View Full Version : Flag burning...
This should ruffle some feathers. Any one out there support this (fascist) amendment being debated?
------------------
You want to go one on one with The Great One?
I think it's the most offencive and therefore the best (to get noticed).
It's also used very much to get people worked up into a kind of mass histeria which is the tool of dictators..
So therefore I vote NO!!
------------------
Thor
I don't. I think trading away a chunk of our freedom of speech simply to protect the sensabilities of some aging veterans is a mistake.
I think burning the flag is an offensive and rather juvinile form of protest, but like prayer (This can's already been opened) it does nobody any physical harm.
I care deeply about what the flag represents, but for cryin' out loud, it's a piece of cloth, people. I'm a little too strong to be moved by the incineration of a colored rag. It tickles me to see protesters in foreign countries burning our flag, as long as they bought it from us. We might even want to think about exporting them pre-soaked in kerosene for a slightly higher price.
Why isn't burning somebody in effigy more of an issue? IMHO, it's just symbolic expression either way.
The flag is a perfect example of confusing the idea with the symbol. Soldiers say they fought for the flag. No, you didn't; you fought for what the flag stands for. If you're foolish enough to fight and die for an object, then you're a tool.
If there were no flags, does that mean that there would be no countries? If I had a flag, would that make me a country?
The push for this amendment seems like a colossal waste of time and money to me. How often does it happen (burning a flag) that we need an amendment to put a stop to it?
BTW, when I was a kid, they taught us that if the flag touched the ground, it was therefore desecrated and must be destroyed! And the only proper way to dispose of the flag was to burn it.
What flag, what country? The Ireland flag? I think you can burn that in the US.
If you go anywhere in the world, no matter how tyrranous the government, no one is going to stop you from waving a flag in SUPPORT of the status quo. The fact that people who hate and despise what this country stands are allowed to burn the Stars and Stripes in protest is what makes this country great.
------------------
"Interested in fashion, Harmonica?"
"There were three dusters like these waiting for a train.
Inside the dusters were three men. Inside the men were
three bullets..."
--Once Upon A Time In The West
Picture some guy standing there all alone burning a flag, and nobody paying him any mind.
Of all the reasons to go messin' with the Constitution, this one ain't.
Peace,
mangeorge
------------------
"If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything" Mark Twain 1894
Actually, the proposed amendment is against desecration of the flag.
1. define desecration.
2. define flag.
------------------
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter Thompson
When taking down the flag at school as a kid, we were told if the flag touched the ground it would have to be burned. The flag had to be folded in a certain way too, or it was ruined. The sun could not set on a raised flag. A flag could not be rained on. A flag that was wore out had to be burned, no other disposal was acceptable. I think this was redicules 50's 60's McCarthism paranoia. Now places leave flags up 24 hours a day reguardless of the weather, and many are ripped and faded. I'll bet when most places get rid of these flags it's without a burning and ceramony. One extreme to the other. I personally wouldn't burn a flag in demonstration, but find passing a law against it another manical on our freedoms.
When I first heard that it's alright to burn a flag as long as it's in protest of something, I was very upset. So I protested that right by burning some flags.
------------------
I don't know who first said "everyone's a critic," but I think it's a really stupid saying.
The rules on flag maintenance must have lightened up in past decades. I was told by a reliable source (a Marine) that flags could be cleaned if dirty. It's only when they become stained or torn beyond repair that they should be destroyed. The correct disposal is burning, but during a "dignified" ceremony. If you need to get rid of an old US flag, the local chapter of the VFW will take it off your hands.
I don't think the strict rules regarding handling and displaying the flag are a product of McCarthyism. I think they are far older than that (from the inception of the country, in fact) and the correlation that people were supposed to draw is that the degree of respect with which you treat the flag indicates the degree of respect you accord to the country. Since the country is your own (our own), then you would treat the symbol of the country (the flag) with the maximum amount of deference and respect -- never letting it touch the ground, etc. And if you disrespect the flag, you are symbolically disrespecting the country. The irony of the proposed amendment is, of course, that this is precisely the country a person should feel most free to disagree with, or even disrespect. So those who support this amendment are in fact attacking one on the central tenets of freedom which makes this country what it is. As you probably can tell, I think the proposed amendment is an amazingly bad idea.
Here's a bit of wordplay:
If we love our country, we must love the thing it's made of: dirt. So why would touching the flag to the sacred dirt of our country be a bad thing? I would think we would want to rub the flag into the ground every chance we got.
