Subverting the Constitution by Opposing the Flag

[Nbadan]

http://www.human-evolution.org/images/burn.gif
The symbol of freedom?


The Senate is expected to vote within the next two weeks on a
constitutional amendment to ban desecrating the flag. Last
summer the House of Representatives, in a vote of 286 to 130,
passed a resolution that would create a new amendment to the
Constitution allowing, “The Congress shall have the power to
prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United
States.” This was the sixth time since 1990 that the House
had approved a flag desecration amendment, only to have the
Senate reject it or simply fail to vote on it. But the Senate
now appears poised to erode our Constitutional right to free
speech and expression by approving it.

Efforts to protect the flag at the expense of the First
Amendment have been a common occurrence during wartime. In
the Civil War, when Union military commanders took control of
Confederate areas they prohibited the desecration of the flag.
In 1862 New Orleans became the first Confederate city to be
occupied by Union forces. General Benjamin Butler was
commander of the Union army for southern Louisiana. He issued
an order that no flag other than the national flag could be
displayed, and that “the American [flag] be treated with the
utmost deference and respect by all persons, under pain of
severe punishment.”

William Mumford tested this order when he removed the flag
atop the New Orleans branch of the U.S. Mint. He dragged the
flag through the streets before tearing it into pieces and
handing it out to his fellow Confederates. General Butler had
him arrested and subsequently hanged for his act of
desecration.

Congress twice violated the First Amendment while attempting
to protect the flag during World War I. In 1917 Congress
passed a law making it a misdemeanor to publicly desecrate
the flag in the nation’s capital. A year later, Congress
passed a law requiring the termination of any federal
employee who “when the United States is at war…in an abusive
or violent manner criticizes…the flag of the United States.”
Many state legislatures also passed flag desecration laws.

The Kansas Supreme Court ruled in 1918 that insulting the
flag was a crime. Montana passed one of the strictest flag
desecration laws during World War I. Over 200 residents of
Montana were convicted of disrespecting the flag during the
course of the war. E.V. Starr, after refusing to kiss the
flag as a sign of his patriotism, was convicted and sentenced
to ten years of hard labor.

Congress passed the first flag desecration law during the
Vietnam War, in the wake of anti-war demonstrations. In 1968
Congress passed the Federal Flag Desecration Law that
criminalized anyone who “knowingly casts contempt upon any
flag of the United States by publicly mutilating, defacing,
defiling, burning, or trampling upon it.” Shortly thereafter,
Sydney Street burned a flag after learning that a prominent
civil rights activist had been shot. Street told the crowd
who gathered around him as it burned, “…we don’t need no
[expletive] flag.” He was arrested and convicted under the
new law.

A year later the Supreme Court overturned his conviction in
the case of Street v. New York. The Court didn’t specifically
address Street’s burning of the flag. However, it ruled that
his verbal comments were protected under the First Amendment
right to free speech.

The Supreme Court finally addressed constitutional issues
concerning burning the flag in 1989. In the case of Texas v.
Johnson, the Court ruled on a Texas law that criminalized the
mistreatment of the flag, to include setting it on fire. The
Supreme Court upheld a Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruling
that the law was unconstitutional. This effectively defined
burning the flag as a protected form of free speech.

Congress was offended by this ruling and later that year
passed the Flag Protection Act. The legislation made a
criminal out of anyone who “knowingly mutilates, defaces,
physically defiles, burns, maintains on the floor or ground,
or tramples upon any U.S. flag.” The Supreme Court responded
to the new law in 1990 in the case of U.S. v. Eichman. In a
five to four ruling the Court found that the act violated the
First Amendment right to free speech and expression.

The current effort by Congress to pass a flag desecration
amendment is largely attributable to the war in Iraq.
Supporters, which include such strange bedfellows as
Democratic Senator Diane Feinstein and Republican Senator
Orrin Hatch, insist that it’s needed in order to show respect
to veterans. They hope that the two-thirds majority needed to
forward the amendment to the states for ratification will be
too fearful to vote against it and run the risk of being
labeled “unpatriotic” or “un-American” during an election
year. But the Senate should reject it.

The flag represents all that is noble about America. It
symbolizes our rights and freedoms, and it should be treated
with respect. But it’s merely a symbol. To outlaw the right
to free speech and expression, especially regarding
desecration of the flag, would be a mockery of the freedoms
and liberties our veterans fought for and defended.


The only "legit" way to get rid of an old or tattered flag is to burn it.

[Spurminator]

It's a stupid idea for a stupid law that only serves to elevate the "shock value" of a stupid protest tactic.

The best way to guarantee an increase in "flag burnings" is to make it illegal.

[fyatuk]

http://www.human-evolution.org/images/burn.gif
The symbol of freedom?




The only "legit" way to get rid of an old or tattered flag is to burn it.

I was about to mention that. My old JROTC unit did several retirement ceremonies for old flags.

It's just pathetic that people would want to ban that, or any form of expression involving the flag. We have the constitutional right to display our displeasure with the government, and the flag is a symbol of the government as well as the nation.

[xrayzebra]

^^It also represents all those who have died defending the country. They and
the flag deserve respect. Not some damn faggot who has not idea what is going
on in the world to begin with burning it.

Freedom of expression my foot. They have a mouth, why don't they try using it.
Of course most of the time they have their foot in it.

[Spurminator]

They deserve respect, but they are not legally entitled to it. Nor should they be. Sort of undermines the value of "respect" to do so.

[xrayzebra]

They will be legally entitled to it, if they pass the amendment! Thats the point
the flag and what it represents should have the legal obligation of respect.

[Spurminator]

How can you legally coerce respect?

[Spurminator]

And let's not forget that this is just another election year special to rile up the base with issues that aren't over their heads.

[MannyIsGod]

Idiocy.

[turambar85]

They will be legally entitled to it, if they pass the amendment! Thats the point
the flag and what it represents should have the legal obligation of respect.

lol, X-ray, you are a joke. I would love to hear one logical reason to prohibit flag burning. Will we then make it illegal to openly question America, or at least to openly slander America and its government? Will we shut down any radio or newspaper which disgraces our fallen or our history?

These people died to protect freedom of speech and freedom of opinion, and lunatics like you want to get rid of that freedom in order to make sure that their ghosts arent disrespected. Well, if you win then their deaths were in vain, they didn't gain us anything except for a delay of the inevitable.

And legal obligation of respect? This isn't Red China old man, we can disrespect our government and our countries past without any threat of bodily harm. We are a free people, living in a free country, or at least we were until Bush and his whack-job friends took hold of the government. Our freedoms are being diminished, and proud patriots like yourself are standing to the side waving the flag and grinning.

Please, tell me one reason why I am wrong, and one reason that is based on reason and logic that this practice should be banned.

[scott]

CLINTON.

OVAL OFFICE.

and...

BLOWJOB!!!

[fyatuk]

^^It also represents all those who have died defending the country. They and
the flag deserve respect. Not some damn faggot who has not idea what is going
on in the world to begin with burning it.

Freedom of expression my foot. They have a mouth, why don't they try using it.
Of course most of the time they have their foot in it.

While true that it is also a symbol of those who died to protect our freedoms, respect is given not demanded.

DEMANDING respect only results in the opposite happening.

Why use the phrase "freedom of expression" and tell them to only use speech? The Bill of Rights protects the freedom of speech literally, expression is an interpretation. You'd think if that was your point of view you'd use the phrase freedom of speech.

There is no valid reason the ban flag desecration. The only reaosn is blind patriotism and demanding something that cannot be demanded.

