One of the greatest plays in sports .....ever

[untateve]

Go try burning the flag in front of those that fight to defend what it symbolizes and see what happens.

 

And this has what to do with my constitutional right to freedom of speech/expression?

[The Holy Roller]

If someone is burning the flag while humping your leg, then PERHAPS.

 

OK. This made me laugh out loud.

[The Holy Roller]

And this has what to do with my constitutional right to freedom of speech/expression?

 

All the freedoms that are ours are limited freedoms. Many feel flag burning is over the limit. Slander and libel are also limits on our freedom of speech. You probably don't call your black friends ni%%ers. But you could. And if you did so at work it would probably get you reprimanded/fired (to say nothing of what would happen to you if done in north St. Louis, etc). Or try exercising your right to freedom of expression by commenting on the nice rack of your supervisor or the gay guy working in the next cubical. You could.

Edited April 29, 2008 by The Holy Roller

[whomper]

All the freedoms that are ours are limited freedoms. Many feel flag burning is over the limit. Slander and libel are also limits on our freedom of speech. You probably don't call your black friends ni%%ers. But you could. And if you did so at work it would probably get you reprimanded/fired (to say nothing of what would happen to you if done in north St. Louis, etc). Or try exercising your right to freedom of expression by commenting on the nice rack of your supervisor or the gay guy working in the next cubical. You could.

 

 

No need to bring Hugh One into this

[westvirginia]

You guys just don't get this (other than pope and uncle steve). I have some old clothes. Assuming I"m not running afoul of fire codes and such, no one can do a thing to me for dousing those old clothes with lighter fluid and firing them up. What's the difference between that and a flag I've purchased for myself? The difference you don't like, is the STATEMENT that burning the flag makes. That, my friends, is speech. Though unpopular and stupid it may be (like the Rev. Wright's GAWD DAM AMERIKA! tirades), one still has the perfect right to do it. Unlike your specious arguments about libel or slander, there is no harm done by burning the flag. To meet the definition of libel or slander, you have to show I've harmed you in some quantifiable way.

 

unta has hinted at it, but I'll come right out and say it. You folks don't like or want freedom. You want people to be free to do and say what they want, as long as you agree with it. Freedom's hard, guys. True liberty does away with a lot of things that make people comfy in this country. But hey, I understand if you still need your Mommy. Just don't try to force her on me (unless she's hawt).

[whomper]

You guys just don't get this (other than pope and uncle steve). I have some old clothes. Assuming I"m not running afoul of fire codes and such, no one can do a thing to me for dousing those old clothes with lighter fluid and firing them up. What's the difference between that and a flag I've purchased for myself? The difference you don't like, is the STATEMENT that burning the flag makes. That, my friends, is speech. Though unpopular and stupid it may be (like the Rev. Wright's GAWD DAM AMERIKA! tirades), one still has the perfect right to do it. Unlike your specious arguments about libel or slander, there is no harm done by burning the flag. To meet the definition of libel or slander, you have to show I've harmed you in some quantifiable way.

 

unta has hinted at it, but I'll come right out and say it. You folks don't like or want freedom. You want people to be free to do and say what they want, as long as you agree with it. Freedom's hard, guys. True liberty does away with a lot of things that make people comfy in this country. But hey, I understand if you still need your Mommy. Just don't try to force her on me (unless she's hawt).

 

 

I never thought I would see that day where I had to defend a stance against burning the American Flag. Neil armstrong may as well have stuck his pepper in the moon. The flag is more than a piece of cloth and not comparable to old clothes IMO.

Edited April 29, 2008 by whomper

[The Holy Roller]

You guys just don't get this (other than pope and uncle steve). I have some old clothes. Assuming I"m not running afoul of fire codes and such, no one can do a thing to me for dousing those old clothes with lighter fluid and firing them up. What's the difference between that and a flag I've purchased for myself? The difference you don't like, is the STATEMENT that burning the flag makes. That, my friends, is speech. Though unpopular and stupid it may be (like the Rev. Wright's GAWD DAM AMERIKA! tirades), one still has the perfect right to do it. Unlike your specious arguments about libel or slander, there is no harm done by burning the flag. To meet the definition of libel or slander, you have to show I've harmed you in some quantifiable way.

