Flag Amendment is back.....

[Wingnut]

Just curious what the feelings are like out there on this issue. This has been tried before, but now it looks like the Amendment has a good chance of passing both the House and the Senate, and I am sure Bush will sign it. The big question is if the States will ratify it.

`The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.' (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.J.RES.12:)

Personally I find burning and desecration a poor way to express your displeasure. I have never felt like burning a flag. I may change my mind if this Amendment is enacted.

[Thud]

Is the US awash in flag-burnings? Or is this yet another solution in search of a problem? av_eek.gif

[NO2STARFORCE]

Maybe it will be written in such a way that

The US can invade any country where a flag burning takes place.

I seem to recall one of our more "communist"-friendly humour tv guys burning a US Flag on state TV.

Which could have prompted an invasion.. and probably if we were really lucky we'd get a former RIAA exec to pen our new copyright law.

[Worbah]

In here, it's the law that when you dispose of an old flag, you burn it. You aren't allowed to make clothing or such from it. You don't throw it into the carbage. And I don't mean the kind of burning that the US flag has usually had (people running in the street screaming and s***). You just burn it in your backyard in silence. Degrading the flag is an offense here. Wipe your a** with one and consider yourself a felon.

[NO2STARFORCE]

Well, in the army we were told that if the flag touched the ground, we were to burn it.

And there is something in the LAW books that states that you can get jailed for abusing another country (or your own) flag.

[Wingnut]

Burning is the proper way to dispose of a flag, but you an usually tell the difference between burning a flag for disposal and burning a flag in effigy.

[MarkN]

Why would anyone want to burn an old flag anyway? If it's old and falling apart or is mothridden it might be cuz the owner didn't take proper care of it, or else perhaps it was just made of inferior materials. I'd never burn an old flag but instead would probably just clean it one last time, fold it and put it away or else maybe even try to save it by framing it or putting it between two panes of glass or some kinda of transparent plastic and sealed as tightly as possible, depending of course on how big the flag was and what the cost of doing that would be, too.

As far as its being seen as practicing a way of freedom of speech then yes, I believe it is since I'm all for free speech.

[enfestid]

I think it's a good amendment, there just needs to be more to it... there needs to be a better definition of what they have the power to prohibit, including if you're disposing of the flag.

[anthonyX]

I have no problem with an amendment outlawing the demonstration of the burning of the flag (as a libertarian this was a hard point to accept - since I detest most of the times when our personal freedoms are taken from us). Most countries have certain laws about disposing of a flag and many countries have outlawed burning a flag for demonstration (unless of course it is the US flag then all is off). What really convinced me is I thought about how it is illegal to burn a cross. One would think if you have a right to burn a flag then why not burn a cross? In most states (if not all) burning a cross is a hate crime. You hate certain races, people or beliefs. Burring the American flag is also about hate (government, people, leader, armies, etc just fill in the blank). We make laws to not allow the burning of a cross so why not stop the burning of the flag? They both are free speech issues and demonstrate a hatred for certain people. Believe me I don't advocate either. I just no longer have problems with this amendment. (Most of my libertarian friends believe that it is a slippery slope that we tread one. It won't take much to push us over the edge). I see intimidation in both cross burning and in flag burning.

[Garpy]

Sheesh, what is it with all of you guys and this pompous nonsense about flags?

It's an object, a piece of coloured material....yes I know it's a symbol of national pride an' all. But at the end of the day, that's all it is...a symbol. I cannot believe the amount of effort and hot air that is being expended by the American ruling elite on such a pathetically trite issue.

By the same token...I was equally appalled by the worldwide demonstrations of outrage by muslims, when it became apparent that an American soldier had spat on a copy of the Koran. It's a freakin' book is all folks!

All this blowhard nonsense over symbols. Honestly, there's enough crud in this world that causes people to get unneccessarily and instantly outraged, without thinking up other pointless reasons to get everyone all hot and bothered.

[Wingnut]

In most states, burning a cross is perfectly legal in most instances. It becomes a hate crime when you burn it on the lawn of your local black leader. You can burn a cross 7 days a week on your own property.

Similarly I would see how the act of burning a flag on the doorstep of a federal judge or legislator could easily be considered intimidation.

