• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Flag burners get attacked by bikers[W:634]

Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

This is one of the most meaningless posts I've ever encountered.

I don't know. He made an excellent point in the end.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Yes because you are so hard core? Right.

I don't advocate assault when I can't get my way. That would be those rooting for the assault on folk exercising their rights. Bunch of entitled ninnies.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

[emphasis added by bubba]

this belief in freedom and liberty you are willing to fight for

why did the peaceful protesters not deserve it too?

The 1stA is in place to protect offensive speech. You have the absolute right to say whatever you wish, but with rights comes responsibility and and, at times, consequences. You have the absolute right to tell your boss to f/o...he would then likely tell you you're fired. Cause and effect. It's the natural order of things.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

I don't know. He made an excellent point in the end.

Waxing poetic about the Revolutionary War may pluck the ol' heartstrings, but it has absolutely dick-all to do with the actual subject at hand.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

The 1stA is in place to protect offensive speech. You have the absolute right to say whatever you wish, but with rights comes responsibility and and, at times, consequences. You have the absolute right to tell your boss to f/o...he would then likely tell you you're fired. Cause and effect. It's the natural order of things.

You can tell your boss to f/o, he can fire you. But he cannot assault you. There's a line to how far the "consequences" can go. Assault against those merely exercising rights is generally preached mostly by the intellectually inferior, insecure entitlement folk.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Just remember, those of you citing the first amendment decision of the SC, that this is the same SC that gave the EPA the potential authority to regulate your exhalations. So if the EPA decides that you yourself should no longer exhale, by all means don't break the law. Somehow the idea that the ever changing legal proscriptions of the SC should also constitute a moral compass is getting lost in the weeds here. The flag is indeed just a symbol - the very same symbol the British tried mightily to shoot off the top of Ft. McHenry. I wonder why they even bothered with such an empty symbol.

That decision about the notorious, lethal pollutant carbon dioxide was authored by the dear departed Justice Stevens. I certainly hope you are not criticizing him. After all, it was Justice Stevens whose exaltation of homosexual sodomy in his dissenting opinion in Bowers v. Hardwick Justice Kennedy picked up seventeen years later, in 2003, and made the basis for his opinion for the majority in Lawrence v. Texas. Why, if not for the jabberwocky foundation Kennedy laid in Lawrence--another of his masterpieces--he might never have been able to concoct a new "right" to homosexual marriage in Obergefell!
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

The 1stA is in place to protect offensive speech. You have the absolute right to say whatever you wish, but with rights comes responsibility and and, at times, consequences. You have the absolute right to tell your boss to f/o...he would then likely tell you you're fired. Cause and effect. It's the natural order of things.

Funny. Nobody has the "right" to assault someone that offends them with speech. Not sure why that simple idea needs repeating so often.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Waxing poetic about the Revolutionary War may pluck the ol' heartstrings, but it has absolutely dick-all to do with the actual subject at hand.

There was nothing poetic about it - a simple statement of fact, which has dick-all to do with your complaint. That you don't understand the import of SC rulings doesn't mean others have the same failing.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Moderator's Warning:
Stop talking about each other and baiting each other as well. Please stick to the topic or thread bans/points are possible.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

You can tell your boss to f/o, he can fire you. But he cannot assault you. There's a line to how far the "consequences" can go. Assault against those merely exercising rights is generally preached mostly by the intellectually inferior, insecure entitlement folk.

Again...I'm not condoning it - just understanding it.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Funny. Nobody has the "right" to assault someone that offends them with speech. Not sure why that simple idea needs repeating so often.

Correct...however, there are times when it's necessary and even expected. Perhaps the whiny flag-burners didn't have the ass whoopin' coming. Evidently, others disagree.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

See, your type is part of the problem. Using the US flag and the Quran in the same context. I pity you.

Because the content works. I could just as easily use the bible or even copies of the constitution. The physical objects are meaningless in and of themselves. What they stand for is what matters, not the physical manifestation. When you revere the object more than what it stands for then you have lost sight of what it really stands for. The Koran is a perfect parallel in the context of the Muslim extremists. They worry more for someone causing physical damage to the object than revering the words within.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

...I know exactly why you are so determined to defend these America-hating rats--and it has nothing to do with the freedom of speech.

