NationStates Jolt Archive

Clicky (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,9211318%255E662,00.html)

I have just one thing to say to these morons:
http://www.flag-net.com/data/Australia.gif
:wink:

Yeah well I'm stupid HEHEHEHHEHEHEHEHHEhEHEHEHEHEHHEHEHHAHAHAHAAHAHh :roll: :cry: :lol: :o :( 8) :oops: :P :? :D :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :x :P :evil: :twisted: :roll: :idea: :?: :?: :?: :?: :shock:

l;igfnb;kygboeshagrjmldfhb vhgiudf jkhgt ljhvdf pidyjn b xclbk hsdgy kj kdyg g nfkjvjnb n fkj gldf hg WAABA NUBBA WABBLY ChUBBERS LALALALALAALLALALALALALHAHHAHAHHHEHHEEHHE!!! :!: :shock: :!: :shock: :!: :!: :shock: :shock: :shock: :!: :!: :shock: :shock: :!: :!: YAHOOO YIPPE LALALALAALAALALLA SPONGEBOB ROCKS!! :!: :!:

That is just stupid, they fly all sorts of flags in DC. All everywhere else and the states have flags too!!! So we Americans can't fly our own state flags?! Typical floridian morons.

l;igfnb;kygboeshagrjmldfhb vhgiudf jkhgt ljhvdf pidyjn b xclbk hsdgy kj kdyg g nfkjvjnb n fkj gldf hg WAABA NUBBA WABBLY ChUBBERS LALALALALAALLALALALALALHAHHAHAHHHEHHEEHHE!!! :!: :shock: :!: :shock: :!: :!: :shock: :shock: :shock: :!: :!: :shock: :shock: :!: :!: YAHOOO YIPPE LALALALAALAALALLA SPONGEBOB ROCKS!! :!: :!:

Stop spamming.

Yeah well I'm stupid HEHEHEHHEHEHEHEHHEhEHEHEHEHEHHEHEHHAHAHAHAAHAHh :roll: :cry: :lol: :o :( 8) :oops: :P :? :D :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :x :P :evil: :twisted: :roll: :idea: :?: :?: :?: :?: :shock:

Yeah well I'm stupid HEHEHEHHEHEHEHEHHEhEHEHEHEHEHHEHEHHAHAHAHAAHAHh :roll: :cry: :lol: :o :( 8) :oops: :P :? :D :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :x :P :evil: :twisted: :roll: :idea: :?: :?: :?: :?: :shock:

You think, so you are.

That's idiotic, frankly. I think that anyone should be able to fly any nation's flag in their yard, just as we can burn our American flag. Which, as soon as I obtain one, I will do so.

Stupidstupidstupidness, do not spam.

http://www.bigwig.net/~bbw10606/pwned.gif
Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Clicky (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,9211318%255E662,00.html)

I have just one thing to say to these morons:
http://www.flag-net.com/data/Australia.gif
:wink:
That's the biggest crock of [...] I've seen in this latest round of excessive "patriotism" in the U.S.

Doesn't she have a First Amendment right to fly whatever flag she wants? That community has opened itself to an enormous legal challenge that they should ultimately lose.

Times like these make me saddened about the sorry state of affairs in my RL country.

That is truly pathetic. Just another way of enforcing uniformity on the "land of the free." Don't give up sensible Americans! Win your nation back before we need to take drastic steps and re-colonise you, it's for your own safety. (that was a joke, although if the opportunity arose, well....)

I live in Windermere. But Windermere, UK. There are American flags in our town. We don't complain. Its called a 'coalition', after all.

Just shows to show 'in the land of the free, there's only a future for the chosen few'.

It is stupid and it is a double standard, but it may be perfectly legal.

What kind of area do they live in? Is it a retirement village or something along those lines? If it is, when you move in, you sign a document agreeing that the outside of your house will conform to the community's standards.

It isn't violating the First Ammendment because the government isn't doing it, just the home owners association.

"conform to the communities standards" There you go. Control. By removing their ability to express their love for their home country, and suggesting they fly an American flag overhead instead, seems like an uneccesary abuse of power, and an act of dictatorship.
(I'm not some kind of anarchist, certainly not, but why would Australians want to fly an American flag?)

You could say that, but they will tell you they just want a respectable looking neighboorhood.

You sign an agreement when you live in these neighborhoods. The company that actually owns the area (the residents pay monthly rent) take care of the lawn care, garbage pickup and all the other regular maintenance. The residents have to abide by the rules regarding the outside of the homes. The inside, they can decorate however thay wish.

