Posted on 06/27/2006 3:49:32 PM PDT by DTogo
Brit Hume just mentioned it.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I agree. For the same reason as the gay marriage amendment.
From a personal perspective, if I saw someone desecrating an American Flag, I'd be in jail for attempted manslaughter.
They didn't die for the flag, they died for the country.
Or are we counting flags with 13 stars, or Stars and Bars, or 48 stars, or ones with snakes on them that say "Don't Tread On Me", or ...
Unfortunately, this President is not securing our borders, and is instead doing the same sort of half-hearted pandering to the Hispanic vote that the Dems do.
I support Constitutional amendments to ban both queer marriage and flag-burning; but I also believe in priorities, and those two fall well below stopping the bleeding at our damned border.
Let me phrase it this way:
The purpose of the Constitution is to define the form and operation of our government, and to define limits to the powers of that government.
It is NOT a criminal code.
Flag burning, to me, belongs in the criminal code, not in the document that defines the shape of our government.
It's up to the Congress and the judicial branch to determine if a law against flag burning is within the powers of the government, but I would NOT amend the constitution to give the government a new power like this one where none existed before.
However, as an originalist – one who interprets the U.S. Constitution based on the meaning it held when it was originally adopted more than 200 years ago -- burning the American flag is a protected right, Scalia told more than 1,200 people at William and Mary Hall.
“It’s protected by the First Amendment,” said Scalia, explaining why he joined the high court’s majority in the opinion that flag burning is a protected form of political expression. “If you play the old way, you often have to reach decisions you don’t enjoy.”"
--- Justice Scalia speaks at W&M
Author: Brian Whitson, W&M News
Date: Mar 21, 2004
McConnell has ALWAYS voted against the flag amendment. Says it is pure free speech, which is the same reason he is the leader in the anti-Campaign Finance Reform fights -- he says contributing money for a candidate is pure free speech.
oh please.
There are men, and there are those who are willing to put up with a fair amount of bad behavior.
Watch this video.
It is what one man did who was not willing to put up with that.
(cut and paste into browser)
mms://a1503.v108692.c10869.g.vm.akamaistream.net/7/1503/10869/v0001/mlb.download.akamai.com/10869/library/open/features/monday_flag_350.wmv?media_type=wms&av_type=video&event_pk=486348&product=gen_video
or go here and the link is just below the schedule.
http://www.patriotguard.org/Forums/tabid/61/forumid/21/postid/104528/view/topic/Default.aspx
The flag represents the country.....and as I said in my earlier post, it doesn't matter if the flag has thirteen stars or fifty, they either are or have been the flag that represents this country.
I think I remember Scalia once saying (maybe on C-SPAN) that the morning after the decision, he walked into his kitchen and his wife started humming "You're a Grand Old Flag" or something similar.
I am not in favor of burning the flag. Rick Monday should be hailed for what he did. I am a patriot. Someone just implied that I was a jihadist. ROTFLMAO!
However, I am opposed to more government. That's the only thing that would come of the flag burning issue.
I agree with you. However, we now have in impass between two branches and we need to find a solution. My solution is to get better justices on the SCOTUS.
"The morning after the decision, Scalia said, he came downstairs at his house and saw a Washington Post on the kitchen table. On the front page was a headline about the courts decision to protect flag burning. His wife, Maureen -- who Scalia said is more conservative than he is -- was fixing breakfast and humming “Stars and Stripes Forever.” "
Oh, yes.
You don't have one.
That's OK. Some people are impressed by bluster.
I'm not.
Come back if, as, or when you have a rational, logical reason why a free society should make repulsive behaviour a matter of Constitutional Law.
Look, you lost the war, the slaves got freed, and it's time to get over it and move on.
The USSC didn't particularly care who owned it ~ they wanted it burned.
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.