# For fuck's sake, the flag burning amendment AGAIN?! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 22, 2005, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434 "2005-06-22T20:45:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/41 "2005-06-22T21:34:50Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > We have a flag code in this country, spelling out how the flag ought to be treated. This code is well established in American custom, and ought to be respected as a part of our national heritage. Suit yourself. But don’t tread on me. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/42 "2005-06-22T21:35:23Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > I have said I don’t favor the amendment, **Liberal**. That doesn’t mean I think flags ought to be burned. > > We have a flag code in this country, spelling out how the flag ought to be treated. This code is well established in American custom, and ought to be respected as a part of our national heritage. > > By the same token, a belief in freedom of speech doesn’t mean that I think any more Ashlee Simpson albums ought to be made. Freedom can be put to some pretty disgusting ends, obviously. 😉 But that’s all it is-a code. It’s not a law. In the event that such an amendment passed, the flag would no longer be worthy of respect, in my view. Because it would be an idol, NOT a symbol. ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/43 "2005-06-22T21:37:18Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > I don’t think the amendment is needed. But burning the flag is needlessly hurtful to others while conveying no useful political message to anybody. If it were illegal, it would. The message being it’s more important to stand up for the principles of your counrty (in this case free speach) then the symbols. ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/44 "2005-06-22T21:37:51Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > By the same token, a belief in freedom of speech doesn’t mean that I think any more Ashlee Simpson albums ought to be made. Freedom can be put to some pretty disgusting ends, obviously. 😉 Agreed. No more albums. Now _videos_, on the other hand… Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/45 "2005-06-22T21:37:53Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > The latest one holds. Think prohibition. Prohibition indeed. A new crime created out of my deepest apologies whole cloth. ---
**Author:** ![Ponder\_Stibbons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ponder_stibbons/32/343_2.png) [@Ponder\_Stibbons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ponder_Stibbons)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/46 "2005-06-22T21:39:12Z")
Under ordinary circumstances I would never dream of burning the US Flag. I have too much respect for what it represents, even if the government is full of misguided bozos. But if this amendment actually gets added to the constitution, I _will_ participate in public flag burnings, because this amendment desecrates the constitution and therefore, in turn descrates the very flag it “protects”. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/47 "2005-06-22T21:39:54Z")
I’m reminded of the _Doonesbury_ strip that printed an American flag and then challenged the reader to properly dispose of it, in the light of an earlier anti-flag-burning amendment proposal. You can’t burn it, you can’t toss it in the trash, you can’t wrap your fish with it – congratulations, you’re stuck with the darn thing until it decays on its own! And count me with the “you must be a :wally to get frightened at the idea of a piece of cloth catching fire” crowd. But then, this is a nation that also thinks the sight of an uncovered female nipple on television will bring the downfall of the Republic… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/48 "2005-06-22T21:39:55Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Here is how I understood **John Mace** ’s statement, “You really are a glutton for punishment, aren’t you?” I (Scott) feel that, unlike many of your past statements, “That summarizes everything that is wrong with the conservative right” is correct, and quite supportable. However, John either feels it is not supportable, but also feels his statement should be taken lightly, or some other thing, I can’t tell what. Nope. Sorry for being so brief, but I thought it would be obvioius, at least to **Liberal**. How many Pit threads get turned into a \*\*Liberal \*\*bashing fun fest after you try and frame the argument in Libertarian terms, and end up antogonizing lots of people on both sides of the issue? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/49 "2005-06-22T21:40:13Z")
I’m a dissenting voice here, but I think it’s a good thing Congress is doing this, because the amendment has no chance at all of passage, and this distracts them from other, more destructive things that Congress could be doing. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/50 "2005-06-22T21:42:38Z")
**Captain Amazing** wins the award for Todays’ Top Cynic! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/51 "2005-06-22T21:42:41Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Prohibition indeed. A new crime created out of my deepest apologies whole cloth. Actually, I shouldn’t have held that up as an example of how to answer your question, since the newer amendment explicitly cancelled the earlier one. But I do believe that, generally speaking, the newer wording is considered primary over the older wording. Not sure there is universal agreement on that, though. Where are those damn lawyers when you need them!! ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/52 "2005-06-22T21:43:58Z")
John Mace: So, you were saying that the fact he posts anything is liable to get people arguing? No, it is what he has said, not the way, or the tone he uses. ---
