Senate to debate "Flag Protection Amendment" just before the Fourth of July

[A18]

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_81583.asp

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, (R-Tenn.) today announced that the Senate will debate the “Flag Protection Amendment” in the end of June.

He said, "The American flag is a proud and sacred reminder of the principles of freedom and opportunity that form the foundation of our Republic. Our flag reminds us that there is more that unites us as Americans than divides us, and a constitutional amendment will give one of our Nation's proudest and most treasured symbols the protection it deserves. It honors the sacrifice of countless brave men and women who died defending our flag and the ideals it represents.

"I look forward to bringing the Flag Protection Amendment to the floor at the end of June so we can debate legislation that respects one of the principal symbols of our nation, and appropriately honors the sacrifice and commitment of all those who've acted to protect it."

--

What a bunch of crap. How many flag burnings have there even been in the last year or two? I doubt it's many.

Why amend the Constitution over something so stupid?

[Gabu]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And to honor this freedom, we're going to take some of it away.

Brilliant plan, Mr. Frist.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, (R-Tenn.) today announced that the Senate will debate the “Flag Protection Amendment” in the end of June.

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, (R-Tenn.) needs to go screw himself.

[nini2287]

Why amend the Constitution over something so stupid?

[Emsworth]

It is a tragedy that the First Amendment, the most important guarantee of individual rights found in the American Constitution, is now being diluted. The fundamental principle underlying the free speech clause is that the expression of unpopular opinions should not be supressed by the government. This new amendment would tend to destroy that great principle. If this measure is proposed and ratified, then it would be hypocritical, or at least inaccurate, to claim that the flag represents freedom.

Even more important to note is the fact that this amendment is completely pointless. The Constitution should be amended rarely, in order to address the great problems that face the nation. However, the issue of flag burning is so utterly insignificant, that even debating it in Congress is a waste of time. Even the Twenty-Seventh Amendment seems to tower over this proposal in terms of importance.

Unfortunately, I think that it is a foregone conclusion that this measure will be ratified by two-thirds of the states very rapidly, if it does pass the Senate. What the Senate will do is unclear, although the chances are in favor of passage.

[The Dowager Mod]

Maybe they will try to make that insipid Lee Greenwood song the national anthem too.
Typical Conservative grandstanding, They keep getting nailed on ethical stuff so change the subject to something warm and fuzzy.

[Jake]

Freedom Fighter

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Congress sure wants to avoid ever considering the real issues. Maybe they can pass another Schiavo bill.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Passing this amendment is the only thing that would make me want to burn the flag.

[MODU]

Freedom Fighter

^^^^

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.  Flag burning laws were never hurting anyone for decades when all but one state had them on the books.  It's sad that it took a commie who caused city wide vandalism to pervert our national pride by saying we have the right to burn the flag.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Freedom Fighter

^^^^

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.  Flag burning laws were never hurting anyone for decades when all but one state had them on the books.  It's sad that it took a commie who caused city wide vandalism to pervert our national pride by saying we have the right to burn the flag.

Wait, if the First Amendment doesn't allow flag burning, then what is the point of this amendment? Haha, got you either way.

America is truly weak if burning a flag hurts it. We need to work on a strong economy and strong civil liberties, not on bullsh**t like this.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ..." (emphasis added)

[MODU]

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ..." (emphasis added)

Sorry, but "expression" is not part of the first amendment.  If it was, the press wouldn't have to be it's own separate protection.  It was a piss poor ruling by the Supreme Court, and the Amendment will fix what they screwed up.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

MODU, even if one takes a narrow view of what constitutes speech, flag burning clearly falls under the Ninth Amendment as one of the rights retained by the people.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

MODU, even if one takes a narrow view of what constitutes speech, flag burning clearly falls under the Ninth Amendment as one of the rights retained by the people.

Republicans don't believe in the 9th Amendment.

[Gabu]

Freedom Fighter

^^^^

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.  Flag burning laws were never hurting anyone for decades when all but one state had them on the books.  It's sad that it took a commie who caused city wide vandalism to pervert our national pride by saying we have the right to burn the flag.

Who exactly does it hurt when a person who is pissed off burns an American flag?  Would you prefer that the person took out his or her anger in a more violent manner?

If Americans' patriotism is so weak or if their feelings are so sensitive that they consider it necessary to write a ban on flag burning right into the foundation of their nation's law in order to protect... something, perhaps they should consider that this might be merely a symptom of a greater problem.

[MODU]

MODU, even if one takes a narrow view of what constitutes speech, flag burning clearly falls under the Ninth Amendment as one of the rights retained by the people.

And here I was half expecting a commerce clause excuse debate.  99.99% of our laws could possibly fall under the 9th amendment.  Using that as the basis of your argument in court would never win.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Commerce clause is used if one is trying argue that the government can do something.  I'm arguing that this is something it can't do.  So actually, if anyone here should be invoking the commerce clause, it should be you, as I certainly don't see the prevention of flag burning listed among the enumerated powers.

