That is exactly what you said. Allow me.to quote you again.
Now I will accept that it is not what you meant to say.
Maybe it seems like a silly word game to you, but I spent years of my life in the Navy to defend our freedoms. Our freedoms, not a piece of cloth. Mind you I do give all proper ceremony to the flag. In my current job, I work resale, or thrift store, if you prefer. When we get flags that are not in good enough condition to sell, I take them home to properly retire them. And it seems to me that attacking the symbol, as a symbol of problems in the system, is the epitome of the freedoms that the first symbol, the flag, stands for.
Indeed there are limits to our freedoms. The classic "my right to swing my fists ends at the beginning of your nose". We are not allowed to use our rights and freedoms when they would violate others' rights and freedoms, or cause them actual harm against their consent. There is no right to not be offended, and offense is at best subjective harm, not actual harm. Burning the flag in protest causes no harm as long as it is the burner's own flag or one they have been given permission to burn.
False comparison. The village is not a symbol of something, setting aside anyone can use anything as a symbol for something, but such is not the intent of the village. The village is the property of others and as such it was BS to "destroy it in order to save it." The closest that principle ever becomes legit is medicine where you might have to remove a limb to save the body. Again, the flag as a symbol belongs to no one, and the physical representation belongs to it's owner. Since it is his property he does with it as he wishes, sans where doing so causes actual harm to another or their property.
Where have I not done so? I have pointed out a conceptual error of yours, I have shown where you actually said what you said when you denied it, and I have expressed my own opinions. Where have I not allowed or supported you rights to an opinion or to express it?
Sent from my Z982 using Tapatalk