Desecration of the U.S. Flag.

[disneydude]

I believe it is a huge stretch that liberals use to say that allowing to desecrate the flag is freedom of speech.......I think its a traitorous act....

If you want to live in a Country that criminalizes activity such as flag burning and considers it a traitorous act....there are plenty of them out there....and I am certain that they would welcome your views with open arms.

 

[Hatuey]

I think you know what the word desecrate means..........

To desecrate something is to rob it of it's sanctity or to insult it's sanctity. Flag burning is desecrating the flag. Using it as a marketing tool is desecrating it because it's meaning is used to lure people into purchasing. I'm sure you'll agree that this is not a sign of respect. If you're willing to oppose the first and not the later then you are not consistant in your beliefs sir.

 

[Kandahar]

I think you know what the word desecrate means..........

Yes. But apparently you do not.

 

[jamesrage]

Of course I know that. That's the point...how are you going to outlaw flag-burning when you make exceptions like that?

Easy,because one is for respect the other is for desecration.

 

[jamesrage]

Burning and desecrating are not the same thing.

If you support an amendment banning burning the flag, do you plan to lock up American Legion guys who loyally retire their flags by burning them in accordance with the Flag Code?

or...

If you support an amendment banning desecrating the flag, do you plan to lock up anyone who wears an American flag?

I believe the amendment he talking about is one that bans the disrespectful anti-Americans flag burning.

 

[Navy Pride]

If you leftys want to make a political statement find another way...Don't burn or desecrate a symbol that brave men (and women 1069) have given their life to protect..........

 

[Hatuey]

If you leftys want to make a political statement find another way...Don't burn or desecrate a symbol that brave men (and women 1069) have given their life to protect..........

If you righties want to make a political statements find another way. Do not degrade the flag by using it on everything from mugs to towels. Drying your *** off with the flag towel after a nice swim is not a sign of patriotism. Neither is using it as a bandanna that will get sweaty at one of your support the troops rallies.

 

[disneydude]

If you leftys want to make a political statement find another way...Don't burn or desecrate a symbol that brave men (and women 1069) have given their life to protect..........

That is where you are so misguided. People who have given there lives died protecting the principles of this country, they didn't die to protect the cloth that the principles represent....and those principles are exactly what makes us free in this Country to speak out in protest.

Again....if you want to live in a country that outlaws burning a flag....there are many out there that I am confident would accept your views with open arms.

 

[Kandahar]

I believe the amendment he talking about is one that bans the disrespectful anti-Americans flag burning.

How exactly do you want to write that distinction into the law?

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

To desecrate something is to rob it of it's sanctity or to insult it's sanctity.

I like that definition. Foolish how some people think that any time you burn the flag, it automatically is insulting or it robs the flag of it’s sanctity.

I say that there are times when waving the flag over an immoral cause has already robbed it of its sanctity, and burning the flag afterwards is no more disrespectful than cremating the body of your best friend. It is far better to properly dispose of the remains and remember the dignity and pride of what we have lost than it is to leave the corpse out in the open to fester and rot, and allow its decomposition to spread disease.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I believe it is a huge stretch that liberals use to say that allowing to desecrate the flag is freedom of speech.......I think its a traitorous act....

Fortunately, the Constitution disagrees with you. Don't you think that going against the Constitution is a traitorous act? If so, check your position on this.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

If you leftys want to make a political statement find another way...Don't burn or desecrate a symbol that brave men (and women 1069) have given their life to protect..........

You don't get it, NP. Our brave men an women fight and give their lives to protect our freedom to have the freedom of speech to burn the flag. You dishonor them by using them to propagandize your anti-free speech position.

 

[jamesrage]

Fortunately, the Constitution disagrees with you. Don't you think that going against the Constitution is a traitorous act? If so, check your position on this.

Lighting something on fire is not speech.So banning a disrespectful form of flag burning is not unconstitutional.

speech - Dictionary definition and pronunciation - Yahoo! Education
1.
1. The faculty or act of speaking.
2. The faculty or act of expressing or describing thoughts, feelings, or perceptions by the articulation of words.
3. A talk or public address: "The best impromptu speeches are the ones written well in advance" (Ruth Gordon).
4. A printed copy of such an address.
2. Something spoken; an utterance.
3. Vocal communication; conversation.
4.
1. A talk or public address: "The best impromptu speeches are the ones written well in advance" (Ruth Gordon).
2. A printed copy of such an address.
5. One's habitual manner or style of speaking.
6. The language or dialect of a nation or region: American speech.
7. The sounding of a musical instrument.
8. The study of oral communication, speech sounds, and vocal physiology.
9. Archaic Rumor.

 

[Hatuey]

Lighting something on fire is not speech.So banning a disrespectful form of flag burning is not unconstitutional.

speech - Dictionary definition and pronunciation - Yahoo! Education
1.
1. The faculty or act of speaking.
2. The faculty or act of expressing or describing thoughts, feelings, or perceptions by the articulation of words.
3. A talk or public address: "The best impromptu speeches are the ones written well in advance" (Ruth Gordon).
4. A printed copy of such an address.
2. Something spoken; an utterance.
3. Vocal communication; conversation.
4.
1. A talk or public address: "The best impromptu speeches are the ones written well in advance" (Ruth Gordon).
2. A printed copy of such an address.
5. One's habitual manner or style of speaking.
6. The language or dialect of a nation or region: American speech.
7. The sounding of a musical instrument.
8. The study of oral communication, speech sounds, and vocal physiology.
9. Archaic Rumor.

First Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The divisive issue of flag burning as a form of protest came before the Supreme Court in 1989, as it decided Texas v. Johnson. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction of Gregory Johnson for burning the flag by a vote of five to four. Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. asserted that "if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Many in Congress vilified the decision of the Court. The House unanimously passed a resolution denouncing the Court; the Senate did the same in March 2000 when the vote fell four short of the required two-thirds majority. [1]. Congress passed a federal law barring flag burning, but the Supreme Court struck it down as well in United States v. Eichman (1990). Many attempts have been made to amend the Constitution to allow Congress to prohibit the desecration of the flag. Since 1995, the Flag Burning Amendment has consistently mustered sufficient votes to pass in the House of Representatives, but not in the Senate. In 2000, the Senate voted 63–37 in favor of the amendment, which fell four votes short of the requisite two-thirds majority. In 2006, another attempt fell one vote short.

You were saying?

If I get what you're proposing right, the government would have the right to ban politcal art. Paintings, sculptures and politically oriented art photography could be banned as the government could argue that they are not protected by the 1st because they're not forms of speech. Is this what you're arguing? If yes send me your address so I can subscribe you to Stalinist-like Regime Daily.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

And I already posted the two court cases that identify flag burning as protected free speech in Post #2. SCOTUS and the Constitution identify this as allowable under the first amendment.

Jamesrage's definition of speech is irrelevant to this topic. Hatuey's and my links regarding the law are relevant.

 

[ptsdkid]

And I already posted the two court cases that identify flag burning as protected free speech in Post #2. SCOTUS and the Constitution identify this as allowable under the first amendment.


****Hey Capitante, flag burning seems to be a big deal for you. Would you have a problem if someone were to burn that hideous looking cape on your avatar?

 

[Inuyasha]

And I already posted the two court cases that identify flag burning as protected free speech in Post #2. SCOTUS and the Constitution identify this as allowable under the first amendment.


****Hey Capitante, flag burning seems to be a big deal for you. Would you have a problem if someone were to burn that hideous looking cape on your avatar?

I think it probably wouldn't bother him much unless he were wearing it at the time.:roll:

 

[Navy Pride]

Fortunately, the Constitution disagrees with you. Don't you think that going against the Constitution is a traitorous act? If so, check your position on this.

That is why we need a constittutional Amendment to ban acts against the flag....People like you try to stretch the first amendment to justify it......

 

[Navy Pride]

You don't get it, NP. Our brave men an women fight and give their lives to protect our freedom to have the freedom of speech to burn the flag. You dishonor them by using them to propagandize your anti-free speech position.

You don't get it.........There are actual documented cases of brave americans dying to protect that flag........

 

[Navy Pride]

And I already posted the two court cases that identify flag burning as protected free speech in Post #2. SCOTUS and the Constitution identify this as allowable under the first amendment.

Jamesrage's definition of speech is irrelevant to this topic. Hatuey's and my links regarding the law are relevant.

A constitutional amendment would take away any loopholes provided by the first amendment...........

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

And I already posted the two court cases that identify flag burning as protected free speech in Post #2. SCOTUS and the Constitution identify this as allowable under the first amendment.


****Hey Capitante, flag burning seems to be a big deal for you. Would you have a problem if someone were to burn that hideous looking cape on your avatar?

Moderator's Warning:

Hey kid, stop trolling this thread or consequences with occur.

 

[adamanarch]

I think it boils down to a general lack of knowledge about the US Flag code. To wear the flag doesn't seem as disrespectful as setting it ablaze...and thus it's assumed that wearing it is not against the flag code.

Either way, I see flags as the property of those that buy them...and thus their use should be determined by their owners and not out-dated rhetoric and formailities.

 

[Navy Pride]

]I think it boils down to a general lack of knowledge about the US Flag code. To wear the flag doesn't seem as disrespectful as setting it ablaze...and thus it's assumed that wearing it is not against the flag code.[/B]

Either way, I see flags as the property of those that buy them...and thus their use should be determined by their owners and not out-dated rhetoric and formailities.

I agree with the bolded part...

 

[Cremaster77]

A constitutional amendment would take away any loopholes provided by the first amendment...........

Glad to see that you view the first amendment as a "loophole".

 

[Navy Pride]

Glad to see that you view the first amendment as a "loophole".

I believe the first amendment is being used to cover a lot o left wing issues which was never the intention of the originators.........

Leftys cite the first amendment for any crackpot issue these days.......