Flag Burning.

[mmmcannibalism]

First off to whoever said it anyone can retire a flag by burning respectfully, not just the boy scouts and armed forces.

 

 

 

also flag burning is legal in America as far as i know though i think often protestors are arrested for things such as violating fire codes.

 

 

 

as for my opinion on this

 

 

 

to the thread owner I think burning a flag for no reason is pretty stupid, though im sure you got some really amusing over reactions on that video.

 

 

 

I will say that people that burn flags in protest do have the legal right to do so (if fire permits or whatever is needed) and they are not breaking any other laws like blocking streets. However, anyone that is protesting a single action and claiming they still want to stay in the country needs to find a better way to protest. If you want to burn my flag I want you to get out of the country.

 

 

 

so basically while I do believe it is legal to burn flags its total bull crap and you should leave the country if you are going to burn the flag because it does mean a lot.

[Lateralus]

Sorry to do the whole 'posting Bill Hicks' cliche, but oh well.

 

 

 

You can't justify hurting someone for burning a flag. I don't particularly think anyone can justify burning a flag in the first place because it doesn't make any sense to me, but as long as they're not hurting anyone there's no reason for me to get involved.

[Lenticular_J]

how can you claim to support free speech and free expression?

 

I hate when people use this in an argument, any argument. This isn't about burning a flag, I just think that's pointless and stupid, as there are funner things to burn, as has been said. But the whole free speech and free expression thing annoys me to no end, just because people use it as an excuse to break the law, like standing naked on a street corner and screaming gibberish. I just think that's stupid.

 

 

 

That aside, using a quote from YouTube period is stupid, no matter where it's from :lol:

 

 

 

All the same, it's a piece of cloth. I don't support it, but I wouldn't understand beating someone with a riot stick for it. Just beat them with a riot stick for fun!

[Giordano]

Flags symbolize something behind them, weither it be a organization or a government. And since I disagree heavily on the US government (and most modern government in general) anyone can burn the American flag for all I care.

[jackattack]

how can you claim to support free speech and free expression?

 

I hate when people use this in an argument, any argument. This isn't about burning a flag, I just think that's pointless and stupid, as there are funner things to burn, as has been said. But the whole free speech and free expression thing annoys me to no end, just because people use it as an excuse to break the law, like standing naked on a street corner and screaming gibberish. I just think that's stupid.

 

 

 

That aside, using a quote from YouTube period is stupid, no matter where it's from :lol:

 

 

 

All the same, it's a piece of cloth. I don't support it, but I wouldn't understand beating someone with a riot stick for it. Just beat them with a riot stick for fun!

 

 

 

The first amendment protects you from the government. Not from me.

[abbydog95]

honestly wut did you expect? you can put preaty much anything on you tube and get flammed...

[9Fade1]

I have nothing against flag burning (it's their property in the end, they paid for it) but it just seems a coincidence that there is always a Camera crew whenever they do burn the flag. Seems like a publicity stunt I can imagine when the camera is off them trying to put out the flames

[Cyco_Reborn]

Dont burn flags, when you can burn politicians instead!!!

[Jernlov]

Anyone remember the Muhammad cartoons in Jyllands-Posten awhile back?

 

 

 

Well, I'm half-Danish, and some Muslims I knew burned the Danish flag. I did feel rather offended because I myself and 99% of other Danes had nothing to do with it at all. If they'd actually read the article before being so uptight and intolerant of freedom of speech - which Denmark is renowned for. I believe the article was on freedom of speech; but I won't link to it out of respect for any Muslim members here.

[The Dark Lord]

Depends. It would be idiotic in itself to ban people from an act of freedom of speech, and yes, flag burning is an act of freedom of speech. It's just speech without words, so to speak.

 

 

 

If let's say there was a good president in the White House and he created equal rights for everyone, such as homosexuals, different races, different genders, etc. and some radical fundamentalist Christian decided to burn the flag, it would be a symbol of hatred. It would be homophobic, racist, sexist, etc, which I don't think it should be a right to be racist or homophobic.

