• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Flag-burning amendment

Ladewig

I lost an avatar bet.
Ladewig
Joined
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
28,828
ACLU story
WASHINGTON - The Senate Judiciary Committee today once again approved a proposed constitutional amendment to ban desecration of the flag, setting up yet another vote on this misguided measure that would write censorship into the U.S. Constitution.
Click to expand...

I don't recall any flag burnings in the past several weeks or several months or even years. I wonder why this bill made it out of committee today?


----------------------

Perhaps George M. Cohan said it best, "Many a bum show has been saved by the flag."
 
Because it's politically convenient. Just like the gay marriage amendment, it has no hope of drawing enough support to actually pass, but it's a very effective technique in drawing attention away from other matters and onto an issue that you can score a few points with.

Every move made is done with the coming election in mind. These are two issues that are highly controversial, though both have a slight but noticeable majority in favor of the conservative side. Using these issues, the Republican-controlled Senate can encourage more "too liberal/out of the mainstream" talking points. It's a shrewd move.
 
Exactly. Rally the rubes.

I'm not sure how any minimally sane, non-retarded person could earnestly support this amendment. Since this forum has a high percentage of posters not from the U.S., perhaps they can tell us if their government places any restrictions on this type of speech. Are you allowed to burn your country's flag?
 
I'm strongly against the amendment.

I understand the desire to stop flag burning. Many who support the amendment feel that the flag is one thing that should be protected against desecration. Some would argue that it symbolizes those who died to make us free. While I find it disgusting that anyone would burn a flag I would argue that allowing such morons to burn the flag only proves them wrong. We are a country that protects dissent even if it is the worst kind of dissent.

As for why now? I really don't know. It might well be a political move. Damn, politicians playing politics. Who would have thought it?
 
They bring this bill up just about every year and every year it gets shot down. I think this has become some sort of symbolic annual event.

It could be worse, they could be proposing new legislation that actually stands a chance of becoming law.
 
Cain said:
Since this forum has a high percentage of posters not from the U.S., perhaps they can tell us if their government places any restrictions on this type of speech. Are you allowed to burn your country's flag?
Click to expand...
I read somewhere that because your head of state is ephemeral, the flag assumes an imporant position w.r.t. national identity one which is filled by the royal family in a monachy.

We in the U.K. are actively discouraged from setting fire to members of the royal family (especially since Fergie is no longer part of that family) :)
 
Cain said:
Since this forum has a high percentage of posters not from the U.S., perhaps they can tell us if their government places any restrictions on this type of speech. Are you allowed to burn your country's flag?
Click to expand...
We are indeed.
But oddly enough we're not allowed to publically burn the flags of other nations. I have no idea what the rationale behind that law was.
 
The Don said:
We in the U.K. are actively discouraged from setting fire to members of the royal family (especially since Fergie is no longer part of that family) :)
Click to expand...
Although I'm sure that the Queen wouldn't mind too much if someone beat the cr@p out of Edward! ;)
 
I can give you all partial credit. The answer I was looking for was the 9/11 commission report is scheduled to be released about 24 hours from now. Given that the last vote on such a measure was in 2000, how can anyone doubt that this move is designed to be a distraction. Part of the stupidity of the measure lies in that when it is not being discussed, virtually no one burns a flag, but if the amendment came close to passing, many people would burn flags.
 
RandFan said:
While I find it disgusting that anyone would burn a flag I would argue that allowing such morons to burn the flag only proves them wrong.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

…and conversely, if they pass the amendment, I think it would prove them right. Protecting the symbol of freedom by taking away the freedom it represents, etc.
 
Ladewig said:
I don't recall any flag burnings in the past several weeks or several months or even years. I wonder why this bill made it out of committee today?

Click to expand...


heh, this is one of the arguments I made to my senator last week in front of the marriage amendment. 10 - 15 years ago, everyone was up in arms about flag burning. Today it is pretty much not an issue. I basically said don't overreact to the outrage de jure. Give it 20 years and then let's see how much "damage" has been done.
 
Nasarius said:
Because it's politically convenient. Just like the gay marriage amendment, it has no hope of drawing enough support to actually pass, but it's a very effective technique in drawing attention away from other matters and onto an issue that you can score a few points with.

Every move made is done with the coming election in mind. These are two issues that are highly controversial, though both have a slight but noticeable majority in favor of the conservative side. Using these issues, the Republican-controlled Senate can encourage more "too liberal/out of the mainstream" talking points. It's a shrewd move.
Click to expand...
Amen brother.

I saw a political cartoon a few weeks back that showed Dubya with the Iraqi war fighting over one shoulder and him pointing to a gay couple in the other direction and saying "look, gay marriage!"

Charlie (not Adam and Steve, Adam and Stephen) Monoxide
 
Forgive me if I am wrong...

...but isn't a burning flag, one that has already been desecrated???

I mean, isn't it military tradition that flags that have touched the ground, be burned?

I heard several military guys bitching about the parade around the 9-11 WTC flag. They thought the flag should have been burned, after it suffered that kind of damage. "Why would you have pomp and ceremony around proof of your vulnerability?"

A 'properly' presented flag is without tear, clean, and colors of a vibrant nature. Torn, faded, or soiled flags are to be properly destroyed. i.e. Burned

How could you make an Amendment that would disrupt this process?
 
Yikes. I just read the "Flag Protection Act of 2004" (congressional bill S. 2259).

The scariest part is the $250,000 fine/2-year sentence to anyone who steals a flag from federal property and then destroys the flag.

The good news is that many protestors will not be prosecuted because the law applies only to people "who destroy or damage a flag of the United States with the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace." If you're just trying to make a political statement and not incite violence, then the law cannot be applied to you - unless one of those damnable activist judges decides all flag burning is an incitement of violence.

Don't these Senators have something better to do?
 
Who's ever burned a flag primarily intending to incite violence or a breach of peace? Sounds like weasel words to me. Tell the ignorant masses we've banned flag buring, but ban nothing.
 
I think anyone who burns the flag of the country in which they live, ESPECIALLY the United States, is a douche.

That said, they have the right to do so, just as much as I have the right to give them the finger for doing so.
 
I can envision only one scenario that would motivate me to burn the flag... passage of the flag burning amendment.
 
varwoche said:
I can envision only one scenario that would motivate me to burn the flag... passage of the flag burning amendment.
Click to expand...

If the amendment was to pass I would make it my morning ritual to burn a flag.
 
Michael Redman said:
Who's ever burned a flag primarily intending to incite violence or a breach of peace? Sounds like weasel words to me. Tell the ignorant masses we've banned flag buring, but ban nothing.
Click to expand...
One of the reasons for the "weasel words" might be that the US flag is everywhere, and we've all probably descrated it at one time or another, at least in the view of some of the pinheads behind amendments of this sort.

Just the other day, I received a letter with a first-class stamp on it, bearing a picture of the US flag. I ripped the envelope, and in the process, ripped the picture of the flag! Desecration!

And then I got this stupid sticker from some junk mail marketer, with a picture of a US flag on it. I threw the sticker in the garbage, next to some icky-poo rotting banana peels. Desecration!

And then I got this newspaper, which included a commercial for a product that was "Proudly made in America!", and to prove it, the ad showed a picture of a US flag. I tossed the newspaper into the recycling bin, where it will be shredded in an undignified manner and maybe even turned into toilet paper. Desecration!

Some of the earlier proposed amendments did not take into account the effect of the desecration on other people, whether it urged them to commit violence or a breach of peace. Also, no distinction was made between a real flag, a picture of a flag, and an item that was supposed to represent a flag (such as a bed sheet painted with the wrong number of stripes or stars).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom