Vote on flag desecration may be 'cliffhanger'

[Mixxster]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-06-14-flag-desecration-vote_x.htm

Vote on flag desecration may be 'cliffhanger'

WASHINGTON — The Senate may be within one or two votes of passing a constitutional amendment to ban desecration of the U.S. flag, clearing the way for ratification by the states, a key opponent of the measure said Tuesday.

"It's scary close," said Terri Schroeder of the American Civil Liberties Union, which opposes the amendment. "People think it's something that's never going to happen. ... The reality is we're very close to losing this battle."

<snip>

But this time may be different. Amendment supporters say last year's election expanding the Senate Republican majority to 55 has buoyed their hopes for passage. Five freshmen senators — Richard Burr of North Carolina, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, John Thune of South Dakota and David Vitter of Louisiana — voted for the amendment as House members and plan to do so again.

They will be joined by at least five Democrats who have co-sponsored the resolution, including Dianne Feinstein of California and Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Both are up for re-election next year.

[patrice]

1. We are an Idolatorous nation.

A flag is a piece of cloth, any meaning beyond that is arbitrary, and those who say it, a/any meaning, is intrinsic are idolators.

If this ammendment becomes ratified, there will be many real Christians who will HAVE to burn American flags publicly, in order to make the distinction between Religion and the State clear.

[SteppingRazor]

2. I'm still not sold on this being a losing battle...

Even if it does get passed by both Houses of Congress (a fairly unlikely event, despite the expected sky-is-falling rhetoric), it'll stall in the ratification phase.
Of course, I could be wrong. But I never am. :dunce:

[BOSSHOG]

3. I'm A Veteran

I served so Americans could be free to show their opposition to our governments actions in a nonviolent manner. If they choose to burn the flag, so be it. There is no logical, coherent reason to prevent such action. I guess that explains the list of insane senators who will choose to vote for the amendment to appease the ignorant trash which comprise their base. Just don't fuck with my Constitution.

[nikraye]

4. (Repug) Duke Cunningham's op-ed in USA Today - 06/14/05

Your post re: Cunningham reminded me of this op-ed by same yesterday in USA Today's online editorial section. All about the sanctity of the flag and why we need an amendment to protect it from evil free-speech protectors (i.e. the Supreme Court). (Warning: seriously nauseating material follows; barf bag highly recommended)



Amendment is our Right

By Randy "Duke" Cunningham
Tue Jun 14, 6:46 AM ET

More than 15 years ago, the Supreme Court reversed 200 years of legal tradition and struck down laws prohibiting desecration of the American flag. In this case, the court disregarded historical and legal precedent, claiming that laws prohibiting flag desecration infringe on free-speech rights.

Given the court's disposition, it is clear a constitutional amendment is necessary to protect the flag. This amendment would return to the American people the right to protect the flag from desecration and disgrace.

Our Founding Fathers recognized that there was a national interest in protecting the flag, and until 1989, the courts concurred. They recognized, as most Americans do, that the free-speech rights of individuals must be considered in relation to the rights of all people, most of whom support protecting our national symbol.

Restricting flag desecration does not limit the right of individuals to express their views. There are still many avenues to do so. It simply protects the physical integrity of the flag.

All Americans have a stake in each and every flag, and when we allow individuals to degrade it, we devalue the universal investment and infringe on the rights of others.

To allow desecration of the flag dishonors those who sacrificed to protect the ideals for which the flag stands. We have asked many to make that sacrifice for this nation, and it is in the public interest to ensure that the flag they fought for is protected.

All 50 states have passed resolutions supporting the restoration of flag protections. The framers of our Constitution set forth a process for amending the Constitution to ensure that the will of the people is carried out when the public consensus demands change.

The First Amendment is a valuable tool for the freedoms our country cherishes and enjoys. Any flag amendment proposed could be shaped to such a narrow scope so as not to disturb the protections of the First Amendment. Protecting the American flag from desecration is consistent with free speech, and it is an affirmation of the resiliency of our democratic system.

Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., is prime sponsor of the proposed constitutional amendment to authorize Congress to prohibit desecration of the flag.

[jojo54]

5. Hell, they're probably trying to ban this law so * can't be

hanged once he becomes a citizen again. Check out this photo - he of all people should have known better. But then again, stupid is as stupid does:

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. The flag fight has nothing to do with the flag.

It has everything to do with church/state.

There is no defense of the protection of the flag that does not speak of the "sanctity" (sacredness) of the flag, the "desecration" (making un-sacred) of the flag.

It makes the flag an object of veneration, an object of worship. It works to blur the line between the sacred and the secular. At its heart, it is an argument that the flag is sacred, not secular, therefore the state is sacred, not secular.

I defy anyone to find a so-called flag protector who doesn't couch his terms in the language of religion.

One of the hallmarks of fascism is the blending of church and state. It is no coincidence that the Pledge of Allegiance became popular during the rise of fascism, in the 20s and 30s. Or that the national anthem, or national hymn, was approved during that same time. Along with the push to put In God We Trust on all currency, in an effort to replace the national motto of E Pluribus Unum.

Other than the Indian Wars of the 19th century, there has never been a religious war in this country. When it comes, this 'most religious country in the world' will end up looking like Europe where after centuries of religious wars, religion languishes at something like 10% of the population. That is the heritage that the religious right is going to leave us.

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Wonder what the definition of 'flag' will be? Will it include any image

of the flag? Or only those made of cloth? If I were to sew up one myself and used all red, white, and blue prints, is it a flag? How will all those 'good 'Mericans' dispose of their flag pins? Will they be arrested if a rhinestone falls out of their pin? What about all those little paper ones used to decorate cupcakes? If you put them in the garbage?

Totally stupid!!

[davelyoung1]

8. Here or abroad

The Republicans can use this to then to send people to Guantanamo, by executive order. He will not need to try them in courts, sentenced for the remained of their lives.

I am a Vietnam Vet, who loves his flag but cannot see putting someone to jail for burning it here or abroad.

[Mixxster]

9. The only good thing that can come of this...

Let's prosecute those driving around with faded, tattered flags flying from their cars. Let's prosecute those who insist on "showing their patriotism" by flying the flag 24/7 - in all kinds of weather, unlit at night, etc. Let's prosecute Bush for scribbling all over miniature flags.

This amendment is not only unAmerican but considering how rare flag burning is in this country, it's simply a cheap political ploy and an idiotic waste of time.

[Akno21]

10. I seriously hope this doesn't pass

it's a major infringement on our rights. BUT, this isn't an issue we want to play up one bit, since opposing flag desecration, while part of our values system, can seem unpatriotic to voters. I still say we oppose it, but don't make a big huff about it. A gallup poll showed 63% support the amendment. http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/login.aspx?ci=3739

[GracieM]

11. I hate flag burning...

But I also hate people swearing pointlessly (is there another kind of swearing?). Certain types of music hurt my ears...

But it's still speech that should be protected. It's frightening that in the 21st century there are governments restricting rights instead of adding them.

I hate to see the flag burning, but there are better ways of fighting it than banning it. Casinos are free to refuse business from people they suspect of whatever. If you feel that strongly about flag burning, refuse to associate with flag burners (unless they take away our freedom of association next). At least that way everyone maintains their freedoms and one freedom can fight the other on a level playing field and let society be the judge.