[Ginger_Warrior]

If let's say there was a good president in the White House and he created equal rights for everyone, such as homosexuals, different races, different genders, etc. and some radical fundamentalist Christian decided to burn the flag, it would be a symbol of hatred. It would be homophobic, racist, sexist, etc, which I don't think it should be a right to be racist or homophobic.

 

That's why a Freedom of Expression law or amendment is fundamentally a stupid idea. Far from jack's interpretation, the government didn't make the amendment to protect its citizens from itself. That quite clearly makes no sense at all. It was part of a general movement against old British tradition (which I'm not saying is necessarily wrong - I'm against the actions of the Empire as much as the next person - but it's sown some of the problems we see today) in favour of new pro-American traditions and values.

 

 

 

You cannot have a Freedom of Expression law, and then claim that some views are totally abhorrent (such as fascism, racism, homophobia, sexism etc.). It's a blatant ideological contradiction.

 

 

 

We do not have a right to freedom of speech enshrined in law in this country, let alone a constitution. Yet we do have de facto freedom of speech. We don't need a piece of paper to tell us we can think what we like, but at the the same time, this provides some leighway for politicians to say "No, that view is totally unacceptable - we're banning it", such as they've done with fundamentalist extremism, with anti-Terrorism legislation and action against far-right groups like the NF.

[DaN]

EDIT fixed quote.

 

 

 

 

 

 

just because people use it as an excuse to break the law, like standing naked on a street corner and screaming gibberish. I just think that's stupid.

 

 

 

 

What law did I supposedly break?

 

 

 

Burning a flag is legal so long as it's not during a fire ban, even then you would be in trouble for the fire not the flag.

 

 

 

 

 

Like it or not burning a flag is free-speech, America has never been very supportive of free-speech (for a western country) so burning their flag for free-speech seems quite adequate, Ive seen that flag burn several times in my life for various reasons, one time it was a group of Americans (well 3 Americans) burning the flag in celebration for their country.

 

 

 

The first amendment protects you from the government. Not from me.

 

It's people with that attitude that give Americans a bad name.

[Lenticular_J]

You cannot have a Freedom of Expression law, and then claim that some views are totally abhorrent (such as fascism, racism, homophobia, sexism etc.). It's a blatant ideological contradiction.

 

Something you and I agree on totally. Did you know there was a case in California where a man defecated on another man, and claimed it was a statement of speech? He got off (it was in the 70's though. Damn hippies) scott-free.

 

 

 

Also DaN, who are you talking to? You did a bad job quoting.

[Kenshinjapan]

Depends. It would be idiotic in itself to ban people from an act of freedom of speech, and yes, flag burning is an act of freedom of speech. It's just speech without words, so to speak.

 

 

 

If let's say there was a good president in the White House and he created equal rights for everyone, such as homosexuals, different races, different genders, etc. and some radical fundamentalist Christian decided to burn the flag, it would be a symbol of hatred. It would be homophobic, racist, sexist, etc, which I don't think it should be a right to be racist or homophobic.

 

 

 

Why do you have do bring in an equal rights rant/the UU church into every one of your posts?

 

 

 

Besides, if you're so acceptive of everyone's right, why can't you let racists have equal right, too? You just seem to pick and choose whichever beliefs you want as right and everything else as wrong. So just because you don't believe it, should we take away the rights of those people? Real equal rights if you ask me :roll: .

[Range_This11]

 

Also DaN, who are you talking to? You did a bad job quoting.

 

*Probably* the most knowledgeable and mature poster on TIF, jackattack.

[Lenticular_J]

 

Also DaN, who are you talking to? You did a bad job quoting.

 

*Probably* the most knowledgeable and mature poster on TIF, jackattack.

 

Yeah, but my name was in the quote too. I'm really confused by i, he mixed up three or four and put his own post in it.

[jackattack]

 

Also DaN, who are you talking to? You did a bad job quoting.

 

*Probably* the most knowledgeable and mature poster on TIF, jackattack.

 

 

 

 

 

Your words not mine.

