| Author |
Message |
    
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 1667
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 12:34 am: | 
|
Yes, it is a big deal. And yes, I would try to stop someone who did so. Men have died to save the flag from desecration by enemies. The least I could do is wrest it away a domestic desecrator. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2204
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 6:55 am: |
|
comparison to the 22nd amendment is ridiculous. after FDR set the precedent, it would have been very likely that presidents would seek more than 2 terms. thus the reasoning behind the amendment.
flag burning almost never occurs, and when it does, the perpetrator is typically a drunken teenager vandalizing his neighbor's property. proponents of this amendment, if they're going to be honest, should acknowledget that at worst flag burning is largely a hypothetical issue. if you think hypotheticals are worthy of the hard work that goes into amending the constitution, that's your prerogative. but flag burning should probably rank just above worrying about an invasion from Klingons on the national priority list. |
Mr. Big Poppa
Citizen
Username: Big_poppa
Post Number: 748
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 8:06 am: |
|
Dr O'Boogie
No need to worry about the Klingons invading any time soon. We have their ringleaders in Guantanamo. We just need translators.....why do you think Bill Gates is retiring....coincidental, huh? |
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15226
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 8:19 am: |
|
What is ridiculous is that you use the frequency of occurrence as proof that an amendment is NOT required and then you turn around and say that using the same logic is, um, not necessarily important on other amendments.
When you figure out the criteria in your own mind, please let us know.
Thankey. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1206
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 8:30 am: |
|
Hey you libs, I don't disagree. But isn't the idea to actually win elections? I just can't understand why you guys spend so much time lambasting or making fun of your adversary, rather than making yourself stronger and better. It is really as if you guys live in bizarro world and believe that by making fun of people they will vote for you. That is bizarro.
And Seb, I agree with you about frequency of occurrence. That really means nothing. The libs are reaching. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2205
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 8:45 am: |
|
I'm not using that logic to support the 22nd amendment, since I don't approve of that amendment at all. I'm simply saying that it doesn't support your argument regarding the likelihood of an act's occurrence and the need for a consitutional amendment.
but let's examine the issue at hand. acts of theft or vandalism involving flags are already prohibited by current statute. so we're looking at acts in which someone buys their own flag and burns it as a protest. an act which is even rarer than vandalism.
there is a profound absurdity in taking the time, expense, and effort to amend the constitution (for the first time putting limits on the First Amendment no less) in order to prevent people from committing an act that virtually no one ever commits. The most that amendment supporters can say is that flag burning is a despicable act that might be a nationwide problem if someone was actually doing it.
even if the act was more frequent, I wouldn't support the limitations it puts on the First Amendment, but if flag burning was more frequent, the debate would lose its absurdity. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 1966
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 8:58 am: |
|
Southerner: The idea is to win elections AND establish good policy. Duh. Republications have that half figured out.
"...believe that by making fun of people they will vote for you."
Am I running for office? Is Hillary here making fun of you? I don't understand what you are getting at?
Stupid is as stupid does, Forrest.
(I honestly can't stop picturing you sitting on a bench in your godforsaken red state with a buzz cut and Nike's, shirt buttoned to the top.) |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 10016
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 9:04 am: |
|
Should the FCC ban broadcasts of flag burning too? |
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 1753
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 9:12 am: |
|
Yes, it is a big deal. And yes, I would try to stop someone who did so. Men have died to save the flag from desecration by enemies. The least I could do is wrest it away a domestic desecrator.
Brett,
Unfortunately, you could end up in the slammer for your actions.
|
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1583
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 9:58 am: |
|
here is my position on flag burning.
If the US government were to take a position that is so abhorent to me (something like using torture as a valid interrogation method or invading a sovereign nation without cause), and despite protest and despite mass demonstrations and despite letter writing and petitioning, the government continued with its policies, then burning a flag outside the white house in protest may be just the message that needs to be sent to our elected officials that what they have done is wrong.
It does not mean that I dont love the USA, nor does it mean that I am denigrating any soldier or patriot that came before me. It means simply that I am extremely upset at my government and their policies and that change is necessary and that I am willing to take the criticism and the irrational hatred of my fellow citizens in order to make my point.
disclaimer - I have not now nor have I ever burned a flag |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2206
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:03 am: |
|
what's interesting is that almost no one on this board actually supports amending the constitution. but we love debating so much we're finding something to disagree on - whether or not the Senate's consideration of the amdendment is "stupid," "absurd," or "borderline."
 |
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1166
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 10:49 am: |
|
Some food for thought.
Even if the government undertook some abhorent action, and refused to redress the greivances of the petitioners, how would burning a flag help, when the mass demonstrations, etc., didn't?
And besides, its not the government's flag; its OUR flag. Burning our homes because we don't like the property taxes might get us on the news, but is that the way we'd want to get attention?
TomR |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1585
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:17 am: |
|
Its a way, not the only way but a way.
The fact is that it probably is a futile effort. But as long as the first amendment still stands it is a freedom that affords us the opportunity to use as a means of displaying our frustration and anger.
It is a plea to the ruling power to realize what they are doing is causing unrest in the population.
|
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2207
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:24 am: |
|
what point did it make to board a ship, steal its cargo, and dump it into Boston Harbor? and yet that act of vandalism stands as a great moment in American history. circumstances and context are everything. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5564
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 11:36 am: |
|
Or, in the words of Otter, in Animal House -
"No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part."
|
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1168
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 12:39 pm: |
|
Doc,
Kinda the same point that was made at the lunch counters of Selma and Montgomery. If everybody can't eat the tuna fish, than nobody eats the tuna fish.
