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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Wowzer who wrote (19550)5/24/2006 9:30:34 AM
From: Dale Baker  Respond to of 541273
 
Re: the flag-burning amendment, it is more than a little bit ironic that our national anthem centers around the flag surviving an all-night artillery barrage and still standing proud in the name of freedom and independence.

Maybe some folks don't think it can wave so proudly on its own nowadays. I would disagree.



To: Wowzer who wrote (19550)5/24/2006 10:35:52 AM
From: TimF  Respond to of 541273
 
The important distinction is that banning flag burning bans and action and imposes punishment for that action. Not recognizing homosexual marriage does neither. It isn't really an issue of infringing on freedom (unless you arrest or fine homosexuals for living together and saying that they are married), OTOH it could be argued that it is an issue of unjustified discrimination.



To: Wowzer who wrote (19550)6/1/2006 3:25:37 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541273
 
This is really banning polygamy and any similar enforcement of "gay marriage bans" would indeed really be a ban, and it would be a reduction of liberty not just a refusal to recognize a union.

althouse.blogspot.com