Although, I don't see whats wrong with flying a standard sized flag from you porch or something.

I agree

I like your flag, Want to See Mine. Visit Charlie Murphy Islands

I don't see how flying the Australian flag makes the neighbourhood look unrespectable, but an American flag does.

d.p.

:lol: That was funny! Maybe Mrs Hogberg should try the Swedish flag instead? With that last name I bet my left arm that her husband (or she) has at least one swedish ancestor. Then they might ok the Australian flag in two shakes of a lamb's tail...

And if the community insisted on it's assinine regulations, I'd just dig up the whole front yard and plant a flower garden carefully laid out to display the Aussie flag as a 20 by 40 foot flower arrangement.


Or have the roof reshingled with colored tiles to do the same....



"Flag? What flag? I don't have a flag.... gosh no - that would be against the rules!"

Patriotism is one thing. Forcing a specific loyalty down the throats of everyone is something else completely.

No, you can't do much of anything to the exterior of the house. they will send their guys to go fix the yard or roof and there is nothing you can do about it.

I wonder what would happen if you flew the flag of some other nations. Maybe they should fly the flag of Libya. They supported us in Iraq.

Are you for, or against the family? You don't make that clear.

Anyway, It's a foolish tyrannical thing to do, and you cannot defend it, unless you quote the stupid regulations, which may be the cause of the whole problem (has anybody else noticed that we are working on the assumption that the house is owned by the company?)

I'm saying if it is one of those communities, they signed a form stating that they would conform the regulations.

I believe that the neighborhood association should allow them to fly the flag(if it is indeed one these arraingements), but its not cencorship or tyranny.

:evil: I AM EFING OUTRAGED!!!

Don't these people realize the first american battle flag had 13 red and white stripes with the old Union Jack in the corner.Very similar to the Australian flag!!!!!!

I worked in a small city where a local tobacco shop flew the Gadsen,There was a British pub owned by a British family who flew the Union Jack,and a White Duster,and a local biker who wasw a transplanted southerner who flew the Stars and Bars of the back of his Harley.

Not to mention Australia was also a former British colony (correct me if i'm wrong I'm pretty mad write now)They are a good people and deserve respect!!!!

Don't be angry! Its Florida! They're to old to know right from wrong :wink:

That has to be one to be one the most stupid, insulting, one-eyed nationalistic things I have ever read! I had a retired US marine who lived up the road from my where I used to live (Ocean Grove, Australia) and he flew both the US national & marine flags, nobody stopped him. So much for America being 'the home of the free'.

I'm definately no nationalist, I personally don't go around waving flags, but if this women wants to, let her. I can't see the harm in it.

I reckon the Australian government should step in and say "Fine, if you don't want our flag in your country, you obviously don't want our troops in Iraq" (not that it has enough backbone to do it), I'm kind of joking with this point.

I reckon we should run a poll on this, see what US residents think.

Another thing, she had to renounce her Australian citizenship so her kids could vote? That strikes as a bit bizare too, my mum is English, always has been and always will be, but I enjoy the exact same rights (voting, the right to a passport etc.) as someone who's parents were both born in Australia. I have two passports too (British/Australian).

BTW - Now the media has got a hold of the story, I bet she is allowed to keep it.

Now your being ignorant of foreign policy. Towns in America have a board of people who live in the town, where everyone can go to or not to decide on town policies. The majority of the town used freedom to decide on that policy. The one who couldn't hang the flag had the choice on whether to go and argue that foreign flags should be allowed or not.

Uh the likely truth is that they don't want to allow the Aulstralian Flag to fly becasue they are worried about what someone else might want to fly...say the Palastinian flag or the Iraqi flag, or the Israli flag. (Or the confederate flag...now that would cause problems...)

Not that their right mind you...but more than likely they don't want to open up that can of worms...

And they will not admit to it either... :?

*streaks forum wearing nothing but an Australian flag*

http://www.eunos.com/keith/brb/images/brb_sm.gif (http://fua.board.dk3.com/2/index.php)
DO NOT PRESS
THIS BUTTON

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/geno/mofo.gif

Right on, I fly a Croatian flag at my house and I live in Texas. I support her 100%. (she should go grab her neighbor's USMC flag and burn it!)

