"When somebody burns the American flag they should go to jail for one year!"

[Captain Adverse]

As I've stated, why Trump proposes something I disagree with, I will argue against it.

In the following video we see a snippet of Trump's recent campaign speech in Michigan:



Now as some members may know, I voted for Trump in 2016. Other's may know that I also "early" voted for him again 2 weeks ago. I support most of his agenda.

However, I do not support this "criminalization" of free expression.

I am a firm believer in the First Amendment right of free expression. While I do recognize some limits (inciting to riot, stealing and destroying other's property to show opposition, etc.) they must be connected to a tangible harm.

Therefore, if someone steals another persons flag, and burns it? Then I can support the idea of arrest for theft and destruction of property, punishable by fine or low-level misdemeanor depending on the circumstances.

But arrest and conviction simply for burning a flag? NO!

As long as the flag is personal property, or freely given by the owner to someone with knowledge and permission of destruction?

That is FREE EXPRESSION folks! Fully protected by the First Amendment.

To allow criminal prosecution and conviction simply for the act of flag burning is wrong. That is a slippery slope which will lead to places we who believe in freedom don't want to see happen.

I still support the President...but NOT in this pursuit.

 

[Cordelier]

If Biden came out and said something as disdainful to the First Amendment as that, I wouldn't vote for him.

That's the difference between you and I, Adverse.... if this were 1933 Germany, you would have voted for Hitler because he was good for the economy. You might not have agreed with all the brown-shirted stormtroopers and all of that nastiness, but you would have looked the other way because you "mostly support his agenda."

Face it... you're a Franz von Papen.

 

[AmNat]

To allow criminal prosecution and conviction simply for the act of flag burning is wrong. That is a slippery slope which will lead to places we who believe in freedom don't want to see happen.

Flag burning used to be a crime nearly everywhere.

 

[calamity]

As I've stated, why Trump proposes something I disagree with, I will argue against it.

In the following video we see a snippet of Trump's recent campaign speech in Michigan:



Now as some members may know, I voted for Trump in 2016. Other's may know that I also "early" voted for him again 2 weeks ago. I support most of his agenda.

However, I do not support this "criminalization" of free expression.

I am a firm believer in the First Amendment right of free expression. While I do recognize some limits (inciting to riot, stealing and destroying other's property to show opposition, etc.) they must be connected to a tangible harm.

Therefore, if someone steals another persons flag, and burns it? Then I can support the idea of arrest for theft and destruction of property, punishable by fine or low-level misdemeanor depending on the circumstances.

But arrest and conviction simply for burning a flag? NO!

As long as the flag is personal property, or freely given by the owner to someone with knowledge and permission of destruction?

That is FREE EXPRESSION folks! Fully protected by the First Amendment.

To allow criminal prosecution and conviction simply for the act of flag burning is wrong. That is a slippery slope which will lead to places we who believe in freedom don't want to see happen.

I still support the President...but NOT in this pursuit.

I couldn't vote for someone who wants to destroy an essential tenet of freedom of speech: protesting one's country without threat of prison. I've seen a few others forego established principles for Trump in other matters. It's an odd position to take.

 

[Casper]

No, in fact it is an expression of free speech, 1st A, whether I like it or not.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I would rather live in a country where flag burning is legal, but hardly anyone does it, than live in a country where flag burning is illegal, and almost everyone wishes to do it. That's because if you criminalize such an act, you've now recruited an army with both the fuel, torches and the will to do it.

All that having been said, the Stars and Stripes belong to the people and it is symbolic of the people, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, thus burning it sends a message to the wrong target.
Since it is the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches who make the decisions that offend the sensibilities of those who wish to express their anger or disappointment, the correct target is not the flag, but those institutions who have committed such offense.

The Congress, both House and Senate, have flags, burn them instead.

 

[Casper]

Flag burning used to be a crime nearly everywhere.

A minor crime and often overturned.

 

[Captain Adverse]

If Biden came out and said something as disdainful to the First Amendment as that, I wouldn't vote for him.

That's the difference between you and I, Adverse.... if this were 1933 Germany, you would have voted for Hitler because he was good for the economy. You might not have agreed with all the brown-shirted stormtroopers and all of that nastiness, but you would have looked the other way because you "mostly support his agenda."

Face it... you're a Franz von Papen.

(Sigh)

I suppose I could "react" by using a similarly fallacious response attacking you personally, or perhaps via a red herring, straw man, or other deflecting post.

But instead, I'll say this.

While I don't agree with the President on this issue, and a few other things; no one EVER agrees with 100% of what a candidate stands for.

IMO this is political hyperbole, which won't get much traction even if the Republicans managed to take BOTH Houses of Congress this election.

