The debate "Flag Burning should be Illegal" was started by
November 29, 2016, 1:06 pm.
18 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 8 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
neveralone posted 10 arguments, Yanksxx21 posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
TheExistentialist posted 8 arguments, PsychDave posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
neveralone, dalton7532, sabrina, PoliticsAsUsual, Yanksxx21, Blue_ray, Matthew_Daniel, allyssa and 10 visitors agree.
historybuff, Ethan8336, TheExistentialist, arpita00, PsychDave, makson and 2 visitors disagree.
"I would say all the examples u gave of freedom of speech is fine besides, kkk, demonize (all) Muslims, and the effigies"
I'm not sure what you're saying here....are you saying that the KKK shouldn't be allowed to hold rallies?
"....shouldn't the gov. make anything wrong illegal?"
by what standard is burning the flag wrong though? you may not like it or agree with it, but what wrong is being done? In other words, who is being harmed, who's rights are violated, and why does the government have a role in regulating it? You're making claims without justification.
"I am ok with them doing conventions and movements...."
it doesn't matter what you're ok with or not ok with. What matters is can you justify limiting speech other than it being offensive. You seem to forget that your feelings and sensibility means absolutely nothing when it comes to the rights of others. You or your opinions don't matter if your rights aren't being infringed upon by the acts of others. The liberty of being able to say what you want, how you want is greater than someone being offended by those acts. In other words, protecting the right to free speech is more important than whether or not you're offended by the content of that speech.
Flying the rebel flag as a private citizen is really no different than burning the American flag. It can be interpreted as supporting treason (the acts of the confederate states matches the constitutional definition of treason). However, I doubt anyone would be advocating the jailing of someone who flies the confederate flag.
I would say all the examples u gave of freedom of speech is fine besides, kkk, demonize (all) Muslims, and the effigies.
idk who should though the gov. would be the best bet since it (should) run by the people.
idk if their is or not but this is definitely wrong and shouldn't the gov. make anything wrong illegal? I am ok with them doing conventions and movements these aren't bad in most peoples eyes
What is that limit though? Who decides that limit?
Shouldn't the limit of our rights be the infringement on someone else's rights, not their sensibilitie?
Is there a real argument against flag burning that doesn't rest on "feelings" about flag burning? If there isn't, and you value the right to free speech, then you should be against criminalizing it, just like you should be against criminalizing what the KKK says. Racism is a terrible thing, and hate rallies are despicable, but they ought to be allowed because limiting free speech is more dangerous than expressing free speech.
I doubt it....Texas v Johnson was initially ruled a false conviction in the Texas court of appeals, an extremely conservative court. Texas then sought an appeal with the supreme Court where the lower court ruling was upheld.
The supreme Court is very wary of violating legal precedence and it is very unlikely that today's court would overturn the decision (especially of Trump appoints a constitutionalist judge to replace Scalia).
The court has an obligation to protect rights, not sensibilities. So if the only thing that is offended by flag burning is your sensibilitie, then your rights aren't being violated by someone burning the flag, no harm is being done, and no one is victimized in any way. If you believe in the first amendment, then you must believe in the right to offend. The KKK can use hate speech, people can demonize Muslims, people can lie, they can spout conspiracy theories, they can make effigies of the president and burn them (a few people did this to effigies of Obama as well as Trump), and people can burn the flag. Free speech protects all these acts and should.
Sounds like you'd rather live in a world where government dictates your behavior to conform with popular sensibilities rather than protect your rights in spite of sensibilitie. I prefer a government protect my rights regardless of what is proper and socially acceptable as polite.
I think there's a limit.
People seem to be missing the point. It is disrespectful to burn the flag. The question is whether you believe being disrespectful should be illegal. If you think it is, where is the distinction between that and other forms of protesting?
Even Antonin Scalia thought it was.
This shouldn't even be an argument that it's ok to burn out flag, and I hope that when we get a new supreme court justice we will revert that it's legal
I hate to tell you this, but you wanting or not wanting to protect someone's right doesn't mean a thing. Agreeing with how someone uses their rights is absolutely irrelevant to whether or not their actions are protected under a given right. I doubt you'd be all slapping high fives with the KKK when they hold one of their rallies or that a black soldier would be happy to defend their right to call him a n*****.