 

unta has hinted at it, but I'll come right out and say it. You folks don't like or want freedom. You want people to be free to do and say what they want, as long as you agree with it. Freedom's hard, guys. True liberty does away with a lot of things that make people comfy in this country. But hey, I understand if you still need your Mommy. Just don't try to force her on me (unless she's hawt).

 

Wrong. The mental anguish experienced by those who hold the flag as sacred are harmed by it's desecration. Your comment about "You folks not liking or wanting freedom" is not true either. Our freedom was paid for in blood and that sacrifice is symbolized in our flag. Dishonor it in the name of whatever freedom you wish. It is still wrong. You just don't/won't get it. And libel and slander are still limits on our freedom of speech. Why don't you accept the fact that our freedom's have limits?

Edited April 29, 2008 by The Holy Roller

[Pope Flick]

All the freedoms that are ours are limited freedoms. Many feel flag burning is over the limit. Slander and libel are also limits on our freedom of speech. You probably don't call your black friends ni%%ers. But you could. And if you did so at work it would probably get you reprimanded/fired (to say nothing of what would happen to you if done in north St. Louis, etc). Or try exercising your right to freedom of expression by commenting on the nice rack of your supervisor or the gay guy working in the next cubical. You could.

 

 

I could burn a flag at my cubicle at work, and get fired as well.

 

Again, the analogies aren't there - you're arguing in the private sphere, whereas free speech is about public speech. I bump into my black co-worker at a grocery store, or in a park and call him that name I won't lose my job. Same as I bump into my supervisor walking my dog and comment on his wife's rack. I don't get fired, although work isn't a good place moving forward.

 

 

WVA nailed it - you want the convenience of freedom, but aren't willing to pay the ultimate price. Remember the "stick and sontes" saying? Well - it applies right here and the bigger man can turn the other cheek. If you want to be a thug, well then you can but you won't be seen as 'right' in the eyes of our laws, fortunately.

[whomper]

I could burn a flag at my cubicle at work, and get fired as well.

 

Again, the analogies aren't there - you're arguing in the private sphere, whereas free speech is about public speech. I bump into my black co-worker at a grocery store, or in a park and call him that name I won't lose my job. Same as I bump into my supervisor walking my dog and comment on his wife's rack. I don't get fired, although work isn't a good place moving forward.

 

 

WVA nailed it - you want the convenience of freedom, but aren't willing to pay the ultimate price. Remember the "stick and sontes" saying? Well - it applies right here and the bigger man can turn the other cheek. If you want to be a thug, well then you can but you won't be seen as 'right' in the eyes of our laws, fortunately.

 

 

So you are willing to look the other way on ANY expression of freedom of speech as long as it doesnt break the law ? Burning a cross, The Flag anything goes ?

[Pope Flick]

So you are willing to look the other way on ANY expression of freedom of speech as long as it doesnt break the law ? Burning a cross, The Flag anything goes ?

 

 

That's what freedom is. It isn't free, either at home or abroad. Paying the price at home means I can be offended to my core, and if I act like a thug in my response by assaulting said offendee I expect to go to court. It also means I can take a confederate flag to a KKK rally and burn it in front of them - which I have done.

 

 

At this place I often hear: its a BBS, why get offended over something you read on a BBS? Well, why should a BBS be any different than real life? Given the stuff that gets written here, I guess that's the way to go. Those two clowns at Dodger stadium? It's fun to watch their plan fail and then get arrested, isn't it?

 

Ad a quick add: I agree with the 'yelling fire in a crowded theater' should be illegal, whereas what we've been talking about should not be against the law. As unta pointed out, most countries that ban that internally and along the lines of China, Iran, etc. Denmark as well.

Edited April 29, 2008 by Pope Flick

[westvirginia]

Wrong. The mental anguish experienced by those who hold the flag as sacred are harmed by it's desecration. Your comment about "You folks not liking or wanting freedom" is not true either. Our freedom was paid for in blood and that sacrifice is symbolized in our flag. Dishonor it in the name of whatever freedom you wish. It is still wrong. You just don't/won't get it. And libel and slander are still limits on our freedom of speech. Why don't you accept the fact that our freedom's have limits?

