Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Burn the flag to protest the hate gay amendment

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:11 PM
Original message
Burn the flag to protest the hate gay amendment
Go ahead, piss off the fake patriots; the ignorant bible thumpers amongst us. I'm a veteran. The constitution is what I choose to protect and "christians" want to rape the constitution to force their hate on America. Burning the flag will take absolutely zero liberty away from any American. Letting "christians" loose on our constitution is the real method of playing with fire.

My hate is rational. Please would a "christian" jump in and set me straight?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. no thanks
but thank you for the excellent pr!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. The last time we mixed government and religion, there were
HANGINGS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE IN THE TOWN SQUARE!

That's right, America - let's take a huge step back in time. Have we learned NOTHING?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm a Christian and I've always heard "Judge not lest ye
be judged".

As for burning the flag, you'll piss Hillary off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I stopped going to church
two years ago because all I got from the pulpit (Catholic Church) was a stream of judgements about other people who weren't in the pews. Liberals, secular humanists, gays, activists judges and on and on and one were being judged from the local church spokesman. Is that the christian example I should be following? "Christians" in America today are being driven by their judgements of others to get their slave legislatures to come up with ludicrous amendments to an extremely sacred document.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Those people ARE NOT Christians. And you don't need to
go to church to be one. It's not about the ritual, its about the faith, hope, love, and charity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. Sigh. Here's the truth about the bill Hillary (and Robert Byrd) co-sponsor
Clinton has co-sponsored a bill that would make it illegal to burn someone else's flag (it's already illegal to destroy someone else's property) or to burn a flag in an attempt to promote violence (again, already a crime).

The background on her support for this bill involves arguments made during the flag-burning amendment debate. Republicans claimed that flag-burning was like cross-burning, which is illegal, and chastised Hillary (and the other liberals) for voting against such an amendment while supporting bans on cross-burning. Hillary tried to explain the distinctions, saying that cross burning was an attempt to incite violence or threaten someone, whereas flag-burning was often a political protest. Her critics blasted this statement, saying she wanted to protect all flag-burning, no matter the purpose. At that time she said she would support federal legislation aimed at banning flag-burning as a means of intimidation or inciting violence, but she would never support an amendment to ban flag burning.

For details, here's the bill's official CRS summary: SUMMARY AS OF:
7/1/2005--Introduced.

Flag Protection Act of 2005 - Amends the federal criminal code to revise provisions regarding desecration of the flag to prohibit: (1) destroying or damaging a U.S. flag with the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace; or (2) stealing or knowingly converting the use of a U.S. flag either belonging to the United States or on lands reserved for the United States and intentionally destroying or damaging that flag.

Here's the whole bill:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.1370:

Same damn misinformation campaign is being waged against Hillary as was waged against Gore in 2000. Repubs convince the conservatives she's too liberal and the liberals she's really a conservative. Same thing they did to Gore, and sadly it worked so well that even on DU there are some people who still believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Oh nuts.
<snip>

(1) destroying or damaging a U.S. flag with the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace; or ...

<snip>

All flag burning is meant to incite a reaction that can be twisted into a breach of the 'peace'. It is a protest, a demonstration against unfair or illegal government tactics.

Yelling at someone is considered assault if someone claims they were afraid of an imminent and offensive bodily contact by the flag burner. It is also disturbing the peace. This bullshit amendment of hers are set ups that can be enforced at any time someone starts screaming 'breach of the peace;, I don't give a damn who's frigging flag you're burning.

And guess which side is more likely to protest by burning a flag. It ain't the ass kissers on the republican bush** supporting republicans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Completely Wrong.
First, it's not an amendment, and she opposed the amendment. This bill was part of her attempt to block the amendment, if you recall.

Second, read the snippet you cited: "destroying or damaging a U.S. flag with the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace." The bill is specific that the INTENTION of the flag-burner has to be to incite violence. A flag burner who incites violence but who only had the INTENTION of protesting the government is NOT in violation of the flag. People can scream "Breach of peace" all day long and it won't invoke this law unless they can PROVE that the intent of the flag-burner was to incite violence.

