Apparently, Treason is the only offense defined in the Constitution: the framers wanted to restrict its meaning, relative to the Crown’s expansive view.
For this reason, there have been fewer than 40 prosecutions for treason in the US, and even fewer convictions.
It seems that MG’s POV is more akin to that of 18th century Britain, than 19th century America.
Here’s an interesting quote from the last link, emphasis added:
“The Burr and Bollman cases prompted the introduction in 1808 of a Senate bill[7] to further define the crime of treason. The debate on that bill, which was rejected, provides insight into original understanding of the treason clause, that it was to guarantee nonviolent political controversy against suppression under the charge of treason or any other criminal charge based on its supposed subversive character, and that there was no constitutional authority to evade the restriction by creating new crimes under other names. Although this intent has since been established by First Amendment jurisprudence, the treason clause stands as a Tenth Amendment protection of the same right, restricting all organs of government, not just the legislative branch.”
I praise the founding fathers for their prescience, tolerance and implicit skepticism towards jingoists and authoritarians.
I love America, and I love what it stands for. Among these principles is the freedom to speak one’s mind, even if the majority disagrees with your opinion.
But there are traitors in our midst, traitors and scoundrels who seek to undermine the First Amendment, creating exceptions here and there. They believe that free speech is ok, as long as it is speech that is consistent with their craven sensibilities.
Clearly these traitors to the Constitution need to be resisted, but in what way?
The best way is by voting against them, if they run for public office.
But what if they seek to besmirch the Constitution? What should be done?
There is a time and place for civil disobedience, and I believe that this would be an appropriate time.
Huh. From where I stand, the first amendment is possibly the single greatest thing about our country. Inasmuch as you’re seeking to limit its scope, it seems to me that it’s you who’s siding with the enemy. Were I to accept your take on the first amendment’s meaning, I’d see your liberties among the first to be sacrificed.
Fortunately for you, that’s not my take on things.
foolsguinea raises an interesting point. I’d like to ask some of these folks whether they’d be willing to include depictions of God in this amendment. If they are, we might get something of a poison pill thang going to the amendment, which is fine by me. And if not, I’d ask them whether they’re not breaking the first commandment, by considering a symbol of something besides God to be more worthy of protection from desecration than a symbol of God.
Beautiful, thank you, Bo, for that. Free speech, to be true for a democracy, must be inclusive, flexible, and forgiving, to give all individuals voice in the process, and to intelligently discuss all points of view to afford the best decisions for all. That’s democracy for me.
If someone burns the US flag, I see it as a protest, symbolic, no gut-wrenching gasps. If the ideals of US Democracy can’t stand some extreme exclaimations of free speech, it’s not worth much.
Our national anthem is all about a damaged and war-torn flag. Whether the bombs are from outward aggression, or internal angst, the flag flying is only a symbolic measure of the people who live under it.
The US constitution has a lot about defending against the “enemy” within… those that would subvert or weaken civil liberties and create a police state. People like Magilla Gorilla (banned btw) can only see the enemy outside apparently.
Many great empires rotted within… they weren’t conquered. I think the US forefathers were right in setting up laws to balance things.
I agree. The flag is a symbol of the country and its people. Not a symbol of the current administration. Burning it I think is more insulting to the people, the REAL people who have made this country great. I think it sullies the memory of those who have defended this nation when it was needed. I just can’t explain to my grandfather, who was a combat medic in WW2, how burning the flag is a protest against an amendment or a policy or the administration. He would think it was a slap in the face of the men he pulled from the battlefield, wounded, dead or dying to move that flag forward another kilometer or two. Personally I tend to agree that the burning of an American flag by and american is in poor taste.
That being said, I don’t think that it should be prohibited by law. You are entitled to have bad taste, or be offensive or even rude or mean, so long as you do not infringe on the rights of others. Meh- not my cup 'o meat, but whatever gets it done for you. Just don’t burn MY flag (the one I paid $39.99 for online).
Another thing I don’t understand is why people would do something they do not agree with just to protest. If you don’t think the flag should be burned, then you shouldn’t burn it even in protest. You are not being true to yourself.
Imagine a group of protestors who go to Lafayette Park across from the White House and smear dog shit all over their face to illustrate what a shitty job Bush is doing as President. Imagine that an amendment is passed making the smearing of dogshit on your face illegal and punishable by law, in effect stifling the poopsmearers’ right to free speach. Would you march down to Lafayette Park and collect a steaming pile of Fido-doo and spread it on your face?
(<chant>The way Bush treats the human race -it’s like he’s shitting in our face!</chant>)
No- you wouldn’t do that. So why would you burn the flag if it is not in your heart to do it now? Wouldn’t your energies be more aptly spent trying to get a new amendment to overturn the one you don’t like? Because in all honesty, if you burn the flag, it will make the news for a few days and then once the drama ceases, well, nothing will have changed. You may have a weekend in jail under your belt and a fine to pay, but that’s it. And the flag burners will be portrayed as wacko-lefties who are on the fringe anyway. You are not going to create a groundswell of support for change by burning the flag. It seems an immature and knee-jerk reaction. Unless of course you hate America and want to show it by burning a piece of cloth.