Now your being ignorant of foreign policy. Towns in America have a board of people who live in the town, where everyone can go to or not to decide on town policies. The majority of the town used freedom to decide on that policy. The one who couldn't hang the flag had the choice on whether to go and argue that foreign flags should be allowed or not.

What do you mean by 'ignorant of foriegn policy'? (not rhetorical, I'm asking seriously. Do you mind not calling me 'ignorant', it's kind of offensive) What you outlined was municiple codes etc., not foriegn policy. Anyway, my point was isn't it an individual freedom to express themselves however they want? (within certain boundries however, I don't support people flying Swastikas from their homes for example). I don't see why flying the Australian flag is problem, if someone isn't allowed to, I see it as an attack on their personal liberties. The fact that this decision was made by a board and was supported by the majority of the population (if I understand what you are saying correctly, feel free to tell me if I misinterapated) makes it worse.

Again, a retired US marine flew both the US national and marine flags where I lived (Ocean Grove, Australia), if we tried to stop him (which we didn't) I bet he would have used 'freedoms' as a defence. I bet you too if the shoe was on the other foot see it as an issue of 'individual freedoms'.

In another town (Barwon Heads) near to where I grew up there was also another US retired couple who flew the American flag and people didn't start waving Isreali and Palestinian flags (if they wanted to, I think they would have been allwed to anyway), I don't think allowing foriegn flags to be flown 'opens a can of worms'.

What's wrong with flying an Iraqi flag? Remember, 'we are not at war with the Iraqi people' and aren't we there to help the Iraqis? (that's if you follow that line, but lets not get into it, this has nothing to do with the Iraq war, even though I made a link between them jokingly)

Could you imagine the outcry if we stopped US citizens from flying their flag in our country?

BTW - I was making a joke about Australian troops in Iraq.

:evil: AAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


WHY DON"T WE THROW ALL OF OUR COLLECTIVE HISTORY OUT THE WINDOW!!!!!!!

WHY NOY BURN A LIBRARY! TAKE A DUMP UN SOMEONES GRAVE!!!!!!!

LETS JUST TAKE FOR GRANTED EVERYTHING THAT HAS MADEVTHIS WORLD LIKE IT IS TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF BECAUSE HUMAN NATURE REMAINS CONSTANT!!!!!!

GRRRRRRRRRRRR@!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Stupidity might help but it´s not the answer.

I don't even know where to start correcting people. That first, then I'll talk about the topic.That's idiotic, frankly. I think that anyone should be able to fly any nation's flag in their yard, just as we can burn our American flag. Which, as soon as I obtain one, I will do so.Why are you going to burn the American flag? Because a small community in Florida has a regulation about displaying flags? That's idiotic, frankly.Times like these make me saddened about the sorry state of affairs in my RL country.Come now, it isn't that bad. It's not even the government's fault. It's the fault of a private community. There are much worse things all over the world. The USA is a pretty good place to live.ust shows to show 'in the land of the free, there's only a future for the chosen few'.It shows no such thing. This is a small incident that the government has nothing to do with. There is no denying that the USA is one of the freest countries in the world.she should go grab her neighbor's USMC flag and burn it!I will be gentle with you, since you're new here. Why should she do that? He has done nothing to her. Were you just trying to be a jackass with that post?


My opinion? I remember a similar story from a while back. Some despotic home owners in Florida no less association told a veteran that he had to take down his AMERICAN FLAG because of some lame ordinance they made. This is the same thing, as far as I'm concerned.They should be allowed to fly their flags. However, if she signed a contract that said she couldn't fly a foreign flag, it's her own fault.

My opinion? I remember a similar story from a while back. Some despotic home owners in Florida no less association told a veteran that he had to take down his AMERICAN FLAG because of some lame ordinance they made. This is the same thing, as far as I'm concerned.They should be allowed to fly their flags. However, if she signed a contract that said she couldn't fly a foreign flag, it's her own fault.[/quote]

The fact that American flags are allowed but non-American flags are not, that's the issue. It's deliberately biased against people who aren't American. If the US marine next door neighbor is allowed to fly his marines flag, which dosen't look like the US national flag, why shouldn't she? It's because *gasp* it's not American.

If no flags were allowed at all, fair enough, but in this case someone is being discriminated against on the grounds of nationality.

Remember multi-culturalism?

I think this whole episode reflects baddly on the US population, it makes you all look like ultra-nationalist who don't give a damn about other countries, which is helpful to no-one. I know not all Americans are like this, but remember, the media paints broad brush strokes.