[smeagol]

Can I take a dump on a flag or that will be illegal too?

[xrayzebra]

^^I fail to see why you are so against protecting the symbol of our freedom. Burning
or "taking a dump" on the flag is expression alright. But expression of what. Your
stupidity in not being able to express yourself otherwise?

How bout I take a picture of your family and take a dump on it. You would want to
kick my rearend and I would deserve it. But, but I have the right to express myself,
right?

Why is it necessary to show your disrespect for your country. Because burning
the flag is just that. Disrespect, not freedom of speech. You people keep
getting your priorities all mixed up. Your argument is not with the government, but
the people in government. YOU are the government. YOU elected the people
in government. YOU can kick them out of government. YOU can express yourself
to your representative or any other person in government without reprisal or fear.
Unless you threaten bodily harm. Lean how to express yourself and no disrespect
the symbols of our country.

[fyatuk]

^^I fail to see why you are so against protecting the symbol of our freedom. Burning
or "taking a dump" on the flag is expression alright. But expression of what. Your
stupidity in not being able to express yourself otherwise?

How bout I take a picture of your family and take a dump on it. You would want to
kick my rearend and I would deserve it. But, but I have the right to express myself,
right?


As long as you didn't crap on the picture in public (public indecency laws), there's no legal problem with you doing that, nor should there. They would have the right to want to kick your butt, and that's fine.

Same with the flag. As long as they didn't do the defecating in public, it should be perfectly legal. You'd have the right to be pissed off about it and yell and scream at them all you want. Big deal.


Why is it necessary to show your disrespect for your country. Because burning
the flag is just that. Disrespect, not freedom of speech.

As I said, you cannot legislate respect. If someone does disrepect this country, this government, the troops, whatever, they should be allowed to express that disrespect. Also, that's how YOU see it. I don't see it that way.


You people keep getting your priorities all mixed up. Your argument is not with the government, but the people in government. YOU are the government. YOU elected the people in government. YOU can kick them out of government. YOU can express yourself to your representative or any other person in government without reprisal or fear.


1) There are 2 uses for "government". One is the system that is in place, the other is the current make up of the government. The word government can be applied to the people currently acting as the government, or the system as a whole.

2) I have a problem with the system as a whole. The House of Representatives should be a parliamentary body. There is no way to overturn a law by judicial decree of the Supreme Court. The 10th Amendment has been raped of its spirit, intent, and authority. These are all problems with the government itself, not the people currently in power.


Unless you threaten bodily harm. Lean how to express yourself and no disrespect the symbols of our country.

You are so stuck on the respect thing its insane. We are ALLOWED to disrespect people, things, symbols if we want to. And YOU are the one seeing it as disrespect. Not everyone sees it as such.

[boutons_]

Desecrating the US flag is much less an insult to America and its mythical ideals than the Repugs insult of nominating dubya to be president.

btw, although the USA is belligerent, war-mongering, murderous country, the US military doesn't own the US flag in exclusivity.

The flag amendment is just another election year litmus testing issue, divding and inflaming, and rousing their base of ignorant rabble. The Repugs can't run on their disatrous record, so they create gay-marriage and flag-descecration BS side issues and force congressional votes on them so the Repugs can hammer/smear so-and-so during the campaign as "pro-gay" and "anti-flag".

Meanwhile, Repug whores fail totally to govern the country, murder and maim 1000s of US military with a phony war in Iraq, while protecting+enriching energy co's and rich.

The Repugs ARE the CENTRAL ISSUE, not gays and flags.

Americans have the politics and politicians they deserve.

[fyatuk]

The flag amendment is just another election year litmus testing issue, divding and inflaming, and rousing their base of ignorant rabble. The Repugs can't run on their disatrous record, so they create gay-marriage and flag-descecration BS side issues and force congressional votes on them so the Repugs can hammer/smear so-and-so during the campaign as "pro-gay" and "anti-flag".

Meanwhile, Repug whores fail totally to govern the country, murder and maim 1000s of US military with a phony war in Iraq, while protecting+enriching energy co's and rich.


Definitely the gay marraige and flag desecration amendments are being brought up to encourage the fan base to mobilize (through getting this on the news and having the votes to advertise). The Democrats did the same things when they were in power (Bush has actually co-opted the Dems pet issues).

The Reps. record isn't as disasterous as people claim, and its not like the Dems record is any better from a domestic point of view (obviously a foreigner will compare Clinton and Bush and favor Dems).

This election, the Dems are much more likely to use smear tactics than the republicans because the uniting Dem platform is "We're not THEM!". I haven't heard a non-presidential Dem candidate talking about issues in over a decade.

A lot of the current problems lie not in the Reps inability to govern, but the Dems/Reps/Bush all refuse to compromise. Heck, stubborn old Bush has been the most willing to compromise of the bunch. The Dems have spent much of the last year trying to disrupt the ability of the Senate to function. It's not as cut and dry as "Repug whores fail totally to govern the country".

And you really should rephrase "phony war". Obviously the war is real. It's the issues that cause them to go into the war that are messed up. That's just a nitpick thing, though.

[01Snake]

Desecrating the US flag is much less an insult to America and its mythical ideals than the Repugs insult of nominating dubya to be president.

btw, although the USA is belligerent, war-mongering, murderous country, the US military doesn't own the US flag in exclusivity.

The flag amendment is just another election year litmus testing issue, divding and inflaming, and rousing their base of ignorant rabble. The Repugs can't run on their disatrous record, so they create gay-marriage and flag-descecration BS side issues and force congressional votes on them so the Repugs can hammer/smear so-and-so during the campaign as "pro-gay" and "anti-flag".

Meanwhile, Repug whores fail totally to govern the country, murder and maim 1000s of US military with a phony war in Iraq, while protecting+enriching energy co's and rich.

The Repugs ARE the CENTRAL ISSUE, not gays and flags.

Americans have the politics and politicians they deserve.

Dude, I can't do anything buy laugh with every reply you make. Your hatred of Bush/GOP makes me laugh. How do you function in life? Your life must consist of you sitting at the computer surfing the internet 24/7 looking for ANYTHING negative about Bush as to ease the mental anguish they cause you. :lol

[FromWayDowntown]

Can I take a dump on a flag or that will be illegal too?

It would depend on the circumstance, but if you were doing it in a way to make a statement -- with people around and all sorts of commotion -- I'd think you could be arrested; not for desecrating the flag (that's protected by the First Amendment) but for public indecency or some other similar crime.

The silly thing to me about the flag burning debate is that the more there's a push to make the flag sacrosanct, the more protesters are fueled to desecrate it as a sign of protest. If the flag didn't mean so much to so many, nobody would really care if protesters burned it or took a dump on it or whatever else. I mean, the endless volumes of the Congressional Record or the United States Code embody the law of the land and the policy decisions that so many rally against, but few would be bothered (and fewer still would get the point) if Paul Protester stood on the steps of the Capital and burned those things.


How bout I take a picture of your family and take a dump on it. You would want to kick my rearend and I would deserve it. But, but I have the right to express myself, right?

Absolutely. The price of free speech is always the possibility that someone will disagree, perhaps violently. I'd never condone violence, but at the same time, I'd be shocked if a jury in most any jurisdiction would convict a person who was charged with assaulting a flag burner.


Why is it necessary to show your disrespect for your country. Because burning the flag is just that. Disrespect, not freedom of speech.

