Brit Hume: Flag-burning ban fails by one vote (to be discussed on the "All Star" panel)

FoxNewsChannel ^ | 6-27-06 | DTogo

[DTogo]

Brit Hume just mentioned it.

[muawiyah]

Why not? Because the flag had a specific law protecting it. So they were charged under that law. In the future they will be dealt with after the manner of private disputes.

[tarheelswamprat]

It conveniently fails by one vote with McConnell casting a decisive vote.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's a show vote. If not McConnell, they'd have volunteeed another sacrficial lamb.

Correct. This is all political kabuki theater, or as I'm certain our leaders refer to it behind closed doors, "boob bait for the bubbas" (a Beltway reference to the high esteem in which they hold their subjects, er... constituents). It's a distraction to keep us from paying attention to the truly destructive activities they're engaged in.

[muawiyah]

Since you are obviously reading all the posts on this thread there's no reason whatsoever to ping you about anything.

In any case, there's no reason to limit my right to free speech to adhere to some antiquated standard of courtly manners such as you propose.

[ArrogantBustard]

I know how Mr. Justice Scalia voted.

I also know that regardless of how he voted, you disagreed with him ... the disagreement is more important than the actual vote.

You expressed that disagreement in a foul, disgusting, despicable, bigoted, less-than-contemptible manner. In doing so, you revealed a great deal about yourself, all of it bad. The First Amendment protects you from prosecution for doing so. It does not protect you from the scorn and contempt of your fellow citizens. That I should have to explain this to you (perhaps I used too many polysyllabic words?), and that you have not yet shamefacedly retracted your putrid expression of ethnic hatred earns you a double portion of dishonor.

Again, the prohibition by the owners of this site, of personal attacks on this site, prevent any further comment on my part.

[muawiyah]

?

You'll have to explain yourself better ~ maybe in English.

[Jim Noble]

Flag-burning amendment fails

Good.

If the Constitution is to be amended, amend it to restore the right of the People to legislate in their States to ban "expressive conduct" and to forbid judicial interference beyond their sphere of competence.

If we need a flag-burning amendment, we will need a thousand others to deal with present and future judicial insanity.

Let's fix it once and for all.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Actually, in many states burning a cross even on your own property is against the law, as it is considered a hate act.

I think it's Ironic that the Supreme Court, who completely messed up the "separation of church and state", managed to get itself in a position where you can burn the symbol of the country, but NOT the symbol of christianity.

It's like we have special protection for christianity not afforded to any other religion.

Note I think it's legal to burn a Koran, you just might end up dead. But the cross, that's different.

[muawiyah]

Have you taken a real good look at New Jersey lately? More than a few deportations are in order, and that would start with most of the elected politicians.

Now, what were you saying?

My concern was with Scalia's stated lack of respect for the sensibilities of Americans who came before him. Obviously he needed more time in the cooker.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Since you are obviously reading all the posts on this thread there's no reason whatsoever to ping you about anything."

When you're talking bad about me there is. I haven't read all the posts, but I did catch my name in yours a few times. Very cowardly of you.

"In any case, there's no reason to limit my right to free speech to adhere to some antiquated standard of courtly manners such as you propose."

You have no right to free speech on this forum. It's whatever the owners of the forum decide. That being said, I never claimed that I wanted to stop you from posting about me behind my back. I just wanted you to know it was a coward's act.

BTW, I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim about me supporting anything to do with the antebellum south. Did you just make it up?

[muawiyah]

Speaking of Ethnic Hatred, you are really out of hand. You are making a number of very false assumptions.

I'd like to remind you that one of my ancestors was, in fact, ruler of Sicilia.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Actually, in many states burning a cross even on your own property is against the law, as it is considered a hate act."

Then those laws are unconstitutional.

"Note I think it's legal to burn a Koran, you just might end up dead."

Agreed.

[FastCoyote]

"I understand that. If some one burns a flag with 49 stars is it against the law??? What about a "paper" flag? all of these issues are unresolved and would have to be resolved by the courts. "

I agree, it would be a nightmare. I might even go burn a flag just for the heck of it if they ever pass this. Don't they have anything better to do than spend time on an issue that is neither life threatening or of economic interest? Gee, they can't even keep the NY Times in line, which is far more dangerous.

[muawiyah]

Now it sounds like you are getting ready to challenge me to a duel.

Hmmmm.

Definitely Ante Bellum stuff there.

[CharlesWayneCT]

That hasn't been how it has worked out in practice. "Fighting words" have some credibility in a defense against aggression, and americans do like their flags.

If it was illegal to burn the flag, stopping it would be a law enforcement function, and the law doesn't like citizens interfering in their tasks.

So perversely I think we can make a better stand in defense of what our country and flag stand for given the current law, rather than having the flag-burning banned.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Now it sounds like you are getting ready to challenge me to a duel.

Hmmmm.

Definitely Ante Bellum stuff there."

You are digging that hole even deeper. When you assume...


I'll take your nonresponse as an admission you made up your claim that I had views in line with the antebellum south. I'll take all of your future claims with the same grain of salt. I doubt it was your first (or last) prevarication.

[ArrogantBustard]

I make no assumptions whatsoever. Your comments on this forum are a matter of public record, and my contempt for you is based entirely on those comments. I couldn't care less who you claim your ancestors were. There's absolutely no reason I should give those claims any credence. Your remarks are beneath contempt, your refusal to retract them is beyond the pale. Worse (for you), the abhominable nature of your attack on Mr. Justice Scalia detract from whatever valid (or at least debatable) point you were trying to make.

[muawiyah]

Your resort to accusing a debate opponent of being a bald faced liar is rather more like what we'd expect from the guys up in the hills than the gentlemen down in the Tidewater, but it's still very Souvr'n.

[Dimensio]

Because the flag had a specific law protecting it.

That law applied to all acts of flag desecration. Theft of a flag would be a seperate act, and should be prosecuted as a seperate crime.

[muawiyah]

Justice Scalia made an attack on us when he voted with the majority on the Flag ruling that precipitated this need for a Constitutional amendment.

He knew very well that behavior and speech had been considered two different things in American law since the Founders adopted the current Constitution.

Still, he rejected their beliefs and inserted his own very distinctly un-American beliefs. That he was in the majority speaks ill of the rest of the court.

In short, Scalia acted in a disgusting and bigoted manner. He owes us an apology, as do you for taking his part in supporting his decision.

[alarm rider]

Bull. If burning a cross as a symbol is "hate speech" then burning the flag of my country, a sacred symbol to me is not, explain that. Who gets prosecuted for burning a cross? And yet the American flag, the flag that so many fought for and died for is not a symbol worthy of protection?

You people that talk about freedom of speech in relation to burning the flag of my country never would go to a "gay pride" rally and get away with burning the "rainbow" flag now would you? What freedom of speech would you have if you attended an illegal immigrant rally and burned the flag of Mexico?

If you want "free speech" in relation to allowing the burning of the American flag, I suggest you try to burn some protected PC symbol and see how quick your freedomn of speech is corked.