Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!

[Victoria33]

If there's a silver lining in any of this...it's taht once he's sworn in...his personal phone will vanish into a box for at least 4 years and he won't have direct access to the POTUS or WH twitter accounts.  That's handled by other people.

@txradioguy

"That's handled by other people."  That would be the case if the President was normal.  Trump sees himself as King, and no one will be allowed to change him in any way.
"Mr. President, you can't post on twitter and give us that phone as it is not secure."  "I am King and don't you touch my personal phone or my personal pad or my personal computer.  You are dismissed."

[txradioguy]

@txradioguy

"That's handled by other people."  That would be the case if the President was normal.  Trump sees himself as King, and no one will be allowed to change him in any way.
"Mr. President, you can't post on twitter and give us that phone as it is not secure."  "I am King and don't you touch my personal phone or my personal pad or my personal computer.  You are dismissed."

Sadly...that's a very realistic scenario.

[libertybele]

The more intriguing question is whether burning a cross is just a form of expression? The Supreme Court has been very mushy on that one, with Scalia at least pointing out the hypocrisy.

It was a dumb thing for Trump to say because it is settled Constitutional law.  On the other hand, it's no harm done.

Burning anything is a form of destruction and should be considered arson.  Those that are protesting religion should be kicked out of the church and likewise those that burn the American flag should be kicked out of the country. We have the right to assemble and protest, but once you start destroying property, then it becomes a crime.  Burning the flag should be no different...it is an attack on our country period.

[Oceander]

Burning anything is a form of destruction and should be considered arson.  Those that are protesting religion should be kicked out of the church and likewise those that burn the American flag should be kicked out of the country. We have the right to assemble and protest, but once you start destroying property, then it becomes a crime.  Burning the flag should be no different...it is an attack on our country period.

Suppose the flag belongs to the person burning it?  Are you saying we cannot burn our own property?

[libertybele]

Suppose the flag belongs to the person burning it?  Are you saying we cannot burn our own property?

Seriously?  The proper way to dispose of a used flag that is worn, tattered, soiled, etc., is to burn it.  Next.

[kjam22]

Seriously?  The proper way to dispose of a used flag that is worn, tattered, soiled, etc., is to burn it.  Next.

Burn it in a respectful way.... you know a little different than dragging it through the street upside down and burning..... while ranting about who knows what.

[Cripplecreek]

Suppose the flag belongs to the person burning it?  Are you saying we cannot burn our own property?

I don't know but I suspect these clowns will find an ever growing list of reasons people should be evicted from America.

Over a year ago one of the scumbags at TOS threatened that "my kind" (people who don't support Trump) would one day face deportation for treason.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Suppose the flag belongs to the person burning it?  Are you saying we cannot burn our own property?

Most flag burners (the bad kind) are burning their own property right? It's always been against the law to burn something you don't own right? As if, I cannot walk over to my neighbor's property, take down their flag, and burn it?


That's theft and destruction of property and has always been illegal AFAIK.

[starstruck]

Is burning a Bald Eagle, free speech? Just trying to figure out the 1st Amendment boundaries. I know there is a law against it, but would the law override a statement being made by the act?

[EC]

Is burning a Bald Eagle, free speech? Just trying to figure out the 1st Amendment boundaries. I know there is a law against it, but would the law override a statement being made by the act?

Nope. Burning a bald eagle causes death to something. Not covered by free speech. 

[kjam22]

Nope. Burning a bald eagle causes death to something. Not covered by free speech. 

How about burning a catfish?

[Sanguine]

How about burning a catfish?

That's a culinary crime.

[kjam22]

That's a culinary crime.

Maybe the misses likes her catfish well done?

[ABX]

Is burning a Bald Eagle, free speech? Just trying to figure out the 1st Amendment boundaries. I know there is a law against it, but would the law override a statement being made by the act?

Is the Bald Eagle your property? 

