PDA

View Full Version : Finally!


Sheeyt
June 22nd, 2005, 04:44 PM
WASHINGTON - The House on Wednesday approved a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power to ban desecration of the American flag, a measure that for the first time stands a chance of passing the Senate as well.

By a 286-130 vote — eight more than needed — House members approved the amendment after a debate over whether such a ban would uphold or run afoul of the Constitution's free-speech protections.

Approval of two-thirds of the lawmakers present was required to send the bill on to the Senate, where activists on both sides say it stands the best chance of passage in years. If the amendment is approved in that chamber by a two-thirds vote, it would then move to the states for ratification.

Supporters said the measure reflected patriotism that deepened after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and they accused detractors of being out of touch with public sentiment.

"Ask the men and women who stood on top of the (World) Trade Center," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass this amendment."

But Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said, "If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag represents."

The measure was designed to overturn a 1989 decision by the Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 that flag burning was a protected free-speech right. That ruling threw out a 1968 federal statute and flag-protection laws in 48 states. The law was a response to anti-Vietnam war protesters setting fire to the American flag at their demonstrations.

The proposed one-line amendment to the Constitution reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." For the language to be added to the Constitution, it must be approved not only by two-thirds of each chamber but also by 38 states within seven years.

Each time the proposed amendment has come to the House floor, it has reached the required two-thirds majority. But the measure has always died in the Senate, falling short of the 67 votes needed. The last time the Senate took up the amendment was in 2000, when it failed 63-37.

But last year's elections gave Republicans a four-seat pickup in the Senate, and now proponents and critics alike say the amendment stands within a vote or two of reaching the two-thirds requirement in that chamber.

By most counts, 65 current senators have voted for or said they intend to support the amendment, two shy of the crucial tally. More than a quarter of current senators were not members of that chamber during the last vote.

The Senate is expected to consider the measure after the July 4th holiday.

Finally. It should've never taken this long for this amendment to pass. This is common friggin sense. Fuck that bullshit 1st Amendment argument. If you hate this country so much you're burning our flag, then fuck you. You have no constitutional rights.

StudioAlex
June 22nd, 2005, 05:01 PM
It makes me happy to see the legislative body spending its time arguing over pointless items because it prevents them from doing truly dangerous things.

Hideous Rex
June 22nd, 2005, 05:26 PM
To be clear: I think that the burning of the American flag, especially by Americans, is a terrible practice and very disrespectful to vetrans!

However, I think that this bill is another slip down the slippery slope of loosing our freedoms in this wonderful country. This seems like something the ACLU would be backing. They are pretty big on taking away our freedoms of speech.

In this Great country you have many rights but, You do not have the right to not be offended!

Casper
June 22nd, 2005, 06:03 PM
This should have been set in stone years ago - but odd that it's getting it's push 4 years after 9/11. Doesn't bother me any, as long as they're not saying people can't protest about what they feel is wrong with the country. Hopefully, that won't be the next anti-partiotism amendment.

Jafo
June 22nd, 2005, 06:27 PM
Well, makes this purdy funny anyway.

http://www.xboxcircle.com/portal/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=1357

Annex
June 22nd, 2005, 08:16 PM
I am totally backing this amendment, (but im not to sure it will pass). If the Flag symbolizes our country, which stands for certain freedoms then using the transitive property, the flag stands for these freedoms. What I cant get if thats true then why as an expression of freedom would someone try to act like its an encroachment on their freedoms to destory(symbolically) those freedoms? I have never met nor seen a mentally-stable person burning a flag...why? because anyone can easily realize how dumb that really is.

MidniteArrow
June 23rd, 2005, 04:20 AM
So, let me get this straight. It would then be illegal for me to take a bunch of material, gather it together in a specific way (a way specifically in the design of the US flag), and then burn it in a method that does not directly harm anyone? Exactly which of your rights does this violate?

Jafo
June 23rd, 2005, 04:22 AM
One could say the same thing about burning a cross...

MidniteArrow
June 23rd, 2005, 04:29 AM
Yes, and one should. It is the other actions related to cross burning which breach rights - such as doing so on private property without permission, as well as the threats that such an act carries. If I want to take 2 sticks, cross them, go into my back yard, and burn them - are you suggesting that should be illegal?

Jafo
June 23rd, 2005, 06:14 AM
So if I live accross the street from a black family and burn crosses in my front yard that would not be ok? Why? Is it threatening? Is burning a US flag not also threatening?

Sheeyt
June 23rd, 2005, 08:10 AM
No surprise here.

Late Wednesday, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., revealed that she would vote against the measure. "I don't believe a constitutional amendment is the answer," Clinton, a possible presidential candidate in 2008, said in a statement.