Burning a flag as part of an organized public demonstration should not intimidate a person. Unless you specifically single out a person, I don't see how you can claim intimidation. If that is the case can you ban gangster looking youths as they itimidate some people? Can you ban the out and out display of the Confederate battle flag as it itimidates another section of folks? The whole anonymous intimidation idea is a bit to PC for my tastes.

[kyleh]

Personally I don't care about this one either way, but I do lean towards going ahead and enforcing the entire Federal flag code (http://www.bcpl.net/~etowner/flagcode.html) if flag burning is made illegal. Might as well go ahead and make it a felony for cities and companies to leave the flag flying when it starts raining or after dark (when not properly lit). av_smile.gif

[treetop]

Don't be fooled by these waste of time 'amendment' ideas. They're red herrings...whether about gay marriage, flag desecration, or any other topic that is thrown out to divert attention from the real issues.

The time it takes to pass an amendment is way too long to sustain an interest. First, the law would have to pass by a 2/3 vote in both Houses of Congress...and then it has to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. That takes YEARS... and trust me, people are not going to amend the Constitution to limit the rights of Americans. That's not what we're all about as a nation.

Freedom means doing something other people may find objectionable, but having the right to do it anyway....so long as it does not infringe on the rights of anyone else, of course.

[OmegaBob]

I have no opinion either way, except that I would never burn a US flag in protest.

Forgetting the issue for a moment, I want to compliment everyone for not getting out of hand with this discussion. av_smile.gif

[Rick_browne]

what if I have stars n stripes underwear? can i throw them out?

can i burn them in protest?

[Wingnut]

Originally posted by Rick_browne:
what if I have stars n stripes underwear? can i throw them out?

can i burn them in protest? Only if it is to get rid of the skid marks.

[Alaric]

I think its a good idea.

Most people don't burn flags. Some, because they are not upset, while others simply have better things to do with their time.

However, if some moron wants to burn a flag, he is insulting great many people. This is wrong.

[Arac]

However, if some moron wants to burn a flag, he is insulting great many people. This is wrong.Yes, insulting a great many people is indeed impolite, or 'wrong' if you prefer. However, it's not illegal. If I want to write an opinion piece saying - for example - that all cigarette-smokers can't drive, I may do so. If I want to disperse a pamphlet suggesting that all women under 30 are bad in bed, I am perfectly entitled. What I say in such a case doesn't even have to be /true/, but I am allowed to say it. Doubtless those people will be insulted.

There is no difference. None at all.

[JadedMage]

Originally posted by Rick_browne:
what if I have stars n stripes underwear? can i throw them out?

can i burn them in protest? Stars-n-stripes underwear? After this thing goes through, you'd better not have a bladder problem...

JadedMage

[Alaric]

Originally posted by Arac:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />However, if some moron wants to burn a flag, he is insulting great many people. This is wrong.Yes, insulting a great many people is indeed impolite, or 'wrong' if you prefer. However, it's not illegal. If I want to write an opinion piece saying - for example - that all cigarette-smokers can't drive, I may do so. If I want to disperse a pamphlet suggesting that all women under 30 are bad in bed, I am perfectly entitled. What I say in such a case doesn't even have to be /true/, but I am allowed to say it. Doubtless those people will be insulted.

There is no difference. None at all. </font>[/QUOTE]Very well then. So you believe anyone is perfectly entitled to call all muslims - terrorists in an opinion article? Or to call for arabs to all be nuked?

I'm asking because I fail to see consistency in your claims. Today you say one thing, two weeks ago is was something else entirely.

[Wingnut]

Originally posted by Michael.Teplitsky:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Arac:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />However, if some moron wants to burn a flag, he is insulting great many people. This is wrong.Yes, insulting a great many people is indeed impolite, or 'wrong' if you prefer. However, it's not illegal. If I want to write an opinion piece saying - for example - that all cigarette-smokers can't drive, I may do so. If I want to disperse a pamphlet suggesting that all women under 30 are bad in bed, I am perfectly entitled. What I say in such a case doesn't even have to be /true/, but I am allowed to say it. Doubtless those people will be insulted.

There is no difference. None at all. </font>[/QUOTE]Very well then. So you believe anyone is perfectly entitled to call all muslims - terrorists in an opinion article? Or to call for arabs to all be nuked?

