Sure, in casual conversation or on this forum. Stuff like that.
If you had gotten together with like minded friends and stood chanting on a street corner would you feel that was covered under the first amendment?
Upvote
0
Sure, in casual conversation or on this forum. Stuff like that.
Chanting at who? Chanting what? At what street corner?If you had gotten together with like minded friends and stood chanting on a street corner would you feel that was covered under the first amendment?
That is pretty ridiculous, it's just a rag, it means absolutely nothing, other than another cheap source of revenue for the chinese, burn one and maybe some Chinese peasant can have a few extra grains of rice for dinner.Yes because burning the nation's flag to me is tantamount to renouncing citizenship anyway, or worse, declaring yourself an enemy of the nation.
I don't know about by his standard but I would agree with that statement as a general rule.If you're going to take it literally, I'm going to take it literally. The Constitution gives the government the ability to mint. Minting has to do with coins and is not related to paper money which is printed. Since it doesn't mention printing paper money, we have to assume by your own standard that paper money is unconstitutional.
I see you have anguish over this, I'll light a flag for you.I think it is exceedingly inappropriate to burn a flag, and I do not see how it would be considered "free speech". In this respect, I believe that certain other statements (such as "kill all the <insert any skin colour you wish>s") are not protected by the constitution. Correct me if I am wrong - I am not an American.
Do you not see how flag-burning can be easily seen as symbolic means to call for the destruction of an entire people. To me, it is essentially the same things as saying "All Americans should die". And, as such, I think it probably should be illegal. The flag stands for the people, not the government. And there is nothing more violent than fire. I just don't see how flag-burning is not a form of dangerous "hate-speech". If you are going to make "Kill all the <insert any skin colour you wish>s" illegal, then flag-burning should be illegal as well.
Contrast flag-burning with the situation where those football players do not stand during the anthem. I think the situations are very different. Like the flag, the anthem does indeed represent the people not the government. But to kneel when the anthem is playing is effectively to say "I do not respect the values that I see reflected in the American people". Expressing disrespect is very different from expressing the wish to destroy (which is what I think flag-burning cashes out to).
Thats pretty sad.
That's the same as saying a book means nothing, it's just some paper with black symbols scrawled on it.That is pretty ridiculous, it's just a rag, it means absolutely nothing, other than another cheap source of revenue for the chinese, burn one and maybe some Chinese peasant can have a few extra grains of rice for dinner.
He wasn't acting like it was, but whether freedom of expression was a fundamental limit protected in the Constitution. You're attacking a strawman by then making a parallel about paper money, which is no fundamental limit.
I don't personally see how the second amendment becomes weird when you take it literally, and as the framers
Its actually not true about your book analogy, a book could have value because of what is written in it, it is not intrinsic to books but possible. A flag has no value other than being a sacrament of state worship.No, it's a wise thing they did.
That's the same as saying a book means nothing, it's just some paper with black symbols scrawled on it.
A flag could have value because of what is written on it.Its actually not true about your book analogy, a book could have value because of what is written in it, it is not intrinsic to books but possible.
Not true. I don't worship the state.A flag has no value other than being a sacrament of state worship.
You probably don't, but the people who exalt the symbols of the state above the rights of others to disrespect those symbols, come pretty close to it.Not true. I don't worship the state.
A flag could have value because of what is written on it.
You go to lengths but alas I cannot agree with you, a flag cannot have any real value except possibly as a drapery, rug or article of clothing, or I guess in a pinch a pricey piece of toilet paper, or fire starter. If you assign it some sacred value then it is worshiped.A flag could have value because of what is written on it.
Not true. I don't worship the state.
A flag could have value because of what is written on it.
Not true. I don't worship the state.
Chanting at who? Chanting what? At what street corner?
No they don't. You're exaggerating.You probably don't, but the people who exalt the symbols of the state above the rights of others to disrespect those symbols, come pretty close to it.
To anyone.Value to whom?
Just plain wrong. Seeing value in something does not mean you worship it. I believe you have value but I don't worship you.You go to lengths but alas I cannot agree with you, a flag cannot have any real value except possibly as a drapery, rug or article of clothing, or I guess in a pinch a pricey piece of toilet paper, or fire starter. If you assign it some sacred value then it is worshiped.
Sounds like a North Korea type thing. Nobody does that here.Depends on a person's level of emotional investment and fealty he believes he has to it. To the extent that a person has any emotional investment and fealty to the state, that is worship. Many people have many gods, and for many people, the state is one of them, its idol being the flag.
Because normally that would not be protected. It could be disorderly conduct and you'd be arrested.Why would any of that matter on the question of is it protected under the first amendment?