?

Log in

philobate

A Penny for your Thoughts : Prohibition of Flag Burning

« previous entry |
Jun. 26th, 2006 | 01:33 pm
posted by: 1ad_astra1 in philobate

This morning, in fact right now, the senate is discussing prohibiting flag burning. On both sides-for or against the prohibition,-arguments meet at the same level of ethical beliefs.

On one hand, we have protecting our pre-existing freedom of speech; the amendment that congress ruled to protect in 1989 by making flag burning a form of protest rather than an offense punishable by law. And on the other hand we have protecting the ideals of the United States ( i.e. unity, justice and liberty), protecting the ideals by prohibiting desecration to the nation's symbol (flag).

Respect is something that should be an attribute of the everyday citizen. However, it is my belief that when it comes to laws, they should be minimal and should only exist when the problem is an everyday situation.

 Dictating laws to the nation means more restraints and more loop holes to be neglected. The main concern i have when it comes to prohibiting something like flag burning would be that this prohibition would be one step closer to a dictatorship where speaking out against the nation is unlawful, therefore punishable.

 The United States citizens should be allowed to think for themselves because those under the limelight are not children and the difference between right and wrong should not always be dictated by law. Once laws determine our everyday lives and our every decision we lose more and more what it is that this prohibition wishes to protect. The US is not a nation of laws it is a nation of its people; a nation of laws is just another saying for dictatorship. While flag burning may be abhorrent and something i do no plan on doing myself, i fear what door this law might open and what door it has to close in order to function.

entry | Leave a comment | Share

Comments {4}

1ad_astra1

[[unnamed]]

from: 1ad_astra1
date: Jun. 28th, 2006 01:34 am (UTC)
entry

Voting results and tid bits from the new york times
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/washington/27cnd-flag.html?hp&ex=1151467200&en=3caeb149d9e60823&ei=5094&partner=homepage
The new amendment lost by all but one vote...

RSVP | Thread

valo_somnio

[[unnamed]]

from: valo_somnio
date: Jun. 28th, 2006 06:44 am (UTC)
entry

I understand both sides of it but its this simple.

burning a symbol of america, justice whatever you consider that flag to be.

its a piece of cloth.

the ideas we in our mind attatch to it are one thing but to take something so seriously is unnecessary. Maybe the senate should be a bit more focused on less trivial matters as whether or not its okay to burn a flag.

RSVP | Thread

Emily

[[unnamed]]

from: justrandomwords
date: Jun. 28th, 2006 10:24 pm (UTC)
entry

at first i was like, yeah it is kind of a direct assault at democracy, and i hate anti-democratic feelings, but then i read about two sentences and i agreed with you. democracy is doing about whatever the fuck you like. and it's not something like burning the flag we should be worried about. when the president starts cheating on his ballot and screwing with old sick people and taking away natural rights like those to our own body, then we should be worried.

upshot: who the heck cares, let them burn the flag.

RSVP | Thread

1ad_astra1

[[unnamed]]

from: 1ad_astra1
date: Jun. 29th, 2006 02:15 am (UTC)
entry

Doubly agreed, with both justrandomwords and valo_somnio.

It startles me to think that something so trivial and something that rarely occurs in the states would be put in front of the senate. Not only does it seem a waste of time but something that would cause more trivial yet devestating laws to occur... Whats worse was the 66 count vote when they needed 67 and only 30 something votng against the law.

RSVP | Parent | Thread