I love my country. I love the strengths that make it great. I love the freedoms that we enjoy. I love our liberties that are unique in all the world. And as the symbol of all the greatness that is America, I also love our flag.
Thats why I burn one every Fourth of July.
On the anniversary of our independence, on a day that marked an irrevocable break with despotism, I can think of no greater way to show my love for this country and all the freedoms it bestows and defends than by burning its very symbol.
Think about it: in almost no other country in the world could you do such a thing without being tossed in jail. Our liberty to burn the very symbol of America is something that makes our country so special to me, and is one reason I love it so much.
The day that burning a flag is constitutionally prohibited is the day that America decides it will pay only lip service to a noble idea. It is the day that America decides true freedom is a passing, frivolous thing, not worthy of vigorous support and defense. The day that America prohibits the burning of its flag is the day that will mark the beginning of a slow, insidious erosion of the freedoms I hold so dear.
Forgive me for waxing poetic, but you can tell I feel strongly about this.
<PRE>
********
********
********
********
</PRE>
------------------
~ Complacency is far more dangerous than outrage
I hate ASCII art. Sorry my flag got screwed up.
------------------
~ Complacency is far more dangerous than outrage
STARK says:
I can think of no greater way to show my love for this country and all the freedoms it bestows and defends than by burning its very symbol.
Well, whatever floats your boat, I guess. But I don't see how burning the symbol of something indicates respect for the thing symbolized. I mean, as a general rule, just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD. If you feel you are showing great respect for the U.S. by burning its flag, then have at it. Personally, I can think of more constructive ways to demonstrate my patriotism and my commitment to the principles of freedom, but that's just me.
Ahem. Apology in advance.
DON'T FUCK WITH THE CONSTITUTION, you clowns, especially for something this trivial.
-----------------
Patriotism is the first refuge of a scoundrel.
Whoops! The clowns I meant were the members of Congress. (Sorry I waxed profane, I don't have the literary talents of a STARK).
The proposed anti-flag-burning amendment is profoundly idiotic, and on such a multitude of levels, too.
1. Pragmatically, such an amendment would only encourage people to burn flags. Making something illegal is hardly the same as making it stop- yet even this concept seems beyond the intellect of the imbeciles who are clamoring for this stupid Amendment.
2. Legally, an Amendment to protect the flag from fire will do nothing to prevent someone from wiping their ass with it, will it? A broad prohibition of "desecration" of any kind is unlikely to be legally binding. The idea of what is and is not "desecration" is largely a matter of taste, and according to Chief Justice Rhenquist of the Supreme Court, it is futile to try to legislate taste (Ref: The People vs. Larry Flint). Is Madonna desecrating Christianity if she wears a big crucifix while fondling herself? Who knows? It's a matter of personal opinion. Who is going to enforce silly and ill-defined "anti-desecration" laws? If I have a pair of flag-patterned underwear, will I be hurled before a federal district court if I have an "accident" while wearing them? What if I try to use a flag to smother a small fire (like Kramer did with the Puerto-Rican flag in the penultimate Seinfeld episode)? What if my flag store burns down because of an errant cigarette? Will the Amendment open the door to hundreds of statutes defining exactly what you can and cannot do to a flag?
3. Historically, the greatest threats to democracies have traditionally been nationalist zealots who have shrewdly wrapped themselves in the flags of their republics- not the clueless political zeroes who choose to burn them instead. An amendment to "protect the flag" will perhaps make the flag-burners arrestable, but it might just also pivotally play into the hands of those who would aim to subvert the nation from within. Sanctioning and protecting the social contracts made by a nation to its citizens is not equivalent to embracing its cloth symbol. One requires a solid commitment to prudent leadership and responsible governance. The other essentially boils down to a lot of talk and flag-waving.
4. Constitutionally, such an amendment would be an epitome of style winning over substance. In a vain attempt to prevent the nation's physical symbol from being desecrated, these morons are willing to introduce a breach in the Bill of Rights- the most sacrosanct contract ever guaranteed by the republic to its citizens.
5. Logically, introduction of the amendment would constitute an admission by the republic that its citizens would have a valid recourse in desecration of the flag to begin with. A flag that needs an amendment to protect it from the people it purports to represent isn't even worth wasting a match on. The flag Amendment would itself desecrate the flag!
