I'll bring it up.... Options

[Frosty]

So, how about the bombings in London today?

I'll tell you how I felt. I was filled with rage when I heard about them. I think 9/11 scared me because it was here on U.S. soil, but this pisses me off, maybe just because it's too far away for me to be immediately scared. I do not understand how people can do things like that. Last I heard the death toll was over 40, but that was this morning. 40 civilians.... I know it's nothing compared to 9-11, but still. The cowardice that it must take to kill innocent people to support a cause....

And what makes it worse is in my mind, I can see someone about 4 years from now telling everyone that it was the British government that planted all the bombs.... Sickening.

Sorry if I offended anyone.

[Druid]

A little off the current topic but I wanted to reply

holden_caulfield
And flag burning, it seems that the only kind of people who get incited are people like you, who get so riled up when they see the US flag on fire that they want to change the constitution. What's the point in banning it? Why shouldn't it be covered by the first amendment? Who is being harmed?

Laws regarding the flag was left up to the states. 48 states had laws prohibiting the desecration of our national symbol. In 1968 the 1st federal law was also passed.
The reason people are seeking a constitutional amendment is because that is the only way to over turn the 1989 Supreme Court 5/4 split decision classifying the ACT of Flag Burning as a type of speech and thus protected by the 1st amendment.
I will ask you the same question I ask everybody when this subject comes up.
Is burning a flag speech?
My answer would be no. Pretty simple I think.
There is no other action someone can do and claim it as protected under free speech so why this one thing. The freedoms protected by the Constitution are not absolute, nor where they meant to be, ie.. libel, slander, perjury, etc....
The Court was wrong to override the Texas law in the 1998.
What most people don't know about the law as it relates to flag burning is the underlying purpose was to restrict whats called "breach of peace"
I'm sure most people have heard the example of you can't falsely yell fire in a crowed theater. The underling reason behind that example is crying fire in a crowded theater would be a "breach of peace".
The only reason behind a person burning a flag would be to incite the people around him, which is probably the intention of the person doing it in the 1st place.
There is no reasonable expression of ideas from someone burning a flag which is whats the 1st amendment is about, it's simply an act done to incite.

Here is another example, if you want to condone burning the flag as a protected form of expression, what would you consider someones actions if they defaced the Washington Monument. If someone can deface one symbol of America as a form of protected expression why not the other?

Now for the real reason why this court ruling was beyond stupid.
The case was Texas vs. Johnson
Johnson was involved in a protest at the 1984 Dallas RNC.
Throughout the day, he and other protesters gave speeches, handed out pamphlets expressing their views protesting policies of the Reagan administration.
No one questioned his right to do this.
Then they marched to city hall where he douses a flag with kerosene and lights it on fire.
Out of the 100+ protesters he was the only one arrested. He wasn't arrested for what he said only for violating the law regarding desecrating the flag.
Johnson claimed the act was speech the court didn't agree and found him guilty.
Next the case is moved to the appeals court where his conviction is upheld.
Then finally it comes before the Supreme Court where they on a split decision classify his act as a form of protected expression.

If thats not insane here's one better.
Guess where he got the flag that he burned. He stole it from a building during the march to city hall.

holden you asked the question who is being harmed by someone burning the flag.
I guess the answer would be different for different people but for me the answer is easy.
Me
I consider it a offensive act of vandalism to a symbol of something I hold near and dear.

[holden_caulfield]

7
I will ask you the same question I ask everybody when this subject comes up.
Is burning a flag speech?
My answer would be no. Pretty simple I think.

Speech CAN be equated to actions. Sign language = speech. So why can't other symbolic actions be understood as an expression of one's opinion? I understand the breach of peace, and I had your fire example in mind, but that's a far cry thinking that burning a flag will incite rioters. Usually people are already rioting before they light up. *shrug. In any case, the people who get incited are the people who want to beat the shit out of those who are doing the burning. And in that case, the flag is no longer the issue.

In any case, you mentioned that you find it offensive. Well, I find it offensive too. I find lots of things offensive. When people give other people the finger ("fuck you!"), that's pretty damn offensive, so why don't we ban that too? We can't just ban things because we don't like them.

Your example of defacing the Washington Monument is completely different. Anyone who defaces the Washington Monument would be charged with the destruction of public property--i.e. breaking shit that doesn't belong to them. They wouldn't be charged with "destroying a national symbol." If, however, someone bought their own flag, or hell, fashioned their own flag out of felt and then burned it... that's their own private property and they can do as they wish with it whether it offends you or not.

You mentioned something about people vandalizing something you hold dear to your heart. Well, someone can't vandalize something that they own. They can't legally vandalize their own house. They can fuck it up, but hey, that's their business, whether you like it or not, whether it offends you or not.

That's just how I look at things.

[TheGhost]

7
I will ask you the same question I ask everybody when this subject comes up.
Is burning a flag speech?
My answer would be no. Pretty simple I think.

Speech CAN be equated to actions. Sign language = speech. So why can't other symbolic actions be understood as an expression of one's opinion? I understand the breach of peace, and I had your fire example in mind, but that's a far cry thinking that burning a flag will incite rioters. Usually people are already rioting before they light up. *shrug. In any case, the people who get incited are the people who want to beat the shit out of those who are doing the burning. And in that case, the flag is no longer the issue.

In any case, you mentioned that you find it offensive. Well, I find it offensive too. I find lots of things offensive. When people give other people the finger ("fuck you!"), that's pretty damn offensive, so why don't we ban that too? We can't just ban things because we don't like them.

Your example of defacing the Washington Monument is completely different. Anyone who defaces the Washington Monument would be charged with the destruction of public property--i.e. breaking shit that doesn't belong to them. They wouldn't be charged with "destroying a national symbol." If, however, someone bought their own flag, or hell, fashioned their own flag out of felt and then burned it... that's their own private property and they can do as they wish with it whether it offends you or not.

You mentioned something about people vandalizing something you hold dear to your heart. Well, someone can't vandalize something that they own. They can't legally vandalize their own house. They can fuck it up, but hey, that's their business, whether you like it or not, whether it offends you or not.

That's just how I look at things.

Holden, your such a fucktard, you know that? If you think burning the AMERICAN FLAG in the U.S. should be legal, then you have a very very disturbed view. Hey, if you got the right to burn this country's flag on US soil, then I also have the right to kick your ass.

Hey, who wants to come with me up to washington to burn a Iraqi or Saudi Flag in protest?

You wouldn't be able to because that would hurt our killers feelings. You'd go to jail so fast you wouldn't know what the fuck happened.

And that, my friend, is whats screwin this country over. What we need is another Revolution, we really do. And when it does break out, Holden, youll be the first one i look for.

This post has been edited by TheGhost: 07/09/05 8:16am

[holden_caulfield]

What we need is another Revolution

I just love how you capitalized "Revolution" too. Ahahahaha. Not just any revolution--THE "R"evolution.

That's just hilarious I don't know why.