Should flag burning be illegal?

Hell yes flag burning should be legal. I'm toasting marshmallows over a smoldering pile of Union Jacks right now.

 

Physical harm is the dividing line. That is something tangible, quantifiable. Pud'n's hurt feelings can't really be measured by anyone other than Pud'n.

 

It sounds like the police abused their authority.

 

And in a free society, you're allowed to hate the country you're in.

Banning flag burning just moves us further away from being a free country.

We already restrict plenty of other freedoms for arbitrary reasons, so we really don't need to add this to the insanity.

 

Not entirely true .- you'll find there was several causes -Militarism, alliances, imperialism, and nationalism played major roles in the conflict as well as Gerrmany was overtaking British French industrides .
France + Britain viewed Germanys industries as a threat to their international trading dominance - its worlwide markets.

" No matter what political reasons are given for war, the underlying reason is always economic.
A. J. P. Taylor


WW1 destroyed Germany's industries WW2 did it again.

imo - it had sweet f-all to do with "Freedom" its always abt enrichment of the financial elite.

...


...

 

WW1 basically showed the danger of entangling alliances.

WW2 was more of an inevitable conflict. It could have been avoided if Germany had been dealt with in less of a punitive fashion after WW1, but once that went into motion, it pretty much guaranteed that another war would occur eventually.

Once the Nazies started conquering neighbors, there wasn't much choice other than to stop them. So, it may not have been about freedom, but it had to be done.

Stopping the Nazies would have been much easier had a lot of Europe not been looking the other way in the beginning.

 

I wouldnt say they were looking the other way . WW1 was still fresh in peoples memories and no one wanted to repeat such a waste of human life , And certainly NOT the fence sitting/neutralist - isolationist Americans. Who got a shock wake up call 2 years later.

The only ones eager for another war was certain little bombastic Italian with dreams of recreating the Roman Empire and a German ex- WW1 corporal with dreams to build an empire to last a "Thousand Years "


I agree "it had to be done, " - and cannot be undone .

...

 

My intention was not to derail this thread with that discussion over here.

I just made a very quick, passing reference to that. It's worthy of being mentioned in this topic because people keep bringing up about how our soldiers are fighting for our freedoms and how flag burning disrespects that.

Although that should not be the main focus/topic of this article, and it isn't. It was definitley very worthy of being mentioned!!!

 

He ended up with 2 years probation.

 

Well if you allow people to fly it upside down, I don't agree. Your still showing your contempt for the government but doing it in such a way it doesn't infuriate people like me. So I don't see where your freedom is being curtailed. But I see by the poll that my views are greatly out numbered by others. That's ok. I won't change my view because I don't believe anyone can show me where that takes away anyone's freedom to show displeasure of the government. It's only doing it a different way.

 

Would you be on board with making it illegal to burn the Koran?

 

I'm not for burning the Koran. Even though I don't like the Islamic religion. Doing so would make many Muslims mad and as some have shown, they have taken that anger out on innocent civilians and our troops. Why would I want to do that when it could hurt or kill a number of people and hurt others of that faith? For every action there is a reaction. I think before we do things we should look at both sides.

 

Well, America's main reason for being reluctant (aside from business deals with Germany) was that we were an ocean away. Just like WW1, we saw WW2 as "Europe's War", at least in the beginning.

Ironically, we've moved to a mindset on the other end of things nowadays.

 

There's a difference between saying you're personally against something and using the government to ban something.

I would agree with you that burning the Koran can lead to the consequences you mention, but is it really something you'd want the government to ban?

- - - Updated - - -

That's pretty messed up.

 

To each their own, but what typically infuriates me are bans.

 

I didn't ask you if you were for burning the Koran, I asked you if you were for making it illegal to burn the Koran.

I'm not for burning the American flag, but I'm far from being in favor of making it illegal.

 

Well I guess that's where you and I and a bunch of others differ. I think if your actions can lead to the harm of others there should be a law against it. You have freedom of speech, but you can't yell fire in a crowed room. You can't smear another's reputation. So you see, we have laws on the books now that limit your freedom. That would be just another. We have the right to have guns but go to a gun store and just try and buy a BAR off the shelf.. People want to streach the freedom clause to allow them to do just about anything they want without thinking of what their actions do to others.

You have the law on your side so there is no way I can win this arguement and I knew that coming in. But I wanted to give my two cents worth. I just don't think it's right and if I had the power, there would be a law against burning this country's flag without hurting your freedom of speech.

 

So does that mean you would support a law that bans burning the Koran?

I'm not trying to be intentionally obtuse or to belabor the point, I'm just genuinely curious and as far as I can tell, you haven't actually said yes or no.

 

If something like burning the Koran became illegal, the message that sends to radicals is pretty scary.

It would encourage Christian extremists to start attacking people if Christianity was mocked in some way like burning a Bible.

It would also encourage fundamentalists of various religions to push for blasphemy laws, since this would be consistent with a Koran burning ban.

 

Yes I would. I think burning it can lead to riots and death and has already. I think that is reason enough to have a law against it. To many Americans have been killed already because some idiots wanted to streach their freedom to the hilt without any thought of what it might do. Your freedom stops when it infrenges on the freedom of others. Getting people killed is steping on their freedom.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes I would. I think burning it can lead to riots and death and has already. I think that is reason enough to have a law against it. To many Americans have been killed already because some idiots wanted to streach their freedom to the hilt without any thought of what it might do. Your freedom stops when it infrenges on the freedom of others. Getting people killed is steping on their freedom.

 

Well, at least you're consistent. But are you familiar with the slippery slope concept?

By taking your reasoning to its logical extreme, pretty much everything that might offend another person may be justifiably outlawed. I know people who are offended by even the slightest whiff of second-hand cigarette smoke. So according to your reasoning, all they have to do to get smoking banned completely is to start beating the crap out of every smoker they see. This example might strike you as a bit hyperbolic, and it is, but go ahead and explain how it's any different conceptually, if you can.

 

Wow, if you haven't noticed burning the Koran has already sent a message to radicals and people have been killed for it.

I told you all when I came in I didn't expect to win this argument. I don't get on these boards just to argue, or win the debate. Just to get people to think more than one way. To many people never look at the whole picture, just their side of it. There is always more than one side and things can look a little different once you look at both sides.

 

Marine, I'm not trying to berate you. I am looking at all sides.

The majority of the reason why I'm against a Koran burning ban is because of how it would look to Muslims, not how it contradicts my principles.

A ban on offensive behavior essentially validates the violence connected to it.

Instead of encouraging people to become more reasonable, it encourages them to become less that way.

Think about how far we've come with Christianity being offended. Christians in America tolerate a lot of mockery of their religion, and only a small portion of them react violently about it.

This is a good thing, because it means that Christianity as an institution has evolved a lot.

What needs to happen with Islam is their own evolution. Handling them with the kid gloves is just going to stagnate them or make them regress.

Unfortunately, that does mean that people will die in the meantime. That's inevitable, however. Banning offensive behavior only postpones the inevitable in that respect.

 

If you guys are so concerned with you freedom so much, why not be angry as hell that they can now tell you what size drink you can buy. What kind of lunch you can give your kids. My God if they can put laws on those without pissing you off, I guess they should be able to say you can't burn our flag.

 

I'm not subject to any such laws. But if I were, I'm not sure I would honor them.