US Flag Desecration on 9/11

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer @ Sep 9 2006, 02:04 PM) [snapback]317069[/snapback]</div>

I'm afraid I must disagree with your premise. I do not believe it is "our job as Americans to respect the flag" or to "ensure that others do not desecrate it." First of all, we'd be much better off respecting the US Constitution, which is what really sets America apart from many other nations, and which guarantees freedom of speech, even that which is offensive to others. Secondly, as Americans I think we have some much more serious matters that deserve our attention, ensuring that our fellow Americans have a job, enough food on their plates, a clean environment, good schools for their children, the list goes on. I'm afraid protecting a symbol would have to come pretty low on any list of real priorities. Finally, the word "desecration" implies that the flag is a "sacred" object; it is not. It is a symbol; as Americans we have the freedom to respect it or not; to ignore it or not. This country will survive without our efforts to protect the flag. If we fail to protect the Constitution, however, its very foundations will be in grave danger.

 

Most of us look at the intent of the person's heart when they do something, rather than the letter of the law. Unless we oppose that person politically, of course, then we trout out the image of him doing something he shouldn't have done three years ago, demand his prosecution (or execution), and pound our chest in neo-righteousness.

And its probably all a pre-emptive strike to try and counteract the flag flying this Monday. Pretty cynical, don't you think?

Ignore the "anti-" folks and fly your flag Monday. Do it for the victims and not for the shrill partisans. A pox on all their houses.

http://www.september11victims.com/septembe...ictims_list.htm

 

I would not go so far as to call i desecration to autograph the flag or list memorial names on it. I do think it is a sign of the gradual "disrespect" of the flag.

Heck, I don't approve of flags on baseball uniforms...or even police/security uniforms. (military OK as identifiers)

 

"treat the flag as we do our fellow Americans"

We'd do better to treat our fellow Americans with the same respect we show our flag.

It's one thing to burn a flag as a statement of protest, as ruled by the Supreme Court.

It's entirely another for it to be used as a way of marketing, advertising or for other monetary or souvenir purposes.

I do not think it is acceptable to autograph a flag. I do not think it is acceptable to print logos or other stuff on the flag. I think "flagofheroes" is in violation of the code. I think our President should know better.

I also don't think a flag should be cut up to make clothing.

I do not think a flag patch should be applied to the seat of a pair of jeans to patch a hole.

There is a code, it should be followed. That includes not flying a flag at night unless it is lit.

The Supreme Court is the final arbiter.

BTW there is a code about the congressional seal too. Randy "Duke" Cunningham violated it when he sold knives with the seal on them without getting permission to do so from Congress. Of course...he had more serious problems than that.

Will I be flying my flag on Monday? No. It is not a national holiday. And I will not celebrate an attack on the United States. I don't fly my flag for Pearl Harbor either.

I'll wait until Veteran's Day to put my flag up again. And I'll take it down at sunset.

 

There is no penalty in the Flag Code for any violation; that is left to the states (and the Federal Government for the DC and territories). However, the SupCt struck down the most recent try at flag laws contained in the US Code in 1989. I suspect all state laws were invalidated by that action too, in practice if not in fact.

 

I find it amusing that the president, who insists so loudly on respect for the flag, desecrates it by signing it, in clear violation of the law which he pretends to hold in such high esteem.

However, for me, freedom of speech is a far higher priority than treatment of a symbolic piece of cloth. As far as I am concerned, a person who purchases a piece of cloth may do what he likes with it, providing he does not hurt anybody with it.

I strongly oppose flag-burning, as that causes pollution. (Just as I oppose diesel engines for the same reason.)

I'm concerned with human rights and civil rights. I'm concerned about how people treat each other and the Earth we all must share. I couldn't give a rat's nice person whether people fly the flag backwards or upside down or use it for toilet paper. And, no, I don't care if W. signs his name on it, other than that I find his hypocrisy amusing.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 9 2006, 07:04 PM) [snapback]317183[/snapback]</div>

If you are concerned about how people "treat each other," then you cannot hold that position.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 9 2006, 08:22 PM) [snapback]317209[/snapback]</div>

Cannot hold what position? I'm concerned about how people treat each other, so, according to you I cannot hold the position that the flag is just a piece of cloth? Or I cannot be amused that Bush signs a flag, in violation of the official legal protocols which ban writing on flags?r I cannot hold the position that I really don't care if he does, other than to be amused by it? Which position do you think I cannot hold? Perhaps, with your conservative mindset, you think I cannot hold the position that it's wrong to kill people? (Because the conservative party line is that you cannot have peace without war.) ???

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 10 2006, 05:41 AM) [snapback]317289[/snapback]</div>

Heh if anyone is middle of the road it would fshagan. Now goto bed all this early morning hypocrisy is straining your brain. [attachmentid=4948]

Wildkow

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Sep 10 2006, 08:47 AM) [snapback]317291[/snapback]</div>

are you taking any classes this semester?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SEAPrius @ Sep 9 2006, 05:49 PM) [snapback]317082[/snapback]</div>

I agree that the flag is a symbol. A symbol that many have died for, but a symbol nonetheless. While I do not advocate desecrating it, I am not going to have an epileptic fit if someone else does. I may think they're a retard, but that's about it. Burning the flag is a form of speech, and isn't that one of those freedoms we're all about? If you want to talk about desecration, how about the corruption & lies that come out of various places like the Congress, White House, etc., Republicans and Democrats alike.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 10 2006, 05:41 AM) [snapback]317289[/snapback]</div>

Here's an assignment, because you and I obviously can't communicate.

Go find a WWII veteran of the Pacific theater. Ask him what the flag means to him.
Go to a local VFW branch, and ask some of the members what the flag means to them.

Then consider if you would say to them that you don't care if someone wipes their butt with the flag.

If you are concerned about how people treat each other, you would be concerned about how your statement impacts these men. But you aren't. So while you may be concerned about how OTHER people treat each other, evidently YOU are excluded from having to "be nice".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Sep 10 2006, 05:47 AM) [snapback]317291[/snapback]</div>

Well, thank you. Finally, someone understands (but I suspect its because we've argued in the past!)

I'm a libertarian-leaning fiscally conservative but socially liberal Republican who has been a Democrat in the past. I'm also a theologically conservative Christian, but most people think that means that I'm politically conservative, and the two are not the same. Not at all!

 

I'm still puzzled about what position you think I cannot hold.

I had a friend who was a Catholic priest and a peace activist. For some reason I cannot fathom, he was also in the habit of going to the VFW. They barred him from entering after they realized that he had marched in a peace demonstration.

I don't frequent places that bar people from admittance for having participated in peaceful, legal protests. And if the VFW is offended by my opinions, that is their right. But I don't change my opinions merely because they are annoying to people who are so opposed to freedom of speech as is the VFW.

Though there are many veterans of foreign wars who are not members of the VFW and who share my opinions. Veterans For Peace is a good example.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 10 2006, 05:58 PM) [snapback]317485[/snapback]</div>

One wonders if even they knew what they were fighting for.

They fight for freedom of speech and then bar anyone that exercises that right because they don't agree with what is being said.

Or maybe it's a do as I say not as I do thing.

 

Just wanted to reprint the inspired words of Justice Kennedy, writing a concurring opinion in Texas v. Johnson (where the Supreme Court struck down the anti-flag burning law). The last sentence in the second to last paragraph is especially evocative:


I write not to qualify the words Justice Brennan chooses so well, for he says with power all that is necessary to explain our ruling. I join his opinion without reservation, but with a keen sense that this case, like others before us from time to time, exacts its personal toll. This prompts me to add to our pages these few remarks.

The case before us illustrates better than most that the judicial power is often difficult in its exercise. We cannot here ask another Branch to share responsibility, as when the argument is made that a statute is flawed or incomplete. For we are presented with a clear and simple statute to be judged against a pure command of the Constitution. The outcome can be laid at no door but ours.

The hard fact is that sometimes we must make decisions we do not like. We make them because they are right, right in the sense that the law and the Constitution, as we see them, compel the result. And so great is our commitment to the process that, except in the rare case, we do not pause to express distaste for the result, perhaps for fear of undermining a valued principle that dictates the decision. This is one of those rare cases.

Our colleagues in dissent advance powerful arguments why respondent may be convicted for his expression, reminding us that among those who will be dismayed by our holding will be some who have had the singular honor of carrying the flag in battle. And I agree that the flag holds a lonely place of honor in an age when absolutes are distrusted and simple truths are burdened by unneeded apologetics.

With all respect to those views, I do not believe the Constitution gives us the right to rule as the dissenting Members of the Court urge, however painful this judgment is to announce. Though symbols often are what we ourselves make of them, the flag is constant in expressing beliefs Americans share, beliefs in law and peace and that freedom which sustains the human spirit. The case here today forces recognition of the costs to which those beliefs commit us. It is poignant but fundamental that the flag protects those who hold it in contempt.

For all the record shows, this respondent was not a philosopher and perhaps did not even possess the ability to comprehend how repellent his statements must be to the Republic itself. But whether or not he could appreciate the enormity of the offense he gave, the fact remains that his acts were speech, in both the technical and the fundamental meaning of the Constitution. So I agree with the Court that he must go free.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Sep 9 2006, 06:31 PM) [snapback]317172[/snapback]</div>

Can you post a link to the "Flag Code"?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(pogo @ Sep 10 2006, 09:50 PM) [snapback]317549[/snapback]</div>

As opposed to using Google? OK.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 10 2006, 03:58 PM) [snapback]317485[/snapback]</div>

That's an interesting response. Let me see if I can make myself clear.

"I'm concerned about how people treat each other"
"I couldn't give a rat's nice person whether people fly the flag backwards or upside down or use it for toilet paper."

What I am trying to point out is that to very many people in this country, someone using the flag for toilet paper is very hurtful, as bad as calling them "nigger" or "spic" or any other hate speech you would (I hope) view as completely unacceptable and mean spirited. Yet, as your response shows, because the vets are conservatives, you .... what? Don't care that they are insulted? Don't consider them "people"? What?

If you really cared about "how people treat each other" you wouldn't want to see Korans flushed down toilets, cartoons of the Prophet, people wiping their butt with the flag, etc., because it is symbolic disrespect, and hurtful. It is important, not because YOU think its important, but because THEY do. If you care about people, then you learn to view things from their standpoint and try to understand them.

If you change your self description to "I don't care how many people are offended, they need to get a life and toughen up" I wouldn't have any quarrel with your outrageous insults towards Christians and conservatives.