No, only flag irrigation.IJ Reilly said:This past Memorial Day I forgot to take my flag off the porch at the end of the day, and it got soaked by the sprinklers. If this amendment is adopted, could I be charged with flag desecration?
I hope it was properly lit then. Can't you only fly the flag at night if it's properly lit (presumably not with flames!) otherwise it's supposed to come down at sunset?IJ Reilly said:This past Memorial Day I forgot to take my flag off the porch at the end of the day...
So I understand. I suppose I could have turned on the porch light, but if I'd remembered to do that, I've have simply taken it down. Reverently, of course.Applespider said:I hope it was properly lit then. Can't you only fly the flag at night if it's properly lit (presumably not with flames!) otherwise it's supposed to come down at sunset?
that's some representation we've got going in congress these days.the article said:A poll released last week by the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center in Nashville found 63% oppose a flag amendment, up from 53% last year.
What I don't like about this is the far-reaching implications. The wording is so broad and vague. Since states have the power, I could drive from state to state and suddenly become a criminal because I have a sticker on my car with the flag on it.The Congress and the States shall have power to prohibit the act of desecration of the flag of the United States and to set criminal penalties for that act.
Yeah I was pretty pissed to see her on the list of sponsors. And the kicker, as you note, is that she doesn't need to protect her right flank. I know Ca is trending red, but not enough to make her need an innoculation like that.IJ Reilly said:I thought I wouldn't have any problem with the senatorial delegation from California until I discovered that Diane Feinstein was signed onto this bit of awfulness. Clearly she is trying to protect her right flank in anticipation of next year's election but I think it might backfire. Not only doesn't she need that protection as nearly as I can tell, it may cause many of us, who would otherwise vote for her, to withold our support.
That's exactly what I was wondering. If it's not to burn a representation of that symbol, then really this ultimately applies to any symbolic criticism of the US.zimv20 said:what if i burned a cloth flag with 49 stars and 12 stripes?
It's not patriotism, it's nationalism. Much more dangerous.Thomas Veil said:I've never understood folks who wear their patriotism on their sleeve.
Im really amazed that our congress is so backward on so many things, How do you have Freedom when you have countless and i do mean countless law after law after law. Here we go after generations fighting for freedoms and libertys our own Congress removes it. See we didnt even need enemy's because our own Govt is our worst enemy. Freedom is almost gone here anyways. Get ready for the Fat police,Weed Police,Seat Belt Police,Gay Police, and now the Flag Police. Only thing missing is the Free Speech Police , just give Congress a little more time on that one.solvs said:It's not patriotism, it's nationalism. Much more dangerous.
I never got it either though. I love this country, I seek to change it when it diverts from it's original intentions. And I believe that though freedom comes at a price, that price should obviously not be freedom. So let them burn the flag. Show them that we are better than that. Bush said it himself when talking about Iraq, a nation is truly free when you are allowed to voice your displeasure with it yet fear no political reprisal.
Maybe if we spent less time giving them reasons to want to burn the flag, this law wouldn't be necessary.