Skip to comments.
Guess Who Else Supported Jail Time For Burning the Flag?
Mediaite ^
| 29 Nov 2016
| Alex Griswold
Posted on 11/29/2016 9:38:37 AM PST by mandaladon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
Clinton had a nuanced view on a complex issue...
To: mandaladon
I’m against this and I’m against the long standing American Legion stance of a constitutional amendment against desecrating the flag. This is all IMO political speech which is covered by the first amendment.
The First amendment is not there to protect speech we all or even most of us agree with. It’s there to protect the most vile of political speech. In Germany, you can be jailed for (and people have been) promoting Nazi ideology. I never want to see our country get to that point.
To: mandaladon
Guess Who Else Supported Jail Time For Burning the Flag? Everyone who believes Big Government should dictate what is and what is not acceptable peaceful political protest?
3
posted on
11/29/2016 9:44:49 AM PST
by
gdani
To: Old Teufel Hunden
Many forms of “speech” are condemned. Desecrating our flag should be one more.
To: mandaladon
If you have got to the point that burning the flag is a logical part of your political speech, then going to jail simply adds emphasis to your statement.
I’m OK with modest jail-time for burning the flag especially when its in combination with a riot.
5
posted on
11/29/2016 9:49:27 AM PST
by
marron
To: Old Teufel Hunden
“This is all IMO political speech which is covered by the first amendment.”
This is not political speech. This is an act of hatred for America. The flag burners and desecrators contribute nothing to society. They hate America and are trying to destroy it. They are supported by the taxpayers of America and they will do anything to hurt them.
It is the height of stupidity to protect and subsidize those whose goal is to destroy your family and your way of life.
6
posted on
11/29/2016 9:51:22 AM PST
by
detective
To: mandaladon
She wasn’t calling for stripping someone of their citizenship. Which the government can’t do to natural-born citizens.
To: mandaladon
The Supreme Court has already answered this question.
To: mandaladon
You mean who actually sponsored legislation.....
To: mandaladon
Here’s my view on “speech”: If it isn’t a spoken or written word it isn’t protected by 1A, SCOTUS notwithstanding. Overt physical acts, like burning flags, aggressive panhandling, etc., are not speech and therefore are not protected.
Next case!
10
posted on
11/29/2016 9:59:23 AM PST
by
clintonh8r
(AMERICA! THANK YOU FOR MAKING MY SCREEN NAME OBSOLETE!)
To: AEMILIUS PAULUS
"Many forms of speech are condemned."
Not political speech.
To: All
IMHO, the President can have whatever view he chooses. They have no authority to act on it. This is a decision that only can be made by the legislative branch with judicial branch review and approval.
The president would only be responsible for enforcing such a law if it were to pass through those two branches.
12
posted on
11/29/2016 10:04:52 AM PST
by
mmichaels1970
(Hillary lied over four coffins.)
To: detective
"It is the height of stupidity to protect and subsidize those whose goal is to destroy your family and your way of life."
I'm talking about first amendment political speech protections. Exactly how are you connecting someone burning a flag with subsidizing and with destroying my family and way of life? It is better to let people protest and get things off their chest than to suppress it and let the pot boil over. Totalitarian regimes suppress political free speech.
I don't advocate burning the flag, I abhor it, but if someone wants to do it, then so be it....
To: Timpanagos1
“The Supreme Court has already answered this question.”
Yes, wrongly. We need to get it right.
14
posted on
11/29/2016 10:06:40 AM PST
by
dsc
(Any attempt to move a government to the left is a crime against humanity.)
To: Old Teufel Hunden
“Not political speech.”
It’s not speech. Not speech. Not speech. Not speech.
The representatives of the forces of evil on the (then) supreme court decided the way they did for the purpose of forwarding the degradation of American society.
The matter was wrongly decided by America’s enemies as an attack on America.
15
posted on
11/29/2016 10:11:24 AM PST
by
dsc
(Any attempt to move a government to the left is a crime against humanity.)
To: dsc
Ok then.
Please ping me when the Supreme Court approves a federal law that dictates that Americans will lose their US citizenship if they burn an American flag.
To: clintonh8r
If it isnt a spoken or written word it isnt protected by 1A, SCOTUS notwithstanding So flying the American flag on my porch can be outlawed and receive no First Amendment protection, under your interpretation?
17
posted on
11/29/2016 10:21:42 AM PST
by
gdani
To: Old Teufel Hunden
Try advocating the overthrow of the government; shooting a specific politician; telling a Marine to desert etc. Go read.
To: dsc
"The representatives of the forces of evil on the (then) supreme court decided the way they did for the purpose of forwarding the degradation of American society."
Actually, many Supreme Courts over time have basically said as long as your speech does not immediately cause someone else to act in an unlawful way, it is protected. If your speech incites a mob to immediately go rob and loot stores, you are liable etc... There has to be an immediate cause and effect is my understanding.
Many people on this site hailed the Supreme Court decision in Citizen's United and rightfully so. However, if you can connect money to free speech (because it costs money to get your message out), you are being a hypocrite to not have the same coverage of political acts during an assembly to also be covered.
To: gdani
You could always challenge any law that prohibited that. I’m just saying that acts that are not actual spoken or written speech should not have 1A protection. How is flying a flag any different from burning a flag, as it relates to speech?
20
posted on
11/29/2016 10:27:13 AM PST
by
clintonh8r
(AMERICA! THANK YOU FOR MAKING MY SCREEN NAME OBSOLETE!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson