Anti-flag-burning amendment clears Senate panel

  • News
  • Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date
In summary, the Senate approved a measure that would change the Constitution to allow Congress to ban burning of the American flag. This amendment will likely never pass, as it will alienate more moderate conservatives and tax and spend liberals.
  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,142
1,756
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A Senate panel approved a measure on Thursday that would change the Constitution to let Congress ban burning of the American flag, setting up an election-year debate over a perennial hot-button issue. [continued]
http://today.reuters.com/News/newsA...Z_01_N04343017_RTRUKOC_0_US-CONGRESS-FLAG.xml

Is there anything more important that we can talk about; say perhaps, whether Keith Richard fell from a palm tree or a jet ski?

For those who don't know, flag burning ammendments are what you talk about when you're desparate - desparate to avoid real issue. There is also the great issue of the Senate elevator operators. True some years ago and I assume that it still is, even though we haven't needed operators in elevators since the 50s or 60s, the Senate still has them. Every now and again a new Senator comes along who sees these unnecessary employees, and who then raises a stink about getting rid of the operators. But then the young Senator is educated as to the real function of the operators, and the issue goes away until the next young new Senator comes along. You see, the Senators use the elevator operators as a go-between [in some fashion] when they don't wish to meet with another Senator directly. Anyway, like elevator operators, flag burning ammendments have their place.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
This confuses me. There is nothing to gain from it. It has no hope of passing, and will alienate more moderate conservatives (not to mention, liberals). I don't see any desperation, just bad decision-making.
 
  • #3
russ_watters said:
I don't see any desperation, just bad decision-making.


Which is about inline with what one would expect.

This reminds me of the Democratic Party congressmen who always reintroduce a military draft bill (there's two of them, I forget who). Made me smile during the '04 election to hear people prattling about the draft we would get if Bush got reelected.

This I'm not worried about. As russ said, it will never pass. Now, http://www.savetheinternet.com/" .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Sounds like that amendment those democrats were trying to get passed to allow more then 2 terms. Ain't happening.

If you ever take a look, Congress tends to toss in some dumb as hell things that they know won't get passed... I am not sure what they think they're going to get out of it.
 
  • #5
franznietzsche said:
This reminds me of the Democratic Party congressmen who always reintroduce a military draft bill (there's two of them, I forget who). Made me smile during the '04 election to hear people prattling about the draft we would get if Bush got reelected.
Yes, that's exactly how I see it. There wasn't any desperation with the draft thing either. It was just pointless.
 
  • #6
I think they hope to [are desperate to] rally the base of old school conservatives.

What else do they have?

"Tax and Spend" liberals won't fly anymore. Just let the "Borrow and Squander" Republicans try that one again. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Ivan Seeking said:
I think they hope to [are desperate to] rally the base of old school conservatives.

What else do they have?

"Tax and Spend" liberals won't fly anymore. Just let the "Borrow and Squander" Republicans try that one again. :biggrin:
Because the Republican base is more concerned about Mexican flags being flown right now, I suspect this ban won't "fly." They'll have better luck with gay marriage props to attact the religious-right.
 
  • #8
I have never considered burning a flag before. However I just might if it is banned, because the flag will no longer be a symbol of freedom.
 
  • #9
Don't worry it won't. They want attention but not to actually do anything.

Edit: Well, maybe this time is different. After all, they are desparate.

I had a little one in my office but threw it away when Bush got re-elected. ...guess we had better get a flag throwing-away ammendment as well.

Of course it wasn't just that Bush got re-elected, it was the half of the country who voted for him.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
I thought the suprme court said it was more of a state thing then a federal one.
 

1. What is the "Anti-flag-burning amendment"?

The "Anti-flag-burning amendment" refers to a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that would make it illegal to burn or desecrate the American flag. It would add a new section to the First Amendment of the Constitution, which protects the right to freedom of speech and expression.

2. Why is this amendment being proposed?

This amendment is being proposed by some politicians and lawmakers who believe that burning or desecrating the American flag is a form of disrespect and should not be protected under the First Amendment. They argue that the flag is a symbol of the United States and should be treated with reverence.

3. Has this amendment been passed?

No, the amendment has not been passed. It has only cleared a Senate panel, which means that it has been approved by a select group of senators, but it still needs to go through the full Senate and House of Representatives before it can become a part of the Constitution.

4. What are the arguments for and against this amendment?

Those in favor of the amendment argue that it is necessary to protect the American flag and show respect for the country. They also believe that burning the flag is not a form of free speech and should not be protected. Those against the amendment argue that it goes against the principles of free speech and could limit the ability to protest and express dissent. They also argue that the flag is a symbol of the freedom and democracy that allows people to burn it as a form of peaceful protest.

5. What impact would this amendment have if it were to pass?

If this amendment were to pass and become a part of the Constitution, it would make it illegal to burn or desecrate the American flag. This means that anyone who does so could face legal consequences. It could also potentially lead to debates and challenges over what constitutes as "desecration" of the flag and how strictly the amendment should be enforced.

Similar threads

News How long until the left labels Zell Miller a traitor?
    • General Discussion
Replies
27
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top