NationStates Jolt Archive

Just wanting to scope peoples opinions on this topic here on NSG, do you support the right of people to be able to burn their national flag? (every country, not just the US flag)

sure

Yup.

Just wanting to scope peoples opinions on this topic here on NSG, do you support the right of people to be able to burn their national flag? (every country, not just the US flag)

It's stupid and cliche. And it harms the environment.

Certainly. I believe that people should have the right to free speech, and that if it must be restricted, it be restricted as little as possible.

Just wanting to scope peoples opinions on this topic here on NSG, do you support the right of people to be able to burn their national flag? (every country, not just the US flag)

Doing that expresses enmity toward the country. I think flag burners should be exiled. People who burn a symbol of the nation they live in don't deserve to be under that nation's wing of protection if all they are going to do is express hatred for their nation. If they leave than both the burners and the rest of the nation are happy. The nation would be glad to get rid of the ungrateful git and the flag burner would as I imagine be glad to leave unless he is a sociopath that just wants to harm society, in that case he should be executed so that no others attempt to harm society maliciously.

I always thought burning something like the Constitution would be far more potent if you wanted to attack the entire system.

Doing that expresses enmity toward the country. I think flag burners should be exiled. People who burn a symbol of the nation they live in don't deserve to be under that nation's wing of protection if all they are going to do is express hatred for their nation. If they leave than both the burners and the rest of the nation are happy. The nation would be glad to get rid of the ungrateful git and the flag burner would as I imagine be glad to leave unless he is a sociopath that just wants to harm society, in that case he should be executed so that no others attempt to harm society maliciously.

Lol, that post alone makes this thread worth it :)

flags are a symbol, it's up to the individual user to decide what meaning that symbol ought to convey by doing what they will with it. as far as i'm concerned burning is about the only reasonable thing that can be done with a flag. but that's just me probably.

I don't know about anyone else, but if a person is upset with there country i'd much rather that person burn a piece of cloth then a building or somthing. The way i see it is a flag is a peice of cloth, symbolic cloth, but cloth no less.

flag burning is fun for the whole family - bring the kids!

From the Onion (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28952):

Man Who Fought For Americans' Rights Demands Americans Stop Exercising Their Rights
August 12, 1998 | Issue 34•02

WASHINGTON, DC—Speaking before the U.S. Senate Tuesday, Herbert Macallum, a retired Wichita, KS, insurance salesman and Navy veteran who fought during World War II to protect the inalienable rights of all Americans, demanded that U.S. citizens stop exercising those rights.

"As someone who risked his life for this country, I am infuriated when I see protesters exercising their First Amendment rights by burning the U.S. flag," Macallum told legislators during a Senate debate over a proposed anti-flag-burning amendment. "I didn't fight the Japanese at Midway to save democracy for a bunch of long-haired jerks who want to freely express their views."

"I love the Constitution, and I nearly lost my life defending it," Macallum added. "That's why it angers me so much to see malcontents exploiting it for their own purposes."

Macallum is president of the Kansas Veterans' Council for Liberty & Restraint, one of a number of veterans' organizations calling upon Congress to pass anti-rights-use legislation. Under the provisions of the proposed legislation, any U.S. citizen convicted of exercising his or her Constitutional rights in a manner deemed controversial would face a fine and/or imprisonment.

Said KVCLR member Walter Mickleson, 81: "Wherever you look today, you see people using the First Amendment to openly criticize or protest the U.S. government. I don't think that's what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. And I, for one, didn't storm the beach at Normandy so I could see America dragged through the mud."

"Men gave their lives for the U.S. Constitution," WWII veteran Robert Schumer said. "I'm sure they would weep if they were alive to see it being followed so shamelessly. If you ask me, protesters who object to our government should not be allowed to vote."

KVCLR spokespersons cite such "societal ills" as flag-burning, pornography, public assembly for the purpose of protest, and the pursuit of "certain forms of happiness" as their motivation for founding the organization.

"The disorder that plagues American society today is rooted in our gross indulgence in civil liberties," said KVCLR treasurer and ex-Army pilot Donald Morrow, 79. "Servicemen fought and died for this great nation, and servicemen know that discipline, obedience and blind faith in one's superiors and country are the key to domestic harmony. Civil disobedience is disrespectful to our government and has no place in a democratic society."

"I firebombed Dresden in 1945, and I lost a son in Vietnam," Morrow added. "What have protesters ever done for this country?"

Clarence Johnson, a retired Marine lieutenant who served in the Korean War, agreed.

"When I entered the United States armed forces, I gave up my constitutional rights in order to be a soldier," Johnson said. "It was one of the proudest days of my life. I had never exercised my rights much before then, anyway. Let me tell you, if you'd fought and seen friends die to protect the God-given rights of all Americans, you'd want to keep them from exercising them, too."

The way I see it, it is far better to destroy a symbol of freedom rather than the freedom itself. Flag burning should not be restricted any more rigorously than the burning of any other piece of cloth.

I always thought burning something like the Constitution would be far more potent if you wanted to attack the entire system.

'cept the Constitution is just a little bit harder to get...You might have to kill or subdue some people to get to it, as it is guarded. A flag is a lot easier to get your hands on; just go to your local Mcdonalds. They always seem to have the biggest flag for miles around: "Look at us, look at us! Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable Oils and excess trans-fat can be patriotic too!"

This Herbert Macallum seems like a bit of a fool really, I mean why have a Constitution and inalienable rights if your never going to exercise them to the fullest extent?

Flag burning should be compulsory for all students as a morning activity at school.

Every time a hippie burns a flag, he/she contributes to pollution.

Good going, hippies.

Just wanting to scope peoples opinions on this topic here on NSG, do you support the right of people to be able to burn their national flag? (every country, not just the US flag)

Sure. Burning is in fact one of the acceptable ways to dispose of a damaged flag, under the US flag code.

;) Besides, let people burn as many flags as they like. It makes them look like idiots (in my opinion) and it's good for the economy -- we've got to produce and sell more flags for the OMG protesters to burn.

'cept the Constitution is just a little bit harder to get...You might have to kill or subdue some people to get to it, as it is guarded. A flag is a lot easier to get your hands on; just go to your local Mcdonalds. They always seem to have the biggest flag for miles around: "Look at us, look at us! Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable Oils and excess trans-fat can be patriotic too!"

Lol, I kinda mean a copy of the Constitution.

'cept the Constitution is just a little bit harder to get...You might have to kill or subdue some people to get to it, as it is guarded.

I think he means a reproduction.

Duh, we need to keep our torching stereotypes right:

Liberals: Burn Flags and effigies
Conservatives: Burn the constitution
Liberals: Blow shit up, acting alone.
Conservatives: Blow shit up, using proxy armies.

Sure. Burning is in fact one of the acceptable ways to dispose of a damaged flag, under the US flag code.

;) Besides, let people burn as many flags as they like. It makes them look like idiots (in my opinion) and it's good for the economy -- we've got to produce and sell more flags for the OMG protesters to burn.

There's this comic called Dork Tower, and in it the gaming store gets protesters against Pokemon cards. And the assistant manager explains how they've had to increase their orders just to catch up with the demands of the protesters...

I don't believe there is that much wrong with burning a flag, other than the fact that I do not believe you are allowed to start fires in public, and the the fact the smoke and debri given off is not healthy.

Simply burning a flag is a wasted gesture though, it does not say what you think is wrong with the country it represents, only that you don't like the colours on it or whatever.

It's only a flag..

I always thought burning something like the Constitution would be far more potent if you wanted to attack the entire system.

Of course, then that would be saying that you don't give a damn bout free speech or liberty seeing as the Constitution embodies those sorta things...

This Herbert Macallum seems like a bit of a fool really, I mean why have a Constitution and inalienable rights if your never going to exercise them to the fullest extent?
Heh... sorry, I forgot to mention that that was an article (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28952) from The Onion. :p

"I would rather wrap myself in the Constitution and burn the flag than wrap myself in the flag and burn the Constitution."

Thought it was a bit too tongue in the cheek to be authentic.

It's only a flag..

To people who fail to understand symbolism, then yes. Just like the Constitution is just a piece of parchment to people who fail to understand what it embodies.

With that said, I think it's more amusing to find innovative ways to use the flag to express your contempt, like the way that Larry Flynt wore one as a diaper.

The way I see it, it is far better to destroy a symbol of freedom rather than the freedom itself. Flag burning should not be restricted any more rigorously than the burning of any other piece of cloth.

I dont understand why the man is upset. If you see long haired jerks burning a flag, they are usually doing it by chanting and jumping up and down like chimpanzees. The only thing that is humiliated is the protesters themselves.

I personally prefer more imaginative protests. Like the ones Greenpeace do sometimes.

Thought it was a bit too tongue in the cheek to be authentic.



To people who fail to understand symbolism, then yes. Just like the Constitution is just a piece of parchment to people who fail to understand what it embodies.

