Flag-Burning Amendment Advances in House

[Clandestino]

i am pretty sure where most people stand on this issue, but i'll post anyway...


By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 7 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - The House moved Wednesday toward approval of a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power to ban desecration of the American flag, a measure that for the first time stands a chance of passing the Senate as well.

Lawmakers in the House debated — as they have six times before — whether such a ban would uphold or run afoul of the Constitution's free-speech protections.

Supporters said the measure reflected patriotism that deepened after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and they accused detractors of being out of touch with public sentiment.

"Ask the men and women who stood on top of the (World) Trade Center," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass this amendment."

But Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said, "If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag represents."

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.

But last year's elections gave Republicans a four-seat pickup in the Senate, and now proponents and critics alike say the amendment stands within a vote or two of reaching the two-thirds requirement in that chamber.

By most counts, 65 current senators have voted for or said they intend to support the amendment, two shy of the crucial tally. More than a quarter of current senators were not members of that chamber during the last vote.

The Senate is expected to consider the measure after the July 4th holiday.

_

The amendment is H.J. Res 10.

_

[Spurminator]

In other news, the House also debated measures to ban Bible-pissings and Michael Moore movies, along with making yellow "Support Our Troops" bumper ribbons a required feature on all vehicles.

[Clandestino]

democrats also tried to make it mandatory to provide terrorist detainees with luxury suites and the granting of every wish possible....

[MannyIsGod]

I'm glad we live in country were our government addresses the important problems.

[SWC Bonfire]

I'm glad we live in country were our government addresses the important problems.

No shit. They need to pass a law stating that you explicitly have the right to make a statement & burn the US Flag.... and the people who beat the shit out of you have the right to because you were inciting violence with your actions.

[spurster]

This will stop terrorism in its tracks and reduce the deficit, too!

[CaptainHook]

Burning the American flag = Anti American

LOVE AMERICA OR LEAVE IT!

[mookie2001]

Burning the American flag = Anti American

LOVE AMERICA OR LEAVE IT!


1. for the most part yes, but it also makes a bold political statement, one that i would never make because its so bold

2. youre an idiot, this country was founded by bastards who left their country for something better, im gonna try to change something i dont like about my country before i leave with my tail between my legs

although i dont like the idea of burning the flag, it seems the governemt is wasting its time and just making new laws for the shit of it and by "the shit of it" i mean to seem more "conservative" and to make it seem like if democrats controlled congress theyd start teaching flag burning in schools



along with making yellow "Support Our Troops" bumper ribbons a required feature on all vehicles.

no no, just on tahoes, yukons and suburbans

[Nbadan]

You gotta love these Flag wavers..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/05/184_patriot.jpg

[gophergeorge]

Banning it, in my opinion, would be a VERY BAD THING!!!

[bigzak25]

flag burning is as stupid as a homeless man burning a dollar to prove a point...

[blaze89]

Burning the American flag = Anti American

LOVE AMERICA OR LEAVE IT!

So do we kick out the Boy Scouts for burning the flag on Flag Day???

[blaze89]

If you don't want to burn the flag then don't burn it. But a person shouldn't go to jail if the person burns the flag.

This is from Flag Etiquette, Issues & Questions (http://flagsource.com/faq.htm#What%20is%20the%20proper%20way%20to%20disp ose%20a%20fla)


What is the proper way to dispose a flag?

In many American communities, one or more organizations (such as the American Legion) render an important community service by collecting and overseeing the proper disposal of old, worn, tattered, and/or frayed U.S. Flags. Some organizations make it an annual service project; others announce when and where Flags will be accepted. Often, community newspapers, radio, and TV stations help broadcast the availability of the service. Churches, synagogues, chambers of commerce, civic organizations, and businesses sometimes have served as "drop off" locations for the collection of worn flags. Any American Legion or local VFW can put you in contact with an approved disposal facility.

If many U.S. Flags are collected, it may be desirable to seek assistance from a corporate, government or military facility which maintains an incinerator or furnace that can readily burn the flags. According to the United State Flag Code 36s 176(k): "The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem of display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning." This burning occurs during a formal ceremony conducted by an approved flag disposal organization.


I'm sure we are all guilty of doing one of the things listen below:

This is from a Flag Etiquette STANDARDS of RESPECT (http://www.usachoice.net/post-32/flagetiq.html)


The Flag Code, which formalizes and unifies the traditional ways in which we give respect to the flag, also contains specific instructions on how the flag is not to be used. They are:

The flag should never be dipped to any person or thing. It is flown upside down only as a distress signal.

The flag should not be used as a drapery, or for covering a speakers desk, draping a platform, or for any decoration in general. Bunting of blue, white and red stripes is available for these purposes. The blue stripe of the bunting should be on the top.

The flag should never be used for any advertising purpose. It should not be embroidered, printed or otherwise impressed on such articles as cushions, handkerchiefs, napkins, boxes, or anything intended to be discarded after temporary use. Advertising signs should not be attached to the staff or halyard

The flag should not be used as part of a costume or athletic uniform, except that a flag patch may be used on the uniform of military personnel, fireman, policeman and members of patriotic organizations.

The flag should never have placed on it, or attached to it, any mark, insignia, letter, word, number, figure, or drawing of any kind.

The flag should never be used as a receptacle for receiving, holding, carrying, or delivering anything.

When the flag is lowered, no part of it should touch the ground or any other object; it should be received by waiting hands and arms. To store the flag it should be folded neatly and ceremoniously.

The flag should be cleaned and mended when necessary.

When a flag is so worn it is no longer fit to serve as a symbol of our country, it should be destroyed by burning in a dignified manner.

[The Ressurrected One]

I'm opposed to the amendment.

As long as the person is burning their own flag on their own property and it doesn't create a hazard for other's property, burn away.

It's always good to know who your enemies are.

[blaze89]

The ironic thing is that burning the flag is considered honorable and dignified. Now the people who buy paper napkins and paper plates and discard them in the trash....

Hell, I've seen the flag sold as neckties, shirts and boxer shorts.

[The Ressurrected One]

The ironic thing is that burning the flag is considered honorable and dignified.
That's not exactly true. It depends on the context. Flags are burned in a ceremony upon retirement. There is a lot of dignity to the manner in which the flag is disassembled and burned. And, it's not considered desecration. Then kind of burning the amendment aims to end is the protest burnings where the flag is intended to be desecrated. But, again, I'm opposed to the amendment on the grounds that it's free speech and protected by the first amendment. (unless, of course you burn someone else's flag or set someone else's property ablaze in you idiotic attempt to make a statement about your stupidity.)

Now the people who buy paper napkins and paper plates and discard them in the trash....Hell, I've seen the flag sold as neckties, shirts and boxer shorts.
Yep. I can't wait to see how badly the Congress must torture the language in order to keep people out of jail for burning their stars and stripes plates.

[Nbadan]

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050623/breen.gif

[Nbadan]

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050624/britt.gif