6. Motivationally- what is the motive behind the Amendment aside from an emotional appeal to "protect our flag" from unnamed villians who would burn it? How does burning the flag endanger the republic or the nation anyway? Who, among the nation's citizens or residents, would be protected or sanctioned by such an amendment? Nobody. The sole purpose of the Amendment is to confer additional powers to the government previously disallowed by the First Amendment: the power to criminalize flag-burning. Even the silly 18th Amendment (Prohibition) was promoted for what were ostensibly altruistic purposes- to keep people clean and sober, to remove the scourge of drunkenness from the nation. This proposed Amendment has no purpose other than to stifle one particular form of hated speech. Or to hear its moronic supporters say it, "to protect our flag"; they have never even bothered to make any pretentions otherwise. Traditionally the purpose of Constitutional Amendments has been for the people to place restrictions upon the powers of government. This Amendment will reverse that trend- it will grant the government additional powers that were previously denied by the people. And it will seriously compromise a document that has functioned well in protecting civil liberties for two centuries- all this just to keep people from burning the flag.
Although it is so logically bankrupt, the anti-flag-burning Amendment appears to have enough votes in the Senate. Many of these Senators and Congresspeople should really know better, but they are pandering to the most deplorable of public instincts in order to secure their reelection.
Being an aging veteran, I'll weigh in with a resounding NO to an anti-flag burning amendment and also a resounding NO to any laws prohibiting free speech.
If you own a particular piece of cloth, you can do with it what you will; I support, and defend, your rights under the Constitution.
Evidently a group in Congress doesn't. This is obviously an errant attempt to get many people to vote for some scoundrels who don't really have platforms.
I don't care if the amendment goes through or not, BUT. Burning a flag as a protest is disgusting. I do not have to justify my opinion., because of the solders that carried the FLAG in to the battle I can do that. Those soldiers held the IDEAL which the flag represented holy to them, for which they would die for. Thence you are not desicrating the nation, rather the memory of the brave sons who gave the ultimate sacrifice for you.
Sorry about the flame here, just that I feel strongly about this.....and I am not a US citizen..... It is a red maple leaf that flies in my flagpole!
------------------
Cogito Ergo Vroom
I think therefore I ride fast...
I think it's terrific. Lesse, the United States is facing such crises as:
- How to ensure access to health care for the huge number of uninsured?
- How to determine the line between protecting citizens and allowing them to bear arms without restriction?
- How to deal with AIDS, the homeless, the growing numbers of destitute.
- How to cope with the ageing population and the strains on social security, housing, health care, and other social needs that the changing demographics will inevitably produce?
... I think it's just wonderful that Congress thinks the highest priority for amending the Constitution is to prohibit flag-burning.
Flag-burning was a form of protest against the Viet Nam war back in the 60s and early 70s. Why this concern for something that has been out of fashion for twenty years?
I weigh in with Monty here. Any politician who wraps him/herself in this issue doesn't have a platform.
The good news: I gives you more time to study the positions of all the opponents.
Personal rant: Keep yer friggin' hands off the Constitution!
Personally, I am very much opposed to burning flags. Not cuz I love my country, or any other country, but because its just childish and outright mean. But when Americans begin burning their OWN flags on their OWN land, what kind of message do you people think THAT kind of picture sends to our friends and enemies abroad? If we can burn our flag, then sure can the Iraqis, the Chinese, the Japanese, and anyone else in the world who becomes mildly ruffled by our nations presence in the world. And that just isnt very nice. In fact when they do it, it is downright hostile not only to our country but to us citezens especially. But, though you can always find someone in the US ready to burn our own flag, I never see protests on the tv where americans are publically burning Cuban flags or N Korean flags or, for that matter, ANY flag but an american one? Why? I think it must be because down under we must realize that sort of behavior is an outgrowth of hatred and that actual innocent people can be affected by that kind of behavior. But we never give into those considerations when its a question of our own flag. There is always someone with a match ready when its our own flag that's to be ignited. So, what freedoms are we really preserving in all this? It seems to me all we are doing is encouraging anti-american demonstrations and anti-american sentiments in the rest of the world. And who is that good for? Its just more hate in the world, regardless of who its directed at.
Aren't most of the US flags made in Japan or China and then sold here?
Frankly, I think you can burn, wear or do whatever you want with it in the privacy of your own home. However, in public or public display, there are laws.