You can symbolize many stuff and make em "sacred".

With that said, I think it's more amusing to find innovative ways to use the flag to express your contempt, like the way that Larry Flynt wore one as a diaper.

Yeah, well, I wouldn't say hippies are the most innovative people out there.

Man Who Fought For Americans' Rights Demands Americans Stop Exercising Their Rights
August 12, 1998 | Issue 34•02

WASHINGTON, DC—Speaking before the U.S. Senate Tuesday, Herbert Macallum, a retired Wichita, KS, insurance salesman and Navy veteran who fought during World War II to protect the inalienable rights of all Americans, demanded that U.S. citizens stop exercising those rights.

"As someone who risked his life for this country, I am infuriated when I see protesters exercising their First Amendment rights by burning the U.S. flag," Macallum told legislators during a Senate debate over a proposed anti-flag-burning amendment. "I didn't fight the Japanese at Midway to save democracy for a bunch of long-haired jerks who want to freely express their views."

"I love the Constitution, and I nearly lost my life defending it," Macallum added. "That's why it angers me so much to see malcontents exploiting it for their own purposes."

Macallum is president of the Kansas Veterans' Council for Liberty & Restraint, one of a number of veterans' organizations calling upon Congress to pass anti-rights-use legislation. Under the provisions of the proposed legislation, any U.S. citizen convicted of exercising his or her Constitutional rights in a manner deemed controversial would face a fine and/or imprisonment.

Said KVCLR member Walter Mickleson, 81: "Wherever you look today, you see people using the First Amendment to openly criticize or protest the U.S. government. I don't think that's what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. And I, for one, didn't storm the beach at Normandy so I could see America dragged through the mud."

"Men gave their lives for the U.S. Constitution," WWII veteran Robert Schumer said. "I'm sure they would weep if they were alive to see it being followed so shamelessly. If you ask me, protesters who object to our government should not be allowed to vote."

KVCLR spokespersons cite such "societal ills" as flag-burning, pornography, public assembly for the purpose of protest, and the pursuit of "certain forms of happiness" as their motivation for founding the organization.

"The disorder that plagues American society today is rooted in our gross indulgence in civil liberties," said KVCLR treasurer and ex-Army pilot Donald Morrow, 79. "Servicemen fought and died for this great nation, and servicemen know that discipline, obedience and blind faith in one's superiors and country are the key to domestic harmony. Civil disobedience is disrespectful to our government and has no place in a democratic society."

"I firebombed Dresden in 1945, and I lost a son in Vietnam," Morrow added. "What have protesters ever done for this country?"

Clarence Johnson, a retired Marine lieutenant who served in the Korean War, agreed.

"When I entered the United States armed forces, I gave up my constitutional rights in order to be a soldier," Johnson said. "It was one of the proudest days of my life. I had never exercised my rights much before then, anyway. Let me tell you, if you'd fought and seen friends die to protect the God-given rights of all Americans, you'd want to keep them from exercising them, too."

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.
You REALLY need to take a lesson in US civics...

And brush up on the ideas of irony and satire while you're at it.

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

I have bled for my country, if stapler accidents count.

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

...

You do realize that article was satire, right?

That the people portrayed were exaggerated caricatures, right?

That their every word was designed to highlight the hypocrisy of anti-flag burners...

...right?

I'm pretty sure he is being sarcastic too.

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

You do realize the irony of agreeing with a satire?

I support the right to burn flags. Also, to the OP: make a poll.

I support the right to burn flags. Also, to the OP: make a poll.

ya

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

lulz

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

Okay. I read it before I called you a facist.

And I admit, I don't think you're just some facist.

You're a JINGOISTIC Facist.

Yup. Absolutely. *burns American flag right now*

Sure, I dont see why not.

The thing that sucks about me is people take me seriously when I joke and think I'm joking when I'm serious. :confused: :(

You do realize the irony of agreeing with a satire?

I get the feeling that sometimes the Onion actually comes here to source the kind of caricatures that they put up on their site. Maybe they modeled one of the neo-fascists characters on South Lizasauria...

The thing that sucks about me is people take me seriously when I joke and think I'm joking when I'm serious. :confused: :(

So you're serious when you want all rights to be stripped from the common citizen. You're serious when you say dissenters must die. You're serious when you say those who disagree with the government must be evicted immediately or be killed.

You shouldn't be living in America. You should be living in Soviet Russia as a KGB officer. That kind of thinking will let you go far there.

So you're serious when you want all rights to be stripped from the common citizen. You're serious when you say dissenters must die. You're serious when you say those who disagree with the government must be evicted immediately or be killed.

You shouldn't be living in America. You should be living in Soviet Russia as a KGB officer. That kind of thinking will let you go far there.

It can work both ways in this case. You'll have to find out for yourselves.

The thing that sucks about me is people take me seriously when I joke and think I'm joking when I'm serious. :confused: :(
Meh... I guess you just weren't outrageous enough. :p

Kinda sad when the true conservative position is hard to separate from satire...

It can work both ways in this case. You'll have to find out for yourselves.

No, no. You don't get it. Freedom of speech in the American constitution doesn't mean "freedom to praise the government only". You however, seem to think it does. Which is completely in line with the Soviet doctrines of free speech. Which is to say, if you disagree with the government, you die.

Which is why you would do well as a KGB officer, sniffing out dissent, killing protesters. Why, you would probably be quite happy to run down students in a tank if they were protesting wouldn't you?

Which is why you're not an American. At least not one that espoused the ideals in the constitution. It doesn't fit you.

South Lizasauria you are very convincing.

Damnit, I voted for the wrong option. I thought the question was "do you support the act of flag burning" rather than "the right to flag burn."

No, no. You don't get it. Freedom of speech in the American constitution doesn't mean "freedom to praise the government only". You however, seem to think it does. Which is completely in line with the Soviet doctrines of free speech. Which is to say, if you disagree with the government, you die.

Which is why you would do well as a KGB officer, sniffing out dissent, killing protesters. Why, you would probably be quite happy to run down students in a tank if they were protesting wouldn't you?

Which is why you're not an American. At least not one that espoused the ideals in the constitution. It doesn't fit you.

Most of these protesters are abusing their rights. Rights belong to every American yes, but once we become enemies with America don't those rights cease to be yours? The way I see it these protesters are power hungry fascists who want to take America by twisting laws. Yes it's ok to point out immoral actions by the government but to burn the symbol of freedom and to become the nations enemy strips you of rights.

Most of these protesters are abusing their rights. Rights belong to every American yes, but once we become enemies with America don't those rights cease to be yours? The way I see it these protesters are power hungry fascists who want to take America by twisting laws. Yes it's ok to point out immoral actions by the government but to burn the symbol of freedom and to become the nations enemy strips you of rights.

further lulz.

Most of these protesters are abusing their rights. Rights belong to every American yes, but once we become enemies with America don't those rights cease to be yours? The way I see it these protesters are power hungry fascists who want to take America by twisting laws. Yes it's ok to point out immoral actions by the government but to burn the symbol of freedom and to become the nations enemy strips you of rights.

Burning the flag is a means to an end. It does not make that person an "enemy" of the nation whose flag is being burned, or then, by your logic, it would be wrong for someone in Soviet Russia to burn the Soviet Flag. Also those who fight against a state do not forfit their natural rights in the process, haven't you ever heard of the Geneva Convention?

If the flag belongs to them, certainly they should be allowed to burn it. If it's someone else's flag, then that's different (unless the owner of the flag consents).

Burning the flag is a means to an end. It does not make that person an "enemy" of the nation whose flag is being burned, or then, by your logic, it would be wrong for someone in Soviet Russia to burn the Soviet Flag. Also those who fight against a state do not forfit their natural rights in the process, haven't you ever heard of the Geneva Convention?

Yes, it only exists because people went too far when it came to punishing the enemy.

Most of these protesters are abusing their rights. Rights belong to every American yes, but once we become enemies with America don't those rights cease to be yours? The way I see it these protesters are power hungry fascists who want to take America by twisting laws. Yes it's ok to point out immoral actions by the government but to burn the symbol of freedom and to become the nations enemy strips you of rights.
Wait, let me get this straight... are you kidding or are you not kidding? :confused:

personally i don't like people burning the flag, but i would never ever want to take away their right to protest or free speech.

Yes, it only exists because people went too far when it came to punishing the enemy.

Would it not be an overreaction to remove the natural rights a human being enjoys for burning a piece of cloth!

South Lizasauria does the best MTAE impression ever.

*You get rights, but if you use them you loose them!!!*

Would it not be an overreaction to remove the natural rights a human being enjoys for burning a piece of cloth!

Arsen is a crime.

South Lizasauria does the best MTAE impression ever.

*You get rights, but if you use them you loose them!!!*

Sorry, MTAE?

Arsen is a crime.
Buring a flag would hardly count as such.

Arsen is a crime.

Only if it's someone else's property. If you buy a flag, and proceed to burn it, it's not arson.