 

OK, so if you say something in favor of gun control, that causes me mental anguish it should be banned (remember, the shot heard 'round the world was the colonists refusal to stack their arms for the confiscation of the British redcoats - that's why I'm so passionate about guns)? If you call me stoopid for smoking, then that causes me mental anguish and should be banned because I'm an addict and can't help myself?

 

I understand where you're coming from, I really do. You just want all the benefits of freedom without the responsibilities. Heck, if you wanted to, you could make a case that everything you do on a daily basis causes some harm to someone else. You use Crest? Well, your freedom to use Crest infringes on Colgate's stockholders. You wear Levi's? Well, what about Wrangler? Do you guys really not see where you're heading here?

[untateve]

So you are willing to look the other way on ANY expression of freedom of speech as long as it doesnt break the law ? Burning a cross, The Flag anything goes ?

 

Burning a cross in a Black family's yard is against the law and should be. At a minimum, you have trespassing and probably criminal mischief. I'm no lawyer, but I think this could be interpreted as a threat as well. However, if I want to burn a cross in my front yard, there is no law against it. If I want to walk around town in Nazi garb, that's what I get to do.

 

Just because I don't agree with someone's speech/expression, doesn't mean I get to censor it. For me, this is the core of Freedom of Speech and again, something that makes this country great.

[wcd480]

Because you are a highly respected and honored Huddler I will make this clear. Yes.

 

 

But afterwards I would recite the Preamble, the Pledge of Allegience, sing America The Beautiful, the Marine Corps Hymn, read the Gettysburg Address, and bake them cookies in the shape of the Statue of Liberty.

 

 

reading that just made my day

[Fatman]

I've never seen that before...very cool.

[The Holy Roller]

OK, so if you say something in favor of gun control, that causes me mental anguish it should be banned (remember, the shot heard 'round the world was the colonists refusal to stack their arms for the confiscation of the British redcoats - that's why I'm so passionate about guns)? If you call me stoopid for smoking, then that causes me mental anguish and should be banned because I'm an addict and can't help myself?

 

I understand where you're coming from, I really do. You just want all the benefits of freedom without the responsibilities. Heck, if you wanted to, you could make a case that everything you do on a daily basis causes some harm to someone else. You use Crest? Well, your freedom to use Crest infringes on Colgate's stockholders. You wear Levi's? Well, what about Wrangler? Do you guys really not see where you're heading here?

 

I still don't understand where you're coming from with this "...want(ing) all the benefits of freedom without the responsibilities."? Each of our freedoms has limits. For me and many others flag burning goes beyond the limits. For you it does not. That's what makes America a great place. I will be forever grateful to those who went before us who made the ultimate sacrifice to allow us the privilege of our conversation. I think we agree on more than we disagree. Peace.

[isleseeya]

You guys just don't get this (other than pope and uncle steve). I have some old clothes. Assuming I"m not running afoul of fire codes and such, no one can do a thing to me for dousing those old clothes with lighter fluid and firing them up. What's the difference between that and a flag I've purchased for myself? The difference you don't like, is the STATEMENT that burning the flag makes. That, my friends, is speech. Though unpopular and stupid it may be (like the Rev. Wright's GAWD DAM AMERIKA! tirades), one still has the perfect right to do it. Unlike your specious arguments about libel or slander, there is no harm done by burning the flag. To meet the definition of libel or slander, you have to show I've harmed you in some quantifiable way.

 

unta has hinted at it, but I'll come right out and say it. You folks don't like or want freedom. You want people to be free to do and say what they want, as long as you agree with it. Freedom's hard, guys. True liberty does away with a lot of things that make people comfy in this country. But hey, I understand if you still need your Mommy. Just don't try to force her on me (unless she's hawt).

 

 

Please tell me you are kidding

[isleseeya]

Then I guess you have a problem with the rule of law.

 

And if you want to place so much importance in a symbol, rather than protecting its ideals, well then YES we won't agree.

