Bravo Jay - my sentiments exactly.

My stand is a little different. I also believe you have a right to burn the flag. However I am also PC and it hurts me to see it done.

So my solution is you burn the flag within your rights and I beat the shit out of you within my rights...

Jay Tea, you remember the name of the man who said "Damn the United States, may I never hear the name again", and his wish came true? Did you know that during the Civil war, men died to protect that flag from hitting the ground? If it is unlawful to speak disrepectfully to a police officer, who is a public servant, inspite of 1st amendment rights, if it so irritates me that I wish to exihibit extreme violence toward anyone burning an American Flag, would my acts be considered freedom of expression, an extention of freedom of speech? If not, why not?

Then we should have the freedom to flush the Koran down the pooper chute.

Should I be able to fly the Nazi flag outside my home?

you burn the flag within your rights and I beat the shit out of you within my rights...

The old "fightin' words!" argument.

This is what's used to justify prohibiting name-calling under the law as "hate speech".

Frankly, it smacks of "I can't control myself, so it's all your fault for being rude".

Further, is cross burning freedom of speech, even if the burner buys the wood? While an individual can own the cloth or whatever material, the flag is constructed from, the symbol belongs to the nation. Your right to free speech stops at our right to a national symbol.

Wait, wait, wait. So if I'm reading this right, a corollary of your argument follows: we should agitate for congress to go out of its legislative way to protect the swastika, the stars and bars, and that ubiquitous portrait of Che Guevara from desecration.

Because, it seems, doing so would specifically rob those flags or pictures of their symbolic power for neo-nazis, seccesh, or commies. And then I could go get a swastika or the stars and bars tattooed on my arm (because they really do look pretty snappy) and not be thought to be a fascist or Union-hating riffraff because *congress* has magically robbed a symbol of its power by protecting it.

Is that what you're saying? Because put in the above light, it seems a bit silly.

Should I be able to fly the Nazi flag outside my home?

Yes.

And we'll have the right to think of you as a racist/anti-semite/whathaveyou. That's what "freedom" means. The ability to offend others without having to fear for your own safety.

People who burn the flag offend me -- yet, ironically, there I times I feel like barbecuing up an Old Glory to a nice crispy brown. We're all free to be offensive in a free society.

Is this a free society?

Oh, and another thing. Would you say that the bald eagle is symbolically representative of America? Because as far as I know it is.

And guess what? *It is protected from "desecration" (well, being hunted) by the US Government.*

"is cross burning freedom of speech"

Yes.

But if you do it on someone else's front lawn it is trespassing and destruction of private property; and if you do it without a proper permit it could very well violate a city ordinance.

Your right to free speech stops at our right to a national symbol.

Spoken like a liberal pushing for Hate Speech laws. "You're right to freedom of speech stops at our right to not be subject to being offended."

i don't agree with flag burning, but this ain't a real hot issue with me. i feel like if law enforcement would do it's job, the arsonists would be arrested. isn't it against the law in most places to start a fire in a public r.o.w., even if they have a permit to assemble, starting a fire in a public place is against the law, isn't it?

Flakbait, if those flags you describe held sway over the symbolism of a nation, then that would be up to that nation concerning flag burning. I suggest to you the Nazis would have frowned in the extreme, at the thought of burning the swastika ladened Nazi flag. Rwilymz, you are free to irritate who you wish, at your own risk.

if law enforcement would do it's job, the arsonists would be arrested.

They are, and for the reasons you list. Right to assemble and freedom of speech does not obviate public safety laws.

But that's usually a misdemeanor with a $50 fine ... which isn't enough for some people.

rwilymz, go yell fire in a theater. See where you freedom of speech defense gets you. If you do not call me a liberal, which I find to be the equivelent of calling you an idiot. I don't know if you are, but if you call me a liberal, then you must be and idiot.

Rwilymz, you are free to irritate who you wish, at your own risk.

I irritate quite a bit, thanks. I'll cite you as authoritative, I'm sure.

I get extremely irritating here: http://dblyelloline.blogspot.com/

And I'll be irritating on this very subject if I'd ever stop being too lazy to post the essay I wrote two days ago.

But "at my risk"? what have you got against freedom?

rwilymz, go yell fire in a theater. See where you freedom of speech defense gets you.