That's the same wording as most of the laws that ban cross-burning. Are you telling me you agree with Charles Pickering that cross-burning should be allowed, that it's a harmless prank, even when it is done on the front lawn to intimidate someone? Or can you now get the distinction between and act INTENDED to incite violence rather than one INTENDED to make a statement that may INCIDENTALLY incite violence?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Don't talk down to me. And pay attention to what I said. I said
that any action can be made to fit the definition of a breach of the peace. And a breach of the peace does NOT NECESSARILY CONSTITUTE ANY VIOLENCE WHATSOEVER.

And where the hell did you get this cross burning crap?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. The sponsor and all co-sponsors of this bill voted AGAINST the amendment
First, the PRIMARY INTENTION of the flag-burner has to be to incite violence or breach the peace. If the intention is to make a statement or protest the government or just to start a fire to warm the burner's hands, this law is not invoked, EVEN IF IT RESULTS IN a breach of peace or violence. "Breach of peace" is not a vague abstract concept, there is a set of specific legal precedents defining the phrase. Same with "primary purpose and intent."

You may argue that people will misuse the law, and I agree. They may also arrest anyone burning a flag now if they feel the intention of the flag-burner was to start a riot or "breach the peace," just as they could for the old proverbial yelling fire in a crowded theater scenario. This bill gives no one any power they don't already have. It takes away no right that you already have.

Now, each of the sponsor and co-sponsors of this bill is opposed to the flag-burning amendment, and if I recall, each of them has voted against it in some form or another, either as Senator or Representative. ALL of the FIVE co-sponsors are Democrats: Dorgan, Byrd, Conrad, Carper and Clinton.

The Hillary bashers are wrong on this. This bill is an attempt to derail the flag-burning amendment, and does not take away one right you already have. It's just an attempt to head off the amendment, and stop the Republicans from screaming about cross-burning.

As for the "cross-burning crap," that's been part of the debate for a while now. The Republicans brought it up, and the Democrats, including Hillary, have responded to it. Hillary even stated--as she announced she was voting against the amendment--that she would support a flag-desecration law similar to cross-burning legislation. That's why cross-burning is part of this debate, and has been for a while now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. Breach of the peace is a vague legalistic concept, just exactly like
'disturbing the peace' for which I've even seen people convicted for arguing with another. What in a normal situation would be interpreted as just words spoken in (oftentimes justifiable) anger is turned into a criminal act because it can be interpreted very loosely and enforced by a prosecutor who likes the sound of his own voice and the feeling of power it gives him to turn a law-abiding citizen into a criminal.

Precedent means nothing, nothing at all, these days. These are times where an accepted and acceptable legal concept has been twisted and turned into an act that can whisk you off the streets and cause you to be taken to a place and held without notification to anyone that you know, including close family. Probable cause is also a firmly established legal requirement supposedly necessary before invading the rights and privledges of an American citizen, and it has been turned into some hoodoo voodoo mind reading act performed by a governmental figure who has been set up to tell any person in this country not only what vague and draconian law they've broken, but that they intend prosecute all in the name of 'patriotism'.

Hillary jumped on this issue to make herself look good to the 'conservative' crowd in this country. She had to keep her name out there, make it look like she's really doing something. So instead of issues that really are important to this country, she's picked herself out a couple that pander to the conservatives and moderates all the while thinking that these non-issues will take her all the way to the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Nice rhetoric, but irrelevant.
You're hung up on the phrase "breach of peace." The operative phrase is "intention and purpose." The rest of your rant, while true, is true whether this bill becomes law or not. The bill Hillary co-sponsored with four other anti-amendment Democrats and one anti-amendment Republican gives no prosecutor or law enforcement agency any power they don't already have, and it just might help to clarify the nuances of the issue for some amendment supporters.

As for your last paragraph, that Hillary is trying to improve her image with conservative voters--well, obviously. That's politics, and most of our great liberal champions were masters of it. JFK would have never been elected if it had been up to DU. Hillary has been a strong liberal senator who has done serious work on the big issues. How come we don't hear about her attacking Halliburton and calling for investigations? How come we don't hear of her calls for troop withdrawals, or her attacks on Bush for botching the job in the first place, or for not sending enough troops or proper equipment in the first place? She's out in front on many of our issues, but all we see here at DU are the misrepresentations that make her look conservative. You'll never convince me that's not by accident, and it doesn't come from our side, at first, anyway.