But disrepect is, in a sense, the practical embodiment of freedom of speech. What good would free speech be if everyone was obliged to respect particular matters? What makes the First Amendment brilliant is that it protects the dissenter, the protester, the person who views things in an unorthodox manner. It stands for the proposition that there isn't an expressive line that we all must toe. It would be hollow if it didn't do that.

[Spurminator]

How bout I take a picture of your family and take a dump on it. You would want to
kick my rearend and I would deserve it. But, but I have the right to express myself,
right?

I'd laugh at you for doing something so outlandish in the attempt to insult me, but I wouldn't try to have you arrested.

[boutons_]

The war is phony becasue the reasons for the war were phony, outright lies.

That the war is a REAL fucking gawdawful disaster in planning and execution is a separate issue.

[fyatuk]

The war is phony becasue the reasons for the war were phony, outright lies.

That the war is a REAL fucking gawdawful disaster in planning and execution is a separate issue.

The invasion was based on bad intel that according to the ISG report Saddam himself purpetuated to the best of his abilities. Yes there were certainly errors in judgement in interpreting the info, but even most of the governments that opposed removing Saddam believed he still had WMD. The only real contention on the issue was some countries wanted the inspectors to prove it one way or the other before action was taken while others believed Saddam was capable of hiding his activities from the inspectors.

Never the less, the war is not phony. It is/was not a fake war. It was a very real war with a very real loss of life. Immoral, unethical, unjust, unnecessary. Those can apply depending on your perspective, but calling it phony is just idiotic.

[boutons_]

"bad intel"

We've heard since that WHIG cherry picked intel that fit their decision, before 2000, to invade Iraq, and suppressed all doubts about its veracity, suppressed/terminated dissenters, fired those who questioned the war planning (Shinsheki), and gave medals to those who played along and provided the "bad intel".

[fyatuk]

"bad intel"

We've heard since that WHIG cherry picked intel that fit their decision, before 2000, to invade Iraq, and suppressed all doubts about its veracity, suppressed/terminated dissenters, fired those who questioned the war planning (Shinsheki), and gave medals to those who played along and provided the "bad intel".

They didn't "cherry pick" any intel with strong reliable sources. Those were all included. From not so reliable sources they did cherry pick, including providing misleading summaries of several reports that gave the opposite impression of what the report actually concluded (the yellowcake incident).

There some definite issues in the leadup, especially regarding Saddam's nuclear interest. He apparently gave up any intention of developing nuclear weapons in 1996 or 7. With his chemical and biological weapons division he made sure they were easily reconstituted, but he did no such thing with his nuclear weapon research.

Saddam still did his best to increase belief that he was subverting sanctions and still working on it, including buying black market dual use equipment and being a bit obvious about it (was confiscated in route).

There were conflicting reports on his programs, and the people controlling the intelligence influenced it to the way they wanted it. It's a horrible shame.

But very few countries doubted that Saddam still had chemical weapons stores, and possibly biological (which apparently he ceased research in 97 with the intent of starting again after sanctions were lifted).

The real lie was suggesting Saddam would give any weapons he had to al-Qaeda. There was never much chance of that.

Like I said, there's no denying that there were a whole mess of anomalies leading up to the war.

I don't care if you think it was all outright lies with no actual info to support it. Doesn't matter.

Calling the war phony ignores the real tragedies of the war, the 2500 dead US soldiers, the tens of thousands of Iraqi deaths, the thousands and thousands of injuries, the problems with getting basic services running over there, the people suffering as they wonder if their loved ones will be blown up today.

Those are the biggest tragedies of this, and calling the war phony draws attention away from that and focuses only on the lies. Like I said, feel free to call the war unjustified, immoral, or anything else. Calling it fake is wrong.

[ChumpDumper]

How bout I take a picture of your family and take a dump on it. You would want to
kick my rearend and I would deserve it. But, but I have the right to express myself,
right?Let me know when the Family Photograph Defecation Desecration Protection Act makes it out of committee, x.

[xrayzebra]

Who really cares. I hope the amendment passes. Then there will be no argument.
It will be in the Constitution. It will be the law of the land. I will be happy and many
unhappy. But that's life.

[ChumpDumper]

Actually it would have to be ratified. That will be pretty interesting.

[xrayzebra]

Yes, you are right. But it would be ratified. And really not interesting, it would
be the law of the land.

[ChumpDumper]

Protecting a piece of cloth that was probably made in communist China can't be a real issue, can it?

[fyatuk]

I will be happy and many unhappy. But that's life.

That is a very capitalist attitude. My happiness at the expense of others. But yep, it's life.

But it won't pass the Senate. Never has, never will.

[MannyIsGod]

Man, I'm so glad the party of limited government is happily propsing amendments left and right. Maybe we can have a few amendments making it illegal to sleep in on Sunday. Hooraaaaaaaaaaaaay!

[FromWayDowntown]

I still don't know what makes anyone think that it's a great idea to amend the Constitution to limit the rights of individuals, rather than protecting individual rights from governmental infringement.

Maybe that's just me, though.

[leemajors]

Can I take a dump on a flag or that will be illegal too?

if you have ever seen mr show, they had a whole bit on how the design of the american flag makes someone unable to shit on it.

[xrayzebra]

I still don't know what makes anyone think that it's a great idea to amend the Constitution to limit the rights of individuals, rather than protecting individual rights from governmental infringement.

Maybe that's just me, though.

Yeah, I think it is. Just you!

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

[Three Lions]

Bloody Yanks and your precious Constitution.

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/fifa/gen/afp/20060610/i/3064697885.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

Abortions for some -- miniature American flags for others.

[Johnny_Blaze_47]

Spurminator, FWD and Manny have all said it already.

[turambar85]

Xray, I would like to know why you never answered my post asking you to give me a reason this is a good law, a factual, logical reason.


Im waiting.......

[Guru of Nothing]

Help me with the math here Xray - how many people have sided with you in this thread?

HAHA!

You wanna know why nobody sides with you xray? It's because your political party of choice chooses to ** use the flag for political gain **, which is an insult to everyone that died defending it.

And now you know.

[Winnipeg_Spur]

Boy: Say, who left all this garbage on the steps of Congress?

Amendment-to-be:

I'm not garbage.
I'm an amendment to be.
Yes, an amendment to be.
And I'm hoping that they'll ratify me.

There's a lot of flag burners
Who have got too much freedom.
I want to make it legal for policemen to beat 'em.
'Cause there's limits to our liberties.
'Least I hope and pray that there are.
'Cause those liberal freaks go too far.

Boy: But why can't we just make a law against flag burning?

Amendment-to-be: Because that law would be unconstitutional. But if we change the Constitution...

Boy: Then we could make all sorts of crazy laws.

Amendment-to-be: Now you're catching on.

Boy: But what if people say you're not good enough to be in the Constitution?

Amendment-to-be:

Then I'll crush all opposition to me
And I'll make Ted Kennedy pay.
If he fights back, I'll say that he's gay.

Narrator: Good news, amendment. They ratified you. You're in the U.S. Constitution.

Amendment-to-be: Oh, yeah! Door's open, boys!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haNlGYCssio&search=simpsons%20amendment

[turambar85]

lol, X-ray, you are a joke. I would love to hear one logical reason to prohibit flag burning. Will we then make it illegal to openly question America, or at least to openly slander America and its government? Will we shut down any radio or newspaper which disgraces our fallen or our history?

These people died to protect freedom of speech and freedom of opinion, and lunatics like you want to get rid of that freedom in order to make sure that their ghosts arent disrespected. Well, if you win then their deaths were in vain, they didn't gain us anything except for a delay of the inevitable.

