House OKs flag desecration amendment... PASS IT!

[rhino 0]

For first time, Senate seen as likely to follow suit

The Associated Press
Updated: 2:50 p.m. ET June 22, 2005

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.

advertisement
By a 286-130 vote, House members approved the amendment — as they have six times before — after a debate over whether such a ban would uphold or run afoul of the Constitution’s free-speech protections. The measure now advances to the Senate, where activists on both sides say it stands the best chance of passage in its 16-year history.

If the amendment wins two-thirds majorities in each chamber, it moves 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, 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.
© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[diablopilot 2]

As much as I'd like to revoke the citizenship of any American who desecrates the American flag, my belief in the fredoms of the Constitution won't allow me to suport such a ban. It's their right of expersion, and such a ban would be just an opening to the floodgates of censorship.

We DON'T want to go down that road.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[billvon 2,400]

>“The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical
>desecration of the flag of the United States.”

Amazing that we'd consider curtailing the freedoms of all americans so some people don't get their feelings hurt. Face reality, guys. Sometimes your feelings are going to get hurt. It's part of life in the real world.

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

“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.”

He seems supernaturally well informed.

Seriously though, I don't get it, how does a flag, a pattern on a piece of cloth, become so important as a symbol that it overrules the very things it symbolises?
And a constitutional amendent! A document that that underlines the very basic foundations of the nation state would, in my opinion, be cheapened by that amendment.

But hey I'm a Brit, so to be honest I don't really care, just baffled by the whole thing.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

As much as I'd like to revoke the citizenship of any American who desecrates the American flag, my belief in the fredoms of the Constitution won't allow me to suport such a ban. It's their right of expersion, and such a ban would be just an opening to the floodgates of censorship.

We DON'T want to go down that road.

Agreed. Also, how do we enforce it and not distract from real issues. Here's another example of special interest trying to leverage a law based on emotion, not raationality.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[KATO33 0]

Quote

As much as I'd like to revoke the citizenship of any American who desecrates the American flag

I Disagree

Quote

my belief in the fredoms of the Constitution won't allow me to suport such a ban. It's their right of expersion, and such a ban would be just an opening to the floodgates of censorship.

We DON'T want to go down that road.

I derfinitely do agree.

Blue Skies Black Death

[Casurf1978 0]

It offends me when people desecrate the flag, but as disgusting and repugnant the actions they take it's their right to do so. The Constitution as been amended 27 times, one of those was to repeal a mistake. It grants us freedon, not limit them. This Amendment limits our freedom of expression. Do you want your children to have less rights than you had?

Like Diablo pilot said, this is not a road we want to go down on.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

As much as I'd like to revoke the citizenship of any American who desecrates the American flag

I Disagree

You disagree that he'd "like to revoke" but won't?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

As much as I'd like to revoke the citizenship of any American who desecrates the American flag, my belief in the fredoms of the Constitution won't allow me to suport such a ban. It's their right of expersion, and such a ban would be just an opening to the floodgates of censorship.

We DON'T want to go down that road.

Alas, 1 thing we agree on .

I think the country has been reduced/relegatd to worrying about symbolic things, which is scarry. Let's worry about healthcare, homelessness, and disease. But no, we need to ensure everyone manditorily swears their allegiance. This is a look toward Naziism. I thought we had the right to peacefully dissent......

[kelel01 1]

Agreed. 100% agreed.

[JohnRich 4]

If it passes it will be in direct conflict with the 1st Amendment. An ACLU member will immediately burn a flag in front of a cop and demand that he be arrested, thus starting a court challenge to this new amendment.

10 years later, the case will reach the Supreme Court and the flag-burning amendment will be struck down.

What a fricking waste of everyone's time.

[kelpdiver 2]

no, the reason they wish it to be an amendment is so that it can pass Constitutional muster.

Too bad it fails common sense.

[quade 3]

Pleasantly surprized to see I agree with JohnRich on this one.

People should not confuse symbols with the things that they symbolize.

