Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think anyone who stomps on our flag or burns it is an idiot that has no respect for what that flag stands for and the countless people who have sacrificed for it. If you hate the country that much the borders are open and you can leave whenever you want just do us a favor and don't come back.
What really gets me are these clowns that protest and hate America that when the flames are out and the mob disperses they all go home, plunk themselves down on the couch to watch TV.. in other words they go home to enjoy what America has given them.
It is hypocrisy at its finest and just plain ignorance.
Don't forget mob a convenience store. That seem pretty popular with these same losers.
Maybe if y'all came from military families, had multiple friends killed overseas, and were war vets yourselves, you would understand. I have no sympathy for a flag burner. Say what you want, voice your opinion, "I hate the US" and all that, got it. But leave Old Glory out of it, pure and simple. You don't have to desecrate the flag to validate some stupid agenda. I don't take back what I said.
I understand how you feel. Nevertheless, I've spent more than ten years working on military bases, and yes, there are service men and women with your opinion, but there are also plenty who do not see things your way. Other service men and women believe what they work for is to protect Americans' right to symbolic acts and civil disobedience because that is what separates us from totalitarian nations. Even members of the military are not a group-think, which I respect very much.
Demonstrations against government policies and actions is not inherently a statement of, "I hate the U.S." If that is what one always sees and hears, then one is projecting onto others because that is not what is being said by the vast majority of demonstrators whether on the Left or the Right.
Not everyone engaging in political protest, not even all the insignificant number of flag burners out there, "hate the US." Just as often, demonstrators believe they are engaging in active participation in our system and do so because they believe it is their responsibility. Technically, even though I don't agree with every tactic by every individual, I think they are right in believing that, because what a representative government does is done in the name of the people; that's all of us regardless of whether or not we agree with the government's actions and policies, or whether or not we are actively engaged in its processes.
When our police forces over-react and crack heads of peaceful demonstrators exercising their civil rights, it is in our names. When our government sends our children to war, for good reasons or bad, it is in our names. We the people are ultimately responsible for what our government does regardless of our level of involvement or our opinions. That's why, even if a demonstrator's actions are intended to provoke or make a controversial statement, he or she is actually engaged in working for something as a citizen to, as he or she sees it, improve our government and its policies.
As an example of what I am trying to expresst, when Tibetan monks set themselves on fire, burning themselves alive, to protest Chinese rule does the world believe they hate themselves or that they do not value themselves? Or do we recognize how serious and even desperate they feel to take a public and dramatic stand that will not be entirely ignored? They aren't merely inanimate objects we've vested symbolic meaning in either, but they use their own bodies and lives in a symbolic act as a form of protest. If they are capable of that, why should we assume every dimwit who chooses to burn a flag is doing so out of hatred for the United States rather than an attempt to make a statement about our government's actions and/or policies that they are against?
A flag is really only a piece of fabric manufactured by the millions in Chinese factories. It is important only because of what it symbolizes. What something symbolizes depends on what meaning people have agreed to assign to it, much like the value of money - that piece of paper represents one dollar because we've all agreed that it does. In a large, diverse nation like the U.S., the symbolism of the American flag is going to be more or less sacred to different people. To those it has less meaning for, or even to those it has a lot of meaning for but they are angry and want to make a big statement against current government policies or actions, it sometimes becomes a tool to make the point they want to make. But even that act is only a symbolic act. It's all just symbolism, thus no one is actually being injured or attacked, and in a free country where we respect the rights of our fellow citizens to express their own values, it is our responsibility to ignore what offends us and to protect their right to do things that offend us.
One point that is missed a lot is that the military serves the civilian population. That is why our civilian president is commander-in-chief, and why the president isn't required or even supposed to follow military protocol about any number of things because they are protocol for only military members. If the commander-in-chief were a member of the military, we would be a military dictatorship, not a representative democracy. For that reason, even though it is painful to service men and women when civilians do things like burn a flag, it really should not be taken personally because that person's action isn't about what members of the military perceive it to be. It isn't a statement against the military or what you serve for, but about that individual citizen and his or her statement to the government representing him or her. Also, while service men and women must obey orders dictated to them from the White House through their commanders until they separate, that is not a requirement for civilians. If it was, we would not be and could not call ourselves a free country; we would be a dictatorship.