And legal obligation of respect? This isn't Red China old man, we can disrespect our government and our countries past without any threat of bodily harm. We are a free people, living in a free country, or at least we were until Bush and his whack-job friends took hold of the government. Our freedoms are being diminished, and proud patriots like yourself are standing to the side waving the flag and grinning.

Please, tell me one reason why I am wrong, and one reason that is based on reason and logic that this practice should be banned.

Here is my original post, X-ray. Now you can give me an amazing argument defending your crazy conservative :elephant beliefs.

I look forward to reading your reply.

[xrayzebra]

Xray, I would like to know why you never answered my post asking you to give me a reason this is a good law, a factual, logical reason.


Im waiting.......

If you don't know, nothing I say will convince you otherwise. You mind is
set in concrete. I have only my years of being on this earth, my time
spent defending this country and my love of country. Maybe someday
you can have the same thing. I have been where I could not view the
symbol of our country, old glory. And believe me when you do see it, it
gives you a feeling of comfort.


Help me with the math here Xray - how many people have sided with you in this thread?

HAHA!

You wanna know why nobody sides with you xray? It's because your political party of choice chooses to ** use the flag for political gain **, which is an insult to everyone that died defending it.

And now you know.

It really doesn't matter how many people have sided with me on this issue.
And what you say really doesn't matter. Your little moniker says it all
about you "Guru of Nothing". Your thoughts are a small bump in the
road.

As for you deciding for those who have died defending it, you are the
last person on earth I would look to for an opinion. You are a zero on
that matter.

[turambar85]

If you don't know, nothing I say will convince you otherwise. You mind is
set in concrete. I have only my years of being on this earth, my time
spent defending this country and my love of country. Maybe someday
you can have the same thing. I have been where I could not view the
symbol of our country, old glory. And believe me when you do see it, it
gives you a feeling of comfort.

Translation: I have no way of defending my beliefs, so I will use an age-old copout. I want a reason X-ray, I dont care if I wont be swayed. If you can't come up with anything then I wll know I was right. You do not even know why you believe this crap.

[xrayzebra]

Translation: I have no way of defending my beliefs, so I will use an age-old copout. I want a reason X-ray, I dont care if I wont be swayed. If you can't come up with anything then I wll know I was right. You do not even know why you believe this crap.

I really don't care what you. You got what I give you, nothing else!
:lol You are a joke. And demanding as well. Go finish your nap, maybe
you will wake up in a better mood. :lol

[turambar85]

Well, we have all listed reason why this should not be a constitutional amendment, we have done what is necessary to defend our views. X-ray, you have simply said crap like "you cant know till your old!" in order to defend you nut-job views.

I know that you love to tell stories of your childhood where you had to walk 20 miles to school in the snow, up-hill both ways, and how people were patriotic and blindly followed whatever the President, who speaks the divine-word-of-God says, but those days are past. Now we require explanations for our views, and your continued evasion of an explanation has left none in doubt.

You don't have a single good reason to believe what you think, and you know this.

[xrayzebra]

^^sigh

[turambar85]

You can sigh all you want, but you have just sighed away the last ounce of credibility that you had. You have made statements, absurd statements, yet you don't have the brains or the balls to defend your beliefs. The funny thing is that you wont even list reason why you wont list reasons defending your claims. You just sigh and sputter meaningly nonsense about how we have no right to criticize, yet we do X-ray...we can make a sensible argument. We can back our beliefs with reasoning.

I have yet to see you make even the smallest step towards doing that on this forum, especially on this topic.

[xrayzebra]

You can sigh all you want, but you have just sighed away the last ounce of credibility that you had. You have made statements, absurd statements, yet you don't have the brains or the balls to defend your beliefs. The funny thing is that you wont even list reason why you wont list reasons defending your claims. You just sigh and sputter meaningly nonsense about how we have no right to criticize, yet we do X-ray...we can make a sensible argument. We can back our beliefs with reasoning.

I have yet to see you make even the smallest step towards doing that on this forum, especially on this topic.

In the first place, I state my opinions. Of which you have no respect nor
intention of accepting. Your idea of reason is beyond most on this board.
Your sense of good reasons is only if you agree.

As far as having the "balls" to defend my beliefs. You are a joke. I have
laid them out in the real world. Which most on this board have not.

I have never said you could not criticize me or anyone else. As far as I
know it is still a free U.S. and freedom of speech has not be revoked. As
much as you wish it were, when it comes to people like me who you
disagree with.

I happen to respect the symbol of our country. Old Glory. I think it
should be protected not used as a symbol of some idiot who disagrees
with George Bush or Bill Clinton or any other President or administration.
Old Glory does not represent any one President or Administration. It
represents the United States of America. You descecrate it and you
descecrate the United States not some dumb politicians. Now that
may upset you to know that. That is what American Service members
have given their life for. That is what they are giving their life for now.
Not George Bush or Karl Rove or Chenney but the United States and
YOU dummy. For the people who's life was taken in 9/11 and on the
Cole and in the Embassies we had bombed. And the barracks in
Saudi Arabia.

Now you may not like the talk I talk, I really don't give a damn. The
amendment is not about getting anyone elected, as far as I am
concerned. You understand that? It is about protecting something
that I am and many more have given many years and as stated before
their lives to protect. A symbol of the United States of America, not
some bunch of politicians. It is not taking away anyone's right to
protest. It is about that symbol of a right to protest.

Now, I have said my piece on this. You can like it or lump it. I don't
hide behind my age, the alternative to age is not that great. I don't hide
behind my age. You can accept those facts or lump them also.
As I have said before, age does one thing. It gives you the benefit
of having been there and done that and you know what happens when
certain facts exist. Your thoughts are not original nor is any of your
so called learned professors. Mine are not, my forefathers before me
who taught me plenty of the principles I live by certainly knew what
they were talking about. They were well read, thoughtful and worked
damn hard at making life work. Unfortunately, many like you have
failed to learn those lessons and don't want to listen to those who
attempt to tell you about life.

[pussyface]

xray...why do you want to impose your will on others?
by advocating that your personal beliefs must be embraced by everyone, you are doing precisely the same thing that liberal types are often maligned for doing in seeking to impose smoking bans on restaurants/bars, for instance.

if you dont like burning the flag, you may respond my not burning the flag. other people must be allowed to do things you don't like when those things have no tangible negative impact on you and do not affect your ability to live freely. otherwise, you don't have a free society. everyone suffers.

having a land where no one is allowed to burn a flag because of the ideals it symbolizes to some is in many ways no better than having a land where all people are required to burn flags involuntarily. Leaving consenting adults alone to determine the course of their own behavior is the overriding principal that we need to respect here.

as a political philosopher, you leave a lot to be desired.

[pussyface]

if you are interested in a more intellectually justifiable brand of conservatism that holds up to greater scrutiny i suggest reading "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, a very noted voice in the intellectual conservative movement.

I think you could learn a lot from reading it and would not be put off by it in any way. check it out.

[xrayzebra]

xray...why do you want to impose your will on others?
if you dont like burning the flag, you may respond my not burning the flag. other people must be allowed to do things you don't like when those things have no tangible negative impact on you and do not affect your ability to live freely. otherwise, you don't have a free society. everyone suffers.


as a political philosopher, you leave a lot to be desired.

But you would impose yours and others will on me by burning the flag.
Not allowing Christian displays on the court house square. Why, because
it might offend others. Give me a break.

Political Philosopher I'm not. Never professed to be. A person who will
express my views I am.