MidniteArrow
June 23rd, 2005, 09:16 AM
So if I live accross the street from a black family and burn crosses in my front yard that would not be ok? Why? Is it threatening? Is burning a US flag not also threatening?

Is it "OK"? No. It's morally wrong because of what it represents. Should it be illegal? Not in my opinion. (unless of course there's some sort of burning ordinance in your neighborhood - but if burning trash is OK, then burning trash in the shape of a cross - or a flag - should be Ok or more to the point legal as well)

Hideous Rex
June 23rd, 2005, 11:40 AM
Is it "OK"? No. It's morally wrong because of what it represents. Should it be illegal? Not in my opinion. (unless of course there's some sort of burning ordinance in your neighborhood - but if burning trash is OK, then burning trash in the shape of a cross - or a flag - should be Ok or more to the point legal as well)

I completely agree.
I am a Christian and the burning of a Cross is offensicve to me, but I would defend anyone's right to do it.

Casper
June 23rd, 2005, 11:46 AM
No surprise here.
Jeez, go figure - someone's against it. Hey, how about pointing out those on your side that are against it, also, instead of just finding what your buddy Matt Drudge threw up on his site today. Just a thought. There should be people against this, that's going to be a given. Hell, even in the original vote there was only 8 more votes that pushed this through.

Reading it over now, it shows why it wasn't passed back in the 80's. Freedom of speech is written in stone, or at least, it used to be. We're heading towards facisim pretty quickly with Bush's troops behind him. Nothing like having Big Brother telling you what to do.

Ford Mustang
June 23rd, 2005, 12:00 PM
There's no way that the Constitution should me amended for something like this. I don't support it at all. Flag burning is a form of protest and I think that people that do it are dumbasses, but if they're not harming anyone, then it doesn't violate anyone's rights and there is no reason that it should be banned.

duke
June 23rd, 2005, 12:02 PM
There's no way that the Constitution should me amended for something like this. I don't support it at all. Flag burning is a form of protest and I think that people that do it are dumbasses, but if they're not harming anyone, then it doesn't violate anyone's rights and there is no reason that it should be banned.

Agreed. I don't enjoy the flag being burned at all, but there are plenty of things I find more offensive.

This should not be a constitutional amendment and it would be nice to pay attention to things that really matter.

Snake Eyez
June 23rd, 2005, 01:51 PM
I oppose this amendment as well. Although I find it troubling for people to burn our flag, I would not want to see it as an illegal action. As long as their actions do not interfere with someone else's rights, then the action should be allowed and a person should have the freedom to chose.

Jafo
June 23rd, 2005, 02:39 PM
I do not believe it is free speech. It is illegal to use speech to say advocate the overthrow of the Government, incite a riot, etc.. Free speech does have it's limits.

Ford Mustang
June 23rd, 2005, 03:07 PM
It does but what does burning a flag do? It doesn't necessarily advocate overthrowing the government, it more so expresses a dislike or disapproval of the current government. It doesn't hurt anyone when someone else burns a flag. I could care less if people want to burn flags. I'll be damned if I allow anyone to burn MY flag or burn a flag on MY property, but if they want to do it on their own time with their own stuff then what the hell. Let them.

Sheeyt
June 23rd, 2005, 04:33 PM
What about all the people who died defending what that flag stands for?

Hideous Rex
June 23rd, 2005, 04:47 PM
What about all the people who died defending what that flag stands for?

But what does that flag stand for? I hope they died defending my freedom to openly express my views in public with out government reprisal. This country is more than a flag, it is a wonderful place where we have great freedom, and that means that you have the freedom to scream out at the top of your lungs against everything I may hold dear.

I love my country and the FREEDOM to do and say what I want to in it. I hope that is the country they died for, and that is what that I believe the flag stands for. I believe that a Government that strips your freedom to protest in a non-violent way is disgracing that flag more than a loon who burns it.

duke
June 23rd, 2005, 04:48 PM
What about all the people who died defending what that flag stands for?

Well, I bet their opinions would have been as varied as ours.

MidniteArrow
June 23rd, 2005, 05:06 PM
They died to defend the rights of all Americans, not all Americans who agreed with them. That is, if they did so defending the principles on which America was founded, in my opinion.

Ford Mustang
June 23rd, 2005, 05:15 PM
It is the choice of the indivual whether or not to respect what those people died for. I choose to respect them, but that doesn't mean everyone does, and the government certainly can't force them to.

Edit - that was a poorly placed typo.

Snake Eyez
June 23rd, 2005, 05:34 PM
I respect every single man and woman who died and served defending this great country of ours. IMO they died for the freedoms that we now enjoy. These freedoms even include things that we don't agree with, but support the right of people to do.