I won't deny there is ignorance about the military among plenty of people on the Left, because there is, but most of the time, their positions are intended to be supportive rather than critical. Unfortunately, whether it is the Left or the Right, too many people form their positions from more misinformation and stereotypes than they do from reality. Even so, at least when Leftists protest military actions, it isn't members of the military they are protesting, but our federal government and what they see as misusing and abusing our military personnel. Most protests, even the occasional flag burning, isn't even protesting anything to do with the military, but rather, other government actions or policies affecting Americans directly.
When some fool burns a flag thinking it will make a difference, it isn't a symbolic act against military personnel but against the federal government's actions or policies. It isn't a strike against anyone, but merely a symbolic act that doesn't actually hurt anyone. if our feelings are hurt by it, that's on us for personalizing it and refusing to accept that people have different ideas about symbols.
Military personnel do not have a lock on ownership of the American flag, but rather, like it or not, it belongs to all Americans. That ownership isn't dependent on whether someone else thinks we deserve it. It is inherently ours merely from being a United States citizen, and for that reason, each one of us is entitled to feel about it and treat it as we choose. Some people treat the flag as a sacred object, while other people wear it on their butts. Every year I attend an event where it is a parachute that lands on the ground and is then spread out by members of the military and carried off. On its way down and while dumped in the dirt, though, it isn't really being treated like a sacred object, is it? I don't think so, but most of the other attendees do and they have every right to feel that way and get all misty over it every year. My feeling is, more power to them.
At least most Leftists have good intentions toward the military rank-and-file, will argue and debate among themselves where to draw the line in order to avoid infringing on the rights of others, and they feel responsible for what our federal government does. I don't feel I can say the same about the Right-wing demonizing of all things perceived as Liberal and/or the continual call for authoritarian responses to them. In my opinion, theirs is the insult to the men and women who've served the country throughout its history. Interfering with, authoritarian responses, and even violence against citizens for merely engaging in protest isn't what service men and women work and fight for, is it? I thought it was to protect and preserve our individual freedoms and right to self-determination. If I'm right, then it can't be dependent on whether any of us agree or disagree with other citizens' points-of-view, or whether they are popular with the majority of us, because if it does, then like I said, we aren't really a free people with a representative democracy.
Lastly, "rational" is mature and valuable. The opposite is irrational, which is not mature, valuable, or safe.
Don't let them confuse you....
The constitution only chains down the government from reacting. It in no way restricts the people from reacting to anything said or displayed. That is the reason we are all to be armed and able to defend our words.
The law of the land does, and rightly so.
We don't get to attack other people merely because we are offended by their symbols or their actions. If we do, we are immediately involved with criminal justice system, and our community reviles us.
The flag symbolizes the U.S. government or the establishment. By burning it, the globalist/collectivist far left burns a nationalist symbol. But its a good question OP -- the far right also stands against the government at times, but I don't get the impression that they try to get attention the same way.
That's because they are in their heavily armed compounds refusing to pay taxes and plotting the overthrow of the American government. In Alaska, they were even plotting to kill at least one federal judge.
The leaders of the party need to tell the people to stop doing it......the leaders happen to meet with these same people. Occupy Wall Street, BLM and others. I was not talking about your personal flag or experience. Republicans are not seen burning the flag and if they were they would be stopped.
The Occupy and BLM movements are large, loosely organized movements. There is no one who can tell individuals among them what to do or what not to do. There is no way to prevent individuals who say they are joining their movements, or any large movement, from exercising free-will. Furthermore, no political party controls the movements or the individuals within those movements either, therefore, they have no authority to tell anyone who has decided to align themselves with any political movement what to do. The DNC has no more power or control over Occupy or BLM than does the RNC. That's how it should be.