You state no negative impact. My friend, the conduct of many has had
such a negative impact on this country is beyond anything most would
have ever envisioned. We have had conduct in the past which
impacted the country. Like lynch mobs. And people took care of it.
And now people are once again waking up to those who would change
the face of our nation and have change the face of our nation.
No one, I repeat, no one is wanting to take anyone's freedom of speech.
Don't confuse the issue by saying this. All us that want the amendment
want is to protect the symbol of the United States of American and
for what it stands for.

[turambar85]

In the first place, I state my opinions. Of which you have no respect nor
intention of accepting. Your idea of reason is beyond most on this board.
Your sense of good reasons is only if you agree.

As far as having the "balls" to defend my beliefs. You are a joke. I have
laid them out in the real world. Which most on this board have not.

I have never said you could not criticize me or anyone else. As far as I
know it is still a free U.S. and freedom of speech has not be revoked. As
much as you wish it were, when it comes to people like me who you
disagree with.

I happen to respect the symbol of our country. Old Glory. I think it
should be protected not used as a symbol of some idiot who disagrees
with George Bush or Bill Clinton or any other President or administration.
Old Glory does not represent any one President or Administration. It
represents the United States of America. You descecrate it and you
descecrate the United States not some dumb politicians. Now that
may upset you to know that. That is what American Service members
have given their life for. That is what they are giving their life for now.
Not George Bush or Karl Rove or Chenney but the United States and
YOU dummy. For the people who's life was taken in 9/11 and on the
Cole and in the Embassies we had bombed. And the barracks in
Saudi Arabia.

Now you may not like the talk I talk, I really don't give a damn. The
amendment is not about getting anyone elected, as far as I am
concerned. You understand that? It is about protecting something
that I am and many more have given many years and as stated before
their lives to protect. A symbol of the United States of America, not
some bunch of politicians. It is not taking away anyone's right to
protest. It is about that symbol of a right to protest.

Now, I have said my piece on this. You can like it or lump it. I don't
hide behind my age, the alternative to age is not that great. I don't hide
behind my age. You can accept those facts or lump them also.
As I have said before, age does one thing. It gives you the benefit
of having been there and done that and you know what happens when
certain facts exist. Your thoughts are not original nor is any of your
so called learned professors. Mine are not, my forefathers before me
who taught me plenty of the principles I live by certainly knew what
they were talking about. They were well read, thoughtful and worked
damn hard at making life work. Unfortunately, many like you have
failed to learn those lessons and don't want to listen to those who
attempt to tell you about life.


You dont understand me at all, and it shows.

1st, I never desired to limit your freedom of speech, though if ignorance was a criteria for doing so you would have long been rendered silent. I have actually begged you to speak more, to give your reasoning behind your claims. Freedom of speech my ass, youre the one attempting to eliminate a part of that freedom.

2nd, I am very open minded, and my views on what is a good reason have nothing to do with my beliefs. If you had attempted to rationalize your thought process I would have accepted that, I may have attacked lame views, but I would have accepted them as your point of view.

3rd, it is a symbol of our country, fine. But our country, and not just the last few politicians, has done some terrible things throughout history, it is not unassailable and beyond verbal attack. But the point of flag burning is to send a message to the entire country. They don't burn a Bush sticker because there are 1000's of Bush's waiting in the wings. There is no other way to send a big "fuck you" to America, not that is within their capacity. And for American citizens doing it, it is just a stupid protest symbol. But we don't put Amendments on stupidity. You can't demand and legislate respect or morality. The government is here to help us, and to make sure that we aren't harmed. Flag burning harms nobody, get used to that fact.


4th, it is completely about getting another Republican elected, and saving Bush's ratings. Its using patriotism to rally the masses, to save face, and it is working.

So, in conclusion, X-ray, I never claimed any of my thoughts were original, jackass, and I didn't get anything I have said from any of my professors. I have never had a teacher mention the flag, Bush, or anything else trying to score liberal points. The only reason people like you harp on that liberal education bullshit is because you are insecure about your own lack of education. I don't know if this is true about you, you may have a great education, but generally speaking I have found this to be a great truth.

Good day X-ray.

[pussyface]

But you would impose yours and others will on me by burning the flag.
Not allowing Christian displays on the court house square. Why, because
it might offend others. Give me a break.
.

I dont know who you think your talking to, but I am consistent in my stances, unlike you. There is no part of me, according to the libertarian worldview I have put forth, that wants to impose my will on you.

"Political Philosopher I'm not. Never professed to be. A person who will
express my views I am. " -you


It's all well and good that you just want to give your opinions and not strive to rise to the level of philosophy. Statements like these make it clear you aren't interested in debate, learning, or developing consistent principals. At the end of the day, any idiot can spout off whatever incoherent bullshit they want and just fall back on "hey, only my opinion, sorry, thought i was alowed to have one." Carry on.

[pussyface]

Another thing that is dismaying about the way you post is that you import experts from academia to intellectualize your conservatism by posting their articles in threads, but aren't willing to stand on your own intellectual two feet.

often, you post from a credible academic source, and then just say "see! who wants to argue with that? huh? not me, thats for sure" You add nothing and don't appear to be equiped to deal with the contradictory points people raise.

you consistently arent up to the challenge of intellectual debate, even when you instigate it yourself. then, its a one way train to HeyItsJustMyOpinionville

[xrayzebra]

^^My goodness I am surrounded by pseudo-intellects. I give up.
Going back to my golf and let you two burn our flag.

Phil is in trouble and Furyk cant get over the hump. Ah, the
freedom of youth and being bullet proof. Been there and done that too.

Been nice exchanging our thoughts.

[pussyface]

"My goodness I am surrounded by pseudo-intellects. I give up.
Going back to my golf and let you two burn our flag."--you

hehe...when things take a turn for the worse in a debate and your taking the conventional conservative opinion, you can always fall back on calling those who expose you "psuedointellectuals."

okay, man. ...weak

[pussyface]

this guy xray doesnt want anyone to be legally allowed to burn a flag because he is opposed to it personally.

if you disagree with him, you are either antiamerican, a communist, or trying in vain to be intellectual.

Also, disagreeing with him wanting to impose his will on all of America because of what the flag means to him on a personal level means that you yourself want to burn the flag in your free time.

[pussyface]

Somehow, I am not surprised that you are heading to the golf course of all places. Keep living that life of Reilly. You typically have to have some money to hold beliefs as insular as yours, or to have the time to sit around obsessing over things like worrying about others burning a symbol.

saying nothing about your particular political beliefs, i'll agree that the golf course appears to be a far more appropriate venue for you than a public debate.

[xrayzebra]

Somehow, I am not surprised that you are heading to the golf course of all places. Keep living that life of Reilly. You typically have to have some money to hold beliefs as insular as yours, or to have the time to sit around obsessing over things like worrying about others burning a symbol.

saying nothing about your particular political beliefs, i'll agree that the golf course appears to be a far more appropriate venue for you than a public debate.

My, why am I not surprised that you envy someone who has made a
modest success of their life. Why am I not surprised that you think
I have never known what it was like to be really broke. I suppose
I could tell you how to make a success and have a little money, but
you again would make fun of that also. Time and experience does that.
It teaches one.

My political beliefs are based on time and experience. You can only
help those that want help. Freedom of expression is just that. An
expression. The only ones that are impressed, unfortunately are
politicians. But only in this day and age. In pass times it didn't work
that way. A minority is just that a minority. And don't try playing the
race card. I am not talking about that. I am talking about a small
group of people who want to be heard and do outlandish things to
get the attention of the media and politicians. Except now days and
in the past it is working less and less.

