Free to Fly the Flag, Bush Says

Newmax.com ^ | 7/24/06

[peggybac]

President Bush on Monday signed a bill that would bar condominium and homeowner associations from restricting how the American flag can be displayed.

Sponsored by Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., the resolution would prohibit those groups from preventing residents from displaying an American flag on their own property.

It was passed unanimously by both the House and the Senate.

"Americans have long flown our flag as an expression of their appreciation for our freedoms and their pride in our nation," Bush said in a statement. "As our brave men and women continue to fight to protect our country overseas, Congress has passed an important measure to protect our citizens right to express their patriotism here at home without burdensome restrictions.

[Arkinsaw]

Congress has passed an important measure to protect our citizens right to express their patriotism here at home without burdensome restrictions.

Without burdensome restrictions by pseudo-governments.

[hauerf]

This will play hob with the hammer and sickle motif of my homeowners' association.

[jiggyboy]

About damn time. There has been more of a Constitutional right to watch TV than to fly the flag.

[cryptical]

Without burdensome restrictions by pseudo-governments.

Restrictions that are governed by a contract agreed to by the "burdened".

I wonder where in the Constitution the power is granted to the Federal Government to meddle in contracts between citizens, which clearly doesn't affect interstate commerce.

[beelzepug]

"...where in the Constitution the power is granted to the Federal Government to meddle in contracts between citizens..."

When one chooses to bargain away his own rights, for whatever reason, he does so at the peril of the rights of the rest of us.

[SR 50]

ping

[Gunny P]

My Highest Respects to Roscoe..a Good Man, if not better.
BUT...why is he fiddlin' with what should have been learnt in Grade School.
Flying OUR Colors...Even in Maryland it's easily taught.
A little Virginanese there...
My families first record is in every defifintion of lovely, colonial Frederick, Maryland. That is, until they went down the Valley of "I-81" to Franklin County Vuyginya.
Well, to stand corrected, as for the I-81 route, back then mountain ranges if not THE indigenous population were an obstacle.

[babydoll22]

I agree.

This is utter nonsense. This is an issue that should be left up the locals and or businesses.

[cryptical]

When one chooses to bargain away his own rights, for whatever reason, he does so at the peril of the rights of the rest of us.

Nonsense. I can't imagine how you think contracting away the "right" to decorate your house would infringe on others "rights" to decorate their homes.

[sergeantdave]

You're right, of course.

This strikes at our common law traditions that allow individuals to enter into lawful contracts. Now the feds have stepped in and nullified these contracts. Under what legal basis I don't know.

I much prefer voluntary HOA contracts as opposed to the fascist government zoning laws that set up unaccountable soviets dictating on every detail of how you can use your property.

At least with an HOA, you can move if you don't like the contract terms. With zoning laws your ability to exercise your rights and seek redress in civil courts is nearly obliterated.

[Arkinsaw]

Restrictions that are governed by a contract agreed to by the "burdened". I wonder where in the Constitution the power is granted to the Federal Government to meddle in contracts between citizens, which clearly doesn't affect interstate commerce.

The 14th Amendment prohibits governments from restricting citizens rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. A homeowner's association is a local government that seeks to avoid being called a government in order to not have the 14th Amendment apply.

It has elections, it has an executive, it legislates and promulgates regulation over private property it does not own, it can make judgments and levy penalties and fines. It's a government, not a contract.

Establishing a local government is fine. Establishing a local government that can restrict free speech rights and other guaranteed rights within its jurisdiction. No, afraid not.

Right now these pseudo-governments are just here and there and you can move. But they are spreading. The day may come when they spread enough that you can't buy a house in a particular county unless you sign some of your rights away.

In the United States, no piece of American dirt should be off-limits to purchase by a US citizen solely because they refuse to sign away their free speech, or other, rights.

[MosesKnows]

It was passed unanimously by both the House and the Senate.

I favor flying the flag being a personal decision but where in the Constitution is the congress empowered to pass such a law?

[beelzepug]

"Nonsense. I can't imagine how you think..."

Nor I, you. But then, if you believe the American flag is nothing more than a house decoration, you have a bigger problem than just signing away your rights.

Many of us here on FR who gave of our time to defend the country that flag represents won't take very kindly to being told we can't fly it, by a homeowners' association or anyone else.