You've got to be kidding.

You are equating the natural impulse for self-preservation in fleeing a burning building to the ideological effrontery of seeing a symbol you cherish being torched?

Do you expect me to take you seriously?

"I don't know if you are, but if you call me a liberal, then you must be and idiot."

You are making the self-same argument that liberals make when trying to rationalize hate speech laws. "I have a superior right to not be offended".

Find the "right to not be offended" in the Constitution.

Shall I wait? or are you going to concede now?

I have to confess, I get a little thrill whenever I see an American flag burned here in the United States.

Just out of curiosity, Jay, how often had you had that little thrill? I've lived in this country for over half a century and I have never seen an American flag burned. From what I'm reading lately, though, it must happen all the time. Maybe I just need to get out more.

Let's step back an realize what burning a flag means.

A flag symbolically represents your country to its core. Not just it current incarnation, but down the foundation. In the case of the US, this include our free speech, innocent until proven guilty, and democracy.

So when someone burns it, they are symbolically destroying not just the US as a country or incarnation, but they are also destroying those ideals. They are saying that they want to take those things away from you forcibly (or at least against your will) and replacement with what they want there.

So we have have a percieved paradox where you can't have free speech unless you allow someone to advocate forcibly taking it away from you. Not just advocate taking it away from you. Let me repeat that: allow someone to advocate forcibly taking it away from you.

They are not advocating change. They are threatening change via a symbolic violent act.

There folks aren't just limited to free speach as well. They can use all our freedoms to build towards on day taking them away from you.

Here's the problem with viewing this a necessary paradox. These people can make their efforts to seize control through our system of government. You can argue that I can make the effort to stop them. Fine. But accepting the percieved paradox, each time they fail, they can try again. All those of us who like our freedoms have to do is fail once and its game over. The only hope after that is bloody revolution which with todays technology in far from assured success.

My personal feelings are that Yes burning the flag is protected under freedom of speech. But as a Veteran, and the son of Veterans and the father of a son currently on active duty, it should be my right to either put the burning flag out using your unpatriotic, disrespectful butt, or to wrap the flaming symbol of freedom around your ungrateful Draft dodging neck. You want to make a lasting statement, do it with conviction, just like the budhist monk in the famous photo taken during the Vietnam war. Yes it is your Constitutional right to burn the flag as an American, But I feel that some rights should have to be earned. Before you dare complain about the country and disrespect the country you should earn that right. Serve your country whatever way you can, be it Military, Civil service, Community service whatever, but Serve The Country someway. Then you have the right to complain if you dont like the way things are being run.

You're getting a little tortured, there, in your analytical depth, arncha, jpm?

They can use all our freedoms to build towards on day taking them away from you.

So the idea is to beat them to the punch?

"We're so free we'll take away your freedoms before you take ours!"

That'll show 'em!

You can't equate symbolism to reality. A symbolic destruction is just that: symbolic. It's a short step from
1] equivocating burning the flag to fomenting revolution; to
2] equivocating hanging the president in effigy to assassination.

One is symbolic, the other is real.

Two different things. That's why there's two different words used to describe them.

The only [censored censored] pukes I see burning American flags are Muslims in the Middle East.

Now, I don't know if I care about this amendment or not. If I saw someone burning the flag on my street, you can be sure we'd have some sharp words and maybe even a fist fight.

I'm not sure we need an amendment, though. Remember when the Cubs' Rick Monday saved the flag from two dirtbag liberal hippies in Dodger Stadium in 1976?

That was a PROUD moment for America. We got to see dirtbag liberals in all their glory, and a man who honors the flag doing what comes naturally.

Quite a contrast.

I have to get a permit to burn leaves in my back yard but burning the flag/cross is ok?

When the Supreme Court upheld the state's rights to pass laws against flag burning, they came up with a new twist on the First Amendment: Symbolic speech.

Imagine how often the Supreme Court will have to reverse all the penumbras and zones and "symbolic" speech - well, all the laws they've passed and "rights" they have discovered if it "offends" a Muslim, say when someone is taken to court for burning the "palestinian" flag. Assuming the person lives long enough to get to the Supreme Court.