I'm asking because I fail to see consistency in your claims. Today you say one thing, two weeks ago is was something else entirely. </font>[/QUOTE]I imagine he can be offended by it, but I hope he at least respects the idiot's right to say it.

[Alaric]

Well, most countries have laws against bluntly insulting people. Of course many insults can be passed as something else, but I think there should be laws against the good old spit in the face.

There is nothing wrong with oulawing of a burning of the flag. Although of course I can't say that something of this nature has ever affected me.

[Arac]

Very well then. So you believe anyone is perfectly entitled to call all muslims - terrorists in an opinion article? Or to call for arabs to all be nuked?As Wingnut went into: Yes, they are. I won't lie and say I wouldn't be hugely annoyed at a person saying such stupid things, and I'd ask them to shut up, but I've never called for it to be illegal for them so say such things.

Well, most countries have laws against bluntly insulting people. Of course many insults can be passed as something else, but I think there should be laws against the good old spit in the face.Yes, that's why we have libel and slander laws. Specifically spreading lies about an individual is not permitted. More pertinently, that's why we have assault laws. Spitting in someone's face is a physically aggressive act. You can't assault an object such as a flag.

[Johannes]

Garpy, no one actually spat on the Qu'ran.

Rick, such underwear is against the rule for displaying the flag (there is actually a proper name for them, but I simply don't recall it).

[Rick_browne]

I find it totally ludicrous that anyone gives a **** about the flag to be honest.

I would happily wipe my *** with my flag, its not that im not patriotic- i just dont treat it with reverence.

And whats this 'dont let it touch' the ground bull? its just a flag!

[Alaric]

You, sir, simply have no concept of abstract representation. A flag is a colored piece of cloth, however, it represents something entirely different.

To illustrate this concept, let me use a tombstone as an example. Suppose your parents have died (or a woman you loved). In memory, you have erected a tombstone on the grave. Any analysis would reveal it to be just a piece of rock, nothing else. Now imagine someone comes and defecates on it.

What happened? Well, you could say that a certain volume of organic matter was placed on a rock. Is that wrong? Of course not.

OR, someone has desecrated a memory of your loves ones, committed a barbaric act and deeply insulted you personally. This is because that rock represents something bigger than itself.

Do you get it yet?

In case you are incapable of relating to the above example, let me use another one.

You, sir, are but a collection of chemicals. The total value of which comes to about $11 US. Because you are located in a free country, you do not belong to anyone.

Wouldn’t you agree that poking a pile of chemical elements with a sharp metal piece is not wrong? Especially if this pile is not anyone’s property. I say, go for it.

On the other hand you may have one or two objections to being run through with a knife. Isn’t it so, sir?

[Wingnut]

Funny, but you miss a few things.

If YOU deficate on MY parents grave, you have committed trespassing and defacement and I would prosecute you. IF YOU deficate on YOUR parent's grave, I would think you a sick puppy and go on about my life.

Indeed I am a random collection of chemicals, but they are owned by someone... ME! Want to alter your own chemical stack with sharp pointy sticks or killer rabbits? Have a good time. If you think you are going to do it to me, you have infringed upon my property.

[Alaric]

Then again, can a pile of chemicals own property?

Basicaly what I am trying to do, is show the mechanism for attaching certain values to an object and explain why people are unhappy when these objects are mistreated.

[shoboy]

Flag burning is such a non issue, it's become a waste of tax payers money and our elected leader's time debating it.

If you want to burn the US flag, go for it, your free to do it.

But for the fact that people have died for what that flag stands for, even the freedom that allows you to burn it, if one should burn it they are an A**HOLE!!!!!!!!

It is my freedom of speech that allows me to say that, as it is their freedom of life that allows them to burn it. No law is being broken, only RESPECT and HONOR.

Our Gov. has no need nor right to make a law based on HONOR and RESPECT of a piece of cloth, despite what has happened because of that cloth. Despite how rude and thoughtless it is to burn a flag in either protest of it or for the sake of burning it (ceremony of old flags non included), it is the very freedom to burn it that the flag represents that allows for it's burning in either fashion.

[Arac]

Basicaly what I am trying to do, is show the mechanism for attaching certain values to an object and explain why people are unhappy when these objects are mistreated.
Thanks, but I don't think anyone in this thread has any problem understanding why people get all riled up about flag-burning. It still has no bearing on the legality of the act.