Bad conservative causes: amendment to prohibit burning the flag

[scottcsmith]

Conservatives still would like to rip the first amendment in half and tack on a bit that would prohibit flag burning.

Why?

Do we live in a land that has been taken over by a rogue band of flag burners? How many flags get burned every year, anyway? Can it even be measured statistically?

Do they really want to waste the time and money it would take to amend the Constitution to prohibit an activity that rarely occurs?

This seems to be an issue that hasn't been thought out very well.

What flags would be covered? Any flag, even if someone just draws it on a sheet of paper?

Would one of those small flags given out at political events be covered?

What if the amendment passed, and at a political event the President does this to a flag:



Would that be in violation of the law?

What if you have a t-shirt that has the flag on it? And you burned the t-shirt?

Flag burning: the hidden scourge of America.

[bluestateguy]

1. More flags will burn if they pass that amendment

Truth be told its not a favorite tactic of even the most radical activists. It's kind of a passe 60's thing. But pass this amendment then thousands of people will register their opposition by burning the flag.

[ranosgol]

2. I am a Patriot and a Veteran and ....

If you want to burn the flag, I wont like it but thats your choice.

[Liberal Veteran]

3. I almost wish it would pass sometimes...

...because they say "flag desecration" and I would have a FIELD DAY calling in republican neighbors flying a ratty faded flag or one from the SUV.

Plus I would start a business making flags with 49 stars and 12 stripes and sell those for burning just to bog the damn courts down with silliness (complete with instructions that people have VIDEO of the flag they are burning to prove it wasn't an OFFICIAL version of the flag).

[luaneryder]

4. Burning is the proscibed method

of putting a damaged, worn flag to rest anyway. What would be the alternative method of disposal? An amendment is ludicrous and totally politically motivated. We've got bigger fish to fry than this.

[DBoon]

5. Would displaying the Confederate flag be implicitly outlawed

by this amendment?

If so, it would almost be worth it.

[fdr_hst_fan]

7. AMEN, brother-

I HATE that Confederate flag. We should have done after the Civil War what we did in Germany after World War II: we banned everything related to the Nazis, and we should have banned everything related to the Confederacy! To hell with free speech-they started the war, and they LOST IT! Now they need, FINALLY, to get oer it!

[Nimrod]

6. My opinion of why

Because the conservatives have been trying to get at the Constitution for a long time now. It's their greatest foil after all. I'm firmly of the opinion that the whole flag-burning thing is just the taking of a pointless non-issue, wrapping it in miles of bogus patriotism, and just seeing if they can do it. Today no flag-burning, tomorrow no speaking out against the country (read current Republican administration) at all.

Probably just me talking through my tinfoil hat again, but you have to admit that it answers a WHOLE lot of nagging questions.

[fdr_hst_fan]

8. Yes-the conservatives HATE the

constitution. Why? Because it literally prevents them from getting away with MURDER!

[jdj]

9. Okay, wasn't this just on here where they are saying the

right wing is trying to appeal to emotion instead of intellect?

Maybe I saw this on tv or something.

If you commit a symbolic act you are more dangerous than if you do concrete harm.

This is where i would make chimp noises if any one could hear me.

NO, they don't believe in evolution, they believe in devolution and they are trying to make it happen.

[TahitiNut]

10. (Neo)conservatives don't 'hate' the Constitution.

What they 'hate' is the idea that it (now) recognizes rights instead of entitlements. When the Constitution recognized classes of human beings (women, blacks, etc.) and supported people as property (and women as chattel), the (neo)conservatives loved it. They still yearn for those days. They're nothing but Tories who've finally adapted to the Constitution in its original form. Hell, some are probably still Royalists - Saudi Royalists if nothing else.

Once upon a time, only male landowners could vote. That's what makes voting an entitlement rather than a right. Words have meaning. The word 'entitlement' means something that's created, granted, and enforced by a government. It's not the same as a 'right' which we see as inalienable. An entitlement can be bought; we're born with rights.

Property (as distinct from possessions) is an entitlement. Without government, there's no way there's any such thing as a title, boundaries, trespassing, or other perquisites of property. The Republicans, in the last 100 years, have been more about property than people. These people don't regard a person's value as innate and equal; it's only what they own, not what they are.

Entitlements have historically been granted only to the wealthy and powerful - and become the very source of wealth and power, certainly not merit or labor. That's what a 'land grant' is all about. That's what Pennsylvania was all about: land granted to the Penn family by the King. America was all about entitlements, colonialism, imperialism, and plantation economics (profiting from the labor of others: slaves). In many ways, it still is. The American Revolution only replaced the King and the King's toadies with a "new aristocracy" of landowners - landowners who owed their very status to the entitlements they received from the King. Indeed, the revolution was close to being reversed and the "new aristocrats" were close to losing all their land and being hanged in the first ten years. That's why the Constitution, to the degree it does, finally recognized "inalienable rights" more than ten years after the Revolution. The "founders" had to do something to keep the hoi polloi from inviting the British back. The "democratization" has never been completed ... nor has it yet been a real republic.

If you want to see a more complete Revolution, look at France.

The furthest we ever got toward a just and equitable democratic republic was the early 70's - certainly not the "Clinton era."

[CaTeacher]

11. One of my friends

(he is a Palestinian--and rightly has issues with America's foreign policy) has a yearly BBQ.

It is awesome--all kinds of great food--and wonderful people. But, one of the highlights is that an American flag is always laid down in the dirt--for the people to step on while they eat, drink, and mingle.

Sparks lots of good political debate too!

The flag is just a symbol--it is nothing special. I don't see any reason for the RWers to get all upset over it.

I got really really angry where I teach--because after 9-11 the principle went around and put little paper flags on everyone's desks. Well--I was really offended--and ripped mine down immediately--I wanted to tell him where to shove it! Most of my fellow teachers were very ticked off--but the majority waited a while to take it down--just because feelings were so hot right then. One or two still have the little flag on their desk--sheeple.