If it is pushed, then I would lobby my Congressmen, and take other actions to work against this.

But let's say this actually manages to pass through Congress (I doubt it)? Then the SCOTUS, which is IMO now both more Originalist and still Independent, would simply take the first case before it and rule it a violation of the First Amendment.

I am not "threatened" by this.

Not when I compare the Democrat's total platform involving threats to the 2A, increasing taxes, allowing open borders, making "nice-nice' with China at the expense of OUR economy and ultimately national security...to name just a FEW major concerns.

So NO, I don't agree that I am a supporter of Fascism, or per your response at best a "Von Papen" do-nothing.

BTW, your response is a perfect example of Moral Panic. Look it up.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Flag burning used to be a crime nearly everywhere.

Perhaps, but it should not be IMHO.

The Flag is just a piece of colored material. Although it is a symbol of national identity, it is not the substance of it. That is an idea, or a set of ideals, that remain in our hearts and minds.

You may burn a symbol, but that does not destroy the idea and it's ideals we preserve personally in how we behave and otherwise stand up for them.

 

[AmNat]

Perhaps, but it should not be IMHO.

You claimed that outlawing flag burning would be a slippery slope leaping to some sort of Orwellian dystopia. Historically you are wrong. America has become far more Orwellian since the discovery that flag burning is protected than before.

The Flag is just a piece of colored material.

Although it is a symbol of national identity, it is not the substance of it. That is an idea, or a set of ideals, that remain in our hearts and minds.

You may burn a symbol, but that does not destroy the idea and it's ideals we preserve personally in how we behave and otherwise stand for up them.

When people burn the flag, they're generally not burning it because they dislike colored material. They generally do it to express contempt for the American nation. No sane healthy society would tolerate such behavior.

 

[Captain Adverse]

You claimed that outlawing flag burning would be a slippery slope leaping to some sort of Orwellian dystopia. Historically you are wrong. America has become far more Orwellian since the discovery that flag burning is protected than before.

When people burn the flag, they're generally not burning it because they dislike colored material. They generally do it to express contempt for the American nation. No sane healthy society would tolerate such behavior.

You are a relatively new member, so perhaps you don't know my viewpoint history.

One ideal I have is based on an old childhood chant: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me."

Thus my view on buring a flag. I will stand for the national anthem. I will salute the flag. I will never burn it, because I respect it's meaning.

However, I will never impose my viewpoint on others. If they buy a flag to desecrate, then IMO that is THEIR RIGHT!

They bought the item, they OWN that particular item.

Therefore as long as what they do with it harms neither anyone else, nor anyone else's property, then IMO they have every right to do with it what they wish.

Much like calling you names, their action cannot harm you, nor can it harm the nation unless you and the rest of us let it.

 

[NotreDame]

Flag burning used to be a crime nearly everywhere.

It still is in many places, with the exception of when it’s done for political expression. Thank you Texas v Johnson.

 

[Cordelier]

(Sigh)

I suppose I could "react" by using a similarly fallacious response attacking you personally, or perhaps via a red herring, straw man, or other deflecting post.

But instead, I'll say this.

While I don't agree with the President on this issue, and a few other things; no one EVER agrees with 100% of what a candidate stands for.

IMO this is political hyperbole, which won't get much traction even if the Republicans managed to take BOTH Houses of Congress this election.

If it is pushed, then I would lobby my Congressmen, and take other actions to work against this.

But let's say this actually manages to pass through Congress (I doubt it)? Then the SCOTUS, which is IMO now both more Originalist and still Independent, would simply take the first case before it and rule it a violation of the First Amendment.

I am not "threatened" by this.

Not when I compare the Democrat's total platform involving threats to the 2A, increasing taxes, allowing open borders, making "nice-nice' with China at the expense of OUR economy and ultimately national security...to name just a FEW major concerns.

So NO, I don't agree that I am a supporter of Fascism, or per your response at best a "Von Papen" do-nothing.

BTW, your response is a perfect example of Moral Panic. Look it up.

I understand your point on moral panic... and that's a valid concern... but there's that, and there's the risk you run by being like those guys on the Titanic who were awakened by the ship crashing into the iceberg, went up on deck and realized what happened when they saw the pile of ice on deck, but deciding instead of worrying, to have a snowball fight. The ship is unsinkable, isn't it?

Here's my thing... I agree nobody ever agrees with any candidate 100%. But there are two types of differences - there are policy differences... and there are fundamental differences. The former, I can overlook... but when the candidate I support starts not only openly talking, but actually acting to subvert the constitution, that I can't handle. And I won't.

Trump can go ahead and appeal to the lowest common denominator like he did with this flag-burning crap. That's what demagogues do. But let's facts here... he's already shown a willingness to abuse his emergency powers to manufacture an "emergency" on the border. He's on record as being non-committal for his willingness to abide by the results of the election.

Not only that, but he was caught literally red-handed abusing the powers of his office to further a political opposition research effort in the Ukraine against a political rival, and people like yourself and his other enablers in the Senate - all of which "mostly agreed" with him - all gave him a pass on that. And not only that... but you also turn a blind eye while he effectively admits his guilt by peddling the "fruits" of that abuse of power on the campaign trail.

You're complicit in that, Adverse. As is every member of the Republican Party who doesn't speak out about it.

I understand... like you say, you're not threatened by this. You're probably not going to go out and burn a flag. I don't imagine all that many non-Jewish shopkeepers felt threatened when the Nazis went on a rampage in Kristnallnacht either. That just happened to the Jews. It doesn't threaten me.

But that's how these things work... it's always the other people - until it's not.

But keep on being one of Trump's useful idiots. Keep on looking the other way.

 

[vegas giants]

Flag burning used to be a crime nearly everywhere.

Slavery was pretty popular too

 

[NewfieMom]

Slavery was pretty popular too

Aw, vegas giants, you keep this up and you're going to make me think that civilization is making progress. You wouldn't want to go and do that.

 

[Captain Adverse]

I understand your point on moral panic... and that's a valid concern... but there's that, and there's the risk you run by being like those guys on the Titanic who were awakened by the ship crashing into the iceberg, went up on deck and realized what happened when they saw the pile of ice on deck, but deciding instead of worrying, to have a snowball fight. The ship is unsinkable, isn't it?

Here's my thing... I agree nobody ever agrees with any candidate 100%. But there are two types of differences - there are policy differences... and there are fundamental differences. The former, I can overlook... but when the candidate I support starts not only openly talking, but actually acting to subvert the constitution, that I can't handle. And I won't.

Trump can go ahead and appeal to the lowest common denominator like he did with this flag-burning crap. That's what demagogues do. But let's facts here... he's already shown a willingness to abuse his emergency powers to manufacture an "emergency" on the border. He's on record as being non-committal for his willingness to abide by the results of the election.

Not only that, but he was caught literally red-handed abusing the powers of his office to further a political opposition research effort in the Ukraine against a political rival, and people like yourself and his other enablers in the Senate - all of which "mostly agreed" with him - all gave him a pass on that. And not only that... but you also turn a blind eye while he effectively admits his guilt by peddling the "fruits" of that abuse of power on the campaign trail.

Once again, in your ZEAL, your response misses the mark.

I have already explained to MY satisfaction why this particular issue is NOT as serious as you pretend.

Moreover, I do not agree with your assertions regarding Ukraine, because I made sure to observe the entire proceedings, from start in the House to finish in the Senate. In fact this Forum has my threads and responses to threads on that topic posted at the time. So do not seek to "instruct" me on the situation. You presume too much.

You're complicit in that, Adverse. As is every member of the Republican Party who doesn't speak out about it.

1. I am not a "Republican." Again you make assertions based on your apparent confirmation bias.

2. You are asserting my "evil" based on your own belief in your moral superiority. Again "moral panic" tactics.

I understand... like you say, you're not threatened by this. You're probably not going to go out and burn a flag. I don't imagine all that many non-Jewish shopkeepers felt threatened when the Nazis went on a rampage in Kristnallnacht either. That just happened to the Jews. It doesn't threaten me.

But that's how these things work... it's always the other people - until it's not.

But keep on being one of Trump's useful idiots. Keep on looking the other way.

Here your summation is a further combination of fallacies, from an emotional appeal, through a red herring, to an ad hominem.

That is the typical resort of those who have no argument. I mean to say, the typical resort of those pretending superiority of knowledge and moral views.

Another affirmation for my opinion about your dependence on the tactics of moral panic.

BTW, "tagline time" is a reference to the little blurb making up the block of text at the bottom of my posts. Where you see the smiley wearing sunglasses.

Hence...tagline time.

 

[CaughtInThe]

small government republicanism.

 

[Vadinho]

As I've stated, why Trump proposes something I disagree with, I will argue against it.

In the following video we see a snippet of Trump's recent campaign speech in Michigan:



Now as some members may know, I voted for Trump in 2016. Other's may know that I also "early" voted for him again 2 weeks ago. I support most of his agenda.

However, I do not support this "criminalization" of free expression.

I am a firm believer in the First Amendment right of free expression. While I do recognize some limits (inciting to riot, stealing and destroying other's property to show opposition, etc.) they must be connected to a tangible harm.

Therefore, if someone steals another persons flag, and burns it? Then I can support the idea of arrest for theft and destruction of property, punishable by fine or low-level misdemeanor depending on the circumstances.

But arrest and conviction simply for burning a flag? NO!

As long as the flag is personal property, or freely given by the owner to someone with knowledge and permission of destruction?

That is FREE EXPRESSION folks! Fully protected by the First Amendment.

To allow criminal prosecution and conviction simply for the act of flag burning is wrong. That is a slippery slope which will lead to places we who believe in freedom don't want to see happen.

I still support the President...but NOT in this pursuit.

Its a piece of cloth, nothing more. It represents something more important then some idiotic flag. Either you understand what America attempts to be or you don't. The ideas are more important then the symbols. Say a Trump supporter buys a shirt made of nothing but the flag. Can this person throw it away or should they cherish it forever? Come on people, get a grip on reality.

 

[Cordelier]

Once again, in your ZEAL, your response misses the mark.

I have already explained to MY satisfaction why this particular issue is NOT as serious as you pretend.

Moreover, I do not agree with your assertions regarding Ukraine, because I made sure to observe the entire proceedings, from start in the House to finish in the Senate. In fact this Forum has my threads and responses to threads on that topic posted at the time. So do not seek to "instruct" me on the situation. You presume too much.



1. I am not a "Republican." Again you make assertions based on your apparent confirmation bias.

2. You are asserting my "evil" based on your own belief in your moral superiority. Again "moral panic" tactics.



Here your summation is a further combination of fallacies, from an emotional appeal, through a red herring, to and ad hominem.

That is the typical resort of those who have no argument. I mean to say, the typical resort of those pretending superiority or knowledge and moral views.

Hence my opinion about your dependence on the tactics of moral panic.

BTW, "tagline time" is a reference to the little blurb making up the block of text at the bottom of my posts. Where you see the smiley wearing sunglasses.

Hence...tagline time.

You're absolutely correct... you aren't a Republican... because in truth they don't exist anymore. Now you're all a bunch of Trump Royalists.

Admit it... if he went out tomorrow and declared himself President for Life, you'd be out there cheering with the rest of the lowlifes.

 

[Vadinho]

You're absolutely correct... you aren't a Republican... because in truth they don't exist anymore. Now you're all a bunch of Trump Royalists.

Admit it... if he went out tomorrow and declared himself President for Life, you'd be out there cheering with the rest of the lowlifes.

I am reminded of the man who said it happened because one third of us wanted to kill another third while the last third looked on. This in essence is the world of Trump.

 

[Cordelier]

I am reminded of the man who said it happened because one third of us wanted to kill another third while the last third looked on. This in essence is the world of Trump.

Exactly so... it just boggles my mind how anyone can listen to this shyster and believe a damn word he says. Christ, the last time I believed a word that came out of Donald Trump's mouth, the USFL was going to be the next big thing. If you don't think Donald Trump will do or say anything to cover his ass, then I don't know where you've been these last 35 years. He literally destroyed the casino industry in Atlantic City to keep Steve Wynn from getting one over on him. He does not care about consequences because he's never been made to face up to them.

And if anyone out there thinks he gives a damn about this country or our laws or our democracy.... or anyone but himself... you're living in a fool's paradise.

 

[AmNat]

You are a relatively new member, so perhaps you don't know my viewpoint history.

One ideal I have is based on an old childhood chant: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me."

Thus my view on buring a flag. I will stand for the national anthem. I will salute the flag. I will never burn it, because I respect it's meaning.

However, I will never impose my viewpoint on others. If they buy a flag to desecrate, then IMO that is THEIR RIGHT!

They bought the item, they OWN that particular item.

Therefore as long as what they do with it harms neither anyone else, nor anyone else's property, then IMO they have every right to do with it what they wish.

Much like calling you names, their action cannot harm you, nor can it harm the nation unless you and the rest of us let it.

I understand your viewpoint, but it is wrong IMO.

All healthy societies defend their values against attack. Those that don't end up being taken over by hostile parasitic values. Eventually adherents of the new evil values will persecute the adherents of the old good values. This is what has happened in basically every liberal society, including our own nowadays.

 

[Cordelier]

I understand your viewpoint, but it is wrong IMO.

All healthy societies defend their values against attack. Those that don't end up being taken over by hostile parasitic values. Eventually adherents of the new evil values will persecute the adherents of the old good values. This is what has happened in basically every liberal society, including our own nowadays.

Which has more value for you? The flag or the 1st Amendment?

 

[AmNat]

Which has more value for you? The flag or the 1st Amendment?

The first amendment did not protect flag burning for the first 198 years of its existence.

 

[Cordelier]

The first amendment did not protect flag burning for the first 198 years of its existence.

That wasn't what I asked you, though.

Which do you value more? The symbol of freedom? Or actual freedom?