[starstruck]

Nope. Burning a bald eagle causes death to something. Not covered by free speech. 

Not necessarily. If I was to find a Bald Eagle that was killed by one of those windmill thingies it is still against the law to burn it.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

They're an endangered species aren't they? So yes it is illegal AFIAK.

[Suppressed]

I like the way you think.

I invited myself to my grandson's kindergarten class on Veteran's Day. I kept it light-hearted, but I hopefully made an impression on his classmates, where 80% of them come from homes where a language other than English is spoken. I basically said that Americans value traditions such as Veteran's Day, Independence Day, etc., and all they entail.

Thank you.

Too few conservatives go into schools.

[starstruck]

Is the Bald Eagle your property?

No. It was attacking my cat. Since the government owns it, that's what my protest is about.
 

[Suppressed]

Being a narcissist, he feels the need to be adored, and the shallow, fear-based, LIV, social right group is willing to give him that.  So, much as you or I feel hungry at lunch time and thirsty after mowing the lawn, he gets that needy feeling and tweets.  I eat a sandwich, you drink water, and he tweets and reads the adoring responses.

You nailed it.

I think it's still relatively few who understand this is a mental illness, not just something he can turn off easily.

[starstruck]

They're an endangered species aren't they? So yes it is illegal AFIAK.

No. They were taken off the list. They are covered by a different law. Dead eagle feathers are gathered by the government to be given to Native Americans.

[ABX]

Here is my little rant on the issue....

In the US, we don't ascribe any magical properties or even religious properties to our flag. Outside of obvious uses as a government standard, the power of the flag is what the flag represents. Those who died for the flag, didn't literally die for a piece of cloth, they died for the freedoms and liberties that the flag represents. Freedoms which (should) make us a unique nation. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from tyranny, putting the rights of the individual above the power of the State. That's what the flag represents.

Some people will abuse those freedoms, but that does not mean those freedoms should be stripped?

Someone abuses the right to own a firearm, an abuse that literally results in the deaths of others. Not just a flag being burned but people dying. Does that mean that we should strip 2nd Amendment rights from everyone because someone abuses the right?

If we ban burning the flag as now a non-protected form of speech, are we not changing the flag's meaning?  We now are putting the physical piece of cloth at a higher level than the rights it represents. We are putting the government's power over the individual.  The rights and freedoms are now less important than the single object.

But let's go back full circle, because the flag isn't just a symbol of our freedom. As I mentioned before, it is also the government standard. A physical representation in an ancient sense, of the ruling authority. Just like how a flag flies over an embassy to let citizens know this is our sovereign territory or a soldier wears it to show what nation he represents. It is an entirely different meaning than just a representation of our freedoms.

Sometimes the government opposes the freedom the flag represents to us. Long before the history of our country, when citizens stood up to an oppressive government, they tore down her flag and often burned it as a symbol.

It isn't just burning the flag, for many, flying the flag upside-down, as a sign of distress over the government, is just as offensive if the context is not known. Should that disrespecting the flag also be banned in the same manner? 

And one more point if I may. What about religious symbols?  For many of faith, religion is a higher priority than government. God comes first in their lives, then family, then country/community. If we hold religious symbols on an even higher level than we do national symbols like the flag, should we ban burning those? Should we ban burning of the Bible? How about the Koran?

If we've gotten to the point where the government threatens free citizens with prison or revocation of citizenship for simply burning a flag, ask yourself, what is the government afraid of with the citizens having that freedom?

[Sanguine]

Here is my little rant on the issue....

In the US, we don't ascribe any magical properties or even religious properties to our flag. Outside of obvious uses as a government standard, the power of the flag is what the flag represents. Those who died for the flag, didn't literally die for a piece of cloth, they died for the freedoms and liberties that the flag represents. Freedoms which (should) make us a unique nation. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from tyranny, putting the rights of the individual above the power of the State. That's what the flag represents.

Some people will abuse those freedoms, but that does not mean those freedoms should be stripped?

Someone abuses the right to own a firearm, an abuse that literally results in the deaths of others. Not just a flag being burned but people dying. Does that mean that we should strip 2nd Amendment rights from everyone because someone abuses the right?

If we ban burning the flag as now a non-protected form of speech, are we not changing the flag's meaning?  We now are putting the physical piece of cloth at a higher level than the rights it represents. We are putting the government's power over the individual.  The rights and freedoms are now less important than the single object.

But let's go back full circle, because the flag isn't just a symbol of our freedom. As I mentioned before, it is also the government standard. A physical representation in an ancient sense, of the ruling authority. Just like how a flag flies over an embassy to let citizens know this is our sovereign territory or a soldier wears it to show what nation he represents. It is an entirely different meaning than just a representation of our freedoms.

Sometimes the government opposes the freedom the flag represents to us. Long before the history of our country, when citizens stood up to an oppressive government, they tore down her flag and often burned it as a symbol.

It isn't just burning the flag, for many, flying the flag upside-down, as a sign of distress over the government, is just as offensive if the context is not known. Should that disrespecting the flag also be banned in the same manner? 

And one more point if I may. What about religious symbols?  For many of faith, religion is a higher priority than government. God comes first in their lives, then family, then country/community. If we hold religious symbols on an even higher level than we do national symbols like the flag, should we ban burning those? Should we ban burning of the Bible? How about the Koran?

If we've gotten to the point where the government threatens free citizens with prison or revocation of citizenship for simply burning a flag, ask yourself, what is the government afraid of with the citizens having that freedom?

@AbaraXas, that is excellent!  You nailed it.

[Oceander]

Here is my little rant on the issue....

In the US, we don't ascribe any magical properties or even religious properties to our flag. Outside of obvious uses as a government standard, the power of the flag is what the flag represents. Those who died for the flag, didn't literally die for a piece of cloth, they died for the freedoms and liberties that the flag represents. Freedoms which (should) make us a unique nation. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from tyranny, putting the rights of the individual above the power of the State. That's what the flag represents.

Some people will abuse those freedoms, but that does not mean those freedoms should be stripped?

Someone abuses the right to own a firearm, an abuse that literally results in the deaths of others. Not just a flag being burned but people dying. Does that mean that we should strip 2nd Amendment rights from everyone because someone abuses the right?

If we ban burning the flag as now a non-protected form of speech, are we not changing the flag's meaning?  We now are putting the physical piece of cloth at a higher level than the rights it represents. We are putting the government's power over the individual.  The rights and freedoms are now less important than the single object.

But let's go back full circle, because the flag isn't just a symbol of our freedom. As I mentioned before, it is also the government standard. A physical representation in an ancient sense, of the ruling authority. Just like how a flag flies over an embassy to let citizens know this is our sovereign territory or a soldier wears it to show what nation he represents. It is an entirely different meaning than just a representation of our freedoms.

Sometimes the government opposes the freedom the flag represents to us. Long before the history of our country, when citizens stood up to an oppressive government, they tore down her flag and often burned it as a symbol.

It isn't just burning the flag, for many, flying the flag upside-down, as a sign of distress over the government, is just as offensive if the context is not known. Should that disrespecting the flag also be banned in the same manner? 

And one more point if I may. What about religious symbols?  For many of faith, religion is a higher priority than government. God comes first in their lives, then family, then country/community. If we hold religious symbols on an even higher level than we do national symbols like the flag, should we ban burning those? Should we ban burning of the Bible? How about the Koran?

If we've gotten to the point where the government threatens free citizens with prison or revocation of citizenship for simply burning a flag, ask yourself, what is the government afraid of with the citizens having that freedom?

[Neverdul]

Here is my little rant on the issue....

In the US, we don't ascribe any magical properties or even religious properties to our flag. Outside of obvious uses as a government standard, the power of the flag is what the flag represents. Those who died for the flag, didn't literally die for a piece of cloth, they died for the freedoms and liberties that the flag represents. Freedoms which (should) make us a unique nation. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from tyranny, putting the rights of the individual above the power of the State. That's what the flag represents.

Some people will abuse those freedoms, but that does not mean those freedoms should be stripped?

Someone abuses the right to own a firearm, an abuse that literally results in the deaths of others. Not just a flag being burned but people dying. Does that mean that we should strip 2nd Amendment rights from everyone because someone abuses the right?

If we ban burning the flag as now a non-protected form of speech, are we not changing the flag's meaning?  We now are putting the physical piece of cloth at a higher level than the rights it represents. We are putting the government's power over the individual.  The rights and freedoms are now less important than the single object.

But let's go back full circle, because the flag isn't just a symbol of our freedom. As I mentioned before, it is also the government standard. A physical representation in an ancient sense, of the ruling authority. Just like how a flag flies over an embassy to let citizens know this is our sovereign territory or a soldier wears it to show what nation he represents. It is an entirely different meaning than just a representation of our freedoms.

Sometimes the government opposes the freedom the flag represents to us. Long before the history of our country, when citizens stood up to an oppressive government, they tore down her flag and often burned it as a symbol.

It isn't just burning the flag, for many, flying the flag upside-down, as a sign of distress over the government, is just as offensive if the context is not known. Should that disrespecting the flag also be banned in the same manner? 

And one more point if I may. What about religious symbols?  For many of faith, religion is a higher priority than government. God comes first in their lives, then family, then country/community. If we hold religious symbols on an even higher level than we do national symbols like the flag, should we ban burning those? Should we ban burning of the Bible? How about the Koran?

If we've gotten to the point where the government threatens free citizens with prison or revocation of citizenship for simply burning a flag, ask yourself, what is the government afraid of with the citizens having that freedom?

 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Here is my little rant on the issue....

In the US, we don't ascribe any magical properties or even religious properties to our flag. Outside of obvious uses as a government standard, the power of the flag is what the flag represents. Those who died for the flag, didn't literally die for a piece of cloth, they died for the freedoms and liberties that the flag represents. Freedoms which (should) make us a unique nation. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from tyranny, putting the rights of the individual above the power of the State. That's what the flag represents.

Some people will abuse those freedoms, but that does not mean those freedoms should be stripped?

Someone abuses the right to own a firearm, an abuse that literally results in the deaths of others. Not just a flag being burned but people dying. Does that mean that we should strip 2nd Amendment rights from everyone because someone abuses the right?

If we ban burning the flag as now a non-protected form of speech, are we not changing the flag's meaning?  We now are putting the physical piece of cloth at a higher level than the rights it represents. We are putting the government's power over the individual.  The rights and freedoms are now less important than the single object.

But let's go back full circle, because the flag isn't just a symbol of our freedom. As I mentioned before, it is also the government standard. A physical representation in an ancient sense, of the ruling authority. Just like how a flag flies over an embassy to let citizens know this is our sovereign territory or a soldier wears it to show what nation he represents. It is an entirely different meaning than just a representation of our freedoms.

Sometimes the government opposes the freedom the flag represents to us. Long before the history of our country, when citizens stood up to an oppressive government, they tore down her flag and often burned it as a symbol.

It isn't just burning the flag, for many, flying the flag upside-down, as a sign of distress over the government, is just as offensive if the context is not known. Should that disrespecting the flag also be banned in the same manner? 

And one more point if I may. What about religious symbols?  For many of faith, religion is a higher priority than government. God comes first in their lives, then family, then country/community. If we hold religious symbols on an even higher level than we do national symbols like the flag, should we ban burning those? Should we ban burning of the Bible? How about the Koran?

If we've gotten to the point where the government threatens free citizens with prison or revocation of citizenship for simply burning a flag, ask yourself, what is the government afraid of with the citizens having that freedom?