There is a possibility of you being right about Monte, but seriously I'm doubting it. It amazes me that conservatives are willing to throw out all sorts of slippery slope arguments against that which they do not support, but heaven forbid they should realize the slippery slopes for what they want. If this act of free speech is disallowed, then what next under the guise of "patriotism"? The true lover of liberty defends that which offends him in the legal arena even as he condemns it socially. This is why we defend the right of a person to burn a flag even while calling such a person abhorrent.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

See, your type is part of the problem. Using the US flag and the Quran in the same context. I pity you.

See your type is part of the problem- only what you hold dear is worthy of 'protection', what others hold dear isn't. I don't pity you, not worth it, just wanted to point out to others how self centered and self absorbed some CONs are. :peace
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Its not a right to deliberately attempt to enrage someone.

So the Right wing nut rabble rousers in Texas had no freedom of speech right to attack Muhammad and thus enrage people? or is it just people you disagree with who have no 1st amendment right :roll:

(FYI the Supreme Court has already stated burning the flag is covered under the 1st amendment.)
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

While we are thinking about things. The the occupy group/disarm nypd admitted that they use the flag burning tactic to gain attention. They wanted people to get upset so that this story would make its rounds. They wanted their message to be spread around. They knew that they were pissing people off. And in typical fashion for a far left extremist group manipulate human emotion to get more air play. They are happy; the only people upset are people like you that dont understand their tactics.

I understand their tactics quite well.

Symbolic acts can only affect you to the extent you allow them to.

So, you recognize they are trying to incite people by a non-violent act. Yet, even knowing this, you still choose to respond exactly the way they hope you do? Your argument is that since they expect it you might as well do it?

I think I pointed out in a prior post that the best way to respond to such a protest is to ignore it. Eventually the protestors will learn that they CANNOT "get people so upset" it makes the news. So if you really want to stop American protestors from burning flags, stop giving them what they want...YOUR violent negative reaction.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

I find it ridiculous how people get so emotional about someone burning their own property because of the way it looks. It's all role playing.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

TIt amazes me that conservatives are willing to throw out all sorts of slippery slope arguments against that which they do not support, but heaven forbid they should realize the slippery slopes for what they want. If this act of free speech is disallowed, then what next under the guise of "patriotism"?

Your remark about conservatives and slippery slopes is incoherent pap. I have not seen anyone but you talk about infringing anyone's freedom of speech. It is basic civics that the freedom of speech is a limitation on government, and not on private persons. No private individual would be violating a flag-burner's First Amendment freedom of speech by knocking his G--damned front teeth out, or using any other kind of force to prevent him from burning the flag. Nothing but ordinary state criminal laws against battery, etc. would apply.

The true lover of liberty defends that which offends him in the legal arena even as he condemns it socially. This is why we defend the right of a person to burn a flag even while calling such a person abhorrent.

How very stirring. Unlike you and your fellow more evolved beings, most of us conservative lawyers are, of course, benighted troglodytes who HATE the freedom of speech.

I've already said I support the right of the Nazis to have paraded in the Skokie incident in the 1970's. (So did the constitutional lawyers, some of them Jewish, who got the case all the way to the Supreme Court.) I agree with Cohen v. California, where the Court upheld a man's right to wear a T-shirt with the words "F--- the Draft" in a courtroom. I accept Texas v. Johnson, the flag-burning decision, although I think it is a close call. And I agree with Justice Scalia's opinion for the majority in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul. In that case, the Court held unconstitutional, on free speech grounds, a city "hate speech" ordinance that would have punished a teenager for burning a cross in a black family's yard.

I even support the right of statist dim bulbs to prattle whatever they want. I would not have government try to silence these drones in any way. I want them to sound off as much as possible, because whenever they do, they show just how damned ignorant and foolish they are.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Your remark about conservatives and slippery slopes is incoherent pap. I have not seen anyone but you talk about infringing anyone's freedom of speech. It is basic civics that the freedom of speech is a limitation on government, and not on private persons. No private individual would be violating a flag-burner's First Amendment freedom of speech by knocking his G--damned front teeth out, or using any other kind of force to prevent him from burning the flag. Nothing but ordinary state criminal laws against battery, etc. would apply.

Actually the right of free speech also means that you cannot silence me either. You can try to drown me out via your own right, and you can invoke, via other rights, consequences that do not violate any of my other rights should I use my free speech right in a manner you dislike on property you own or otherwise control. But in a public area, save for the drowning out option you can do nothing to stop my speech. Well you can but you would then violate other rights of mine, much like the bikers violated the protesters' rights in assaulting them. Now a proper counter protest to the flag burning would be to have an extinguisher at hand and douse the fire each time it is lit. No rights are violated and since the burner is on public property, as is the counter protester, both would be excising free speech rights.

