NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/23/cracking_the_flagbur.html

Easy. Burn flags that are similar but not identical to the US Flag :)

or burn anyway. They cant prove it was a real flag anyway. "see that burn mark there? there wasnt a star there anyway."

I think it's still legal to burn state flags. So burn 50 state flags.

or you could just stop burning flags. It's pretty much pointless as a political action anyways, no one is going to care about what your message is as they'll be too concerned about the medium.

The only net positive I can see coming out of a constitutional amendment about flag burning--assuming it passes, and we're a long way from that--is that it just might force companies to stop putting the flag on all manner of consumer merchandise, because if it's illegal to burn a flag, then I assume it's illegal to burn napkins with flags on them, or t-shirts with flags on them, or underwear with flags on them, etc.

And by the way--since the only way to get rid of a flag properly at present, how are we supposed to get rid of tattered flags if this passes?

or you could just stop burning flags. It's pretty much pointless as a political action anyways, no one is going to care about what your message is as they'll be too concerned about the medium.
No one would have given a rats ass about it if no one banned it. its the prohibition effect: you ban something, everyone has gotta do it

The only net positive I can see coming out of a constitutional amendment about flag burning--assuming it passes, and we're a long way from that--is that it just might force companies to stop putting the flag on all manner of consumer merchandise, because if it's illegal to burn a flag, then I assume it's illegal to burn napkins with flags on them, or t-shirts with flags on them, or underwear with flags on them, etc.

And by the way--since the only way to get rid of a flag properly at present, how are we supposed to get rid of tattered flags if this passes?

oooh. there's an idea! if it passes, i'll slap a flag sticker on every book in the u.s! no more book burnings!

i did wonder about the disposal thing, too. every memorial day, the local vets hold a watchfire where they dispose of all the tattered flags that people donate. i hardly think that is disrespectful.

oooh. there's an idea! if it passes, i'll slap a flag sticker on every book in the u.s! no more book burnings!

i did wonder about the disposal thing, too. every memorial day, the local vets hold a watchfire where they dispose of all the tattered flags that people donate. i hardly think that is disrespectful.
It's not disrespectful at all. Proper flag educate dictates that the proper way to retire an old tattered flag is through burning. (Obviously there is a ceremony involved and it's done in a respectful manner, not simply pouring gas on it and lighting it on fire)

Regardless, this current cadet would be upset if this ammendment to ban flag burning passes. Afterall, we do take an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Not that I like flag burning for protest, I just think that the right to free speech trumps any disgust one might have from seeing the flag burned.

Its almost ironic that flag burning is both respectful and disrespectful at the same time...

I think the reason people burn the flag in protest is this: a flag is to be burned if it becomes soiled or dirty. The protesters see whatever they are protesting as soiling the flag, and therefore burn it. In this light, they are doing what they should. Unfortunatly they don't burn it with the correct decorum, but it kinda makes sense.

Beyond being contrary to the principles of freedom of expression and conscience, the "anti-flag desecration" amendment obviously begs the question of what will count as flag "desecration."

According to section 8 of the US Flag Code, all of the following count as among the many ways of "showing disrepect" for the flag:

(d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery.

(g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of it, nor
attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design, picture, or drawing of any nature.

(i) The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner
whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or
handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or
boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard.

(j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform.

So, will every politician that uses a flag as part of his/her advertising, signs, symbols, etc., be prosecuted for "flag desecration"?

How about all those so-called patriots in their flag t-shirts?

Makers and users of tons of 4th of July decorations -- including those disposable little flags on sticks?

Anyone with one of those "'God Bless America'/Eagle imposed on a US flag" or "'Support the Troops' imposed on a flag" bumper sticker?

BTW, during the first Gulf War I attended a protest on the steps of a federal courthouse in which the protestors explained the flag had been soiled by blood and oil and then they respectfully washed it clean. (FBI agents and other law enforcement were present to keep an eye on the protest.) Was that "flag desecration"

how sacred can a flag be?

Is it now one nation OVER god?

There is a differance between the real thing, and look-alikes. Anything can bear the patriotic red, white, and blue. That means that those bumper stickers are just fine, as are the t-shirts. It can have a depiction of a flag on it, and still not be the flag. It is only applying to a flag itself. It can't be torn or dismembered to make clothing, the flag itself can't be used as an ad, which goes along with it can't have any words and such added on to it.

how sacred can a flag be?

Is it now one nation OVER god?

It's not sacred, just respected. And don't start with that sort of BS.

The only net positive I can see coming out of a constitutional amendment about flag burning--assuming it passes, and we're a long way from that--is that it just might force companies to stop putting the flag on all manner of consumer merchandise, because if it's illegal to burn a flag, then I assume it's illegal to burn napkins with flags on them, or t-shirts with flags on them, or underwear with flags on them, etc.

Not as far off as you think. The US House passed the amendment by voice vote. It carried overwhelmingly. Next stop the US Senate. This time they think it has a chance to pass there. I'm not sure on that point though. It still could go either way. And it is against the Flag Code to have it on napkins, t-shirts, ect unless it is not an exact replica of the flag.

And by the way--since the only way to get rid of a flag properly at present, how are we supposed to get rid of tattered flags if this passes?

You take it down to your local military base and they'll dispose of it. I think they have a proper flag burning ceremony. The military has a ceremony for everything :D

It's not sacred, just respected. And don't start with that sort of BS.

Why is it called desacration then?

You must at least understand it is a little confusing.

1) Burning a flag is the proper way to dispose of it when it is worn or otherwise damaged. Refer to your local Boy Scout manual or inquire at your local American Legion office.

2) This bill has been brought before Congress four times previously, and shot down four times previously. The House keeps raising it and the Senate keeps killing it -- and all indications show that the Senate has more than enough votes to prevent this idiocy from being signed into law the fifth time it's brought before them.

3) Nevertheless, I would prefer if people utilized other ways of showing their displeasure -- how about burning photos of the Cabinet? ;)

1) Burning a flag is the proper way to dispose of it when it is worn or otherwise damaged. Refer to your local Boy Scout manual or inquire at your local American Legion office.

Yep!

2) This bill has been brought before Congress four times previously, and shot down four times previously. The House keeps raising it and the Senate keeps killing it -- and all indications show that the Senate has more than enough votes to prevent this idiocy from being signed into law the fifth time it's brought before them.

Actually, this point is up in the air. Yes it has been brought up 4 times before. This time it has a better chance of actually passing. Will it? It might. All they need is a couple of more votes and the majority of the people do want flag burning banned. This is going to be an interesting senate vote to be sure.

3) Nevertheless, I would prefer if people utilized other ways of showing their displeasure -- how about burning photos of the Cabinet? ;)

LOL

It's not sacred, just respected. And don't start with that sort of BS.
You can't mandate respect.

3) Nevertheless, I would prefer if people utilized other ways of showing their displeasure -- how about burning photos of the Cabinet? ;)
Well there's a book out there with faux pictures of naked supreme court justices.

Meh. For me the burning of the Star Spangled Banner is proof of its resliance. It's proof our freedoms are still cheap, and our lives so peaceful that we have to go about inventing controversy. Who couldn't find that at least a little bit reassuring? Especially after watching the evening news. And if it happens in other countries, I like to know who hates me so I can hate them right back.

Well there's a book out there with faux pictures of naked supreme court justices.

Meh. For me the burning of the Star Spangled Banner is proof of its resliance. It's proof our freedoms are still cheap, and our lives so peaceful that we have to go about inventing controversy. Who couldn't find that at least a little bit reassuring? Especially after watching the evening news. And if it happens in other countries, I like to know who hates me so I can hate them right back.

"Hate them right back"? Is that your answer to the international displeasure directed at the U.S.A.? Don't you care to know why a person half a globe away got off his ass and demonstrated his/her anger in such an extreem and insulting way, literally wishing your country off the face of the planet?

The U.S.A. is the current dominant empire, it's a world power of immense proportions and much grief wells from actions it takes, supports or supresses around the world. And of course like any country it looks after its own interests first - period"."