Click on the link at the bottom here to see and hear the story of Rick Monday saving the flag 30 years ago this month.

http://www.redstate.com/story/2006/6/14/163111/745

The only thing more un-American than burning The Flag is making the act a crime.

- MikeB

I've never seen a flag desecrated in person, but I've been exposed to it quite a bit -- most memorably in news coverage from New York City about a year ago:

http://wizbangblog.com/2005/06/09/three-cheers-for-the-flag-burners.php

J.

The eagle is protected because it's an endangered species.

As to the flag burning: it is a symbol of my country and there do exist specific rules and regulations vis-a-vis handling it. However, all of those regulations have been largely ignored since the 60s when generalized disrespect of a lot of things became the norm.

I still don't like flag burning, nor (with apologies to Jay Tea) do I wish to see an American (or any other flag) made into a bikini - or as jeans or as a shirt or whatever. One of the things that I think has happened since the 60s (dear heavens, I'm OLD)is that we have forgotten to insist upon respect in many areas. And we should: respect for our flag, respect for our president (regardless of whether we voted for him), our police and firemen, our soldiers, and so forth. This slouchy contempt is about as infuriating and detrimental to my blood pressure as anything I can think of!

Peoples! Burning the flag is not something for the Supreme Court to decide! Neither is it "symbolic" free speech. The Supreme Court doesn't think the American people are smart enough to amend the Constitution, so they do it for us. Why do we also have freedom of the press? Wouldn't that be considered "symbolic" speech? I think the Bill of Rights should be scrapped anyway. Read Federalist Paper No. 84, where Hamilton says, "It has been several times truly remarked that bills of rights are, in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects." "I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power."

Call me crazy Jay, but I have this rage building inside of me after reading your post. "Flag-burning" as you so easily put it is the way to officially retire the flag from service. I was in the boy scouts, I worked my way to the rank of Eagle scout and while at the boy scouts, I learned that there are only TWO non-military organizations that are officially recognized to retire the American Flag from service (see that "from service"? I've said it twice): The American Legion, and The Boy Scouts of America.

"Flag-burning" is not free speech, it is destroying a symbol of our nation in a vulgar way, in such a way that SHOULD be a solemn and meaningful ceremony (one that ends in taps as a flag is draped over a fire, and every person present saluting the flag that scores of men over the course of history have fought and died over). To paraphrase an earlier commenter, during the civil war men died protecting the flag from even touching the ground.

It is a powerful symbol of our nation. Please protect it.

Hmmm.

@ Jay Tea

Sorry but I disagree.

I don't see the Flag as a symbol of freedom. I see the Flag as a symbol of America, something far less philosophical and rather more concrete.

To me burning the Flag is tantamount to renounciation of citizenship. It is a public statement that the individual has severed all relationship with America.

rwilymz wrote:
"You can't equate symbolism to reality. A symbolic destruction is just that: symbolic. It's a short step from
1] equivocating burning the flag to fomenting revolution; to
2] equivocating hanging the president in effigy to assassination."

Hang the president in effigy and let me know if takes more than a day for the Secret Service or FBI to pay you a visit.

Quite simply, burning the flag is a slap in the face to Americans. Why not propose a law that burning the flag is not illegal but instead automatically renounces of your citizenship?

Think about the the soliders and Navy corpsman at Iwo Jima. There are some young folk here who have been poisioned the last 30 years of negative thinking about the flag. To them I say, get some time in life.

Right now there are only three countries in the world that ban desecration of their respective flags: Iran, China, and Cuba. This is not company that I would want the United States to keep.

Yes, the flag is an important symbol of America, but part of what makes America great is that it is far more than simple devotion to symbols.

As a veteran from a military family that goes back to the revolution I can't imagine burning a flag. It disturbs me to see it anywhere but waving from an appropriate flagpole. That said I agree that this country is not defined by that symbol and the weenie who does attempt to insult the country by burning the flag is showing his lack of appreciation for this country and the very right that allows him to burn it. To me it is the ultimate display of ignorance, immaturity and foolishness. None of which can be legislated against, at least not in this United States of America.

Burning a flag is a retarded way to make a statement. It's insulting, degrading, mean-spirited and counter productive.

Yet, the pricks who want to burn flags must have the right to do so.