FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION SAFE (Political)

[Zeb_Carter]

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION SAFE .... FOR NOW

The headline on foxnews.com this morning read "First Amendment Lives Another Day." Well put. The so-called "Flag burning" amendment to our Constitution has failed ... by one vote. Freedom wins ... by one vote.

Get down on your knees and thank God or Allah or whom ever is politically correct to worship these days; the flag burning amendment failed in the Senate! The scary part, folks, is that it failed by just one vote. One vote!

That means sixty-six of our Senators (out of 100) voted in favor of an amendment that would limit your right to freedom of expression. Sixty-four Senators wanted to use the United States Constitution to limit your freedoms, rather than to limit the range of government power.

The three key Republican "nay" notes went to Robert Bennett of Utah, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Lincoln Chaffee of Rhode Island. While their heads may be on the chopping block come November, at least there seems to be a few politicians who are voting based on reason rather than re-election.

The New York Times astutely points out that this was a close call, but there is no need to worry about future votes because "...most analysts expect Republicans to lose Senate seats in the November election." Most analysts? Could the New York Times, the "godfather" of print journalism, not be any more specific? Maybe they were too busy printing top-secret stories about how we track terrorists. Go figure.

So why do politicians keep coming back to this issue? Well, for one, it's very popular. Poll after poll shows that the idea of a flag-burning amendment is popular. That's not surprising in this age when so many Americans has lost their love of true freedom. The same polls also show that an amendment banning gay marriage would be a good idea, even though both ideas are terrible. But it's a cheap and easy way for politicians to change the subject in Washington and start debating. It's another way for them to look like they're doing something.

But they'll never give up. The lure of political pandering is far too great.

 

[rgraham666]

Freedom of speech will always be in danger. Many people really don't like it.

For example, I was on another forum yesterday. One poster said it was time to bring back the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Brrrr.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Freedom of speech will always be in danger. Many people really don't like it.

For example, I was on another forum yesterday. One poster said it was time to bring back the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Brrrr.

Yes and politicians will always be looking for ways to restrict our freedoms.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

ONE VOTE, though!??! It didn't pass by ONE VOTE!?

This thing should have gone down in flames, if you ask me... pun intended...

 

[rgraham666]

Yes and politicians will always be looking for ways to restrict our freedoms.

This guy was not a politician.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

You might find it interesting that the entire point behind burning the flag is as an expression of freedom. You don't have to like it, but that's what it's about.

So when you say Freedom wins by one point, I think it makes you look like an idiot.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

You might find it interesting that the entire point behind burning the flag is as an expression of freedom. You don't have to like it, but that's what it's about.

So when you say Freedom wins by one point, I think it makes you look like an idiot.

Sixty-fsix Senators voted FOR the bill. That's 66% of the Senate. Our freedoms are under fire from all corners.

Whether I'm an idiot is a matter of opinion, but I will fight for your right to express that opinion to the death.

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Sixty-fsix Senators voted FOR the bill. That's 66% of the Senate. Our freedoms are under fire from all corners.

Whether I'm an idiot is a matter of opinion, but I will fight for your right to express that opinion to the death.

I apologize. I misread your initial post to read that the bill had passed and that's how freedom had won. Very sorry. I am the idiot in this instance.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I apologize. I misread your initial post to read that the bill had passed and that's how freedom had won. Very sorry. I am the idiot in this instance.

I will still fight for your right to express it beautiful!

 

[lucky-E-leven]

I will still fight for your right to express it beautiful!

Me too, you too.

 

[Liar]

Out of curiosity, I googled "flaggbränning" (flag burning) so see what the law said here... only to read that a man was charged for torching a Swedish flag just a few weeks ago.

Then I read on. The problem was not that it was a flag. It was someone else's flag.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Out of curiosity, I googled "flaggbränning" (flag burning) so see what the law said here... only to read that a man was charged for torching a Swedish flag just a few weeks ago.

Then I read on. The problem was not that it was a flag. It was someone else's flag.

There's a lesson to be learned there:

If it's not your flag, don't burn it!

You want to burn a flag, go buy one!

 

[minsue]

The thing that always confuses me about this law, that's been tried and tried over and over, is that the proper and respectful way to dispose of a flag is to burn it. I'm curious how the law is written, if they actually write it to be illegal to burn a flag only in protest or if they write it to be illegal to burn it at all?

And what in the hell would the flag stand for then if they took away the right to burn it?

 

[imalickin]

The thing that always confuses me about this law, that's been tried and tried over and over, is that the proper and respectful way to dispose of a flag is to burn it. I'm curious how the law is written, if they actually write it to be illegal to burn a flag only in protest or if they write it to be illegal to burn it at all?

And what in the hell would the flag stand for then if they took away the right to burn it?

Old worn out flags are disposed of by burning, but there is a ceremony that is supposed to be followed and it isn't done in the open in protest of something or other.

And if you couldn't protest by burning the flag, then it wouldn't stand for much in my opinion.

Now the question: Would I burn the flag in protest?

I believe I am too patriotic to use the flag in such a manner. Burning the politicians in effigee would be better in my opinion.

 

[minsue]

Old worn out flags are disposed of by burning, but there is a ceremony that is supposed to be followed and it isn't done in the open in protest of something or other.

I know, I've been a part of such ceremonies. That's why I question how the law is worded.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I apologize. I misread your initial post to read that the bill had passed and that's how freedom had won. Very sorry. I am the idiot in this instance.

Why is it that I find this statement ravishing?

It's pathetic, but nothing gets to me quite like a truly sincere and damn-everything apology. That and that AV.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

It makes me proud when I see misguided people burning a U.S. flag. I always think, "Try that in North Korea, Zimbabwe or Cuba, cretin! This nation so loves liberty that we even defend the rights of jerks like you to be jerks."

Here's what saddens me about the issue: That the boob-geosie allows themselves to be suckered and distracted by crap like this by obscenely cynical pols who are meanwhile robbing the boobs blind and violating the principles they've promised and even sworn to ubhold.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Now the question: Would I burn the flag in protest?

I believe I am too patriotic to use the flag in such a manner. Burning the politicians in effigee would be better in my opinion.

What an excellent question. I defend to the hilt the right of people to burn flags, but frankly I find it a cliche-ridden act too melodramatic and over-used to carry much meaning. The flag is a very imprecise symbol; burning it seems to convey a very broad message, "I hate everything about this country," which really ends up sounding more like self-dramatization than an issue. I can't that as a gesture it's really very effective, and of course there are quite a few people whom it genuinely pisses off.

The morale of this post: if you're going to protest through a symbolic gesture, pick one that is fresh, clear, and deeply resonant - dressing up like clowns and beating a several-ton missile silo cover with a sledgehammer, for instance.

 

[Liar]

And still, what's he big effin deal with flags? It's a piece of cloth. Fro some reason representing a country. As long as nobody is burning the actual country, I couldn't care less.

I mean this in the most general, philosophical way. How did a patchwork quilt on a pole become such a central symbol instead of, I dunno, a totem?

And why a national anthem and not a national jig?

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

The flag is a very imprecise symbol; burning it seems to convey a very broad message, "I hate everything about this country," which really ends up sounding more like self-dramatization than an issue.

The wise horsie has put his finger on the thing that caused me to use intemperate language about flag-burners, when I wasn't even clear myself why they riled me - there is nothing about dramatic protest per se that I find objectionable.


Edited to say: This crossed with Liar's post. I think horsie answers Liar. I lean toward the view expressed by Liar, which is why I was confused by my own animus against flag burners. Horsie made me understand.

 

[angela146]

The actual text proposed was:

The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.

Hence, you could still burn a flag as long as you didn't do it in a way proscribed by congress.

Oh, by the way, do you think maybe the Republicans didn't really want it to pass? It seems pretty well staged to allow just exactly the right number of votes in favor without actually passing the thing.

Hmmmmm......

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

The actual text proposed was:

Hence, you could still burn a flag as long as you didn't do it in a way proscribed by congress.

Oh, by the way, do you think maybe the Republicans didn't really want it to pass? It seems pretty well staged to allow just exactly the right number of votes in favor without actually passing the thing.

Hmmmmm......

Oh, they could never be that cynical, could they?


(This will give a clue about how I would answer my own question here.)

 

[S-Des]

The actual text proposed was:

Hence, you could still burn a flag as long as you didn't do it in a way proscribed by congress.

Oh, by the way, do you think maybe the Republicans didn't really want it to pass? It seems pretty well staged to allow just exactly the right number of votes in favor without actually passing the thing.

Hmmmmm......

EXACTLY!!! We have a winner. Just like the immigration debate, they didn't want to win so that they can use it to get stupid people to vote for them in the fall (oh yeah, don't forget saving marriage for people like them who like it so much that they get married 3 or 4 times). What scares me is that it's not just the Right (who I actually dislike only slightly more than the Left). Hillary Clinton was booed at a rally when she announced support for the ammendment. Talk about pandering!

And still, what's he big effin deal with flags? It's a piece of cloth. Fro some reason representing a country. As long as nobody is burning the actual country, I couldn't care less.

To me the funniest part is that if you look closely, you'll probably see the words, "Made in China"

 

[Pure]

this is one of several votes that are silly, but designed to provide
campaign material in Nov. it appears a number of Dems were scared of havin it flung in their faces in a few mos.

there have now been votes on gay marriage, and on pressing ahead in Iraq and winning the war on terror. all designed for embarrassment. hardly any voted against the latter.

 

[Matadore]

One more hot button issue

Com'on, somebody say it...abortion

BTW, Did I miss the nationwide sponteanous outbreak of flagburnings?