[Da Pirates]

*Burns Australian Flag*

 

 

 

You do realize that USA is the most powerful country in the world? I wouldn't be messing with it's symbol tbh.

[Range_This11]

*Burns Australian Flag*

 

 

 

You do realize that USA is the most powerful country in the world? I wouldn't be messing with it's symbol tbh.

 

Jackattak, I retract my statement to and about you. I've found the real person I was looking for.

[Foxtrot17]

I think the way you burn a flag and what it symbolizes could offend someone, IE. Retiring a flag.

[deloriagod]

 

You do realize that USA is the most powerful country in the world? I wouldn't be messing with it's symbol tbh.

 

 

 

:lol: I don't think I can even bring myself to come up with a decent response to this :lol:

[mmmcannibalism]

 

You cannot have a Freedom of Expression law, and then claim that some views are totally abhorrent (such as fascism, racism, homophobia, sexism etc.). It's a blatant ideological contradiction.

 

 

 

We do not have a right to freedom of speech enshrined in law in this country, let alone a constitution. Yet we do have de facto freedom of speech. We don't need a piece of paper to tell us we can think what we like, but at the the same time, this provides some leighway for politicians to say "No, that view is totally unacceptable - we're banning it", such as they've done with fundamentalist extremism, with anti-Terrorism legislation and action against far-right groups like the NF.

 

 

 

your missing a key difference here

 

 

 

while I think racists homophobes and such are total garbage they have the right to hate people as long as they are not harming anyone or going out of their way to harrass them. Obviously it should be illegal to cause harm based on anything religious or what not, which is what would make you a terrorist.

 

 

 

(here is an example lets not flame me for being a little generic in example, and yes i know the muslims that are militant is an extremely small number) there are some muslims that believe sharia(spelling) law should be put in place instead of the current government. It should be perfectly acceptable for them to peacefully petition for this. It would be illegal for them to have that opinion if they are commiting terrorists acts based on that because they are commiting crimes.

 

 

 

your allowed to think/believe whatever you want as long as you arent harming anyone based on that belief

[Ginger_Warrior]

*Burns Australian Flag*

 

 

 

You do realize that USA is the most powerful country in the world? I wouldn't be messing with it's symbol tbh.

 

Oh dear lord... the presence of that comment is enough to make me believe god doesn't exist. :roll:

 

 

 

mmmcannibalism - You're allowed to think whatever you like. However, when you get groups which are actively spreading vicious ideologies a danger is present. The act of speaking is itself an action, and where concerning homophobes and racists, is potentially harmful. No one is forcing you to speak, you've gone out of your way to speak out against certain groups in society who haven't done anything to merit that abuse.

 

 

 

There are also several groups who will start out in public speaking in order to attract new members, who will then use those members in aggressive behavior later, as the NF consistently do. It's alright saying you're peaceful - the fact is we've no way of knowing that. Therefore, if a person's opinion is quite clearly the opposite of what a country stands for (in our case, tolerance) such that it would be clamped down on if it ever did become popular, they should just keep it to themselves, or move to a country where their opinion is tolerated.

 

 

 

In that sense, yes - the intolerance of intolerance is the only intolerance to be tolerated.

 

 

 

I'm not gonna sit here and cling onto a "freedom of expression" sentiment when people are using that freedom to abuse others. I find that totally unacceptable and the state should be taking action against it, far from holding onto an amendment passed around two centuries ago and calling it an inalienable right.

[Will H]

I wouldn't get offended if someone burnt the English or Union Flag, but I would say, "Ok, what are you protesting about, and why didn't you do something a bit more impressive and original? Anyone can burn a flag."

 

 

 

Sure it's symbolic, but it just says that you don't like something but can't be bothered to do something any better.

[BlueTear]

It might be legal but if I ever saw anyone do it they would be in the hospital. People have died for that flag.

Did they give their lives for a symbol traditionally displayed on a piece of apparently flammable cloth, or for a collection of moral, ethical and political values...?

 

 

 

I know I'd be pretty upset if some jackass assaulted someone else because of their treatment of an empty symbol rather than showing due respect for, say, the legal code I died to protect.