Ever heard of backlash? People get tired of crap.

You and turambar85 are wrong, you know you are wrong and that
is your problem. Not mine.

By the way Furyk got over the hump and is doing great now. Good
tournament. You ought to watch it. It is a game where you are
responsible for what you do. Cant blame anyone. :angel

[xrayzebra]

Okay, golf is over. And guess what, the winner is the loser. Yeah, you
more than likely cant figure that out. Well Mickelson was leading all the way
and lost it, yeah, he lost it, no one took away from him. The winner was
an Aussie. Ogilvey. He won it, because he stayed the course.

Like some on this board. You more than likely will be losers in life while those
who stay the course, remain true to tried and true principles, will be the
winners.

But that is life. I'm a winner. I know because I have been there, done that
and know the rules of life.

[pussyface]

oh my god what are you talking about?
you are one crazy son of a bitch.

thanks for imparting your considerable wisdom on me. I for one give you full credit for "staying the course" with your desire to impose your will on everyone, equally.

[Guru of Nothing]

But that is life. I'm a winner. I know because I have been there, done that and know the rules of life.

And doggonit, people like you!

[xrayzebra]

Happy you finally saw the light. And I am not a SOB, my Mother was a fine
lady. But you may have had a different childhood.

Like I said. I am a winner. You still have a chance to be one.

And by the way you claim to be a libertarian, you aren't, but no matter. Those
that claim to be should remember something. Laws are suppose to be the
rules of living together. Without rules you have nothing.

[pussyface]

And by the way you claim to be a libertarian, you aren't, but no matter. Those
that claim to be should remember something. Laws are suppose to be the
rules of living together. Without rules you have nothing.


Okay xray. Explain.

[pussyface]

Do you even know what libertarianism is?
Its not the same as the redneck conservatism you embrace.

[xrayzebra]

No explanation necessary. Just go back and read your own post. Explains it
all.

[pussyface]

oh you mean where i advocated for libertarian principles like leaving consenting adults to make their own decisions so long as they do not infrindge on the freedoms of others? actually, that doesnt really explain your claim.

there is no such thing as a libertarian that is for an amendment making it illegal to burn the flag.

[pussyface]

...that would be like "libertarians against gay marriage."
or "libertarians for the invasion of Iraq!"

Again, you don't know what libertarianism is, but if you are interested in learning I suggest a book called Atlas Shrugged. Its a classic and a cornerstone of libertarian philosophy. It has a lot of pages though...and no pictures.

[pussyface]

Now that I think of it though, don't bother checking out the book.
You are already a self-proclaimed winner in life. Its clear you pretty much have all the answers.

[pussyface]

here is one of my previous posts:
"if you dont like burning the flag, you may respond by not burning the flag. other people must be allowed to do things you don't like when those things have no tangible negative impact on you and do not affect your ability to live freely. otherwise, you don't have a free society. everyone suffers.

having a land where no one is allowed to burn a flag because of the ideals it symbolizes to some is in many ways no better than having a land where all people are required to burn flags involuntarily. Leaving consenting adults alone to determine the course of their own behavior is the overriding principal that we need to respect here."

Your right, that totally contradicts libertarianism.

[Guru of Nothing]

And by the way you claim to be a libertarian, you aren't, but no matter. Those that claim to be should remember something. Laws are suppose to be the rules of living together. Without rules you have nothing.

George Bush laughs in your face.

[Guru of Nothing]

And by the way you claim to be a libertarian, you aren't, but no matter.

I voted Libertarian last election. Is that not enough?

[turambar85]

You and turambar85 are wrong, you know you are wrong and that
is your problem. Not mine.


Ok, Mr. Winner, why are we wrong? It takes some kind of man to sit on the sidelines and call the shots, but once in a while you gotta jump into the fray and explain you calls. Tell me why I am wrong, and I will admit that you are the great winner, since you have obvious confidence issues.

Also, why is he not libertarian?? Its called Wikipedia, it will answer your questions about things you don't understand.

And for Gods sake, answer and refute a post for once, that generic bullshit won't cut it here in the kitchen X-ray.

[fyatuk]

Okay, golf is over. And guess what, the winner is the loser. Yeah, you
more than likely cant figure that out. Well Mickelson was leading all the way
and lost it, yeah, he lost it, no one took away from him. The winner was
an Aussie. Ogilvey. He won it, because he stayed the course.

Like some on this board. You more than likely will be losers in life while those
who stay the course, remain true to tried and true principles, will be the
winners.

But that is life. I'm a winner. I know because I have been there, done that
and know the rules of life.

Society cannot evolve if everyone "stays the course". It will stagnate and die without inspiration, without exploration.

Most "winners" in life are those who have bucked the trend. Who stepped off the path before them and tred a new course.

The US itself refused to "stay the course" repeatedly, and usually ended up better off.

But that'd be just another pointless discussion, seeing as how this has basically turned into a back and forth competition of insults, back-handed or otherwise.

The only other comment I have is that just because someone's principles do not match yours, it does not mean they are not "tried and true" principles. In life there is no black and white, and there are ALWAYS multiple answers.

[FromWayDowntown]

There's no better way to defeat a well-reasoned argument than to throw out a bunch of a.m. radio cliches that have become the mantra for many who have recently adopted "conservatism" in its mass media form.

[turambar85]

God, how it kills me inside.

I don't sit around here all day posting just to beat a dead horse. I would like an opponent who actually will give me a good solid debate, and clowns like X-ray just spout mindless gibberish, ignoring any attempt at backing their claims with actual reasons...however weak they may be.

[xrayzebra]

My O my, do I detect some frustration in these post?

Hey remember this is a political forum. Not a debating society. You make your
statements and take your lumps. You want philosophie, go talk to someone else.

You want justification, forget it. I don't need to justify anything to anyone here
on this forum. I state what I believe with no regrets.

fyatuk, you are so full of it, it must be coming out both ears as well as your mouth. You have
idea of what you speak. I guess you think our constitution is also a "living"
document.

Now all of you have a good day, you hear. I have some important stuff to
do today and haven't got time to play with you. Maybe catch you on the
flip side this afternoon.

[pussyface]

...you couldn't even spell the word "philosophie"

[RandomGuy]

How can you legally coerce respect?

Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, and others knew how, so I guess we are learning something from them... :rolleyes

[turambar85]

X-ray, this is all I want for my wedding gift. Debate the flag-burning issue with me, alone. You and me will have a fun little debate in this forum whenever you choose. The ball is in your court.

Its' bad luck to refuse a grooms-to-be's only gift request!

[fyatuk]

fyatuk, you are so full of it, it must be coming out both ears as well as your mouth. You have
idea of what you speak. I guess you think our constitution is also a "living"
document.


Actually, I make a lot more sense than you.

And no, I don't think our Constitution is a "living document". Whether it was in the past or not, the Constution was murdered in the mid 1800's. Half our federal laws are unconstitutional. It's disgusting.

I rather see a government of strict Constitutionalism than this crap we have now. That's why I don't have a problem with flag burning.

[xrayzebra]

Gee fyatuk if your not careful you are going to hurt my feelings.

No problem with flag burning. Hmmmm, wonder why. No other way to express yourself
except show your disrespect for your country I guess.

[ChumpDumper]

Coerced respect is no respect at all.

[DarkReign]

Coerced respect is no respect at all.

Tell that to the fallen heroes who died for this country.

[ChumpDumper]

I respect them. Not little pieces of cloth made in communist China.

And no one had to pass an Amendment to force me to respect them.

[turambar85]

Tell that to the fallen heroes who died for this country.

??? :wtf

[xrayzebra]

Tell it to the two that died today in Iraq after being gutted by the terrorist thugs.
Ask them if it is okay to burn the flag. Oh, I am so absolutely disgusted with some
on this forum today.

[turambar85]

Tell it to the two that died today in Iraq after being gutted by the terrorist thugs.
Ask them if it is okay to burn the flag. Oh, I am so absolutely disgusted with some
on this forum today.

Do I get my wedding present, X-ray?

[turambar85]

It doesn't matter who thinks it is ok to burn the flag, this is completely irrelevant. You could also say "Ask them if it is ok to protest the war in Iraq?" Well, they wouldn't like that either, but it is, and should be, legal.

[xrayzebra]

Do I get my wedding present, X-ray?

You might if I knew where to send it.

[xrayzebra]

It doesn't matter who thinks it is ok to burn the flag, this is completely irrelevant. You could also say "Ask them if it is ok to protest the war in Iraq?" Well, they wouldn't like that either, but it is, and should be, legal.


Yeah, it was okay to demonstrate about VN too. And look where it got us,
and what it got us. Kerry. A real VN vertran. And Clinton who
demonstrated against his own country in another country. Oh, so really
big winners.

[turambar85]

I suppose you didn't see what I had asked for. A fun little 1-1 debate. A real debate.

[turambar85]

Yeah, it was okay to demonstrate about VN too. And look where it got us,
and what it got us. Kerry. A real VN vertran. And Clinton who
demonstrated against his own country in another country. Oh, so really
big winners.


Fine, think that you will about the merits of protesting, but see that it can be considered bad and not be illegal....much like flag-burning.

[DarkReign]

The elusive blue text strikes again....

chumps.

[fyatuk]

Gee fyatuk if your not careful you are going to hurt my feelings.

No problem with flag burning. Hmmmm, wonder why. No other way to express yourself
except show your disrespect for your country I guess.

See, there's a difference between thinking it an acceptable form of protest and being willing to do it. I have never considered burning a flag other than a retirement ceremony. I have no problem with others doing it.

I have to admit though, I would be willing the burn the current flag if I saw something I wanted to protest, NOT because I can't express myself in other ways, but because it garners a forum in which you can express yourself to a wider audience.

I would never even consider burning the original US flag though. I respect that government.

[xrayzebra]

See, there's a difference between thinking it an acceptable form of protest and being willing to do it. I have never considered burning a flag other than a retirement ceremony. I have no problem with others doing it.

I have to admit though, I would be willing the burn the current flag if I saw something I wanted to protest, NOT because I can't express myself in other ways, but because it garners a forum in which you can express yourself to a wider audience.

I would never even consider burning the original US flag though. I respect that government.


Whoooopeee. Gather a forum. Now what do you think you have here.
How about a nice little band. Or fireworks. Or a nice bbq. Or a pie eating
contest. NO, just call the local media tell them I am going to burn a
flag, want to come film it. But you gotta be careful of the timing. They
have deadlines.

[fyatuk]

Whoooopeee. Gather a forum. Now what do you think you have here.
How about a nice little band. Or fireworks. Or a nice bbq. Or a pie eating
contest. NO, just call the local media tell them I am going to burn a
flag, want to come film it. But you gotta be careful of the timing. They
have deadlines.

What do you not get about that idea? Burn a flag within site of the Capitol or White House and you will immediately have millions of people listening to what you have to say, and not just listening. They will actually WANT to know what you have to say.

It's low cost and much more effective than anything else you can do. Now granted it loses its power if it is used often, but that hasn't been a problem.

We have the right to peacefully assemble to protest. We have the right to Freedom of Speech (and expression by extension). We have the right to protest the government to institute change, or even peacefully work to overthrow the government (see Declaration of Independence). Burning a flag falls under each and every one of those. Each of them is one of those ideals the flag stands for. I honestly can't even understand why its even a contention.

[xrayzebra]

What do you not get about that idea? Burn a flag within site of the Capitol or White House and you will immediately have millions of people listening to what you have to say, and not just listening. They will actually WANT to know what you have to say.

It's low cost and much more effective than anything else you can do. Now granted it loses its power if it is used often, but that hasn't been a problem.

We have the right to peacefully assemble to protest. We have the right to Freedom of Speech (and expression by extension). We have the right to protest the government to institute change, or even peacefully work to overthrow the government (see Declaration of Independence). Burning a flag falls under each and every one of those. Each of them is one of those ideals the flag stands for. I honestly can't even understand why its even a contention.

You also have the right to have your butt kicked up to where you have
to unbottom you collar to do a number 2. No offense, just an observation.
Others have rights too.

[ChumpDumper]

You also have the right to have your butt kicked up to where you have
to unbottom you collar to do a number 2.Actually , there are laws against that. Of course, being a law and order type, you would want the perpetrators of the assault to be pusnished to the fullest extent of the law.

[fyatuk]

Others have rights too.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for making my point.

[boutons_]

Repugs Waving The Flag!

http://www.uclick.com/feature/06/06/30/tt060630.gif


.


No More Flag Burning

http://www.uclick.com/feature/06/06/30/gm060630.gif




http://www.uclick.com/feature/06/06/30/wpnan060630.gif

[xrayzebra]

Well hope you all have a happy 4th of July. I invite you to visit the site below.
Enjoy.

http://www.llerrah.com/raggedflag.htm

[sabar]

Wow, it's amazing how many people so blindly cling to the ideals of the far right and left. Do some of you even read your posts and really look at what you believe? George Washington had the right idea with not wanting political parties.

You know, there is actually a MIDDLE in the political spectrum. Where you aren't some radical whacko that can't even think for themselves.

At least progressives and libertarians are much more moderate. This "repug lolol neocon sucks" and "libs suck lol dimocrap lol" thing is getting real old.

Onto the issue, if you support an amendment to outlaw flag burning, you are un-american. No ifs ands or buts about it. Some people need to spend less time listening to political pundits and the far left and right and more time in say, an american government class or politics course. I guarantee that people like TJ and Washington would never support an anti-flag burning amendment. This isn't the USSR circa 1950. This isn't the 1760's under a tyrant-king where you can limit anyone's freedom.

Honestly, where do people get their silly ideas? Go read the damn constitution before you start spouting off about how flag burning must be outlawed. Just like the gun control fanatics. What's next, an amendment to prohibit anti-government speech in all formats? Are we living in communist china?

[Clandestino]

Wow, it's amazing how many people so blindly cling to the ideals of the far right and left. Do some of you even read your posts and really look at what you believe? George Washington had the right idea with not wanting political parties.

You know, there is actually a MIDDLE in the political spectrum. Where you aren't some radical whacko that can't even think for themselves.

At least progressives and libertarians are much more moderate. This "repug lolol neocon sucks" and "libs suck lol dimocrap lol" thing is getting real old.

Onto the issue, if you support an amendment to outlaw flag burning, you are un-american. No ifs ands or buts about it. Some people need to spend less time listening to political pundits and the far left and right and more time in say, an american government class or politics course. I guarantee that people like TJ and Washington would never support an anti-flag burning amendment. This isn't the USSR circa 1950. This isn't the 1760's under a tyrant-king where you can limit anyone's freedom.

Honestly, where do people get their silly ideas? Go read the damn constitution before you start spouting off about how flag burning must be outlawed. Just like the gun control fanatics. What's next, an amendment to prohibit anti-government speech in all formats? Are we living in communist china?

stfu about reading the constitution... "our" forefathers had slaves and all kinds of shit going on... things evolve as time goes by so should we...

