Posted on 06/20/2005 10:35:24 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
A newly released independent poll confirms that the vast majority of Americans want the U.S. Flag protected from acts of desecration.
The random poll of 1,004 adults nation-wide was conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation June 16-19. In responding to the question how important do you think it is to make flag desecration against the law, 81 percent said it was somewhat to extremely important. Another 75 percent said they wanted Congress to pass a flag protection constitutional amendment.
The poll echoes numerous others conducted since a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturned five previous courts and made flag desecration legal. Poll after poll indicated that between 75 percent and 80 percent of the public support legal protection of Old Glory from physical acts of desecration.
"I'm delighted but not surprised that this poll again confirms what we already know," said Thomas P. Cadmus, national commander of The American Legion. "When asked a straight forward question, most Americans will give you a straight answer -- protect Old Glory."
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote on HJR- 10, the flag protection amendment this week.
Only 28 percent of those surveyed said they would be likely to vote for someone who is opposed to protecting the U.S. Flag.
Complete poll results are available online at http://www.legion.org.
"The people have spoken again loud and clear," Cadmus said. "I urge Members of Congress to heed the voices of the people and the call of all 50 state legislatures. Pass the flag protection amendment now."
The poll has a 3 percent margin of error.
i oppose a flag desecration amendment
A U.N. Flag? I haven't pledged any allegiance to it or the "nation" for which it stands :-)
So, if burning the flag is free speech, then you're saying that you support the suppression of free speech, as long as its done by a baseball player?
So, if burning the flag is free speech, then you're saying that you support the suppression of free speech, as long as its done by a baseball player?
I do not care to read further, these types of attitudes sicken me. People such as yourself support art as freedom of expression, like religious objects submerged in piss. Nothing wrong with the ability to destroy the cross but damage the damn Koran and spend a lifetime of happy hours incarcerated. Our Americans pulled our flag out of the 9/11 rubbish after the terrorists destroyed our WTC works of art, not to mention those inside. You are defending the freedom of these morons to destroy the flag we died under? People can do whatever they desire under the guise of freedom, why the hell can't we flush the Korans?
Nope, once on the baseball field, it was a case of trespassing on private property, and free speech rights were no longer in effect. :)
Since the floor has been opened to the "people such as yourself" crowd, I'll chime in with my feelings on the matter:
I support the rights of those who want to dunk crosses in piss, burn the Koran, or eat a menorah, but I do not call it art.
You look at the problem that there is Nothing wrong with the ability to destroy the cross but damage the damn Koran and spend a lifetime of happy hours incarcerated. and think the correct solution is to outlaw them both. I believe the correct solution is to no take away our freedom to do either.
I won't fight for a flag. I won't die for a symbol. I don't care what people do to a piece of fabric, no matter what "deeper meaning" some people put behind it.
I'll fight for my friends, family, and countrymen. I'll die for those I love. And I do care when people try to chip away a little bit at my rights in order to protect a symbol which should stand for those very rights.
And Constitutional Amendments should definitely be used to further PROTECT the rights of citizens, by clearly stating them, and not to take away our rights, as Amendments 16 and 18 see remarkably show.
We should ask ourselves: why can't this be a law? Why does it have to be an amendment. Because it attempts to alter our Constitutional rights!
It's intellectually dishonest to press for a constitutional amendment and deny it takes away some of our rights.
This is a conservative site -- we should strive for logic and justice, and not feelings, dictate our laws.
I was angry when the towers fell, and our proper response was to go after those responsible for the deaths of Americans --- a tattered flag in the rubble was horrible to behold, but it was not because of the torn fabric. It was because thousands of people died, and creating a law which takes away the rights of the survivors to protect a piece of fabric misses the point entirely.
If you chip away enough at our rights, you destroy what our flag symbolizes more than a brief burst of flame ever could.
It is totally disgusting but it is not treason.
It displays a total disregard for everything this country stands for.
It's definitely of the same spirit as treason.
Think of the men who bore the colors into battle in the Civil War. By doing so, they increased the likelihood of being singled out by rebel snipers exponentially. But to do so was a point of great honor.
I'll bet they would consider those who dishonor those colors to be traitors.
Its a complete waste of time, is everyone so afraid of the republic that they think a burnt flag will destroy it?
Bread and circuses.
If they print a flag in a newspaper (like on 4th of July), and I throw away or crumble up or burn the paper, then I am burning the flag.
That is the idiocy of this, burning a flag, any flag, any picture of a flag is just burning an object, a representation of something else, its madness to waste time and sully the constitution with piffle like this.
If some dude is unhappy with America and wants to burn a flag, so what? What he is doing doesn't harm the nation, in fact it makes it stronger, because we live in America, where speech (even speech you don't agree with) is protected.
"Nothing wrong with the ability to destroy the cross but damage the damn Koran and spend a lifetime of happy hours incarcerated. Our Americans pulled our flag out of the 9/11 rubbish after the terrorists destroyed our WTC works of art, not to mention those inside. You are defending the freedom of these morons to destroy the flag we died under?"
My sentiments, too. The wild-eyed, flag-burner defenders in this thread will hear no reason whatsoever on the issue. They keep saying that an amendment won't stop people from burning the flag in Iran or somewhere, so it's not worth it. Well, duh. If we're not willing to protect our flag on our own turf, then we have no position to resent it abroad.
And why do people who support this flag amendment like myself think that burning the flag is NOT FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION? Simply because we believe it is a treasonous expression and it should not be permitted anymore than blowing up public property as 'freedom of speech' and 'expression'. The line must be drawn.
If you guys want to desecrate our flag, then move to a country that has no respect for it.
Freedom, warts and all, is tough for some people to deal with.
People such as yourself support art as freedom of expression, like religious objects submerged in piss.
Sure. I might not like the artwork or the message it puts forward, but that's kind of the point of the 1st Amendment- protection of unpopular speech.
Nothing wrong with the ability to destroy the cross but damage the damn Koran and spend a lifetime of happy hours incarcerated.
Has anyone been put in jail for damaging the Koran? If you want, you are free to stand on a streetcorner and deface the Koran all you want.
Our Americans pulled our flag out of the 9/11 rubbish after the terrorists destroyed our WTC works of art, not to mention those inside.
I'm quite familiar with what happened on 9/11. I was there.
You are defending the freedom of these morons to destroy the flag we died under?
Absolutely.
People can do whatever they desire under the guise of freedom, why the hell can't we flush the Korans?
Has someone prevented you from flushing the Koran?
We are not able to write laws that violate the First Amendment to the Constitution. Nor should we amend the Constitution to weaken First Amendment protection. Neither of your examples are analogous for the reasons I and other individuals on this thread stated earlier.
There is a huge difference between blowing up someone else's property and burning your own flag. The former is a crime, and has never been considered free speech, the latter is a boorish expression of free speech.
Are you intimating that a centerfielder for the Cubs can violate your Constitutional rights?
Not directly. However, the government has the power to pass laws to protect rights, and assault and theft of property would violate those rights.
That being said, this incident occurred on private property and as an employee of the Cubs, he was probably within his power to put out an unauthorized fire. If someone came onto your front lawn and started burning a flag, you would be legally allowed to stop him, put out the fire and eject him from your property.
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.