And going back to my previous analogy, they didn't dump their own tea or burn their own tea houses; they dumped the tea of the King's importers.
TomR |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 2208
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 12:42 pm: |
|
it certainly makes more of a point if you destroy someone else's property instead of your own, but it can certainly be argued that theft and vandalism aren't valid means of conducting public discourse. |
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1171
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Agreed.
TomR
Be back later. |
Lydia
Supporter
Username: Lydial
Post Number: 2019
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Hoops -
Quote:If the US government were to take a position that is so abhorent to me (something like using torture as a valid interrogation method or invading a sovereign nation without cause), and despite protest and despite mass demonstrations and despite letter writing and petitioning, the government continued with its policies, then burning a flag outside the white house in protest may be just the message that needs to be sent to our elected officials that what they have done is wrong.
'zactly - I agree. And I too, have never burned a flag.
I have burned many troops of little plastic green army-men back in the day.
It's easy to take on the obvious targets, "Hey stop torching the flag!" - a no-brainer.
IMO, there's a lot of truly unpatriotic behavior that most people turn a blind eye to - driving cars that aren't fuel-efficient, buying from businesses that don't pay a living wage, buying products that exploit workers here or in other countries, etc.
Burning the American flag amounts to symbolically desecrating a symbol. Really doesn't hurt anyone, and because it pisses off so many, it's hard to calm down and figure out what the flag-burners point is at all. Not very creative is my main criticism of flag-burning.
|
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1210
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 30, 2006 - 5:56 pm: |
|
See how the Repubs are framing the issues and setting the tone. The possibility of gaining control is slipping through your hands and you just don't see it. I love this. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 14848
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 1, 2006 - 1:21 pm: |
|
TomR and everyone else, the fact that flag burning is uncreative and ineffective doesn't mean we need an amendment or even a law prohibiting it. And the fact that it is offensive does mean it should be a protected act.
We have a right to be uncreative, ineffective and offensive. It's not advisable to be any of these, but we have the right.
Southerner, how do you figure that the tone of the debate indicates that we're losing (the possibility of) control?
|
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 10031
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, July 1, 2006 - 3:11 pm: |
|
Why don't Republicans simply try to reinstate the Sedition Act of 1918? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5209
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, July 1, 2006 - 4:25 pm: |
|
They'd prefer the 1798 version. |
Southerner
Citizen
Username: Southerner
Post Number: 1218
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, July 1, 2006 - 5:23 pm: |
|
Because Tom, look what the nation is talking about. Are we talking about Demcratic liberal ideas or policies? No. We are talking about flag burning, building fences and using the National Guard on the border, Congress giving the POTUS more power via the latest SC ruling, etc, etc. Us conservatives are framing every issue, and on every one of these the Democratic response is weak. Look at the corner the Dems have allowed themselves to be painted - they are painted as against border control, against the war, against a strong President, for flag burning, etc, etc. Normally, the minority party is able to force the issue on at least one of their pet projects but the Dems haven't even been able to do this. I know you guys are insulated in deep blue territory, but what you see or read that lends you to the belief that the Dems are poised to take back power is very interesting to me. I sure don't see it out here. And with every day that passes the Dems are losing more opportunities to change votes from Republican to Democrat. |
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1176
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, July 1, 2006 - 5:54 pm: |
|
Noglider,
While I generally agree with the sentiment you are trying to express, I gotta axe:
Why is your post addressed to me?
TomR |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 14851
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 1, 2006 - 9:27 pm: |
|
Good question, TomR. Um, I don't know why. Sorry if you felt targeted.
|
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 1684
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, July 6, 2006 - 5:38 pm: |
|
Phenixrising- My father was willing to die to stop enemy forces from urinating on Old Glory in WWII (personally, I'm relieved it didn't come to that). Sitting in the calabozo for a few hours seems a small price. Principles aren't worth much if they fold up at crunch time. |
TomR
Citizen
Username: Tomr
Post Number: 1182
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, July 6, 2006 - 9:00 pm: |
|
Brett,
Principles are one thing. Creating a crunch situation to see if somebody's principles will fold is another.
There was an interesting op-ed piece in the Star Ledger earlier this week, I think, on Tuesday.
The long and short of the piece, insofar as I understand it, was that OUR flag is a symbol of something great and unique.
If WE raise the importance of that symbol to the same level as that which for which it stands; have we elevated the symbol, or have we denigrated that which WE hold to be great and unique?
Its a grand old flag. I like it. But I revere the rights guaranteed by by OUR Constitution.
If WE make OUR flag an object of reverence by Constitutional Amendment, which is more important: the right to prevent the flag's desecration; or the right to assemble and seek redress of OUR grievances?
Tough questions. Fortunately, these are not tough times.
TomR
|
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 1770
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 7, 2006 - 8:28 am: |
|
The GWB writing on the flag. Is this considered desecration?  |
Mr. Big Poppa
Citizen
Username: Big_poppa
Post Number: 764
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, July 7, 2006 - 9:29 am: |
|
Desecration?
Ok, maybe yes for the one smuggling a banana. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 14923
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 7, 2006 - 12:33 pm: |
|
TomR, thank you for recounting that OpEd piece. If desecrating the symbol is a crime but desecrating the object of the symbol is fine, then things are totally fmessed up.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page