The "Official" Anti-ACLU Rant for 6/23/05
This week's anti-ACLU topic, as chosen by Gribbit, was sure to divide us all:
Congress is once again trying to pass a Constitutional amendment to ban the burning of the American flag (HR 1974)
On the one hand, I agree with many who say that burning the flag desecrates a symbol of this Republic and shows tremendous disrespect to our country. In many cases, it may be considered an act to incite a riot and/or foment seditious activity.
On the other hand, the flag is merely a symbol. Burning our flag is merely expressing one's displeasure with this country and everything it stands for. In this day and age, you would hope that developed countries have an evolved sense of propriety and not stoop to this childish behaviour. It also shows what kind of mental midget you are, but that's a given with the ACLU!
But, freedom of expression is guaranteed by our Constitution and HR 1974 flies right in the face of "Congress shall Make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" (HT to Memento Moron). And, as Common Logic so eloquently puts it "The flag symbolizes liberty. To put any restrictions on the flag restricts our liberties and is a disrespect to all those who fought for your very right to do as you choose."
If Congress, and by extension the citizenry of this Republic, didn't like what was being said about our government, and its leader, and its symbols, then the likes of Howard Dean, Dick Durbin, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi would have been brought up on charges and locked away years ago. THAT action alone would put this great country on the same playing field as Hitler's Third Reich or Saddam's Iraq.
In closing, if you're going to burn the US flag, you are an asshole and an idiot in my not-so-humble opinion. But as the old chestnut goes: "You can't legislate common sense and you can't cure stupid."
NB: In the interest of fairness, here's the link to Jay's posting on the subject.
As always, the anti-ACLU gang is:
posted by TheBitterAmerican @ 7:27 PM
1 comments
1 Comments:
I wouldn't go as far as Brad Todd (indeed, I find little about Lincoln worthy of emulation--little, but some).
However...
"On the other hand, the flag is merely a symbol. Burning our flag is merely expressing one's displeasure with this country and everything it stands for."
Yep. Merely a symbol. Of course, a prime differentiation between humans and animals is the ability to invest mere signs with symbology... but I'll leave the epistomology stuff outa this... mostly.
:-)
1.) I'd say anytime we can say that something which symbolizes the blood and toil and sweat and tears of generations who have fought and bled and died for liberty is a "mere" anything, then we've not progressed as a civilized society but reverted to something approaching brutality.
2.) Legislate against imbecility, rudeness and coarse behavior? Well, of course we can. I imagine your own locality has ordinances concerning disorderly conduct, noise abatement and public drunkeness and the like. Saying one cannot legislate against such is simply not true.
And flag desecration is far beyond such behavior. And it is NOT speech, at least not according to James Madison, the author of the First Amendment, who viewed flag desecration (including burning) as criminal.
Perhaps a better solution to such ills would be an amendment instituting Robert heinlein's view of a safe and orderly society. You know: every citizen _required_ to wear a loaded sidearm at all times. Flag burning? Nah. The gene pool would be much cleaner than to have such as that in such a society...
:-)
Post a Comment
<< Home