I'm not saying you should go out there and start an anti-imperialistic crusade to purge the U.S.A. of its diminishing characteristics or that you should even feel guilty about it, just don't act smug and selfrighteous when the rest of the world dreads the day the U.S.A. is going to bomb them to Peace whether anbody likes it or not, and then tell them what to believe and how to govern their country (see Viet Nam, Korea, Somalia, Yugoslavia, later Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, just to name a few). And it's all in the name of big construction and armament companies, so that they can Limit-up next trimester and their CEOs build big villas at the expense of third world nations rights to selfgovernment and your national pride and dignity.

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/23/cracking_the_flagbur.html

Easy. Burn flags that are similar but not identical to the US Flag :)
It's highly unlikely such an amendment will pass.

"Hate them right back"? Is that your answer to the international displeasure directed at the U.S.A.? Don't you care to know why a person half a globe away got off his ass and demonstrated his/her anger in such an extreem and insulting way, literally wishing your country off the face of the planet?

The U.S.A. is the current dominant empire, it's a world power of immense proportions and much grief wells from actions it takes, supports or supresses around the world. And of course like any country it looks after its own interests first - period"."

I'm not saying you should go out there and start an anti-imperialistic crusade to purge the U.S.A. of its diminishing characteristics or that you should even feel guilty about it, just don't act smug and selfrighteous when the rest of the world dreads the day the U.S.A. is going to bomb them to Peace whether anbody likes it or not, and then tell them what to believe and how to govern their country (see Viet Nam, Korea, Somalia, Yugoslavia, later Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, just to name a few). And it's all in the name of big construction and armament companies, so that they can Limit-up next trimester and their CEOs build big villas at the expense of third world nations rights to selfgovernment and your national pride and dignity.
It's a dirty and thankless job, but somebody's gotta do it. :p

"Hate them right back"? Is that your answer to the international displeasure directed at the U.S.A.? Don't you care to know why a person half a globe away got off his ass and demonstrated his/her anger in such an extreem and insulting way, literally wishing your country off the face of the planet?
I find them deserving of as much consideration as they render unto me. If they find their own morality harsh, or that the asymetry of American power renders it particularly unfair, I'd suggest they re-evaluate their position.

The U.S.A. is the current dominant empire, it's a world power of immense proportions and much grief wells from actions it takes, supports or supresses around the world. And of course like any country it looks after its own interests first - period"."
If it were an Empire, believe me, you'd be able to tell the difference. Is there an American soldier you're forced to quarter taking liberties with your daughter(s)? No? Then it's not an empire. The rest of that I don't particularly disagree with.

I find them deserving of as much consideration as they render unto me. If they find their own morality harsh, or that the asymetry of American power renders it particularly unfair, I'd suggest they re-evaluate their position.
Meaning they should bend over and say thank you afterwards? I think I was way too understanding with you in explaining where the U.S.A. stands, while you are just plain obnoxious and refuse to see, understand or comment a point. Normally people wouldn't put with that kind of narrow-mindednes, but I happen to have a lot of time in my hands and a badgering mood directed at ill-fated pro-U.S.A. debaters.

If it were an Empire, believe me, you'd be able to tell the difference. Is there an American soldier you're forced to quarter taking liberties with your daughter(s)? No? Then it's not an empire. The rest of that I don't particularly disagree with.

That is an actual, if a bit grafic, representation of a Feudal serf's fate. Fortunatelly Serfdom has been abolished in Europe, and most of the world for at least a century (although Rusia supported Serfdom well into the 20th century).

I think you're brighter than that, in order for you to see and understand the simile. I didn't mean the U.S.A. is an actual empire, replete with an emperor (though wouldn't the Bush family like to try?), gentry, high ranking clergy and land parceled out to courageous soldiers (officers mind you, not the rank-and-file riff-raff), promoting the word of god on earth with "DEUS VULT" written all over it.

No! It's just a figure of speech!

P.S.: AlthOugh you could say the y preach "LIBERATIO VULT", meaning they bring Peace and Freedom everywhere they strike. Their peace, their freedom.

***GO TEAM AMERICA***