**Author:** ![Gala\_Matrix\_Fire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4da419/32.png) [@Gala\_Matrix\_Fire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gala_Matrix_Fire)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/53 "2005-06-22T21:44:18Z")
Yay, the states are finally going to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment, eighty years after it was proposed!! Oh, no? A flag-burning amendment? Aw, crap. ---
**Author:** ![Indyellen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/indyellen/32/4176_2.png) [@Indyellen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Indyellen)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/54 "2005-06-22T21:45:03Z")
BTW, the text of the proposed amendment is: (found [here](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:2:./temp/~c109DoNXXP::) ) \* H. J. RES. 10 [Report No. 109-131] JOINT RESOLUTION Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing the Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States. \* So the actual amendment is to allow Congress to pass a law to prohibit physical desecration of the flag. Not an amendment to prohibit it, but to be able to **pass a law prohibiting it** that SCOTUS can’t override. I haven’t seen such a slippery tap dance since…well…oh hell, there’ve been too many lately. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Ponder\_Stibbons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ponder_stibbons/32/343_2.png) [@Ponder\_Stibbons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ponder_Stibbons)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/55 "2005-06-22T21:47:59Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > … the amendment has no chance at all of passage … I sure hope you’re right. For fuck’s sake you had better be right. Great Og Without The Ability To Smash you had better be right. ---
**Author:** ![Pullet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Pullet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pullet)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/56 "2005-06-22T21:49:09Z")
Wow. Thanks, **Indyellen** WHAT THE FUCK IS HAPPENING TO MY COUNTRY?!?!?! Now the balace of powers isn’t good enough for them? Fuck finishing school. If this passes, I’m leaving. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/57 "2005-06-22T21:50:30Z")
No, that’s typically how it’s done. Prohibition gave Congress the power to ban liquor, which it did with the Volstead Act. Separation of powers and all that. ---
**Author:** ![NDP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ndp/32/55_2.png) [@NDP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NDP)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/58 "2005-06-22T21:50:31Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > It must be silly season up on the hill again…I can’t believe some of the rank crappola that is coming out these days. A flag burning AMENDMENT?? Really! Gods. > > -XT Don’t forget that the Fourth of July is coming up soon and, to the Republicans, there’s no better way to show how they’re 100% solid, patriotic, real Americans than to ban flag burning. This certainly isn’t the first time they’ve done it. Ever since Bush Sr. successfully used the issue of flag burning against Michael Dukakis in 1988, the Republicans have gone back to it again and again to rile up their followers against all the unpatriotic, godless, and decadent liberals who would think nothing of using our sacred red, white, and blue as toilet paper. It also serves to distract people from such things as the fact we’re bogged down in Iraq, Osama Bin Laden is still on the loose, the economy is spotty, the federal deficit is exploding, and oil prices are daily climbing to new highs. The issue of flag burning/desecration is the political equivilent of junk food: it may taste good and provide a quick burst of energy but, ultimately, it will do nothing beneficial for the body politic. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/59 "2005-06-22T21:53:52Z")
To be fair, this is an example of the balance of powers. The Supreme Court finds that a law is unconstitutional, so Congress and the states use their power to amend the constitution so the law can be passed. It’s still a stupid thing to amend the Constitution for, but that’s a different issue. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [June 22, 2005, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434/60 "2005-06-22T21:53:58Z")
> [@](#): > > **Mr. Moto** : But burning the flag is needlessly hurtful to others. Would private flag burnings be allowed? I can think of really _important_ issues that are a matter of law that are “needlessly hurtful to others.” These laws hurt the people who are involved in order to please the people whose business it is not. > [@](#): > > The private incineration of a worn flag or the dignified ceremonies organizations like the American Legion perform are worlds away from burning or desecrating a flag in protest. Your comparison makes it even clearer that the action in Congress is an attempt to stifle **protest**. > [@](#): > > **knorf** : By the way, the amendment appears to address not merely burning, but any desecration or debasement of the flag. Like flying it at Gitmo? Another example: At the beginning of the war, I saw a large flagpole with the flag on it used to stike a peace demonstrator. To me _that_ was desecration of the flag. If this amendment becomes law, I wonder if the episode of **West Wing** where Penn and Teller burn the flag will be censored. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/for-fucks-sake-the-flag-burning-amendment-again/309434.md?page=4)