[MODU]

Commerce clause is used if one is trying argue that the government can do something.  I'm arguing that this is something it can't do.  So actually, if anyone here should be invoking the commerce clause, it should be you, as I certainly don't see the prevention of flag burning listed among the enumerated powers.

It was a cheap attempt at sarcasm.  Trying to use a "catch all" argument as the 9th amendment is weak at best.  Besides, don't take my word for it.  Every state has issued a request to the federal government for a flag protection/anti-desecration amendment.  The last one being Vermont (surprise surprise).  As they stated on January 10th, 2002:

Whereas, the flag of the United States is one of the greatest symbols of our nation, and

Whereas, this symbol represents the defining principles of our country, and

Whereas, Americans have placed their lives in harm’s way and, in hundreds of thousands of cases, have sacrificed their lives defending these principles, and

Whereas, their willingness to sacrifice their lives in defense of these cherished principles demonstrates one of the purest and most commendable forms of patriotism, and

Whereas, these patriots have focused on the flag as the ultimate symbol for which they and their families have sacrificed, and

Whereas, the flag serves important ceremonial functions at public gatherings, funerals, celebrations of patriotic holidays, parades and countless other gatherings, and

Whereas, respect for the flag and the various protocols attendant thereto (such as proper display, proper folding, saluting, et cetera) serves as an introduction, for many young Americans to the symbol of our nation, and

Whereas, we the American people, accord our flag a unique position of respect, love and admiration for the principles it represents, and recognize the importance of providing dignity and honor to this symbol, and

Whereas, these principles include the protection of individual freedoms enumerated in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution including free speech, free press, peaceable assembly, and petitions for the redress of grievances, now therefore be it

Resolved By The Senate And House Of Representatives:

That the General Assembly expresses its respect and admiration for our United States Flag, and be it further

Resolved: That the General Assembly expresses its condemnation of all acts of flag desecration, and similar displays of disrespect for the United States Flag, and be it further

Resolved: That the General Assembly urges the Congress of the United States to ensure that proper respect and treatment will always be afforded to the United States Flag, and that the Congress explore all avenues available, which may include a constitutional amendment, a statutory change and a public education program, to protect the United States Flag from physical desecration, and be it further

Resolved: That the Secretary of State transmit copies of this resolution to the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the President of the United States Senate and all members of the Vermont Congressional Delegation.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I don't doubt that if this ill-conceived amendment event gets past the two-thirds of each House requirement in the Congress that it will be swiftly adopted by the States.  Still I don't want the precedent set for eroding our freedoms that the Flag Protection Amendment embodies.  What's next?  An amendment forbidding graven images?

[Gabu]

Freedom Fighter

^^^^

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.  Flag burning laws were never hurting anyone for decades when all but one state had them on the books.  It's sad that it took a commie who caused city wide vandalism to pervert our national pride by saying we have the right to burn the flag.

Who exactly does it hurt when a person who is pissed off burns an American flag?  Would you prefer that the person took out his or her anger in a more violent manner?

If Americans' patriotism is so weak or if their feelings are so sensitive that they consider it necessary to write a ban on flag burning right into the foundation of their nation's law in order to protect... something, perhaps they should consider that this might be merely a symptom of a greater problem.

Any takers?

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Freedom Fighter

^^^^

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.  Flag burning laws were never hurting anyone for decades when all but one state had them on the books.  It's sad that it took a commie who caused city wide vandalism to pervert our national pride by saying we have the right to burn the flag.

Who exactly does it hurt when a person who is pissed off burns an American flag?  Would you prefer that the person took out his or her anger in a more violent manner?

If Americans' patriotism is so weak or if their feelings are so sensitive that they consider it necessary to write a ban on flag burning right into the foundation of their nation's law in order to protect... something, perhaps they should consider that this might be merely a symptom of a greater problem.

Any takers?

I think this amendment is a symptom of certain (ahem) shortcomings on the part of its proponents.

[opebo]

Freedom Fighter

^^^^

It's sad that a bunch of bleeding hearts think that flag burning is protected under the First Amendment.  Flag burning laws were never hurting anyone for decades when all but one state had them on the books.  It's sad that it took a commie who caused city wide vandalism to pervert our national pride by saying we have the right to burn the flag.

You are a pathetic, spineless fascist, MODU.

[J. J.]

Okay, how many people here would be willing to restrict my right to express my political views by advertising my political views?  You know, buying TV time to say, "Vote all the Democrats out?" Seriously.  What if I win the lottery and pull a Soros?

I see these two issues as being the same principle.

[opebo]

Okay, how many people here would be willing to restrict my right to express my political views by advertising my political views?  You know, buying TV time to say, "Vote all the Democrats out?" Seriously.  What if I win the lottery and pull a Soros?

I see these two issues as being the same principle.

No, not all, J.J.  the issue you bring up is about power, while the one about burning the flag is about individual freedom.