Keep in mind, who cares? They don't grant rights. But nice try.
We can safely assume Sam Adams and James Madison would laugh at the idea as well.
No we can't. And it doesn't matter either, just so ya know.
On the other hand, Ruthbadgirlginsberg, Steve Breyer, Dave Souter--and probably his boyfriend-- would be on your side.
Oh, so some agree but others don't? And you think these people are wrong and others are right just because you think so? And then throw in a personal reference in lieu of anything bright to say. LOL, funny stuff.
I'll take the judgement of the former group over the latter.
And who cares who's judgement you take?
"There is all the difference in the world between defending the right to desecrate the flag and defending flag desecration itself. It is the the difference between a free society and an unfree society." ...... Roger Pilon
I care, primarily because unlike yourself, Bork and Rhenquist are credible legal scholars and recognized as strict constructionists. Yourself?
They are correct to dismiss the Flag Burning decision as not germane to the First Amendment. I've read extensively about Sam Adams (a relative) to know if he ever was concerned with "rights" such as flag burning, it was never noted historically. Perhaps you can point out an instance where this was so?
As regards the 3Libs, yes their collective and regularly occuring bad judgement and pointed disregard for original intent are reflected in their support for this. Yes some agree (mostly the strict constructionists), others don't (primarily those who legislate their beliefs). While nobody grants rights, some folks create them where none exist.
As for Dave Souter's boyfriend, I'm sure he'd side with Dave. Once you are in Public Office, there is no personal.