Handy: the laws against burning the flag as a public display are what's at the core of the issue. Apparently, some folks (politicians) think it's better to wrap themselves in the flag and deny others their rights under the constitution than actually, as CK said above, do something along the lines of their jobs.
Personally, I am very much opposed to burning flags. Not cuz I love my country, or any other country, but because its just childish and outright mean. But when Americans begin burning their OWN flags on their OWN land, what kind of message do you people think THAT kind of picture sends to our friends and enemies abroad?
Well, you may be thinking that when someone in Iraq or Iran or wherever sees a bunch of Americans burning an American flag, it sends a message that our country must be despicable because these people are burning its flag and they're even Americans so it must be really bad!!! The message that is also implicitly sent, however, is that you can burn this country's flag in this country without fear of reprisal. You can burn an American flag in Iran, but that really doesn't say much. You sure as hell can't burn an Iranian flag in Iran. To see people burning American flags in America without being arrested sends a much more powerful message about the freedoms in this country and its tolerance of dissenting opinion, especially when compared to most foreign nations who like to burn our flag.
If we can burn our flag, then sure can the Iraqis, the Chinese, the Japanese, and anyone else in the world who becomes mildly ruffled by our nations presence in the world.
I'm not sure I follow. I mean, they can burn it whether we can burn it ourselves or not.
And that just isnt very nice. In fact when they do it, it is downright hostile not only to our country but to us citezens especially.
Well, it's certainly not as nice as a backrub with warm baby oil and a big fat kiss with some tongue action. But that hardly qualifies it as a worthwhile target for a Constitutional Amendment.
But, though you can always find someone in the US ready to burn our own flag,
No you can't! It happens so rarely that the media is drawn to a burning flag like moths to a flame. It always draws good news ratings because seeing a flag burned makes so many people angry as hornets. People like WWII veterans tune in to it and lose their minds. In fact, the inevitable media attention is probably the only real reason why people burn flags. An anti-flag-burning amendment would only exacerbate the situation.
I never see protests on the tv where americans are publically burning Cuban flags or N Korean flags or, for that matter, ANY flag but an american one? Why?
Well that's a good question. I can think of several reasons immediately:
1. Wal-Mart doesn't sell them. And wherever they do sell them, they're expen$ive- too expensive to casually be setting on fire all the time.
2. Nobody even recognizes those stupid flags anyway. Think of the foreign flags you can identify. Canada, Britain, Japan, Italy, France... all are countries we're on hunky-dorey terms with. The typical American Joe Sixpack would recognize the McDonald's corporate flag before he'd recognize even some of those five. Maybe you HAVE seen a Cuban flag burning (Cuban-Americans burn them sometimes in protest of Castro's regime) but you didn't recognize it. A flag that isn't very recognizable won't make such a political impact upon being burned. But everyone knows what an American flag looks like.
3. Nobody cares if someone here burns a foreign flag- except maybe the news services from that country, which would hardly be interested in the story anyway if they are influenced otherwise (e.g. Serbia's state-controlled media). The American media couldn't care less. No veterans are offended. No constitutional amendments can be proposed. A foreign flag burning can only be considered a waste of airtime.
4. The American government does not distribute Cuban/Iraqi/Serian flags and actively encourage its people to burn them. This is not the case in most countries where you see American flags being torched.
I think it must be because down under we must realize that sort of behavior is an outgrowth of hatred and that actual innocent people can be affected by that kind of behavior.
Now you're sounding a bit like the people who are blaming Marilyn Manson and South Park for the Littleton massacre. It's a nice warm fuzzy sentiment but there's little evidence to indicate that Americans are more sensitive about our expressions of hatred than are people in the rest of the world.
The fact that many foreign governments encourage their citizens to burn American flags undoubtedly has much more to do with it than individual scruples.
But we never give into those considerations when its a question of our own flag. There is always someone with a match ready when its our own flag that's to be ignited.
See above. Flag-burning only seems as prevalent as it actually is because of the media's fascination with it.
So, what freedoms are we really preserving in all this?
In not passing childish Constitutional Amendments to ban forms of speech and dissent we find distasteful, we are preserving your freedoms and mine, and the freedoms of generations of Americans to come. The First Amendment is one of the most cherished freedoms we have. Now people are arguing that we should introduce a precedent-setting limitation in it. Perhaps someday the First Amendment will be riddled with exceptions and constraints. It would be a foul legacy to leave to our inheritors.
It seems to me all we are doing is encouraging anti-american demonstrations and anti-american sentiments in the rest of the world. And who is that good for? Its just more hate in the world, regardless of who its directed at.
The act of flag-burning may certainly introduce more hate into the world. I do not recommend that people burn flags. But the last thing we need is an Amendment to the Constitution prohibiting flag-burning!!!
Well said, Lipochrome. I am in total agreement with you.
Uh, okay, Lipochrome. Calm down. Nobody's thinking of setting YOU on fire, okay? It was just an opinion as based on my own experiences. If there werent two sides to this debate then there would be no debate.
I must confess that this issue makes me really upset. It wouldn't, if there was no chance that the anti-flag-burning Amendment would pass- but the political climate in Washington has been looking quite good for it recently.
In the interest of presenting both sides of the debate, here are some pro-Amendment URLs:
The "main" URL is www.cfa-inc.org (http://www.cfa-inc.org) .
There is also http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6199/ . The entries in his own guestbook are mostly biased against the Amendment. (Warning: This is one of those badly done Geocities pages, and it has the "Star Spangled Banner" play on it as a MIDI file.
compositejoe
04-28-2012, 02:52 PM
This thread reminds me of something horrible I witnessed back in about mid-2002. I was at a major get together reunion sort of party and everything was going great. That is until somebody threw a hissy fit over a conversation about how the government runs things. So what they do is, they rip the flag which mounted on the wall off the wall and stand on the stage and burn the flag with a cigarette lighter and rant on about how they hate how the government runs the country and how they hate the country in general. It made me want to throw up everywhere! :mad::mad::mad::mad:
DrFidelius
04-28-2012, 02:57 PM
1999, dude. No one who participated in this thread is even with us still. Their very names have been stricken from the Great Record of Cecil.
As to your story, wouldn't the smoke detectors have gone off? What kind of venue were you at that had a mounted flag?
compositejoe
04-28-2012, 03:04 PM
1999, dude. No one who participated in this thread is even with us still. Their very names have been stricken from the Great Record of Cecil.
As to your story, wouldn't the smoke detectors have gone off? What kind of venue were you at that had a mounted flag?The place for some strange reason didn't have smoke detectors, and they can't be fitted now, as the place has long since been demolished and the place we were at was a 19th century built hotel. I felt I had to get the story off of my chest, as I was reminded of it after seeing something on TV where a flag gets burnt.
I personally think very strongly indeed that there should be capital punishment for people who dare to burn the state flag! :mad:
fifty-six
04-28-2012, 03:11 PM
nevermind
DrFidelius
04-28-2012, 03:15 PM
The place for some strange reason didn't have smoke detectors, and they can't be fitted now, as the place has long since been demolished and the place we were at was a 19th century built hotel. I felt I had to get the story off of my chest, as I was reminded of it after seeing something on TV where a flag gets burnt.
I personally think very strongly indeed that there should be capital punishment for people who dare to burn the state flag! :mad:
The state flag? Which state? How long ago did this happen? Do you often have flash-backs which induce you to resurrect thirteen-year-old conversations instead of starting a new one?
compositejoe
04-28-2012, 03:24 PM
The state flag? Which state? How long ago did this happen? Do you often have flash-backs which induce you to resurrect thirteen-year-old conversations instead of starting a new one?The United States flag. And I don't have flashbacks, I was just told that it is the proper forum etiquette to search for and add to an existing thread about something, rather than starting a new thread on the subject. I apologize sincerely if resurrecting this thread has caused you any annoyance or upset.
DrFidelius
04-28-2012, 03:55 PM
You were misinformed. We want to avoid seven simultaneous threads about last night's episode of the Whatever Show, or multiple threads rehashing something currently in the news, but the resurrection of zombie threads not needed.
John Mace
04-28-2012, 05:20 PM
The United States flag. And I don't have flashbacks, I was just told that it is the proper forum etiquette to search for and add to an existing thread about something, rather than starting a new thread on the subject. I apologize sincerely if resurrecting this thread has caused you any annoyance or upset.
Not for anything this old. Etiquette is to start a new thread and link to the old one.
sqweels
04-28-2012, 05:28 PM
And what do we burn apart from zombies?
More zombies!
tomndebb
04-28-2012, 05:48 PM
This thread is almost old enough to post here.
But it is far to old to revive.
Anyone wishing to argue the topic may open a new thread. This one is closed.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.