SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (744645)7/6/2006 2:46:46 PM
From: pompsander  Read Replies (3) of 769667
 
John: You seem like a reasonable guy....and a good conservative. You like James Madison and support traditional value. You don't like activist judges and seem to be a strict constructionist on constitutional issues.

So, help me with this. The Constitution is a magnificent document, rightfully revered by us all. We don't want people trying to abuse it, change its intent, create rights that are not in it, etc.

So...why are the same conservatives who revere the Constitution and don't want judges or others to expand its original intent and framework trying to amend it to add a provision (flag burning) that is not a current problem or even a practice in the country? Why not leave the sacred document alone? I am serious about this....I love the flag, but I see conservatives (and liberals and people with no affiliation that I can figure out) wearing the flag, putting it in decals on their cars (that get dirty, torn and defaced from road use).

If we amend the constitution to prevent "defacing" the flag, couldn't (and wouldn't) defacing have to be defined by the same courts the conservatives don't want interpreting such things? Is wearing the flag "defacing it"? Is a torm bumper sticker defacing it? Someone will challenge all of these and what a waste of precious time and resource. Can't the first amendment just stand on its own, and let the definitional arguments about speech work their way up to the new conservative supreme court? Why tinker with this issue? Couldn't just be cheap politics could it?

On TV I saw South Koreans burning North Korean flags. Seemed no one had a problem with it. Foreigners can burn our flag all they want. No legal problem there. So instead we are going to amend our most sacred and powerful codification of law to cover an act by Americans that is not even common...and which will open a tinderbox of definitional questions. Why?

Can you help me out on this? Anyone? Take off those red, white and blue kerchiefs first, And remember, to retire the flag properly it is to be burned.

Are we not missing the point of properly honoring our country here? Are we not cheapening the flag by trying to regulate how it is honored? I would never disrespect the flag, but I don't think i would ever wear flag clothing either.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext