Poll: Should It Be a Crime to Burn the American F**g?
Nov 30, 2016 00:29:04 #
Two Schools of Thought! http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-it-be-a-crime-to-burn-the-american-f**g
Nov 30, 2016 00:44:59 #
peter11937
Loc: NYS
fullspinzoo wrote:
Two Schools of Thought! http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-it-be-a-crime-to-burn-the-american-f**g
SCOTUS has already rules on it, protected free speech action if you burn the f**g. Question is moot.
Nov 30, 2016 00:45:07 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
yes
fullspinzoo wrote:
Two Schools of Thought! http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-it-be-a-crime-to-burn-the-american-f**g
Nov 30, 2016 00:54:49 #
Boo_Boo
Loc: Jellystone
Yes they have and they were wrong. It can be elevated again to the SCOTUS and a new ruling can be made. Bet that this happens in the next 2 years. No more wiping one's behind, dancing, or otherwise showing disrespect to our f**g.... It is time to bring back p***e!
peter11937 wrote:
SCOTUS has already rules on it, protected free speech action if you burn the f**g. Question is moot.
Nov 30, 2016 01:00:48 #
The F**G represents this Nation. Get the hell out of MY country if you want to burn a f**g you want to burn MY country. I see someone burning a f**g, I am shooting em dead as all hell. NO hesitation. Put me in jail....I can get free as I know damned good and well the COURT deciding the f**g has no meaning is gonna change. I have a CONSTITUTIONAL right to protect MY NATION....argue that one you liberal cat crappers.
Nov 30, 2016 01:02:53 #
peter11937 wrote:
SCOTUS has already rules on it, protected free speech action if you burn the f**g. Question is moot.
Yes, we've been watching the same shows, but if Trump was to put some conservative Justices in the Supreme Court would that change things? IMHO, the f**g should be respected. When (I believe it was) Hampshire College in Western Mass. and the headmaster flew the f**g at half mast (allowed) the day after the e******n and then took it down, this to me was a real slap in the face to America. Men and women have fought and lost their lives so that we can show respect for our "symbol" of a great nation. Don't like the law the way it is. I understand fully the concept. Example: Palin was being harassed by a Left wing loon out in the audience and response was spot on. Basically she said you wouldn't be allowed to do this in any other country (and you would be shot in Cuba, I might add), but stick around and maybe you will learn something.
Nov 30, 2016 01:47:32 #
fullspinzoo wrote:
Two Schools of Thought! http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-it-be-a-crime-to-burn-the-american-f**g
No need for a poll. This is an issue of free speech. Ripping up the constitution to save the f**g is a very poor exchange and why are conservatives, who claim to be the protectors of the constitution, even making such a suggestion?
Nov 30, 2016 01:50:08 #
Pennylynn wrote:
Yes they have and they were wrong. It can be elevated again to the SCOTUS and a new ruling can be made. Bet that this happens in the next 2 years. No more wiping one's behind, dancing, or otherwise showing disrespect to our f**g.... It is time to bring back p***e!
So you are saying p***e is more important than the constitution? Which is worse, showing disrespect for the f**g or disrespect for the constitution? I'll take the constitution any day over a piece of cloth...
Nov 30, 2016 01:57:03 #
Pennylynn wrote:
Yes they have and they were wrong. It can be elevated again to the SCOTUS and a new ruling can be made. Bet that this happens in the next 2 years. No more wiping one's behind, dancing, or otherwise showing disrespect to our f**g.... It is time to bring back p***e!
And why is it you think the second time around will be any different? It was Scalia after all who said it was protected under the first amendment and he was one of the most conservative justices ever to serve on the court. If he says it's protected under the first amendment it's unlikely you will find 5 justices who will disagree...
Nov 30, 2016 02:13:57 #
PeterS wrote:
Since when is burning a f**g "speech"? Does a f**g on fire talk? The 1st amendment protects our right to FREE SPEECH, not ACTION meant to disrespect our f**g and nation. The only defense for calling f**g burning "free speech" is a Supreme Court ruling (Texas vs Johnson), and, like so many SCOTUS rulings, that doesn't make it constitutional. No need for a poll. This is an issue of free speech. Ripping up the constitution to save the f**g is a very poor exchange and why are conservatives, who claim to be the protectors of the constitution, even making such a suggestion?
Our military and veteran's organizations such as VFW and American Legion have a special ceremony for disposing of worn out American f**gs. The f**gs are burned to honor them, not defile them.
Nov 30, 2016 02:17:43 #
peter11937 wrote:
SCOTUS has already rules on it, protected free speech action if you burn the f**g. Question is moot.
The question is: SHOULD it be a crime, not IS it a crime.
Answer: YES, desecration of Old Glory SHOULD be a crime!
Nov 30, 2016 02:22:21 #
PeterS wrote:
No need for a poll. This is an issue of free speech. Ripping up the constitution to save the f**g is a very poor exchange and why are conservatives, who claim to be the protectors of the constitution, even making such a suggestion?
The suggestion was that it could be elevated back to the SCOTUS and the decision could be reversed. No one has indicated otherwise.
To that end this is a valid discussion.
Nov 30, 2016 02:33:11 #
PeterS wrote:
So you are saying p***e is more important than the constitution? Which is worse, showing disrespect for the f**g or disrespect for the constitution? I'll take the constitution any day over a piece of cloth...
You are misrepresenting.
A******n and same sex marriage were illegal.until the SCOTUS legalized them. Enormous discussion led up to those cases.
Here it was asked SHOULD destroying our f**g be illegal. There is no discussion regarding.punishment of offenders prior to the decision being overturned.
That twist comes from.you. I had thought you to be reasonable but considering your tone here I am reconsidering.
I'd prefer you don't go full frontal liberal on us. You have some interesting views and usually present them in a manner that encourages discussion. Lately you have been more liberal than sensible.
You need not stir the ashes. .
Nov 30, 2016 02:33:41 #
Docadhoc wrote:
The suggestion was that it could be elevated back to the SCOTUS and the decision could be reversed. No one has indicated otherwise.
To that end this is a valid discussion.
To that end this is a valid discussion.
Exactly!
Nov 30, 2016 02:35:00 #
PeterS wrote:
And why is it you think the second time around will be any different? It was Scalia after all who said it was protected under the first amendment and he was one of the most conservative justices ever to serve on the court. If he says it's protected under the first amendment it's unlikely you will find 5 justices who will disagree...
Not giving up is a quality you should encourage. Look at Hillary.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.