[Clandestino]

What do you not get about that idea? Burn a flag within site of the Capitol or White House and you will immediately have millions of people listening to what you have to say, and not just listening. They will actually WANT to know what you have to say.

It's low cost and much more effective than anything else you can do. Now granted it loses its power if it is used often, but that hasn't been a problem.

We have the right to peacefully assemble to protest. We have the right to Freedom of Speech (and expression by extension). We have the right to protest the government to institute change, or even peacefully work to overthrow the government (see Declaration of Independence). Burning a flag falls under each and every one of those. Each of them is one of those ideals the flag stands for. I honestly can't even understand why its even a contention.

if you have to burn a flag to get people to listen to you then you probably don't anything worth a fuck to listen to anyway...

[xrayzebra]

Wow, it's amazing how many people so blindly cling to the ideals of the far right and left. Do some of you even read your posts and really look at what you believe? George Washington had the right idea with not wanting political parties.

You know, there is actually a MIDDLE in the political spectrum. Where you aren't some radical whacko that can't even think for themselves.

At least progressives and libertarians are much more moderate. This "repug lolol neocon sucks" and "libs suck lol dimocrap lol" thing is getting real old.

Onto the issue, if you support an amendment to outlaw flag burning, you are un-american. No ifs ands or buts about it. Some people need to spend less time listening to political pundits and the far left and right and more time in say, an american government class or politics course. I guarantee that people like TJ and Washington would never support an anti-flag burning amendment. This isn't the USSR circa 1950. This isn't the 1760's under a tyrant-king where you can limit anyone's freedom.

Honestly, where do people get their silly ideas? Go read the damn constitution before you start spouting off about how flag burning must be outlawed. Just like the gun control fanatics. What's next, an amendment to prohibit anti-government speech in all formats? Are we living in communist china?


Well Mr. sabar, I hate to burst your bubble. But if the amendment had
passed and been ratified by the states, it would have been part of the
Constitution of which you want everyone to read. Maybe you should
re-read it and see that the very steps as outlined in the Constitution
were being followed. And no fear, you can still burn the flag, without
fear of retribution from the authorities. Although, you may have a little
problem with those who witness such an event.

Now, middle of the road are you? Guess you don't take a stand on much
of anything then. Not surprising.

Those of us here that do, whether it be left or right, have our views
we express them. That too is our right. To take a stand, thank you
very much.

Now you have a really good Fourth of July and remember those who have
fought so you can be a middle of the road type. You hear!

[boutons_]

"if you have to burn a flag"

When was the last flag burned in the USA, that ANYbody noticed? Early 1970s?

The gay marriage amendment (will NEVER happen),

the flag-burning amendment (will NEVER happen),

the Miami-7-jokers entrapped by FBI al-cracka,

the attack on NYT publishing 4-year old "news" the WH itself flouted in 2002

... are all smoke-and-mirrors diversionary tactics to divert attention from the 100% Repug disaster in Iraq.

The Repugs have NO record of governing, of any successes, to run on, so it's bullshit, fear, "national security", all-9/11-all-the-time, inflammatory, divisive, polarizing issues, repeated diversions from real issues of govt and from real problems, the #1 being Iraq.

But Rove understands the somnolent, ignorant, dont-bother-me American sheeple are easily diverted, the American rabble easily roused (but much harder to enlist for Repug phony war), and negative campaigning and Swift-boat personal destruction works because of the sheeple it's aimed at.

R E P U G N A N T

[xrayzebra]

Then boutons, you have nothing to worry about. So why are you pointing out
all these flaws. And degrading the American people as "somnolent, ignorant, dont-
bother-me American Sheeple"

Why do you bother about the American people, are you not one of them? Maybe
you aren't.

[Clandestino]

we have an extremely low capital gains rate and the lowest taxes in history... those are great... in the 80s taxes the highest tax bracket was 70%... can you imagine that???

[FromWayDowntown]

Now, middle of the road are you? Guess you don't take a stand on much
of anything then. Not surprising.

Those of us here that do, whether it be left or right, have our views
we express them. That too is our right. To take a stand, thank you
very much.

Fascinating that only those who are on the extremes of the political spectrum "take a stand" for anything. What an utter load of crap. I could believe half of what the extremist conservatives say and half of what the extremist liberals say and in professing that viewpoint, I too would have taken a stand.

The notion that buying into the lowest common denominator approach taken by the political parties is somehow "taking a stand" for anything is patently ridiculous. I'd hazard a guess that the rank-and-file on the right and left wait to hear what they're supposed to think on really tough issues before "taking a stand" on one side or the other.

Certainly, it's anyone's right to allow a political party to dictate the stand that he takes, but it's equally my right to challenge the problematic nature of one-size-fits-all policies.

[George Gervin's Afro]

the funniest thing about this ridiculous debate is that how many flag burnings occur annually?...probably less than you can count on one hand but the GOP needs meat to throw to the mindless one's... it will be a long year for gay flag burners.. those psuedo christians will support fucking with our constitution at any cost.. or a couple of extra votes..and we must all remember democrats :rolleyes will do anything for their power back

[xrayzebra]

Fascinating that only those who are on the extremes of the political spectrum "take a stand" for anything. What an utter load of crap. I could believe half of what the extremist conservatives say and half of what the extremist liberals say and in professing that viewpoint, I too would have taken a stand.

The notion that buying into the lowest common denominator approach taken by the political parties is somehow "taking a stand" for anything is patently ridiculous. I'd hazard a guess that the rank-and-file on the right and left wait to hear what they're supposed to think on really tough issues before "taking a stand" on one side or the other.

Certainly, it's anyone's right to allow a political party to dictate the stand that he takes, but it's equally my right to challenge the problematic nature of one-size-fits-all policies.


And your stand on anything is?

[xrayzebra]

the funniest thing about this ridiculous debate is that how many flag burnings occur annually?...probably less than you can count on one hand but the GOP needs meat to throw to the mindless one's... it will be a long year for gay flag burners.. those psuedo christians will support fucking with our constitution at any cost.. or a couple of extra votes..and we must all remember democrats :rolleyes will do anything for their power back

Okay, lets look at it another way. Flag burning is a hazard to my health. Now
you cant smoke in public most places now days.

Most flags are made from man made material. Burning most man made
materials can cause cancel by inhaling the smoke. Now should we ban
burning of the flags to protect the health of the public? You know like
second hand smoke.

I think I may just contact my elected representatives and ask them
that question.

Now I just know you support the no smoking ban, don't you?

[ChumpDumper]

Ok, no flag burning in hospitals, bars and restaurants.

I guess minors can't buy flags then either.

[xrayzebra]

^^They can buy them, just not burn them where others can inhale the smoke. In
the privacy of their homes I guess it would be okay to burn them.

But not at Nelson Stadium, and outdoor facility I would like to point out. Or at most
public gatherings. Especially if you draw a crowd and children are present.

[ChumpDumper]

So you are for flag burning.

Understood.

[FromWayDowntown]

And your stand on anything is?

Usually quite different than yours.

[xrayzebra]

So you are for flag burning.

Understood.


As usual, the chump got it wrong. :lol

[xrayzebra]

Usually quite different than yours.

And the otherside. Because you are in the middle. Right. Ooops, Left.
Oh, nevermind! You have an openended mind.
:lol

[ChumpDumper]

As usual, the chump got it wrong. :lol
I guess it would be okay to burn them.