Why shouldn't non-US flags allowed in the first place?

It is stupid and it is a double standard, but it may be perfectly legal.

What kind of area do they live in? Is it a retirement village or something along those lines? If it is, when you move in, you sign a document agreeing that the outside of your house will conform to the community's standards.

It isn't violating the First Ammendment because the government isn't doing it, just the home owners association.
U.S. courts have expanded the definition of state actors (and thus the reach of Constitutional protections, such as the 1st Amendment) to encompass not only bona fide government bodies but to private organisations which exercise governmental functions (company towns and the farking homeowners' associations, even privately organised bodies that regulate interscolastic sports -- if their activites are deemed to be sufficiently "entwined" with those of the state). So if Mrs Hogberg sues, I'm inclined to think that her right to fly the Aussie flag will be upheld.

For case law look up Marsh v. Alabama (1946), and here's a link to more recent case of homeowners' association getting their patooties whipped for abridging freedom of speech: http://www.ccfj.net/courtdecsigns.html

Clicky (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,9211318%255E662,00.html)

I have just one thing to say to these morons:
http://www.flag-net.com/data/Australia.gif
:wink:
But they permit the flying of the Mexican flag?
And homeowner associations cannot pass laws to ban people from flying flags. Only the government can do that. Homeowner associations are not the government and their rules only apply to their membership. And no, you cannot be forced to be a member just because you choose to live in a certain geographical area.
Nor do they have the power to force people to them member dues, taxes, assessments or other fees.

It is stupid and it is a double standard, but it may be perfectly legal.

What kind of area do they live in? Is it a retirement village or something along those lines? If it is, when you move in, you sign a document agreeing that the outside of your house will conform to the community's standards.

It isn't violating the First Ammendment because the government isn't doing it, just the home owners association.
U.S. courts have expanded the definition of state actors (and thus the reach of Constitutional protections, such as the 1st Amendment) to encompass not only bona fide government bodies but to private organisations which exercise governmental functions (company towns and the farking homeowners' associations, even privately organised bodies that regulate interscolastic sports -- if their activites are deemed to be sufficiently "entwined" with those of the state). So if Mrs Hogberg sues, I'm inclined to think that her right to fly the Aussie flag will be upheld.

For case law look up Marsh v. Alabama (1946), and here's a link to more recent case of homeowners' association getting their patooties whipped for abridging freedom of speech: http://www.ccfj.net/courtdecsigns.htmlThese communities have a lot of leeway when it comes to this kind of stuff. There have been cases where owners of homes in these communities--owners--have been evicted for failing to meet the community standards. I read of one case where a couple purchased a condo and was later evicted because it was an adult-only community and the wife of the couple got pregnant. They went to court and lost--they were forced to sell their condo and move. When you lock yourself into a homeowners group like that, you sign away a ton of rights--it makes absolutely no sense to me either, but it's the truth.

I'm saying if it is one of those communities, they signed a form stating that they would conform the regulations.

I believe that the neighborhood association should allow them to fly the flag(if it is indeed one these arraingements), but its not cencorship or tyranny.
Most such groups pop up out of no where, created by newcomers, and force themselves on long time residents who were there 30 to 50 years before the group even existed.

Either way, in California, the 9th US Circuit Court of appeal has ruled that most regulations passed by these groups can't be enforced cause they violate the rights of the property owners to the use of their own property.

I'm saying if it is one of those communities, they signed a form stating that they would conform the regulations.

I believe that the neighborhood association should allow them to fly the flag(if it is indeed one these arraingements), but its not cencorship or tyranny.
Most such groups pop up out of no where, created by newcomers, and force themselves on long time residents who were there 30 to 50 years before the group even existed.It's my understanding that in Florida that's not the case--the homeowners associations come along with the developments. And there's no way that a person automatically and against his or her will becomes a member of the association if they predate it.

I'm saying if it is one of those communities, they signed a form stating that they would conform the regulations.

I believe that the neighborhood association should allow them to fly the flag(if it is indeed one these arraingements), but its not cencorship or tyranny.
Most such groups pop up out of no where, created by newcomers, and force themselves on long time residents who were there 30 to 50 years before the group even existed.It's my understanding that in Florida that's not the case--the homeowners associations come along with the developments. And there's no way that a person automatically and against his or her will becomes a member of the association if they predate it.
That's the case with most of America. In Florida, the communities in question must be really new ones.

