Forums | MacLife

I believe the proposed amendment doesn't make burning the flag unconstitutional, but rather - allows congress to pass a law against it.

There are other ways to express your disdain for whatever you disdain without needing to burn a flag.

What an incredible waste of time over something so trivial.

unnecessary

Idiotic. Who cares if someone burns some colored fabric.

bedstuy wrote:

Correct me if I'm mistaken but flags and matches existed in 1789 and the Holy Founding Fathers so no need to address this issue back then.

Why thank you, I believe I will.
Matches weren't invented until either 1827 or 1832, depending on what you wish to call a match but weren't marketed in Germany until '32.
In 1836 an American patented his version and called them locofocos. They were very hazardous and it wasn't until 1845 and the discovery of amorphous (red) phosphorus that they became safe.
In 1889 a Pennsylvania lawyer named Joshua Pusey invented the book of matches. It was these paper matches that really started to sell. Pusey sold his patent to the Diamond Match Company later for $4000.
Oh, and they used flint on steel before then

What an enormous waste of time.

"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."
-- Rep. Jerrold Nadler

dvpierce wrote:

This will have absolutely no effect on the majority of the people who burn american flags.

And isn't there a supreme court ruling making it constitutional? That would make the logical sequal to this law unconstitutional, and the first time anybody tries to get a conviction on this, it'll get tossed out of court.

Unless the prosecutor involved appeals all the way to the US Supreme Court and they overturn their former ruling.

Which makes this the legislative equivalent of masturbation.

anti flag burning constitutional amendment

I happen to think someone burning an american flag is a smurf, and shouldn't be surprised if someones reaction to such a desecration is curse  at them or spit on them(hey, freedom of speech goes both ways after all - not saying the spitee would be right). That being said, I don't think it was necessary to have an amendment in this case.

It doesn't bother me that it was done, but I don't think it was necessary. And I don't think we actually should deprive people the right to burn flags.
Then again, we get all huffy when someone displays a confederate flag, so if we are going to make displaying that an issue I don't see why burning a flag couldn't similarly be an issue to regulate.

Last edited by everlong205 (2005-06-22 8:53 pm)

Farmerkev wrote:

bedstuy wrote:

Correct me if I'm mistaken but flags and matches existed in 1789 and the Holy Founding Fathers so no need to address this issue back then.

Why thank you, I believe I will.
Matches weren't invented until either 1827 or 1832, depending on what you wish to call a match but weren't marketed in Germany until '32.
In 1836 an American patented his version and called them locofocos. They were very hazardous and it wasn't until 1845 and the discovery of amorphous (red) phosphorus that they became safe.
In 1889 a Pennsylvania lawyer named Joshua Pusey invented the book of matches. It was these paper matches that really started to sell. Pusey sold his patent to the Diamond Match Company later for $4000.
Oh, and they used flint on steel before then

Wow, thanks!  Obviously in light of this information we need this ammendment.  What were the Founding Fathers thinking?

BURN A FLAG FOR FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!!


i sure as hell will. this saturday. any freedom loving american in the chicago area should join me. show your support for america!

What if one wanted to burn someone else's flag? Is that illegal. What about folding an American Flag while singing God Save the Queen? Is that on the docket as well?