Only if it's someone else's property. If you buy a flag, and proceed to burn it, it's not arson.

So if I walked in the middle of a croud, burnt paper that I owned then urged everyone to do it would it be a crime? :rolleyes:

So if I walked in the middle of a croud, burnt paper that I owned then urged everyone to do it would it be a crime? :rolleyes:

No, no it wouldn't. No more than burning logs in your fireplace, and suggesting everyone who has a fireplace do the same.

Arsen is a crime.

It's a piece of CLOTH. It represents the government, it does not, I repeat not make someone eligible to have their rights taken from them. As a side note even criminals have natural rights; however it should not be a crime to burn a flag so long as you did not steal, or obtain it illegaly by some other means.

So if I walked in the middle of a croud, burnt paper that I owned then urged everyone to do it would it be a crime? :rolleyes:
Uh... no... Not really.

Otherwise we'd have to arrest anyone who has ever smoked.

Most of these protesters are abusing their rights. Rights belong to every American yes, but once we become enemies with America don't those rights cease to be yours? The way I see it these protesters are power hungry fascists who want to take America by twisting laws. Yes it's ok to point out immoral actions by the government but to burn the symbol of freedom and to become the nations enemy strips you of rights.

Ok, let me get one thing straight. You're serious about this right? Because I'm taking you at face value here (which I probably shouldn't).

You want to call protesters enemies of America? You want to call a visible, tangible sign of discontent with the government by its citizens a traitorous act? So if a large number of people disagree with the government, you would rather they shut up, keep their heads down and bow down to the demands of the government?

As for the flag, if America does not live up to its founding ideals, it has no more meaning than used toilet paper. And right now, you're advocating that it shouldn't.

Which means said flag would have as much symbolism as used toilet paper. In your rush to defend the flag, you are casting aside just about the entire thing that America was supposed to stand for. In which the government is FOR the people. And not the other way around.

Stripping rights, suppressing dissent, these are the actions of someone who believes that the people should serve the government as mindless drones, not someone who believes in life, liberty, equality and freedom of speech.

No, no it wouldn't. No more than burning logs in your fireplace, and suggesting everyone who has a fireplace do the same.

I dunno, burning stuff in the yard is illegal and can get you jailed where I live. What more for in public, especially if its a flag?

So if I walked in the middle of a croud, burnt paper that I owned then urged everyone to do it would it be a crime? :rolleyes:

I don't see why it would be. but people might think it a little odd you want them to burn papper scraps.

I dunno, burning stuff in the yard is illegal and can get you jailed where I live. What more for in public, especially if its a flag?

Now we're on a completely different topic. If the burning of anything in a public place is illegal, flag burning of course must be. However, if there is no restriction in place, flag burning should not be a crime.

Ok, let me get one thing straight. You're serious about this right? Because I'm taking you at face value here (which I probably shouldn't).

You want to call protesters enemies of America? You want to call a visible, tangible sign of discontent with the government by its citizens a traitorous act? So if a large number of people disagree with the government, you would rather they shut up, keep their heads down and bow down to the demands of the government?

As for the flag, if America does not live up to its founding ideals, it has no more meaning than used toilet paper. And right now, you're advocating that it shouldn't.

Which means said flag would have as much symbolism as used toilet paper. In your rush to defend the flag, you are casting aside just about the entire thing that America was supposed to stand for. In which the government is FOR the people. And not the other way around.

Stripping rights, suppressing dissent, these are the actions of someone who believes that the people should serve the government as mindless drones, not someone who believes in life, liberty, equality and freedom of speech.

For smeg sake! The flag is a symbol of how America was supposed to be like. Not the way it is so they shouldn't be burning flags in the first place. Maybe pictures of elephants and mules would be more reasonable but burning the symbol of the way the US should be? Thats like going up to a cousin you onced liked that you hate because he/she changed for the worse and burning a picture of you and him/her, when he/she was your good friend before the transformation. And no I don't want people to be mindless drones of the government, I simply ask they don't burn the symbol representing the nation, it seems analogical to burning the nation. Flags should only be burnt on battlefields.

I agree 100% with these soldiers. They have bled for this country and now parasitic protesters are misusing and abusing the gift given to them by these soldiers and on top of that they're spitting in their faces. And before you say I'm a fascist remember, soldiers have sworn out of their own free will to protect America from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC! Besides all most protesters want is to snatch power from the government the way I see it. Protests should be treated like hostile armies marching down main street.

Heres a perfect punishment for flag burners in America. They burn the flag of the nation that granted them freedom, they should be publicly burned because the free banner they burned represents the freedom they used to burn the flag in the first place.

Wow. So much for freedom, huh? Sorry buddy, sounds like you're the domestic enemy here.

For smeg sake! The flag is a symbol of how America was supposed to be like. Not the way it is so they shouldn't be burning flags in the first place. Maybe pictures of elephants and mules would be more reasonable but burning the symbol of the way the US should be? Thats like going up to a cousin you onced liked that you hate because he/she changed for the worse and burning a picture of you and him/her, when he/she was your good friend before the transformation. And no I don't want people to be mindless drones of the government, I simply ask they don't burn the symbol representing the nation, it seems analogical to burning the nation. Flags should only be burnt on battlefields.


Meh. You appear to value the symbol of the flag more than the freedom it represents.

Flag burning is a completely valid form of protest.

Besides, Flag exports to the Middle East is one of the US's biggest industries.

Americans don't get much exercise these days. At least let them exercise their constitutional rights. :p

I myself have not burned the Maple Leaf, although I certainly support the right to do it. I did once have a flag bonfire in my backyard, which was illegal, so when the police were called, I pissed on the Stars and Stripes to put it out. It was the happiest day of my life.

I hate the idea of nation-states anyway. All flags and borders do is divide us. No one is illegal.

The flag is a symbol of how America was supposed to be like.

on fire?

May I point a mildly related story on Australian Media Watch. Its an article on a story that featured on Today Tonight, Australia's worst "current affairs" program.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1726065.htm

After the Media Watch story, I was convinced flag burners should be jailed.

the right or the act?

on fire?

no

Texas v. Johnson (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=US&vol=491&invol=397), 491 U.S. 397, 419-420 (1989):

The way to preserve the flag's special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong. "To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence." Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 377 (1927) (Brandeis, J., concurring). And, precisely because it is our flag that is involved, one's response to the flag burner may exploit the uniquely persuasive power of the flag itself. We can imagine no more appropriate response to burning a flag than waving one's own, no better way to counter a flag burner's message than by saluting the flag that burns, no surer means of preserving the dignity even of the flag that burned than by - as one witness here did - according its remains a respectful burial. We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in doing so we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents.

I simply ask they don't burn the symbol representing the nation, it seems analogical to burning the nation. Flags should only be burnt on battlefields.
I personally think that the actual freedoms are far more important than the symbol, but that's just me.

most definitely. it's a silly thing to do, but our dear constitution does not forbid it in the slightest.:D :p :fluffle:

I personally think that the actual freedoms are far more important than the symbol, but that's just me.

I agree. I never really understood the flag anyway. It always seemed like an odd way to use cloth to me. you know, to hang it on a poll outside in the weather. I think the stars and stripe underwere was kinda cool though. and i want pants that look like the british flag, like on Flushed Away. those were cool pants. :p :D

no

it would look better that way

I don't support it, but i don't condemn it ether

The proper way to dispose of a flag when it gets soiled, damaged, or otherwise desecrated is via burning. To those who burn flags in protest, the government (or something else, but usually the gov't) has taken an action which has soiled, damaged, or otherwish desecrated America. The flag as a symbol of the country symbolically takes on this damage as well. Therefore, what looks like a normal flag in the eye of the observer, is actually a flag that is soiled, damaged, and desecrated, which would be inappropriate for anything other than burning.

The proper way to dispose of a flag when it gets soiled, damaged, or otherwise desecrated is via burning. To those who burn flags in protest, the government (or something else, but usually the gov't) has taken an action which has soiled, damaged, or otherwish desecrated America. The flag as a symbol of the country symbolically takes on this damage as well. Therefore, what looks like a normal flag in the eye of the observer, is actually a flag that is soiled, damaged, and desecrated, which would be inappropriate for anything other than burning.
Interesting argument. I've never heard that one before...

I skipped a couple pages, but I don't think anyone's mentioned this yet...
What bother's me most about the concept of anti-flag-burning legislation is that it would be the government's endorsement of a concept that is undeniably fascist.

Doing that expresses enmity toward the country. I think flag burners should be exiled. People who burn a symbol of the nation they live in don't deserve to be under that nation's wing of protection if all they are going to do is express hatred for their nation. If they leave than both the burners and the rest of the nation are happy. The nation would be glad to get rid of the ungrateful git and the flag burner would as I imagine be glad to leave unless he is a sociopath that just wants to harm society, in that case he should be executed so that no others attempt to harm society maliciously.

