the hate speech legislation being promoted by Liberals? Both sides of the political spectrum have symbols that they have invested a certain part of their identity in. Why are some of those symbols sacred and others just objects. If you agree that burning a cross is used to invoke fear, how can you not concede that burning a flag can do the same thing to a certain segment of the population? If I see a flag burned in protest I feel an attack against the very things I believe in. I think the flag represents the promise of America even if the leaders don't. I hope this helps you understand our point of view better. While the flag is just a piece of cloth (probably made in China) to some of us it is the symbol of the sacrifices others have made in order for you and me have this discussion.

Anonymous said...

Here's a good shot of bush and where he stands, on this issue.


http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagbush.htm

Anonymous said...

we must not change the constitution every time the poeple in power at the time wants something special for re-election. why cant the republicans pass something that has real benifits for the american people

Anonymous said...

The last time I read the 1st amendment it was freedom of "speech" not "expression".

Ric said...

I am glad this went down.

Don't get me wrong, desecrate the flag in my presence and I just might end up in jail.

That being said...

This is not something to be in the constitution.

Plus, I felt the wording is too broad.

If you own a flag, and some protester grabs it from you and wipes their ass, stomps it and tries to burn it so by the time you get them to back off it more closely resembles a rag than a flag - what are you to do?

Reverently Burn it.

And the Veterans of Foreign Wars - VFW, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, can help with that task.

If you can't burn the flag, then what?

Had this been a law, rather than an amendment, then I would have been in support.

Kaelri said...

"The constitution does not but court rulings have said that we do. Yell 'fire' in a crowded theater and see if that is considered 'free speech.'"

I happen to disagree with Schenck v. United States, but I recognize the improbability of an overturn by this court in particular. (Although admittedly they made an admirable move today...)

"First, if the flag is not your personal property. Second, if the act is used to incite a violent action or riot."

But both of those things are already criminal in their own right.

"Is hate not harmful? If it isn't, then what's with all the hate speech legislation being promoted by Liberals?"

I don't believe in the criminalization of hate speech. I believe that the burning of both an American flag in America and a Gay Pride flag among gays are harmful and dangerous (although only dangerous, typically, to the person burning the flag). But in both cases it is an expression of an idea. People are responsible for how they react to it.

"The last time I read the 1st amendment it was freedom of 'speech' not 'expression'."

A nitpicky distinction, and I think you probably know it.

"For liberals ... it's a potential poncho or fabric for a bikini or a do-rag."

I want people to be allowed to burn the flag. I don't actually want to burn the flag myself and would condemn anyone who exercises their right to do so.

But yeah. It's a symbol. I'm not saying it's unimportant - not by any flight of idealistic imagination. I do believe, quite strongly, that passing a Constitutional amendment to protect it would be wholly contrary to all of the principles that the flag is a symbol of. It's self-defeating.

Anonymous said...

I am actually fresh out of flags to burn. I need to hit elmers and get a couple for the 4th to light up. As victoria taft says, "it's just a piece of cloth"

Shaky Louie said...

Anonymous @ 1120 said: "I am actually fresh out of flags to burn. I need to hit elmers and get a couple for the 4th to light up."

Do you enjoy acting like a petulant child? Yes, we all see you.
I just hope that I dont see you burning an American flag on Independence Day! I may be forced to exercise MY freedom of expression...
Have a nice day.

Gunslinger said...

Ask one of the family members of a fallen soldier, whom all they have left is the flag given to them, how they feel about burning that flag.

This is a big deal to me, and one of great torment. Here I am, defending some asshole's right to desecrate the flag under which I fight. Yet I have to side with the argument the it should remain legal. Burn one in my presence, spit on my shoulder patch and you are going to the hospital--and I am going to jail for sure.

But where does it stop from there? Can we now not denounce out nation? Can we now not denounce our president? Eventually (and in an extreme case) we have what the soviets and the germans had.

for the record. If you burn the flag (or desecrate it in any other way) please be advised of a few things:

1. Wrap yourself in it before lighting it.

2. Hundreds of thousands of people have died to give you the right to do that. Recognize.

3. That flag stands for your right to burn it.

4. If you are desecrating the flag--YOU ARE A COWARDLY FUCKING ASSHOLE who needs to move out of this country. I am sure that they would let you burn the flag in China or Iran.

Anonymous said...

The best place [url=http://coecomm.missouristate.edu/cs/user/Profile.aspx?UserID=2479]purchase viagra[/url] !

Anonymous said...

FynPqu, cloud atlas movie in theaters cloud atlas book review new york times, nFbkAp, cloud atlas book google