What people on the Right don't seem to grasp is that the Left is made up of a wider, more diverse range of thinkers, races, ethnicities, cultures, and religions, and, therefore, diverse positions on many issues. They agree on enough to step under the same umbrella, but they are in no way a homogeneous group-think. If they were, things wouldn't be so messy or take so long.
I prefer to align myself with a group rich in diversity, even though it means that sometimes I am frustrated by the continual haggling over the details. I value a movement that does not represent group-think and does not try to impose one set of values and opinions on people who want to join in.
When anyone on the Left tries it, as the DNC just did and got caught with its pants down, I want nothing to do with them until they clean house.
Republicans are not seen burning the flag and if they were they would be stopped.
Neither are Democrats. The occasional flag burner one stumbles across is not a Democrat just because he is a Leftist. In fact, most of the time, the further Left a person is, the less likely he or she is an actual Democrat.
Everyone on the Left is not the same. It's just the most people on the Left, from center-Left to far-Left, vote for Democrats because there is no other choice that even comes close to their values and positions. The more Right-wing the Republican Party has become, the more that is true. Heck, even moderate Republicans don't want to vote for Republicans that much these days.
By whom? Does the right have some sort of security detail that ensures every declared member of the party abides by flag code? And when's the last time any member of either of those protest organizations openly declared their allegiance to the Democratic party? They're protestors! I did not think this thread could get any more ridiculous, but you all keep proving me wrong.
In fact, it was the Democratic presidential contenders the BLM activists kept disrupting in protest, not Republicans!
It's consistently been either Clinton or Sanders supporters that start these incidents and escalate them into violence, and yet the media is always discussing Trump supporters as if they are the people prone to violence.
The left is were the violent people reside. Whether it's another violent Occupy Wall Street rally, or BLM, or another Ferguson riot, it's always the left and democratic party voters.
Let me get this straight, you are equating the Ferguson riots, which happened only because of generations of oppression and brutal abuse against a community, and after militarized police showed up to prevent a peaceful demonstration the residents of that community had every right to engage in just as the rest of us would so the citizens stood their ground and were attacked for it, and wasn't as bad as some media outlets portrayed it because as soon as the first break-ins started the community's residents actually protected local businesses from looting, to political demonstrations at presidential primary events?
Also, please provide all those instances of violence at Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders rallies. I'd like to see your sources, too.
How many people have Democrats and other Liberals shot lately? Examples and sources, please.
I agree. Its protected speech alright, even wearing a flag bikini and passing wind into it is protected speech. My problem with flag burning is that it distracts from the real issues and makes the flag burners and their antics the focus of attention.
Which is why those few who do that are scorned by everyone else at a demonstration.
The difference, apparently, is that those on the Left understand it is not their right to physically interfere with another person's right to demonstrate how he sees fit, no matter how frustrating it is to see going on.
I don't agree with your assessment though. In my experience, they are usually young and fired up with righteous indignation. The young are usually the most radical the world over, and a few go over the top for awhile until they mature. Most are sincere, but still immature and naive. The ones who go too far so they end up a distraction don't mean to get in the way. They think they are doing something important. It doesn't usually take long for life to teach them otherwise.
Of course, there are sometimes over-excited testosterone-pulsing males who do things like that, but there are so few flag burners they really are irrelevant except for the distraction they give the media and the Right, and so the even fewer yahoos who aren't as sincere are even more irrelevant and the sincere ones, foolish or not, don't deserve to be painted with their brush.
There are MANY court decisions people disagree with.
Even later courts have CHANGED what earlier courts have ruled on, so it is nothing new.
Freedom of EXPRESSION is NOT, IMO, freedom of SPEECH.
Burning a flag is AN ACTION NOT SPEECH.
You may disagree and that is OK.
Is it okay with you if we censor art? Paintings, sculptures, literature, all kinds of art are expressions of thought that do not include speech. Is artistic expression protected by the Constitution?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So wrong