Nice to know that you care more for a piece of cloth than for the principles of freedom America was supposedly founded under.

Arsen is a crime.

I didn't know you lived in a flag. Or do you drive it?

I didn't know you lived in a flag. Or do you drive it?

*images uncle sam getting his clothes lit on fire by a protester*

*images uncle sam getting his clothes lit on fire by a protester*

So you'd rather see actual people burn than your dear symbol. Cute, but, luckily, the Constitution won't allow people to get arrested or murdered because you happen to have a thin skin regarding cloth.

By the way, if the Superman comics got burned in the 50's, the other character can get burned as well.

Hey, If everybody is willing to look the other way while someone burns my national flag, and they should be allowed to because of freedom of speech, everyone should also look the other way when me and my buddies kick the living shit out of those fuckers. ( you know - freedom of speech? 'this is what I think of you *punches!*)

P.S. I'm serious.

Hey, If everybody is willing to look the other way while someone burns my national flag, and they should be allowed to because of freedom of speech, everyone should also look the other way when me and my buddies kick the living shit out of those fuckers. ( you know - freedom of speech? 'this is what I think of you *punches!*)

P.S. I'm serious.

We won't look the other way when you play governmental inquisition, no. You will get arrested and go to jail for it, because burning an object that you bought with no damage to others is cceptable, whereas beating up a person isn't. Period.

P.S.: You're a troll.

You do realize the irony of agreeing with a satire?

It's so damned full of irony that it's giving me metabolic acidosis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolic_acidosis).

Hey, If everybody is willing to look the other way while someone burns my national flag, and they should be allowed to because of freedom of speech, everyone should also look the other way when me and my buddies kick the living shit out of those fuckers. ( you know - freedom of speech? 'this is what I think of you *punches!*)

P.S. I'm serious.
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes

We won't look the other way when you play governmental inquisition, no. You will get arrested and go to jail for it, because burning an object that you bought with no damage to others is cceptable, whereas beating up a person isn't. Period.

P.S.: You're a troll.

Yeah, but it does have damage to me - it pisses me the hell off. That feels a lot worse most of the time ( compared to getting hit).

And how am I a troll?

Yeah, but it does have damage to me - it pisses me the hell off. That feels a lot worse most of the time ( compared to getting hit).

And how am I a troll?

The right to freedom of expression is in the Constitution. The rights to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness are.

Now repeat after me:

THE RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED ISN'T IN THE CONSTITUTION.

flag burning is immoral and should not be done.

flag burning is immoral and should not be done.

Maybe, maybe not, but it should not be FORBIDDEN.

We won't look the other way when you play governmental inquisition, no. You will get arrested and go to jail for it, because burning an object that you bought with no damage to others is cceptable, whereas beating up a person isn't. Period.

P.S.: You're a troll.

so the flag burners have a right to freedom of expression and those who don't agree with them don't. Now who's the one being fascist....comrade ;)

Hey, If everybody is willing to look the other way while someone burns my national flag, and they should be allowed to because of freedom of speech, everyone should also look the other way when me and my buddies kick the living shit out of those fuckers. ( you know - freedom of speech? 'this is what I think of you *punches!*)

P.S. I'm serious.

couldnt agree more

so the flag burners have a right to freedom of expression and those who don't agree with them don't. Now who's the one being fascist....comrade ;)

You know, calling ME a "comrade" implies that YOU are a communist. Even more so than it would imply that I am one. Also, physically harming PEOPLE isn't freedom of speech, but, if you have to be informed of that, you might want to learn a bit more before going out in public.

So you'd rather see actual people burn than your dear symbol. Cute, but, luckily, the Constitution won't allow people to get arrested or murdered because you happen to have a thin skin regarding cloth.

By the way, if the Superman comics got burned in the 50's, the other character can get burned as well.

you didn't get my point. Someone said I lived in a flag, then I remembered Sam in his flag clothing. Looks like anyone dressed like Sam gets fried by protesters....literally...:(

Just wanting to scope peoples opinions on this topic here on NSG, do you support the right of people to be able to burn their national flag? (every country, not just the US flag)

No. The Chickenshits who descecrate such a symbol of national glory should be shot by Firing Squads and their families blacklisted for treason. That shit should be illegal, and I will literally assault anyone who I catch burning Old Glory. I'll take the sacrifice and go to the jail house if that's what it takes to defend America from itself.

(In the case of America only...other countries, I don't give a shit.)

you didn't get my point. Someone said I lived in a flag, then I remembered Sam in his flag clothing. Looks like anyone dressed like Sam gets fried by protesters....literally...:(

I suggested burning cloth is acceptable. You suggested burning PEOPLE is acceptable. Not the other way around.

You know, calling ME a "comrade" implies that YOU are a communist. Also, physically harming PEOPLE isn't freedom of speech, but, if you have to be informed of that, you might want to learn a bit more before going out in public.


No I'm a fascist. Damn! stop twisting my werdz! :sniper: :D

so the flag burners have a right to freedom of expression and those who don't agree with them don't. Now who's the one being fascist....comrade ;)

You're saying violence should fall under freedom of expression?

Try again.

Any one who said burning flags is ok is a commy and needs to take there "shareing is for everyone" ass out here.:upyours:

You know, calling ME a "comrade" implies that YOU are a communist. Even more so than it would imply that I am one. Also, physically harming PEOPLE isn't freedom of speech, but, if you have to be informed of that, you might want to learn a bit more before going out in public.

I avoid it because I hate people....

flag burning is immoral and should not be done.
"Flag burning is not immoral and should be done if somebody wants to."

There, we have an impasse. Such is life in a democratic society. Now, do you have any other valid reason to ban the practice beyond your own personal opinion?

The right to freedom of expression is in the Constitution. The rights to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness are.

Now repeat after me:

THE RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED ISN'T IN THE CONSTITUTION.

The rights to the so called "Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness" are not in the constitution. If you can prove me wrong, please do.

And even if that was in there, seeing someone burn the flag would be pretty damn detrimental to the happiness part for me.

I'm expressing myself just as much as they are expressing themselves, just in different means.

"Flag burning is not immoral and should be done if somebody wants to."

There, we have an impasse. Such is life in a democratic society. Now, do you have any other valid reason to ban the practice beyond your own personal opinion?

my foot in your ass.

No. The Chickenshits who descecrate such a symbol of national glory should be shot by Firing Squads and their families blacklisted for treason. That shit should be illegal, and I will literally assault anyone who I catch burning Old Glory. I'll take the sacrifice and go to the jail house if that's what it takes to defend America from itself.

(In the case of America only...other countries, I don't give a shit.)

Do you turn to stone permanently when hit by sunlight or only until you're back in the shade?

so the flag burners have a right to freedom of expression and those who don't agree with them don't. Now who's the one being fascist....comrade ;)

Assaulting someone because they do something you disagree with does not exactly catagorize as speech.

And you do realize "comrade" is communist, right?

so the flag burners have a right to freedom of expression and those who don't agree with them don't. Now who's the one being fascist....comrade ;)
Oh you have the right to protest the protesters, you do NOT have the right to harm them or strip away their rights.

my foot in your ass.

I believed he asked for a valid reason.

But if you wish to go ahead, give it a shot, I will have ample time to burn many more flags while you are in jail.

Any one who said burning flags is ok is a commy and needs to take there "shareing is for everyone" ass out here.:upyours:

Quoth the 5-year old... :rolleyes:

I'm expressing myself just as much as they are expressing themselves, just in different means.

Sorry, once again, assaulting someone isn't a "right" you enjoy I fear.

Most of these protesters are abusing their rights. Rights belong to every American yes, but once we become enemies with America don't those rights cease to be yours?

Burning a flag doesn't make you an "enemy of America."

Please see Cat-Tribe's totalpwnageposts.

The way I see it these protesters are power hungry fascists who want to take America by twisting laws.

That's funny, since it's you who seems to advocate and glorify fascism, even going so far as to say that Hitler's fault was "ruining fascism."

And really, you think a couple of hippies are "power hungry fascists?" No, you don't. You're just saying that to troll.

Yes it's ok to point out immoral actions by the government but to burn the symbol of freedom and to become the nations enemy strips you of rights.

No. It doesn't. You are flat-out wrong.

I'll be waiting for the next 15,000 years for you to admit to being wrong.

Assaulting someone because they do something you disagree with does not exactly catagorize as speech.

And you do realize "comrade" is communist, right?

I believe fascists use it too.

my foot in your ass.
Some advice, read the One-Stop-Shop because the Mods do NOT like threats and they will drop the hammer on you.

I believe fascists use it too.

You believe many things.

I believe fascists use it too.

no, not really. It's pretty much a communist term, the implication of "comrade" is not one particularly ingrained in fascist ideology.

You claim to be a fascist and don't know anything about fascist political orientation and history?

You believe many things.

most of them, it seems, wrong.

I believed he asked for a valid reason.

