Skip to comments.Flags burn in celebration
Posted on 07/04/2006 3:31:16 PM PDT by RetroSexual
About 25 revelers celebrated their freedom of speech and welcomed the Fourth of July on Monday night with the "2nd Annual Old Time American Flag Burn."
Around a burn barrel at Seabright State Beach, organizer Brent Adams, 41, of Santa Cruz, declared flag burning not a protest, but a celebration of the Constitution's First Amendment.
"It seemed like a good idea to burn some flags just because we can," added fellow organizer Sha Lar, 32, of Santa Cruz.
The festivities were especially relevant after a constitutional amendment allowing Congress to ban flag desecration died in the Senate last week.
That proposal came in response to Supreme Court rulings in 1989 and 1990 that burning and other desecrations of the flag are protected as free speech by the First Amendment.
But it failed by one vote in the Senate to reach the two-thirds approval required before going to the states for ratification.
"The Senate overruled it by one vote, and let's celebrate it," Lar said. Some at the celebration noted that in other countries, they could be shot for torching the national flag.
Poison Oak, 35, of Aptos, said he wanted to "reclaim the flag. Not only those who support President George W. Bush can wave the red white and blue."
Still, not everyone on the beach appreciated stars and stripes melting over the fire.
"I think they should keep it to themselves," said Bill Crawford, 16, of Aptos, who was on the beach with buddies Elijah Manchester and Jacob Kendall, both 16 and from Santa Cruz.
The trio looked away as flames consumed the large and small flags.
"To me this is what represents our nation and what represents our freedom," Manchester said. He questioned why the group would want to burn the symbol of free speech.
Despite their different views, those who didn't agree with flag burning were still welcome at the event, said Igliashon Jones, 23, of Santa Cruz. Free speech is what it was all about.
"I don't think this would be what it is without debate," Jones said.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
If they wanted demonstrate free speech, they should've burned other countries' flags where such activities are illegal or liable to get you taken behind your house and shot.
Burning the American flag as a demonstration of free speech is not a positive demonstration of free speech. In fact, it is just the opposite.
What an a-hole.
Some at the celebration noted that in other countries, they could be shot for torching the national flag.
So why not burn THOSE flags, since that protest would mean something, as opposed to burning the flag of the country that ALLOWS such a display? If you're truly looking to make a statement about freedom, why not burn the flag of a country that doesn't allow it, here?
said he wanted to "reclaim the flag. Not only those who support President George W. Bush can wave the red white and blue."
Notice that liberals are the ones who always bring this up? Supporters of the President never say "we're the only ones who can wave the flag." But the liberal pursuit of the Victim Pose is never-ending.
Burn in hell you anti-Americans!
But I'm sure that burning the Gay Pride flag in Santa Cruz is considered a hate crime.
They should have burned their underwear...while they were still wearing them!
He wants to 'wave the flag' by burning it.
I don't know about this guy -- but generally speaking, in my opinion, only a drug addled America hating scumbag could ever conceive of such a notion.
The article should have been footnoted that
"The Associated Press often contributes to this movement"
Maybe they will next time they have their head so far up their @ss that they can't see what they are doing!
Free speech? So I guess it's okay to burn the flags of France, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, and the PRC?
It's not called Kalifornia with their dream of Amerika for nothing.
"Because we can". This is so childish.
Notice that liberals are the ones who always bring this up? Supporters of the President never say "we're the only ones who can wave the flag."
Lefties had disassociated themselves from the flag for so long, that when it appeared to be everywhere after Sept 11, 2001, and they could not bully us into not wearing or waving it, they had to blame conservatives for the fact that they did not have any emotional or physical connection to the flag. So they started saying they were going to "take back the flag." Even politicians running for offices made this ridiculous statement in front of cameras and audiences.
They will never take responsibility for anything they do.
Like the Constititutional right to get drunk and stupid and blather out any idiot thing.
Remember, free speech != smart speech (or even relevant speech)
Too bad noboy used their free speech to put a hose on their flags before they could burn them.
That's what they want you to say. Every post to this thread is giving these mental midgets their jollies. "We're relevant!" they're thinking.
I'm sorry this article was printed--it's pure puffery--and I'm sorry it was posted. It will bring nothing but joy to these Rats.
Maybe they should try burning some crosses "just because they can" and see what happens....
There, I made a slight correction. BTW, Would it be a good idea for me to beat this little "Sha Lar" POS into a coma? I'm sure I can, so why not?
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.