I will defend the right of every democrat flag burner against this Administration. The White House has no right to wrap itself around the American Flag when we are trying to burn it.
/Sarcasm OFF
Posted on 06/13/2006 11:44:31 AM PDT by pissant
IF the Constitution is amended to prohibit "desecration of the flag", our liberties will be finished. The flag does not need "protection" from cretins who wish to stomp on it. The police cannot arrest and prosecute all the cretins who wish to piss on it. The flag is a piece of property. If I own it, I can burn it (unless the EPA says otherwise), cut it up, line a bird cage with it, or stuff it up the nose of a Muslim. People who do such things ought to be subject to public shame - but God save us from idiot Republicans who put more pressure on symbolism such as this than on REDUCING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT!
Nor was he gaining in wisdom.
According to Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language, it is indeed speech (see definition #7).
If they want to pass that law instead, I'm all for it. But we would go to jail, because burning the flag is protected "speech" according to jackasses on the SCOTUS.
IMO, banning flag burning limits the rights of the people while increasing the power of the government, as did the Kelo ruling. Abortion of course cannot be an individual right because it infringes (obliterates) the individual right of another being.
As an aside, flag burning is not free speech in the way that the Boston Tea Party was not free speech. Free expression is more like it, which is a right so far.
Unlike Hamilton and Washington and many FReepers, he was not a Federalist.
ANd you think the founders would have approved this as speech? Cmon now.
No one should be able to make a law that usurps the right of free speech.
How about abortion?
Abortion is murder. Murder is not a federal matter.
How about the kelo case?
Property rights are gone in this country due to the decision. There should be a revolt if it cannot be otherwise peacefully restored. Armed if necessary.
With no property rights, all other rights are doomed as well.
But, gee, lets make an amendment to ban certain political free speech.
Nor am I, nor was Jefferson or Franklin.
I will defend the right of every democrat flag burner against this Administration. The White House has no right to wrap itself around the American Flag when we are trying to burn it.
/Sarcasm OFF
Absolutely I do. Without any hesitation, without any doubt whatsoever.
Where is "freedom of expression" guaranteed? Far as I know, it was made up by the same idiot organization that "discovered" the "right to privacy".
Why mess with the constitution to "protect" a symbol? Part of what makes our country and our flag great is that they protect those who would disagree with them and allow them their opinions. People are and should be allowed to protest. It's not worth it to change our constitution; free speech and protest are one of the things that make the United States a free country. We can (and have) trashed the president, we can and have trashed members of congress, and I don't see the symbol of the American flag being so frail that it needs a Constitutional amendment to protect it. What's next? An amendment banning speech against a sitting president? And if you think that's ridiculous, I would need to know why it is worse to burn a facsimile of the American flag than it is to criticize a president. At least there's an argument (that I don't agree with) that can be made the criticizing a president during wartime could be detrimental to the country. I see no such danger with allowing people to burn the flag.
The Federalists continue to gain. Hate crime as a new classification put some murder under Federal jurisdiction and increased Federal police powers.
You proved my point. If the courts impose crap on the country, the way to override it is through an amendment. I would support one to further define property rights and overide Kelo. I would support an amendment to revert abortion to the states. And I would support an amendment to ban flag burning, or better yet, return states rights on the issue.
But keep yakking, and prove my points again if you like.
Then you better read the laws that were common on the books in the various colonies/states at the time and get educated a bit better about what was legal and illegal in the day.
So the SCOTUS was correct in your opinion when it usurped the power of cities and states on this issue?
ANd that is an abomination.
Kelo affirmed property rights. Property rights as seen by the FedGov and the ACLU pertain to the modern American corporation, a creation of FedGov. Corporate property rights have precedence over private property rights and Kelo carved that in stone. FedGov protects its own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.