But if you wish to go ahead, give it a shot, I will have ample time to burn many more flags while you are in jail.

but wait liberals will try to rehabilitate me and ill be out real quick and ill put your head on a stick then of course i wont be put on death row cause "death row is cruel":p .

p.s. i want to give a shout out to all you spineless rehab people

My point is we shouldn't protect someone who burns the flag, and criminalize the person that kicks their ass.

and you are wrong.

Sorry, once again, assaulting someone isn't a "right" you enjoy I fear.

My point is we shouldn't protect someone who burns the flag, and criminalize the person that kicks their ass.

most of them, it seems, wrong.

I'm sorry, was that not implied?

My point is we shouldn't protect someone who burns the flag, and criminalize the person that kicks their ass.

Yes, we should, yes, we do, and no, you can't do anything about it but whine online.

My point is we shouldn't protect someone who burns the flag, and criminalize the person that kicks their ass.
Because someone using their first amendment rights is FAR more evil than someone using aggivated assult?

I've just GOT to hear the logic behind this one.

No. The Chickenshits who descecrate such a symbol of national glory should be shot by Firing Squads and their families blacklisted for treason. That shit should be illegal, and I will literally assault anyone who I catch burning Old Glory. I'll take the sacrifice and go to the jail house if that's what it takes to defend America from itself.

(In the case of America only...other countries, I don't give a shit.)
That is about as anti-American as you can get.

You see, you are not really patriotic. Most people who think they are patriotic simply idolize the flag, the anthem, the pledge, and all the other empty trappings of this nation. They're just colors and words, man. Not that important. Certainly not important enough to jail people for "disrespecting" them.

No, if you really want to be patriotic, you should commit yourself to the ideals expressed by the Founding Fathers in the Bill of Rights. The most important of these ideals is found in the First Amendment: the right to free speech.

Now, think on this carefully: why would the Founders guarantee freedom of speech? If a despotic government attempted to ban a popular political party, say, or a prominent religion, then surely the people would rise up to defend it. Why guarantee freedom of speech when the people could protect it adequately enough on their own? They overthrew the British government, after all.

The truth is that the First Amendment is meant to protect the minority. To stop a bigoted majority from censoring unpopular ideas. And that is exactly what you're trying to do -- censor ideas that you and many others find offensive or objectionable. But -- and this is important -- the ideas that are most offensive are the ones most in need of protection. No-one's going to attack you for reading the Pledge of Allegiance in public. Flag-burners, on the other hand, are a bit more unpopular.

The protesters of the Civil Rights Movement were pretty damn unpopular in the South. But if the government had obeyed the people's wishes and brutally crushed the rallies, then the nation would still be locked in segregation. Sometimes it's necessary to protect unpopular opinions -- they may just be the correct ones.

So, if you want to be a real American, swallow your nationalistic pride and pay homage to the ideals that are truly important -- not a flag, not a motto, but the freedom of expression that makes this country so great.

Burning a flag doesn't make you an "enemy of America."

Please see Cat-Tribe's totalpwnageposts.



That's funny, since it's you who seems to advocate and glorify fascism, even going so far as to say that Hitler's fault was "ruining fascism."

And really, you think a couple of hippies are "power hungry fascists?" No, you don't. You're just saying that to troll.



No. It doesn't. You are flat-out wrong.

I'll be waiting for the next 15,000 years for you to admit to being wrong.

Not all fascsits share the same ideals. Fundies and feminazis disagree with each other and me whilst protesters disagree with them. Heck, not even all communists agree, thats why there are multiple kinds.

My point is we shouldn't protect someone who burns the flag, and criminalize the person that kicks their ass.

you're kinda out of luck I fear. My right to burn a flag is protected by the constitution, the supreme law of the land, to which all other laws are below. It is my right, protected in the most fundamental laws of this country.

You, on the other hand, have no right to not be bothered by my actions. YOu have no right to not be offended by them. And you don't have the right to lay one finger on me if I don't want you to.

so the flag burners have a right to freedom of expression and those who don't agree with them don't. Now who's the one being fascist....comrade ;)

You might want to tell your puppets that beating the hell out of someone isn't freedom of speech. Although fascists make me wish it were. "I was just protesting fascisim officer!"

Not all fascsits share the same ideals. Fundies and feminazis disagree with each other and me whilst protesters disagree with them. Heck, not even all communists agree, thats why there are multiple kinds.

how exactly are the "multiple kinds" of communists?

Any one who said burning flags is ok is a commy and needs to take there "shareing is for everyone" ass out here.:upyours:

I'm not just a commie, I'm a mutant traitor as well.

Not all fascsits share the same ideals. Fundies and feminazis disagree with each other and me whilst protesters disagree with them. Heck, not even all communists agree, thats why there are multiple kinds.

Flag burning is an activity associated with protest and freedom of speech/expression.

Fascism is a set of ideologies and practices that seeks to place the nation, defined in exclusive biological, cultural, and/or historical terms, above all other sources of loyalty, and to create a mobilized national community. Fascist nationalism is reactionary in that it entails implacable hostility to socialism and feminism, for they are seen as prioritizing class or gender rather than nation. This is why fascism is a movement of the extreme right. Fascism is also a movement of the radical right because the defeat of socialism and feminism and the creation of the mobilized nation are held to depend upon the advent to power of a new elite acting in the name of the people, headed by a charismatic leader, and embodied in a mass, militarized party.

If you think the two things are the same, you are literally batshit insane or stupid.

Flag burning is an activity associated with protest and freedom of speech/expression.

Fascism is a set of ideologies and practices that seeks to place the nation, defined in exclusive biological, cultural, and/or historical terms, above all other sources of loyalty, and to create a mobilized national community. Fascist nationalism is reactionary in that it entails implacable hostility to socialism and feminism, for they are seen as prioritizing class or gender rather than nation. This is why fascism is a movement of the extreme right. Fascism is also a movement of the radical right because the defeat of socialism and feminism and the creation of the mobilized nation are held to depend upon the advent to power of a new elite acting in the name of the people, headed by a charismatic leader, and embodied in a mass, militarized party.

If you think the two things are the same, you are literally batshit insane or stupid.

people say that about having sex with children doesnt mean it is.

Do you turn to stone permanently when hit by sunlight or only until you're back in the shade?

Any one else suspect that all of South Lizzy's supporters are South Lizzy?

how exactly are the "multiple kinds" of communists?

Stalin and Gorbachev ideals didn't quite agree with each other.

And here are some other examples of multiple communist branches:

Christians communism
Leninism
Stalinism
Maoism
Kim Jong Li's version
(look these up on wiki)

Any one else suspect that all of South Lizzy's supporters are South Lizzy?

I wouldn't believe he was capable of keeping them all seperate and unconfused for so long...

Any one else suspect that all of South Lizzy's supporters are South Lizzy?

If that is true, he, under the guise of Conservative Idon'tcarewhat'shisname, was threatening a user with physical harm.

Stalin and Gorbachev ideals didn't quite agree with each other.

And here are some other examples of multiple communist branches:

Christians communism
Leninism
Stalinism
Maoism
Kim Jong Li's version
(look these up on wiki)

and yet, the functional ideology is still the same, is it not?

What you said was the equivalent of saying "well there are different kinds of fascists, including those that are not ideologically fascist in the slightest"

<stuff>Knock it off.

Read the rules. Love the rules. Live the rules.


-The Most Glorious Hack
NationStates Game Moderator

people say that about having sex with children doesnt mean it is.
The hell does that have anything to do with the argument?

Any one else suspect that all of South Lizzy's supporters are South Lizzy?

Like I can't recruit on the internet. :rolleyes:

If that is true, he, under the guise of Conservative Idon'tcarewhat'shisname, was threatening a user with physical harm.

really lets get real how am i going to get my foot in someones ass?really come on.

you're kinda out of luck I fear. My right to burn a flag is protected by the constitution, the supreme law of the land, to which all other laws are below. It is my right, protected in the most fundamental laws of this country.

You, on the other hand, have no right to not be bothered by my actions. YOu have no right to not be offended by them. And you don't have the right to lay one finger on me if I don't want you to.

OK, all of you are failing to see the point, so I'll give a new example.

I want to make a huge freaking sign that I can drive around town on a truck (like ten stories high or so). It's going to say "I hate fags, hippies, pinko commie liberal pansies, and those dumbshit religious people!!!!!"

According to you, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, society should glorify me like I'm a hero, right? And then when all the offended people come and pick on me, they should all go to prison, cause they are the true evil ones.

people say that about having sex with children doesnt mean it is.

Are you honestly going to sit here and make me explain, patiently, to you, how child rape and burning a flag are different?

Can I just throw a dictionary in your general vicinity in the hopes that you will read it instead?

The hell does that have anything to do with the argument?

people say it freedom of speech same as falg burning

OK, all of you are failing to see the point, so I'll give a new example.