Burning a flag, while disrespectful, really doesn't do anything.

Making a law or admendment that bans flag burning, does quite a bit.

It's a really bad idea.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Actually, you can't strike down an Amendment. Odds are they'll rule that this Amendment was passed as an excpetion to the First Amendment.

John, you can't strike down a Constitutional Amendment as Unconstitutional. If this passes, it goes until it's repealed.

I really, really hope we don't go down this road too far...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

It's their right of expersion, and such a ban would be just an opening to the floodgates of censorship.

Ok then, I'm gonna have a big party in a public square and have a Quran burning party. Who's up for that? Did I spell Quran right?

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[wmw999 2,123]

Yes, you have that right. And to suffer the consequences thereof.

Just as someone who burns the flag has the right to burn it (and should continue to have that right), and to suffer the consequences thereof. Which will probably include having his picture printed in the paper, people telling him what they think of him, and possible future job consequences (as in who wants to hire that guy).

Does it hurt you? It's a strong statement. It's intended as such. Personally, I'm more offended by people taking the flag cheaply, and putting it on their swimsuits, butts, and flying tattered nasty ones to show their patriotism. Treat it with respect.

The people who burn it are showing more respect to its power in some ways than the people who think that little flag diapers are cute.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[gkc1436 3]

>The people who burn it are showing more respect to its power in some ways than the people who think that little flag diapers are cute.


very well said...

[SkydiveNFlorida 0]

Quote

But Rep. Jerrold Nadler, 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.”

HA! Funny this guy just voiced thta the members of Congress care more about a symbol than the freedom it represents (which would, btw, include burning said symbol!)

Ok, just thought that was sad. It'd be another sad day for "freedom" if this amendment is passed.

-A

[billvon 2,400]

>Ok then, I'm gonna have a big party in a public square and
>have a Quran burning party.

That is your right. People may think you despicable for it - but then again, that's _their_ right. The right to do both is protected by our constitution.

What would you think of a constitutional amendment that made desecrating the Koran illegal?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Actually, you can't strike down an Amendment. Odds are they'll rule that this Amendment was passed as an excpetion to the First Amendment.

Then Congress should just modify the 1st Amendment, rather than pass another Amendment which contradicts the 1st.

Quote

I really, really hope we don't go down this road too far...

Yep, if we start "cheapening" Constitutional Amendments with crap like this, there's no telling where it will end.

My position: I don't like the idea of someone burning the flag. If I see someone about to do it, I will move to stop him. However, I am in favor of assholes having the right to try. I don't think it should be against the law.

[Zenister 0]

anyone who supports this amendment lacks basic faith in the American system itself and should be deported for not understanding the REAL principles our country was founded on...

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[pajarito 0]

I despise witnessing the desecration of the US Flag. However, if this thing is made law, how would one define desecration? Burning? I think that's desecration. But how about a flag patch on someone's blue jean shorts? How about a flag bandana? Some might think that's desecration. If I don't hang my flag from my house at the proper angle, someone might think that's desecration. If they do this, I hope they at least limit it to specific extreme circumstances. I do, however, think it's worthy of special consideration as far as personal freedoms go.

[rhino 0]

You all make very good points.. Yet I still support burning the American flag being deemed a crime... I don't give a damn. You can still have your free speech. Just do it without burning my flag...

Rhino

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I don't give a damn. You can still have your free speech. Just do it without burning my flag...

In other words, you're all for semifree speech. Or as we often see in the Bay Area, speech that you happen to agree with.

Parijito - the amendment gives Congress the right to make laws. There they would define was constitutes desecration.

[rhino 0]

Quote

In other words, you're all for semifree speec

Call it what you want. Word it how you wish. I sincerely hope this bill passes. Free speech as everyone calls it has fucked this country. As a country we have no integrity. Everyone thinks they have the right to know everything. They don't. Everyone thinks they should be able to run their sucks with out consequence. Call it what you will... Burning the flag to exercise your free speech should be against the law.

I hope it passes.

Rhino