And yes, it is censorship and its illegal cause it violates the constitutional right of free political speech. In America you can't have regulations that restrict political or religious speech. Only commercial speech can legally be censored.

That's the case with most of America. In Florida, the communities in question must be really new ones.Considering the huge amount of development in south Florida over the last 20-30 years, it they probably are. On the east coast, they're literally running out of room and as a result the market is going nuts. My inlaws have seen the value of their house more than double just in the last 5 years, and their house is no mansion--it's a smallish thing in an older community. The developers are just trapped between the Atlantic and the Everglades and there's nowhere to go but north.

It is stupid and it is a double standard, but it may be perfectly legal.

What kind of area do they live in? Is it a retirement village or something along those lines? If it is, when you move in, you sign a document agreeing that the outside of your house will conform to the community's standards.

It isn't violating the First Ammendment because the government isn't doing it, just the home owners association.
A home owners assoc. does not have governmental powers.
And the contract scenario can only apply if the community is on private land owned by company.

You could say that, but they will tell you they just want a respectable looking neighboorhood.

You sign an agreement when you live in these neighborhoods. The company that actually owns the area (the residents pay monthly rent) take care of the lawn care, garbage pickup and all the other regular maintenance. The residents have to abide by the rules regarding the outside of the homes. The inside, they can decorate however thay wish.

Although, I don't see whats wrong with flying a standard sized flag from you porch or something.
Aesthetics do not take precedence over the constitutional right of political speech or the consitutional right of fair use of one's own property.
These are rights that cannot be restricted or abolished no matter where you live in America. Not even in private gated communities.

And yes, it is censorship and its illegal cause it violates the constitutional right of free political speech. In America you can't have regulations that restrict political or religious speech. Only commercial speech can legally be censored.The First Amendment says that government can't restrict speech, but private entities are free to level as many restrictions as they like on their members. That's why these commuities have such ridiculous rights. It's maddening, I kow, but that's where we are right now.

Personally, I'd like to see corporate entities stripped of many of their rights--they get the benefits of personhood but have few of the responsibilities, and that bugs me to no end.

And yes, it is censorship and its illegal cause it violates the constitutional right of free political speech. In America you can't have regulations that restrict political or religious speech. Only commercial speech can legally be censored.The First Amendment says that government can't restrict speech, but private entities are free to level as many restrictions as they like on their members. That's why these commuities have such ridiculous rights. It's maddening, I kow, but that's where we are right now.

Personally, I'd like to see corporate entities stripped of many of their rights--they get the benefits of personhood but have few of the responsibilities, and that bugs me to no end.
No. They don't have those rights. Free political speech is inviolable right no matter where you live in the US.

For clarification, a homeowners association is not a corporation and it is not a government. It is a group of elitists trying to impose itself on a neighborhood. They are most successful in neighborhoods where they are not opposed.

Now your being ignorant of foreign policy. Towns in America have a board of people who live in the town, where everyone can go to or not to decide on town policies. The majority of the town used freedom to decide on that policy. The one who couldn't hang the flag had the choice on whether to go and argue that foreign flags should be allowed or not.
Town councils cannot ban the flying of certain flags. Cause the decision to fly a certain flag or not, is purely political speech.

For clarification, a homeowners association is not a corporation and it is not a government. It is a group of elitists trying to impose itself on a neighborhood. They are most successful in neighborhoods where they are not opposed.The homeowners associations I've come in contact with--and that contact is admittedly brief--do have corporate characteristics. But I think your description is mostly accurate. I'm certainly no fan of them and would never belong to one if given a choice.

It is stupid and it is a double standard, but it may be perfectly legal.

What kind of area do they live in? Is it a retirement village or something along those lines? If it is, when you move in, you sign a document agreeing that the outside of your house will conform to the community's standards.

It isn't violating the First Ammendment because the government isn't doing it, just the home owners association.
U.S. courts have expanded the definition of state actors (and thus the reach of Constitutional protections, such as the 1st Amendment) to encompass not only bona fide government bodies but to private organisations which exercise governmental functions (company towns and the farking homeowners' associations, even privately organised bodies that regulate interscolastic sports -- if their activites are deemed to be sufficiently "entwined" with those of the state). So if Mrs Hogberg sues, I'm inclined to think that her right to fly the Aussie flag will be upheld.