"setting it on fire is like saying u want to bring down America"
So what, even an explicit claim of wanting to take down America isn't illegal, so why should a symbolic one be. Furthermore, that is YOUR interpretation of flag burning, which may be wrong given the circumstances.
I'm not arguing that there aren't better ways of getting a message across than flag burning, but being ineffective isn't an argument for making it illegal, it's a non sequitur.
honestly I would not protect somone who spits in mine and every other Americans face.
this is a symbol of ur country. setting it on fire is like saying u want to bring down America. no being a dissident doesn't mean u hate ur country. or that ur bad. but how is this anything like that? u simply do movements and fliers. there is no justification for burning the flag. show me where in our history where solely burning the flag ever got things done.
I don't care what a soldier says to a guy burning a flag. It's irrelevant. Their duty is to protect the guy burning the flag just the same as it is to protect the guy waving the flag.
Sure, I have an obligation to our country, but those are civic obligations. Please show me how I'm morally obligated to a country. There is no moral obligation that says I can't speak ill of our country, there is no moral obligation to not desecrate an effigy of our country, etc... Also, being a dissident doesn't mean you don't love your country. It may mean you love it enough to speak out against the wrongs being done by your country.
so u think any soldier seeing a guy burning the flag is going to go over there and say "God bless america I'm so proud I could risk my life just so u can burn what I stood for" no they wouldn't.
u have an obligation to ur country. if u don't like ur county there's always Canada.
How does some random protester burning a flag harm us internationally? They see that we are allowed to dissent, we not only preach freedom of speech but we protect even the most controversial forms of it. If anything it shows consistency, it shows continuity of liberal values, it shows we are not hypocrites when it comes to our own people when we ask countries to extend the same liberties to their people.
You can't harm those that are dead, they are already dead. If you're claiming that by burning the flag, somehow their sacrifice isn't being honored, I'd say you're absolutely wrong. If someone dies protecting the constitution and therefore the bill of rights, they died protecting all aspects of it. They died to protect the freedom of people to voice their opinions. They died so the KKK could spout their "evil" hate speech, they died so Martin Luther King could give his "I have a dream" speech, they died so that people could protest for the 40 hour work week, they died so that people could burn effigies. The sacrifice they made is for us all, not just for those they agree with.
By what standard is flag burning morally wrong? This makes no sense to me. What moral obligations does anyone have to a piece of cloth?
u r for one harming how other countries see us, then u are harming every person who has died or lived to defend it. it is morally wrong.
Freedom of speech has nothing to do with effectiveness. Ineffectiveness is also not an aspect that should go into deciding whether an act is legal or illegal. It is about harm. What harm is being done by burning the flag? Who's rights are violated by someone burning a flag? If it is just your sensibility that is being offended by the act, then by what measure do you judge it to warrant criminal charges? Your sensibility is not protected by the constitution, however free speech is.
yeah I know about the case but I think this is more about the issue than the decision.
there are other ways to voice ur opinion it has happened throughout history. the most common is having a movement. when u see somone burning the flag it is a sad ordeal. u r doing absolutely nothing to help ur cause all ur doing is angering people. if u want a change then go further than ur front yard or pull out ur wallet.
Flag burning is considered "symbolic speech". It is therefore protected under the 1st amendment. The supreme court already ruled on this with the Texas v Johnson case.
It is therefore unconstitutional to punish someone for burning a flag. On a personal note, it's also silly to punish someone for burning a flag. It's just a piece of cloth which symbolizes America. It's an effigy. Burning effigies should never be punishable. It's simply not an act that impacts anyone else's rights, it doesn't cause any harm to any individual or the country as a whole. There is simply nothing there but offended sensibilities. If you value free speech at all, then you must also be ok with having your sensibilities offended.
to run that up your protected lawfully not socially
depends who u ask. yes and no. u have the right but if u do it u'll likely end up beat up in an alley
Racism is wrong. Do I not have the right to be racist?
theirs other ways than that. if u feel that intensely about something make a movement or shout out ur voice or a hundred of diff. ways. this one is simply wrong.
The issue isn't approval. They should be able to voice their opinions.
I can't either
can any one Pat somone on the back and stand there while they burn the flag?