I'm not saying you should vote for her. I've got issues with her, too. One thing she is NOT is a DINO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 04:40 AM
Response to Reply #27
28. Believe what you want, I don't care. There are a lot of people on DU
with some strange fixation for Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grytpype Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. If you're going to burn a flag, burn this one:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vexatious Ape Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
6. I feel your hate also
but I haven't any flags to burn and it all goes back to the day the chimp "won" his reelection in 04, I threw all my flags away, for good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. "Hurry, Mr President! Stop me Before I Burn the Flag in my Assless Chaps*"
From Huffington Post:


Hurry, Mr President! Stop me Before I Burn the Flag in my Assless Chaps* (38 comments )
READ MORE: Dick Cheney, Bill O'Reilly, Homeland Security, George W. Bush
First off, understand that I am not gay nor have ever desecrated the American flag...yet.

But if something isn't legislated soon, I don't know how long before I head down to my local leather shop to suit up and match Old Glory. "Old Glory." There you go. A few days ago I would have called the flag "The Stars and Stripes." Anyone with a scintilla of flag history behind them knows that the term "Old Glory" was coined by Navy Captain William Driver, a 19th-century ship master.

Sailor. Ship. Do I have to draw you a Village People map?

Finally, our president and a solid 33% of our legislators are standing up for what is right, no matter how many of conservative core voters come out to vote Republican this November.

Thank you, Mr. Bush -- and Mr. Frist -- for standing up in support of the Federal Marriage Amendment. For if not passed, how soon before gay men who married each other would start having gay babies? How long before extremely well-built, extremely attractive men who know how to dress will be wasted on other men? How soon before gay women start marrying and stop having that hot single lesbian sex that straight men love to watch?

Those who mock the Constitutional amendment seem to have overlooked that the legislation does not say gays cannot marry. They just would not be able to marry each other. What is the big deal? I would have loved to marry Catherine Zeta Jones Douglas but that didn't work out. Should she have been forced to marry me when she was single? And for the most part I can't marry people who are already married to someone else. Should Michael Douglas be forced to make Catherine available to me now. Not likely. But do you hear me complaining about changing the law? I mean a law that I agree with.

There's no denying a slippery slope. If we allow a man to marry a man how soon before bisexuals will be allowed to marry each other. If we allow women to marry women, Mary Cheney may never have the opportunity to marry a man. How soon before Ellen marries the Dixie Chicks? And with all the men marrying men and women marrying women, the sanctity of marriage would suffer so immeasurably that there would leave little time or opportunity for Rush Limbaugh to keep getting married. Is that something future wives waiting to be future divorcees of el Rushbo would want?

We must focus on the country's vital objectives. The sooner we stop gays from marrying the sooner we can bring the troops home; the sooner we stop desecrating the flag, the sooner that the Homeland Security Department can become competent and keep bureaucracy from desecrating the safety of Americans at home.

Let us no longer let gays nor flag burners divide our country. Let's give that job to the Constitution.

*How that flag got into my assless chaps I'll never know.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-young/hurry-mr-president-sto_b_22167.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sammy Pepys Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. I won't burn my countries flag....
...but I will make my voice heard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I would not choose
to burn the flag either but the constitution is way more important to each and every one of us then the flag. The constitution is not a symbol, its the real deal which does not belong to radical christian clerics to alter and amend to fit their religious beliefs. I look forward to the civil war.

I received "my" flag during my retirement ceremony and it is protected in a a beautiful shadow box. My "I love me wall" includes the flag and the Constitution in all their glory. "Christian conservatives" are not patriots and I would choose not to serve with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:42 PM
Response to Original message
11. Hate isn't good for you
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 01:46 PM by Pigwidgeon
Edited to include the postscript and a second chance to Bushbash.

Why ruin your health?

Turn that hatred into activism. You'll be happier, healthier, and the country will be a lot better off.

Of course, "hate" could be a metaphor for a lot of things, including activism itself. Since my Mother is much more socially active than I am, I took my hate, and a cheap laser printer, and have been feeding a steady stream of information to her friends through her. The response has been excellent, and a number of people were even persuaded to register to vote. Some of the selected "re-prints" get read by as many as a dozen people. And here's the best part: they include military, Republican, and Fundamentalist families. Only two of the recipients have gotten mad about them, and one had a sudden change of heart as a result of serving nine months in Iraq and coming back with a big leg muscle cut in half by an IED.

Should I also mention that he also lost two buddies AND a cousin over there? Yes, I think I will.

Then there was the chalk attack in my apartment parking lot. Someone who obviously hated America went out at 3:30 AM one night with some kids' street chalk and wrote "41 + 43 = 911" and "al-Qaeda Flew And Bush Knew!" on several of the parking lot sections. I'm quite certain it brought his blood pressure down about 20 points.

The apartment custodian crew must have also hated America. They weren't available for several days to erase it, until God HimSelf decided that such blashphemy against His other beloved son, Bush, must be erased, and sent rain to restore the sanctity of the blacktop.

Show the slightest amount of backbone, and the barstool patriots and other such bullies tuck tail and get lost.

So don't get mad -- get active!

--p!

PS - 24 years in uniform? If I ever get to Mississippi, the drinks are on me.
The chalk, too. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. A barstool patriot
ran into me in early 2003 and did leave tail tucked after he questioned my patriotism and told me to join the army to "prove" my love of country. Of course he never served in the military.

OT - I was born in Philly and grew up (through the sixth grade) six blocks from Connie Mack Stadium in the early 60's. I went to St Columba on Lehigh Ave.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:24 PM
Response to Original message
14. I would adopt a different tag than "hate gay amendment"
it's more like "Gays are not people amendment".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marnieworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
16. best thought of the day!
That'll show 'em! :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
19. ** NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO ** !!!!!
Absolutely NOT !!!

The argument is clear. WHY are they bringing this crap up when it is a NON-ISSUE.

Don't prompt people to make it an issue and hand the Republicans a gift! :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
steelyboo Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
20. Better yet
hire an illegal immigrant to burn the flag to protest the hate gay amendment. Hell, if you can get him to talk about violent video games while he's doing it, you could be the next president! :p
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
22. Just about the only thing that could revive the GOP
would be for somebody on the far left to pull a stunt like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. No kidding.. Even making such suggestions on here is a dumb move!
Sorry Boss.. but it does NOTHING but give the R-thugs.. the ones who scan this forum looking for shit just like this, the fodder they need to write up their "anti-American rhetoric" articles.

And they WILL.

As that guy on the Simpsons would say..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. It's disgraceful that this was allowed to stand
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. And when Benchley says something's disgraceful, that's going some...
nt.

(BTW, Benchley, before you blast me, you'll noticed I agree with your basic position that this would be a stupid idea...)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberaliraqvet26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
25. Please don't.
Flag burning is not cool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 06:24 PM
Response to Original message
29. Burn the flag? let me get this straight...
You want every right-wing vet and biker to beat the crap out of us?

Uh...why exactly do you think this will help?

And shouldn't you be getting Sheriff Roscoe to teach those Duke boys a lesson?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BaldEagleATV Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Can a right winger agree with you? I do to some extent..read on.
Burning flags..no.
should the republicans try to legislate morality.....no
Freedom to choose whom you love?....Yes
Any of my business?...No
Im a christian? Yes
Do I care if Jessica and Lucy love each other?...No

The MEAT!
Do I believe people have a right to force their religious beliefs on others? No..Hell No!
Do I believe in Freedom?...Yes
Do I believe most truly do?..No


So many people of the right wing persuasion dont believe in making religious beliefs the law of the land. Like me they believe in freedom. Freedom of choice but that includes economic freedom.
The freedoms I want are for all not just a group of people.
While true there are people that hate gay people.
You should also understand that its a small insignificant number of people.
Just like the number of people that hate blacks.
Its a small insignificant number of people that dont matter anyway.

I think that turning this country around would take people like minded about freedom to win.
Not about dem or rep. Neither are the solution.

Why have the reps won since 1994?

The dems will take most all the money from the people that earned it.
They see the rep as the lesser of the evils.

Just my 2 Cents
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-07-06 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
32. Why don't we burn the GOP flag, instead?
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
33. Burning the flag will really get the general public on the side of gays.


Right. Good thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
34. Has anyone ever converted someone to their cause by buring the flag?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 08:11 AM
Response to Original message
35. Then the terraists (in the White House and Congress) win.
You play right into their hands like putty.

I understand the anger, but this is the stupidest, reactionariest (sorry, that's the only worde that fits) idea I could possibly think of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC