MelissaB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 09:53 PM
Original message |
Conyers on flag burning: "Once we decide to limit freedom of speech, |
|
Edited on Wed Jun-22-05 09:54 PM by MelissaB
House approves amendment to protect U.S. flag..snip Opponents warn the amendment would alter the Bill of Rights to exclude an expression of free speech. It "elevates a symbol of freedom over freedom itself," Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., said. "Once we decide to limit freedom of speech, limitations on freedom of the press and freedom of religion may not be far behind." Link: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-22-flag-burning_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA
|
FloridaPat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 09:56 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The gov has been trying to pass that since the 60's. It plan does not |
|
belong in the Constitution. Besides, desecrating a flag is self-penalizing. People who desecrate the flag tend to get beat up.
I remember in the 60's a union working in NYC beat up a hippie that had the flag sewed on his/her jeans. Now I go into stores, and there are slacks with the flag on it.
|
MelissaB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. I'm nervous about this one. |
|
Here is another quote from the article:
Those on both sides of the issue say this may be the year. Vote counts by the Citizens Flag Alliance, which supports the amendment, and the American Civil Liberties Union, which opposes it, show the Senate could be only two votes shy of the 67 needed to send the measure to the states for ratification.
|
BattyDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 09:59 PM
Response to Original message |
|
:loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:
Everytime I reach a point where I think that I can't possibly love him any more than I do, he does something wonderful or says something wonderful and I end up loving him even more!
:loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:
|
Erika
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
entanglement
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
21. How long before hate radio hosts spin this into something |
|
like "Conyers support flag burning"?
|
Raiden
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:01 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Brilliant! What a guy! |
LostInAnomie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:02 PM
Response to Original message |
5. It would be an absolutely unenforcible law. |
|
What if they burn a flag with only 49 stars, or inversed stripes, or a homemade flag that looks like crap. Eventually it is going to come down to either permitting it all or cracking down on any anti-governmental speech.
It can't be enforced.
|
MelissaB
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. but it would be a great excuse for arrests at protests |
Ian David
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. They'll be finding burned flags littering the highway |
|
Are they going to ban cross-burning too? MoPaul had a great idea- burn the CONFEDERATE flag burn THIS flag chumps! http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3924411
|
Pachamama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 03:52 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
22. What if I paint an image of the flag on fire & march around with that? |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-23-05 03:53 AM by Pachamama
Would I be guilty of "flag desecration"? Would even possessing the image of the flag being desecrated be punishable by law? And if so, where does it stop? :shrug:
|
merbex
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:05 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I am convinced that certain politicians like Conyers, Kennedy,Byrd |
|
reach a certain point in their career when THEY JUST DO THE RIGHT THING
Is it because they are a certain age,have no asperations for higher office and they say WTF I'm here,I might as well do good and live up to my conscience,my belifs and the oath I took
We need more like them
|
SnoopDog
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:09 PM
Response to Original message |
8. 'limitation on freedom of religion"...? |
|
Would that mean that 'they' would force a religion on me?
That will be the day. If anybody ever mandates that I 'follow' a religion - that will be the day I 'protect' myself...always.
Being agnostic, to have someone force me to believe is the 'invisible man' would be the day I... I.... I guess I would leave America.... Just like our founding fathers.... Escape religious prosecution.
Or, I guess enforce the Constitution of the United States of Americs...
|
candy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:18 PM
Response to Original message |
9. If flag burning Is okay is Bible burning or Torah burning or |
|
Quran burning okay?
Could someone explain the difference to me?
|
TahitiNut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
16. Flag burning began as a PATRIOTIC protest -- saying the flag was 'soiled' |
|
... by the acts of a government that ran contrary to the ideals the flag stood for. (A 'soiled' flag must, by law, be disposed of by burning.)
Thus, burning the American flag is a protest against government corruption and treachery. In promulgating this amendment, elected officials are, in effect, consecrating themselves! They're reacting to a protest against corrupt government, not an insult to the nation!
|
Inland
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:36 PM
Response to Original message |
12. That's true, and that's what sells it to the fundies and neocons. |
|
You think they don't know that further limits on speech are going to come the second we step on the slippery slope?
They are hoping for it.
|
moondust
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:38 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Does this apply to all past and future flags of the U.S.? To the confederate flag which was once the flag of parts of the U.S.? To stickers and decals and other symbols of the symbol? Will this apply to the new flag of Jesusland?
|
FreedomAngel82
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
the way to properly get way of a flag is to burn it. It's disrespectful to just throw it away. And what about all the tshirts, bandana's, bears etc? That's also disrespectful.
|
LynnTheDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jun-22-05 11:05 PM
Response to Original message |
15. SYMBOLS over Freedom. Give up your FREEDOM for a SYMBOL. |
|
Only in America can so many be so fucking stupid.
Please don't have to learn the hard way, America.
|
FreeCajun
(167 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 01:18 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
17. As if these people would elevate a Cross over Jesus' moral teachings! nt |
Hobarticus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 02:34 AM
Response to Original message |
18. I have yet to talk to anyone in support of banning flag-burning... |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-23-05 02:38 AM by Hobarticus
It's such a non-issue. I bet this will go over badly.
You've got Bush wandering the highways and byways like a crazed hermit, blathering about Social Security being on the verge of collapse...and Congress is worried about tripe like this? How can the GOP shreik about one thing, and do another?
This isn't a priority. People aren't stupid, they can smell grandstanding a mile away. This is the next "Big Brother" act to blow up in their faces.
|
OrlandoGator
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
19. Eh, I ran into a few people at work who are 100% in favor of it. |
|
They think this law is about flag burning and not about limiting rights of expression.
By the way, how can you have a constitutional amendment that: a) Is worded so vagely that it could never possibly be enforced, and b) Is in diametric conflict with the First Amendment?
People, keep in mind that this is the second proposed amendment byt the Republicans to limit our freedoms. The only other such amendment was the 18th (alcohol prohibition), and it was repealed.
|
Hobarticus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
20. "First Amendment, Schmirst Amendment..." |
|
"Let's bust us some hippies!"
Nonsense. I'm with ya...if it makes the books, it won't last long.
|
LostInAnomie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 04:41 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
23. If this one makes it to the Constitution it will never be repealed. |
|
It would be impossible to enforce, and easy as hell to find loopholes around, but it would never get repealed.
To do so would bring a wave of righteous indignation like no one has seen before. And all because people don't understand the meaning or freedom of speech.
|
OrlandoGator
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-23-05 06:57 AM
Response to Reply #23 |
24. It's "unrepealable" just like "under God" in the Pledge. |
|
Edited on Thu Jun-23-05 06:57 AM by OrlandoGator
Anyone who tried to repeal the Amendment would be labeled a "flag burner" and ostracized.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 10:09 AM
Response to Original message |