[FerdieMurphy]

That last paragraph says it all.

Our Elite Political Class has flipped us a fish.

Of course it's inedible.

[Dane]

Neal who?

And why should I care.

[driftdiver]

This one will be popular here. After all its only a "symbol".

Idiot

[pissant]

Your anti-dote to my thread? I don't wish you any luck. ;o)

[PeterPrinciple]

My first reaction when reading the headline was why bother. There is such little integrity in Washington if if they won't follow legal laws and high standards, why should I follow any laws.

Sorry, I have a bad case of DRA (dirty rotten attitude) this morning...........might be terminal.

[Talking_Mouse]

If we do not burn our flags how are we supposed to disposed of them honorably?

I realize my question has nothing to do with the issues of the article, that congress is not taking up the real issues of the day. However is is my question, the day after flag day.

[SmoothTalker]

"It's a hideously bad idea, and what we see in Washington is politicians simply pandering to the base emotions, if not the outright ignorance, of the American people. Instead of making the tough choices on items such as government spending, immigration, tax reform and returning our economic liberties, these political hacks are spending time on this nonsense. What's next? An amendment banning speech that others may find offensive? That's where we're headed if this nonsense isn't nipped in the bud."

I agree. This is nothing but cynical election year politics. They know it has no chance of passing. They know that flag burning is a tiny, tiny, tiny problem at best in this country. But they think this red meat issue could help steer ignorant people into the voting booth come November. It really is insulting how little the party elites think of the base and our intelligence.

Beyond that the whole amendment is pointless. For one thing flag burning is not a problem in this country. Can anyone recall the last time he was walking down the street and ran into someone burning a flag? Can anyone recall the last time you heard about this happening in your town? I am a libertarian and an opponent of unnecessary government encroachment on freedom of any type and of the growth of the nanny state. Flag burning is offensive to me but I don't have a right to avoid being offended. I believe in a pretty high threshold that any government imposed reduction in rights of expression or speech must reach and this doesn't come close to reaching it. Being able to tolerate all kinds of expression and all kinds of offensive expression is one of the things that proves the strength of our system and makes it the best in the world. When I think of countries that would pass a measure such as this flag burning amendment I think of insecure dictatorial states like Red China and Saddam's Iraq, not a strong democratic state like ours.

[Vaquero]

I agree with Neal as well as with Justice Scalia, who knows the value of protecting free speech.

On the other hand if I saw someone defiling the flag...I would risk arrest for battery and attempt to knock the offender senseless.

[FreePaul]

An amendment banning speech that others may find offensive?

We don't need an amendment for that. It's already in force.

[Diggler]

Banning flag burning will do far more damage to the flag than any flame could ever do.

[MACVSOG68]

Indeed! Senate, please get back to work and forget these inane election year ploys.

[LDO4CNO]

And I believe that using the flag in a purely political tug-o-war is no different than spitting on it or burning it.

[bigdcaldavis]

What's next? An amendment banning speech that others may find offensive?

Won't be a need for another amendment banning speech that others may find offensive, because chances are likely that the flag amendment, if fully ratified, would be used as legal precedent to "ban offensive speech" such as anti-gay speech. Just think if the flag amendment was used to criminalize the following biblical passage : "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." - Leviticus 20:13 Would all Bible makers be forced to omit that passage? Better to make no Bible at all than to omit a passage. “For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” - Revelation 22:18-19

[TET1968]

If you want to protest by burning something, this is how you should do it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1525000/images/_1527055_protest1963_150ap.jpg