I want to make a huge freaking sign that I can drive around town on a truck (like ten stories high or so). It's going to say "I hate fags, hippies, pinko commie liberal pansies, and those dumbshit religious people!!!!!"

According to you, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, society should glorify me like I'm a hero, right? And then when all the offended people come and pick on me, they should all go to prison, cause they are the true evil ones.
Yes! You want to do that, yeah, that's YOUR right to do so. And if someone does assult you for it, they SHOULD be in jail.

They do have the right to counter-protest though.

OK, all of you are failing to see the point, so I'll give a new example.

I want to make a huge freaking sign that I can drive around town on a truck (like ten stories high or so). It's going to say "I hate fags, hippies, pinko commie liberal pansies, and those dumbshit religious people!!!!!"

According to you, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, society should glorify me like I'm a hero, right? And then when all the offended people come and pick on me, they should all go to prison, cause they are the true evil ones.

No one here suggested a hero treatment, but I would sure as hell report whoever physically attacked you.

people say it freedom of speech same as falg burning
Freedom of speech IS the same as flag burning (Or rather flag burning is an example of freedom of speech). It doesn't have anything to do with child molestation though.

if i burned a flag accident or not i would except a brutal beating

people should do whatever they want. like smoke pot. and drive really fast. that never hurt anybody, right? this isn't sarcasm. i am really tired of having to stash my weed behind my dresser. and hell, you know, stopping and stuff all the time is really rough on the brakes. sometimes a girl just wants to be able to go up to seventy-five, turn on the cruise, and relax listening to her favorite Van Halen CD really loud.

people say it freedom of speech same as falg burning

If you don't stop interrupting the adults, Santa will give you a lump of coal.

people say it freedom of speech same as falg burning

I've never heard anyone argue that child rape is freedom of speech. Not even pedophiles and child rapists. Apparently they unlike you can differentiate between "speech" and "violent assault on another human being."

OK, all of you are failing to see the point, so I'll give a new example.

I don't think it's us

I want to make a huge freaking sign that I can drive around town on a truck (like ten stories high or so). It's going to say "I hate fags, hippies, pinko commie liberal pansies, and those dumbshit religious people!!!!!"

According to you, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, society should glorify me like I'm a hero, right?

I personally find a great deal wrong with it. I figure some people would glorify you, mustly guys with titles beginning with "imperial" and ending with "wizard" or "dragon."

I would probably call you a racist biggot. But it would still be your right to do it.

And then when all the offended people come and pick on me, they should all go to prison, cause they are the true evil ones.

Arrested for picking on you? No, not at all. You have the freedom to say what you wish. They have the freedom to say what they wish back at you. They can pick on you as much as they wish.

If they assault you however, that is illegal. Whether that is "evil" or not is rather irrelevant to the fact that your sign is legal, assaulting you is not.

oh yeah, and people should be able to burn flags. except if theyre made of asbestos.

Freedom of speech IS the same as flag burning (Or rather flag burning is an example of freedom of speech). It doesn't have anything to do with child molestation though.
child rape is an example of freedom of speech to there both physical acts that you would feal your right to do

This is insane....liberals saying its ok to offend people but when some minorities like gays and atheists or whatever squeal the offender gets it for being offensive.

I'm confused. :confused:

people should do whatever they want. like smoke pot. and drive really fast. that never hurt anybody, right? this isn't sarcasm. i am really tired of having to stash my weed behind my dresser. and hell, you know, stopping and stuff all the time is really rough on the brakes. sometimes a girl just wants to be able to go up to seventy-five, turn on the cruise, and relax listening to her favorite Van Halen CD really loud.
*blinks* Oooookay, that one came out of left field.


I think we'll leave it there.

I don't think it's us

I want to make a huge freaking sign that I can drive around town on a truck (like ten stories high or so). It's going to say "I hate fags, hippies, pinko commie liberal pansies, and those dumbshit religious people!!!!!"



I personally find a great deal wrong with it. I figure some people would glorify you, mustly guys with titles beginning with "imperial" and ending with "wizard" or "dragon."

I would probably call you a racist biggot. But it would still be your right to do it.



Arrested for picking on you? No, not at all. You have the freedom to say what you wish. They have the freedom to say what they wish back at you. They can pick on you as much as they wish.

If they assault you however, that is illegal. Whether that is "evil" or not is rather irrelevant to the fact that your sign is legal, assaulting you is not.

Bullying is illegal in the US last I checked. So they can't pick on him without getting in some sort of trouble.

This is insane....liberals saying its ok to offend people but when some minorities like gays and atheists or whatever squeal the offender gets it for being offensive.

I'm confused. :confused:

It's insane, but it's been the doublestandard for many years now. Just like how liberals don't believe in "free" speech, but "fair" speech. In short, you can say whatever you please so long as it doesn't offend them in any way--if you do, you'll get silenced despite their supposed love of expression and speech. Or you'll get sluffed off as a racist/bigot/insert liberal epithet here.

Yes! You want to do that, yeah, that's YOUR right to do so. And if someone does assult you for it, they SHOULD be in jail.

They do have the right to counter-protest though.

The problem is that I don't have a right to do that. I would get a legal shitstorm if I carried it out. Probably end up in prison.

No one here suggested a hero treatment, but I would sure as hell report whoever physically attacked you.

The 'hero' treatment is implied because people always believe oh that's their right. But they also say no one has a right to say it isn't their right ( if you know what I mean). I would be evil for getting mad at them, basically.

I'm confused. :confused:

That was the only thing remotely resembling sanity you said here. Even because we're saying that he still HAS THE RIGHT to offend with words, yes.

child rape is an example of freedom of speech to there both physical acts that you would feal a your right to do
No, it's not. How on earth is child rape freedom of speech. NO ONE has ever claimed that (AFAIK).

Child rape is assult and rape. It has nothing to do with protesting or protected speech.

This is insane....liberals saying its ok to offend people but when some minorities like gays and atheists or whatever squeal the offender gets it for being offensive.

I'm confused. :confused:

I'm not surprised.

You can offend people all you want. You can say every single piece of vile drivel your hate filled mine can come up with. That is your right.

But your right ends the moment you touch another person. At that point, it is no longer expression.

You can be offensive as you like. That doesn't, however, mean I have to sit in silence and listen to it.

The laws which grant you the right to be as offensive as you wish give me the right to tell you just how much of an intolerant ass you are.

This is not hypocracy, this is not two faced. You have the right to be offensive. I have the right to tell you exactly what I think about that.

child rape is an example of freedom of speech

...

Alright, I'm done feeding the trolls tonight. I'm about to say things that are possibly more offensive than what "conservatives states" is, otherwise.

It's insane, but it's been the doublestandard for many years now. Just like how liberals don't believe in "free" speech, but "fair" speech. In short, you can say whatever you please so long as it doesn't offend them in any way--if you do, you'll get silenced despite their supposed love of expression and speech.

Oh, lookie. The guy that claims speech should be used only to praise the government is accusing the liberals of being against free speech. Isn't that cute? In a cock-fight sort of way?

National Flags? hell yeah I support it.

This is insane....liberals saying its ok to offend people but when some minorities like gays and atheists or whatever squeal the offender gets it for being offensive.

I'm confused. :confused:

i totally agree with you, man! I should totally be able to voice my opinions about gays. like, those damn fags, theyre disrespecting my body. like my gay friend he told me he thinks my body's gross. i mean wtf? how rude is that.

But in all seriousness, one should look at what's appropriate for polite society. To say you think homosexuals to die is rude and will probably warrant you a slap in the face. To say that you think homosexuality is a bad idea in general is completely different. To burn a flag is one thing, saying you disagree with the country's stands, but to say "Fuck you, W!" is rude but will not warrant you a slap in the face, because liberals run the media, and liberals are irrational, and are a bad idea in general, and I know I'll probably get slapped in the face for saying it.

*blinks* Oooookay, that one came out of left field.


I think we'll leave it there.

Originally Posted by Arcos Irises View Post
people should do whatever they want. like smoke pot. and drive really fast. that never hurt anybody, right? this isn't sarcasm. i am really tired of having to stash my weed behind my dresser. and hell, you know, stopping and stuff all the time is really rough on the brakes. sometimes a girl just wants to be able to go up to seventy-five, turn on the cruise, and relax listening to her favorite Van Halen CD really loud.

Thats why the left is dangerous, if everyone does what they wants guess what happens...society crumbles as everyone starts caring for themselves. the living standard sinks down to hell. We tolerate people a little bit soon it has a domino effect and most of the achievements by man are flushed down the toilet.

OK, all of you are failing to see the point, so I'll give a new example.

I want to make a huge freaking sign that I can drive around town on a truck (like ten stories high or so). It's going to say "I hate fags, hippies, pinko commie liberal pansies, and those dumbshit religious people!!!!!"

According to you, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, society should glorify me like I'm a hero, right? And then when all the offended people come and pick on me, they should all go to prison, cause they are the true evil ones.