How very stirring. Unlike you and your fellow more evolved beings, most of us conservative lawyers are, of course, benighted troglodytes who HATE the freedom of speech.

Actually I find that the liberals are quite hateful of free speech as well when it comes to their little idiosyncrasies. They like to call it "hate speech". Sorry to disappoint you, but you con's haven't managed to corner the market on attempts to limit free speech.

And I agree with Justice Scalia's opinion for the majority in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul. In that case, the Court held unconstitutional, on free speech grounds, a city "hate speech" ordinance that would have punished a teenager for burning a cross in a black family's yard.

The teenager should very well have been punished, but not on "hate speech" grounds. He put that cross on someone else's lawn without permission and the set it on fire. Trespassing, destruction of property (not the cross itself since that was his), arson (albeit indirectly), and many other property rights violations. Now had he decided to burn a cross in his own lawn as a protest, he would be fully within his rights to do so.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Actually the right of free speech also means that you cannot silence me either. You can try to drown me out via your own right, and you can invoke, via other rights, consequences that do not violate any of my other rights should I use my free speech right in a manner you dislike on property you own or otherwise control.

You can be very sure I would never let you set foot on property I own, whether to speak or do anything else there. And your understanding of the freedom of speech is not very accurate. The constitutional law in that area is a lot more complex than you imagine.

But in a public area, save for the drowning out option you can do nothing to stop my speech. Well you can but you would then violate other rights of mine, much like the bikers violated the protesters' rights in assaulting them.

I already made clear I am happy to let you and people who share your views say whatever you want in public. You might want to keep in mind that the freedom of speech is not absolute, even in public places. Or disregard that fact, if you want, and risk getting arrested or sued--all the same to me.

Now a proper counter protest to the flag burning would be to have an extinguisher at hand and douse the fire each time it is lit. No rights are violated and since the burner is on public property, as is the counter protester, both would be excising free speech rights.

Some of us are not so civilized. There are some problems physical force solves very well, and a person's constitutional freedom of speech won't stop me if he insults my girlfriend.

Actually I find that the liberals are quite hateful of free speech as well when it comes to their little idiosyncrasies. They like to call it "hate speech". Sorry to disappoint you, but you con's haven't managed to corner the market on attempts to limit free speech.

I don't know what a "con" is, but I can not state any more clearly than I have that I support the freedom of speech very strongly. So do other true, classic liberals. "Hate speech" codes are hostile to the freedom of speech, and the Court sent a clear signal in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul that it took a dim view of them.

The teenager should very well have been punished, but not on "hate speech" grounds. He put that cross on someone else's lawn without permission and the set it on fire. Trespassing, destruction of property (not the cross itself since that was his), arson (albeit indirectly), and many other property rights violations. Now had he decided to burn a cross in his own lawn as a protest, he would be fully within his rights to do so.

Whether he was punished under other laws, whether he trespassed, whether he trampled their flower bed, etc. does not interest me. The issue in R.A.V. was whether the ordinance he was charged with violating unconstitutionally abridged his freedom of speech. The Court held that it did.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

So whatever we do that is LEGAL BTW, we should be prepared to face attack and ILLEGAL actions?
If it is a sensitive subject, yes. That seems sensible enough.


We see protesters breaking the law regularly, though not in this case, and now we can expect to see fed-up anti-protesters breaking the law. Whether that is right or wrong can be debated but its inevitability cannot.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

Some of us are not so civilized. There are some problems physical force solves very well, and a person's constitutional freedom of speech won't stop me if he insults my girlfriend.

Logan's Law #12: There is no problem that can not be solved with ignorance, brute force and a suitable application of high explosives. Hey I get it, as long as you realize that you are violating other constitutional rights when you physically assault someone and are willing to take the legal consequences.

I don't know what a "con" is, but I can not state any more clearly than I have that I support the freedom of speech very strongly. So do other true, classic liberals. "Hate speech" codes are hostile to the freedom of speech, and the Court sent a clear signal in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul that it took a dim view of them.

"Con" as in opposite of "lib". Or more clearly, short forms of "conservative" and "liberal". Sadly classic liberals are a dying breed.
 
Re: Flag burners get attacked by bikers

I find it ridiculous how people get so emotional about someone burning their own property because of the way it looks. It's all role playing.

ANd If someone burns their own cross in front a of a African Americans house, its all good to you?
 
Back
Top Bottom