 

symbols can have a huge and deep meaning ...for example I hold the Cross very dear to me as a christian ...so yes symbols can move people and be powerful

 

people did not die for freedom and the flag which symbolizes so it can be burned ...period

 

 

As a matter of fact, I do. They fought over belief in the right to say what one feels. They fought and died for a concept of a way of life. They didn't fight for a piece of cloth. They didn't fight for a symboI. I respectfully submit that you are missing the forest for looking at the trees with this one.

 

Ok they fought for a way of life and concept ...no problem with that ...what does burning a flag say or show ? what concept ? is it freedom to do so or disrespect towards the United States and its people ?

 

I think its the latter ... and i think that should not be allowed ...period

 

 

i am done PF ...like i said we will not agree but i wont criticize you for it

[Dr. Love]

It is hard for me to read some of these posts without humming some Alanis Morrissette. Some here are more concerned about protecting the symbol of freedom than they are in protecting the freedom itself. Banning flag burning (or any other harmless form of expression) would attack the liberties and values that this country was founded on infinitely more than burning 1000 flags.

[yo mama]

It is hard for me to read some of these posts without humming some Alanis Morrissette. Some here are more concerned about protecting the symbol of freedom than they are in protecting the freedom itself. Banning flag burning (or any other harmless form of expression) would attack the liberties and values that this country was founded on infinitely more than burning 1000 flags.

I was thinking the same thing when I read this thread earlier today. I'd never burn a flag, and hope those that do accidentally set themselves ablaze. Regardless, I'd be way more upset if a precedent was set that allowed government to curb my constitutional freedom of speech merely because it was unpopular.

[untateve]

people did not die for freedom and the flag which symbolizes so it can be burned ...period

 

And there is the crux of our disagreement. I posit that this is a freedom that they most certainly fought and died for.

[montster]

symbols can have a huge and deep meaning ...for example I hold the Cross very dear to me as a christian ...so yes symbols can move people and be powerful

 

people did not die for freedom and the flag which symbolizes so it can be burned ...period

 

 

 

 

Ok they fought for a way of life and concept ...no problem with that ...what does burning a flag say or show ? what concept ? is it freedom to do so or disrespect towards the United States and its people ?

 

I think its the latter ... and i think that should not be allowed ...period

 

 

i am done PF ...like i said we will not agree but i wont criticize you for it

 

but when you protect one symbol, where does it end? surely plenty were offended when roseanne barr sang "the star-bangled banner" offkey and grabbed her crotch at the end, so why not make that illegal, too?

[I Like Soup]

The flag represents freedom of speech. Many have died for that right. If you were to make flag burning illegal, then you're doing more to desecrate its concept that burning a thousand flags.

 

In fact, that's what makes the symbol so strong: destroying it does nothing to its concept. Restricting speech regarding the flag weakens the symbol.

And the two absolutely go together: the revolutionary war was fought to rid ourselves of a king and concepts of creating symbols that are sacrosanct.

 

People died to protect freedom of speech. Start protecting symbols, you have infringed upon that right meaning those who died died in vain.

These statements from Pope have really hit home with me. While the flag remains a symbol of freedom to me and always brings heartfelt emotions, I must say I agree with this line of reasoning...:gag:

 

That doesn't mean I wouldn't sit idly by while someone was lighting the flag, a la Rick Monday style...I'd try to tell them how stoopid they are on the way by. I can't suppress the ex-military side all the way.

[wiegie]

There are only two times that I have set fire to an American flag:

 

Once was when I set fire to a politician who was wearing an American flag lapel pin and the other time was when I was trying to get my students in Germany to like me better.

[whomper]

but when you protect one symbol, where does it end? surely plenty were offended when roseanne barr sang "the star-bangled banner" offkey and grabbed her crotch at the end, so why not make that illegal, too?

 

 

Its really a very short list for me. The flag and The Cross.

[untateve]

Its really a very short list for me. The flag and The Cross.

 

What about the Star of David? The Muslim Crescent and Star? The Scientology Cross? The Jesus fish? (etc.)

 

Surely you're not advocating protecting only your particular religious symbol? I have to assume you want a law to protect all religious symbols, yes?