There's plenty wrong with it, it's just not illegal. The offended people are free to protest your sign, they are not free however to beat the hell out of you. Now begone Trollboy, I banish you back to the hell from whence you came.

The problem is that I don't have a right to do that. I would get a legal shitstorm if I carried it out. Probably end up in prison.

Actually...you do.

The 'hero' treatment is implied because people always believe oh that's their right.

Why in hell would I consider you a hero for exercising your rights?"

But they also say no one has a right to say it isn't their right ( if you know what I mean). I would be evil for getting mad at them, basically.

If I think you are evil for getting mad at a flag burner, that is merely my subjective opinion. I may think you're wrong, I may think you're closed minded, but it still your right. Maybe you shouldn't be mad, but if you are, well, that's your right.

I am forced, by law, to accept that you can assert my rights. It is however MY right to say, at the top of my voice, exactly what i think of you based on how you assert them.

But I still can't touch you

The problem is that I don't have a right to do that. I would get a legal shitstorm if I carried it out. Probably end up in prison.
Ah yes, that explains SO much why when the KKK and the Neo Nazis march they are ALWAYS arrested. It explains why Ann Coulter is sitting in jail right now after making so many remarks about "faggots" and Rush is right next to her. :rolleyes:

No, as long as it conforms to regulations (Permits and such) you CAN say it.

No, it's not. How on earth is child rape freedom of speech. NO ONE has ever claimed that (AFAIK).

Child rape is assult and rape. It has nothing to do with protesting or protected speech.

ok if someone said i want to have sex with a child and you should stop them and you do then they protest about not being able and do it any way.is that no protest?

Oh, lookie. The guy that claims speech should be used only to praise the government is accusing the liberals of being against free speech. Isn't that cute? In a cock-fight sort of way?

I don't have a problem with praising the right government, only the wrong ones, or its policies.

child rape is an example of freedom of speech to there both physical acts that you would feal your right to do

Did you just call me a paedophile?

No, really, I'm asking because your typing, sentence structure and spelling are so utterly bad that I can't understand if you did.

We tolerate people a little bit soon it has a domino effect and most of the achievements by man are flushed down the toilet.

I guess the irony of the fact that many of these great achievements were accomplished by people who were left the hell alone to do what they want is lost on you, huh?

Thats why the left is dangerous, if everyone does what they wants guess what happens...society crumbles as everyone starts caring for themselves. the living standard sinks down to hell. We tolerate people a little bit soon it has a domino effect and most of the achievements by man are flushed down the toilet.
So we should activily opress them?

There's plenty wrong with it, it's just not illegal. The offended people are free to protest your sign, they are not free however to beat the hell out of you. Now begone Trollboy, I banish you back to the hell from whence you came.

But it would be illegal people, that's kind of my point. In some stupid way, it would be.

So I guess what makes me a troll is when I might say something that irritates someone else? However, to have an entire thread full of posts saying you should burn the flag is just fine with everyone.

ok if someone said i want to have sex with a child and you should stop them and you do then they protest about not being able and do it any way.is that no protest?

did anyone get that? reading this feels like trying to have a conversation underwater.

Actually...you do.


Never heard of a hate crime?

That's one you are deemed evil because your views differ from the preferred views of a certain minority.

did anyone get that? reading this feels like trying to have a conversation underwater.

wow must not be able to read. i said if someone did that and you told them they couldnt do it and they protested it and did it any way that isnt protest?

ok if someone said i want to have sex with a child and you should stop them and you do then they protest about not being able and do it any way.is that no protest?
1. If they say that they want to have sex with children, and do not do so, that is their view. I will argue about it with them, but I cannot 'stop' them as they haven't DONE anything yet. We do not arrest people for thought crimes. If they are activily raping a child, that is a different story.

2. PLEASE learn how to frame an argument, because I am getting tired of trying to figure out what the hell you're talking about.

But it would be illegal people, that's kind of my point. In some stupid way, it would be.

Except...no, it isn't. That's the whole point. Your entire argument is premised on a falsehood.

"It's unfair because they can burn a flag but I can't speak freely"
"yes you can"
"no, I can't.
"yes...you can"
"no, I can't...somehow"

The problem with people like you is you don't want the right to freedom of speech. You have that, you always did.

People like you want freedom to speak, and not have anyone speak back to you.

Sorry, doesn't work that way. You can say what you want, and I can tell you exactly what I think of what you just said.

ok if someone said i want to have sex with a child and you should stop them and you do then they protest about not being able and do it any way.is that no protest?
There's nothing illegal about saying you want to have sex with a child, or protesting for your right to do so (Ever hear of NAMBLA?). But actually doing so is another matter entirely.

You need to understand that there is a major difference between words/ideas and actions.

child rape is an example of freedom of speech to there both physical acts that you would feal your right to do

Ok then, why don't you come over to my place. I'll put on some Barry White, light some candles, then I'll freedom of speech you. Damn man, do you even make sense to yourself?

did anyone get that? reading this feels like trying to have a conversation underwater.

I think he tried to offend us by typing with his tongue.

Ah yes, that explains SO much why when the KKK and the Neo Nazis march they are ALWAYS arrested. It explains why Ann Coulter is sitting in jail right now after making so many remarks about "faggots" and Rush is right next to her. :rolleyes:

No, as long as it conforms to regulations (Permits and such) you CAN say it.

Do the flag burners need a permit for the pyrotechnic display they are putting on? No. When they should have to have one. Even a license probably.

Never heard of a hate crime?

Yes, yes I have.

Crime of aggravated assault, arson, burglary, criminal homicide, motor vehicle theft, robbery, sex offenses, and/or crime involving bodily injury in which the victim was intentionally selected because of the victims' actual or perceived race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or disability.


Nope, don't see putting a sign up as one of those.

But it would be illegal people, that's kind of my point. In some stupid way, it would be.

So I guess what makes me a troll is when I might say something that irritates someone else? However, to have an entire thread full of posts saying you should burn the flag is just fine with everyone.

If it were illegal, Fred Phelps would be in jail. And I'd sooner burn flags than people, no matter how much you'd like to do it the other way around.

Do the flag burners need a permit for the pyrotechnic display they are putting on? No. When they should have to have one. Even a license probably.

of course they do. Lighting a fire in a public area is often illegal in and of itself. There's no magic exception to that.

Never heard of a hate crime?

That's one you are deemed evil because your views differ from the preferred views of a certain minority.
A hate crime is an action, usually assault or murder. That is illegal.

Once again, there's a difference between words and actions.

wow must not be able to read. i said if someone did that and you told them they couldnt do it and they protested it and did it any way that isnt protest?

Yeah....I'm not the one with the problem here.

Never heard of a hate crime?

That's one you are deemed evil because your views differ from the preferred views of a certain minority.
Ok, say this with me now. Hate crime. Hate crime. Hate crime. One more time. Hate CRIME. Meaning unless you commit a crime you can have different views all you want. Beating up someone just because they are homosexual or Jewish, or Asian is not expressing a different point of view.

But it would be illegal people, that's kind of my point. In some stupid way, it would be.

Show me the law that makes it illegal Trollboy. I thought I banished you anyway? Guess I need more raid.

Saying somthing like that is fine(well not sex with children).But doing it isnt.raping a child and burning a flag can eather physicaly or mentaly hurt someone.

Except...no, it isn't. That's the whole point. Your entire argument is premised on a falsehood.

"It's unfair because they can burn a flag but I can't speak freely"
"yes you can"
"no, I can't.
"yes...you can"
"no, I can't...somehow"

The problem with people like you is you don't want the right to freedom of speech. You have that, you always did.

People like you want freedom to speak, and not have anyone speak back to you.

Sorry, doesn't work that way. You can say what you want, and I can tell you exactly what I think of what you just said.


HATE CRIME -crime (violent, hate speech, VANDALISM) motivated by feelings of enmity against an identifiable social group.

That is what my sign would be.

That is also what flag burning is to me.

why the hell are you guys talking about pedophilia? not to betray my republican friends, but we're republicans! we believe in freedom. our party freed the slaves! and guess what, J. K. O'rourke is a republican, so there's one more thing to be proud of-the original Republican Party Reptile! They want to burn flags? Let them burn thirteenth-century tapestries! it doesn't mean anything. They're being babies and you can let them express their anger through heat and smoke (hell?). Just because you tolerate their opinions doesn't mean you have to take them on yourself. That philosophy, that one must believe something to tolerate it, is what liberals think!

Saying somthing like that is fine(well not sex with children).But doing it isnt.raping a child and burning a flag can eather physicaly or mentaly hurt someone.
How is burning a flag causing physical or mental harm?

Saying somthing like that is fine(well not sex with children).But doing it isnt.raping a child and burning a flag can eather physicaly or mentaly hurt someone.

so...burning a flag in protest...is the same as raping a child....

did anyone get that? reading this feels like trying to have a conversation underwater.

Basically Trollboy2 seems to be saying that because flag burning is both action and free speech ALL actions are free speech. Therefore since child raping is an action child raping is free speech. I know it doesn't make sense to me either.

wow must not be able to read. i said if someone did that and you told them they couldnt do it and they protested it and did it any way that isnt protest?

No, we can read. You, however, can't write.

Basically Trollboy2 seems to be saying that because flag burning is both action and free speech ALL actions are free speech. Therefore since child raping is an action child raping is free speech. I know it doesn't make sense to me either.

Of course it dont make sence to you.Your a liberal!!!

HATE CRIME -crime (violent, hate speech, VANDALISM) motivated by feelings of enmity against an identifiable social group.

That is what my sign would be.

A hate crime must be either an overt physical act OR call for the death of a group. Your sign does not, it merely states your displeasure.

I believe Fred Phelps has been doing pretty much the EXACT same thing for years.

That is also what flag burning is to me.

Tough. You aren't special enough for your feelings to have baring on the law.

Do the flag burners need a permit for the pyrotechnic display they are putting on? No. When they should have to have one. Even a license probably.
Sure they do. If you're publicly protesting, you need a permit for certain areas.

Oh and just to clarify what HATE SPEECH is (part of hate crime)

"term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance"

There's nothing illegal about saying you want to have sex with a child, or protesting for your right to do so (Ever hear of NAMBLA?). But actually doing so is another matter entirely.

You need to understand that there is a major difference between words/ideas and actions.

Damn. You just stepped into a logical trap made by an idiot. Now they're going to say the same thing about flag burning.

Of course it dont make sence to you.Your a liberal!!!

I think it makes sense to him because he's a person that actually understands logic and rationality, which you apparently don't.

Of course, if that's the definition of liberal....well, it'd explain some things in the last 6 years.

Saying somthing like that is fine(well not sex with children).But doing it isnt.raping a child and burning a flag can eather physicaly or mentaly hurt someone.

Threatening to beat people up can do that as well, and you didn't refrain from doing that, now did you?

Of course it dont make sence to you.Your a liberal!!!
Here, go read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy Learn and come back when you can actually make sense.

Oh and just to clarify what HATE SPEECH is (part of hate crime)

"term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance"

and how is a sign that says "I hate fags" showing the inherent intent to degrade, intimidate or incite violence?

Where is a degredation? Where is the incite to violence? Where's the intimidation?

abortions for some, tiny american flags for others

http://www.astronomija.co.yu/teorije/aliens/fermi/kengikods.gif

hey beat up people is wrong to

abortions for some, tiny american flags for others

http://www.astronomija.co.yu/teorije/aliens/fermi/kengikods.gif

don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

hey beat up people is wrong to

Which is why you threatened to do exactly that, kid?

Oh and just to clarify what HATE SPEECH is (part of hate crime)

"term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance"
You're pulling that off of Wiki and you forgot to read the part noting that in the US, it is publicly protected speech.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech#Legal_aspects

you know what i've noticed? how liberals add letters to words. unnecessary vowels. like o and a. like in foetus and paedophile. why? i guess it's just a further corruption of the original latin. like the fe- having to do with offspring (filii, filly). ped- has to do with child. but who cares about paedophiles? what the hell is a paedophile, anyway?

hey i didnt say that beating people was legal didnt say it wasnt ether.

Of course it dont make sence to you.Your a liberal!!!

I AM? :eek: Damn thanks for letting me know, I'll try to do better.:p

HATE CRIME -crime (violent, hate speech, VANDALISM) motivated by feelings of enmity against an identifiable social group.


It's only vandalism if the flag belongs to someone else.

and how is a sign that says "I hate fags" showing the inherent intent to degrade, intimidate or incite violence?

Where is a degredation? Where is the incite to violence? Where's the intimidation?

You just don't get it do you?

DEGRADE - #1 To lower in dignity; dishonor or disgrace: a scandal that degraded the participants;
#2 To lower in moral or intellectual character; debase.

That is what they would say my sign is doing.

You just don't get it do you?

No, you don't. As you've ignored, people like fred phelps have been putting up signs that read, literally "god hates fags" for YEARS.

He's still out there.

you know what i've noticed? how liberals add letters to words. unnecessary vowels. like o and a. like in foetus and paedophile. why? i guess it's just a further corruption of the original latin. like the fe- having to do with offspring (filii, filly). ped- has to do with child. but who cares about paedophiles? what the hell is a paedophile, anyway?
*Thunk*
British spelling vs US. This IS an international board.

hey i didnt say that beating people was legal didnt say it wasnt ether.

Please, enlighten us then. We await with baited breath for your judgment on whether beating people is legal or not.

It's only vandalism if the flag belongs to someone else.

it belong to the country dumass

You just don't get it do you?

DEGRADE - #1 To lower in dignity; dishonor or disgrace: a scandal that degraded the participants;
#2 To lower in moral or intellectual character; debase.

That is what they would say my sign is doing.

You can say that about flag-burning as well. However, neither them nor you get to sue anyone or beat up anyone.

Damn. You just stepped into a logical trap made by an idiot. Now they're going to say the same thing about flag burning.
Not so. Burning a flag expresses an idea in a symbolic way, and is thus a form of expression protected under the First Amendment. Same thing if NAMBLA members went out and burned copies of... I don't know, a copy of COPA, or something.

Although I admit that I should have better phrased "action" as "violence against another person".

but that's not the point. what im really here for is to stick up for the other republican, no matter how ignorant or ten-years-old he may be. my dear conservative, if they want to burn flags, let them burn tapestries...ones from the thirteenth century! i dont care! just because you tolerate their opinion doesn't mean you hold those opinions yourself.

it belong to the country dumass
You mean all my US flags belong to CHINA?!

Just wanting to scope peoples opinions on this topic here on NSG, do you support the right of people to be able to burn their national flag? (every country, not just the US flag)

Why is there no 'yes, but I think it's stupid' option?:p

*Thunk*
British spelling vs US. This IS an international board.

i guess. but it doesn't help that all the people who spelled it that way were pro abortion and ambiguous when it came to paedophiles.

i guess. but it doesn't help that all the people who spelled it that way were pro abortion and ambiguous when it came to paedophiles.

are there really that many pro paedophile people out there?

it belong to the country dumass

No, it belongs to whoever bought it.

i guess. but it doesn't help that all the people who spelled it that way were pro abortion and ambiguous when it came to paedophiles.
You know what, I'm dropping this because there is a ban on talking about this topic.

it belong to the country dumass

Verdict?

Fail.

You just don't get it do you?

DEGRADE - #1 To lower in dignity; dishonor or disgrace: a scandal that degraded the participants;
#2 To lower in moral or intellectual character; debase.

That is what they would say my sign is doing.

'I hate fags' is a statement of opinion, neither a threat nor an accusation. The only person lowered in dignity, dishonored or disgraced would be the one making the statement.

The american flag symbolises are way of life and burning it is a hate crime against people that live the life of an american

If you follow those DEFINITIONS up through the thread, you will find that each one ids defining a part of another leading to Hate CRIME.

It could not be more obvious how it is a crime.

The reason Phelps can do what he wants is 1: he has a religious first amendment cover and 2: he has a large following, so it is harder to touch him.

what are you even talking about now? you know what would be great? if we all came to my house and shared a toke. because you know what? in the perfect world, as described by my sister after I gave her some crack for her birthday, there would be no drugs. all the happiness could be gotten from other people. and also no reason for that syndrome where you think you're a zombie, which can result from crack addiction and loss of sleep. but that's not the point!

The reason Phelps can do what he wants is 1: he has a religious first amendment cover and 2: he has a large following, so it is harder to touch him.
Right. And flag-burners have a political First Amendment cover.

Although they do not have a large following, ergo the need for said First Amendment protection.

The american flag symbolises are way of life and burning it is a hate crime against people that live the life of an american
Riiiight. Because all 300 million Americans are somehow living the exact same lifestyle.

Hell, I'm living that lifestyle in Japan right now and someone burning a flag in Whocares, WA is hurting me. :rolleyes:

Yeah , actually the flag does belong to the country, and therefore the citizens of that government.

And you can't really call yourself a true citizen of a country whose flag you are currently burning.

Hey, I bought my Driver's license to!!! Does that mean I own it? No.

This thread is gonna go back and forth so im done.

The american flag symbolises are way of life and burning it is a hate crime against people that live the life of an american

You don't really have to worry about it then, do you?

If you follow those DEFINITIONS up through the thread, you will find that each one ids defining a part of another leading to Hate CRIME.

It could not be more obvious how it is a crime.
Uh, no. It's not obvious. You missed the part were we all pointed out that your imaginary sign does not constitute hate speech, nor is hate speech actually part of a hate crime as defined in the US.

The reason Phelps can do what he wants is 1: he has a religious first amendment cover and 2: he has a large following, so it is harder to touch him.
1st Amendment covers freedom of speech (the same with Phelps) and his church isn't large at all.