For case law look up Marsh v. Alabama (1946), and here's a link to more recent case of homeowners' association getting their patooties whipped for abridging freedom of speech: http://www.ccfj.net/courtdecsigns.htmlThese communities have a lot of leeway when it comes to this kind of stuff. There have been cases where owners of homes in these communities--owners--have been evicted for failing to meet the community standards. I read of one case where a couple purchased a condo and was later evicted because it was an adult-only community and the wife of the couple got pregnant. They went to court and lost--they were forced to sell their condo and move. When you lock yourself into a homeowners group like that, you sign away a ton of rights--it makes absolutely no sense to me either, but it's the truth.
They lost cause they didn't have the money to go to court.
The thing about the rights granted by the constitution, is that they are inviolable which means you cannot sign them away.

Now we're getting into the lagalities of it, can I point out one little thing. The question to me isn't 'are' they allowed to do it, the question is 'why' are they making such a decision (not allowing non-US flags) in the first place?

Feel free to go back to what you were talking, I just thought I'd raise that little point.

For clarification, a homeowners association is not a corporation and it is not a government. It is a group of elitists trying to impose itself on a neighborhood. They are most successful in neighborhoods where they are not opposed.The homeowners associations I've come in contact with--and that contact is admittedly brief--do have corporate characteristics. But I think your description is mostly accurate. I'm certainly no fan of them and would never belong to one if given a choice.
In most cases, you do have a choice. You could form opposition. Only the city council has the right to pass ordinances and local tax laws. Cause it is the city that provides the police and fire services, not the homeowners assoc.

Now we're getting into the lagalities of it, can I point out one little thing. The question to me isn't 'are' they allowed to do it, the question is 'why' are they making such a decision (not allowing non-US flags) in the first place?

Feel free to go back to what you were talking, I just thought I'd raise that little point.
Simple answer to your question. Elitist nationalism.

good thin about being american: you think your country is the greatest in the world. when it's not. far from it.

It is stupid and it is a double standard, but it may be perfectly legal.

What kind of area do they live in? Is it a retirement village or something along those lines? If it is, when you move in, you sign a document agreeing that the outside of your house will conform to the community's standards.

It isn't violating the First Ammendment because the government isn't doing it, just the home owners association.
U.S. courts have expanded the definition of state actors (and thus the reach of Constitutional protections, such as the 1st Amendment) to encompass not only bona fide government bodies but to private organisations which exercise governmental functions (company towns and the farking homeowners' associations, even privately organised bodies that regulate interscolastic sports -- if their activites are deemed to be sufficiently "entwined" with those of the state). So if Mrs Hogberg sues, I'm inclined to think that her right to fly the Aussie flag will be upheld.

For case law look up Marsh v. Alabama (1946), and here's a link to more recent case of homeowners' association getting their patooties whipped for abridging freedom of speech: http://www.ccfj.net/courtdecsigns.htmlThese communities have a lot of leeway when it comes to this kind of stuff. There have been cases where owners of homes in these communities--owners--have been evicted for failing to meet the community standards. I read of one case where a couple purchased a condo and was later evicted because it was an adult-only community and the wife of the couple got pregnant. They went to court and lost--they were forced to sell their condo and move. When you lock yourself into a homeowners group like that, you sign away a ton of rights--it makes absolutely no sense to me either, but it's the truth.

As far as free speech is concerned, I gave a link which cites a number of cases where HOA's attempts to restrict free speech have been struck down by courts.

As for the getting pregnant issue you raise, federal law provides some leeway for establishing "senior communities" but otherwise is fairly rigid in outlawing such type of discrimination:

"The Federal Housing Act (of 1988) prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of a dwelling based on race, color, national origin, sex, handicap, religion, or familial status. However, an exemption to the Act allows for housing for older persons provided that the housing is intended for and operated for occupancy for persons over 55, at least 80% of the units actually are occupied by one person at least 55 years of age, and the association documents provide for, or later are amended to include such an exemption."

from http://www.soflalaw.com/law/condo.html

Now we're getting into the lagalities of it, can I point out one little thing. The question to me isn't 'are' they allowed to do it, the question is 'why' are they making such a decision (not allowing non-US flags) in the first place?

Feel free to go back to what you were talking, I just thought I'd raise that little point.
Simple answer to your question. Elitist nationalism.

That's what I thought, thanks. What gave them the idea in the first place? The whole thing smacks of arrogance and intolerance to me.

That's why you just make your own flag...hell what are they gona do?

The best flag would be of a goat :)

:lol: :lol: :lol: