It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Which Flag Would Jesus Burn?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   
i agree with souljah this could very easily pass. and burning the flag should not be compared to murder.that is ludacris.just because someone's opinion is vile does not mean it should not be expressed.freedom of speech applies even to those that disagree with you. believe it or not.




posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   
First as to the topic of this thread, I do not believe that Jesus or any other religious icon would desecrate any nations flag.
Now, I have a question,
What is the difference between desecrating the flag and the desecration of the Qu'ran? They are both symbols. One is the symbol of a nation and the other is the symbol of a religion as well as a people.
Under the 1st Admendment, we as a people, can "voice" our opinion by burning the flag and nothing will come of it (as it stands now). BUT, if I were to burn the Qu'ran, urinate on it, Flush it (still want the toilet and plumbing that could do that), or even touch the Qu'ran, I would be demonized around the world. As recent events have shown, if I were to do any of the above acts against /to the Qu'ran other people would be killed.
What is the difference? It is more of a double standard here than anything else. If muslims, feel it is their right to desecrate the US flag as an expression of their freedom of speech, then why can they not accept the same offenses when performed on the Qu'ran?

I for one am a proponent of the Feedom of Speech but I am also one that believes that certain things should be protected. As it is written now, such actions as the blowing up of the Twin Towers can be argued as an expression of a people excerzing their freedom of speech as they "destroyed" a symbol of economic power for which they did not agree with.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
OK, Fine - then Write a Law or an Amendement that would Protect ALL of these "Holies" and Prevent any Desecration of them - and not Just the American Flag.

Becuse this Act then put the Flag High above everything else, that some people find Holy and are still Citizens of the United States.

Promote an Act that will Protect ALL of them - not just the Flag.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   
I may be wrong but in America isnt it legal to burn bibles and religious papers if you chose to?

Souljah, do you think it's ok to burn chrisitan bibles in America? should it be illegal?



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

I see that you dont have a problem with this same Flag Proudly Waving infront of Corporate HQ's of War Profiteers?

Where do you see that?



They are the Bunch of War Criminals, that Profit from this Madness called War on Terror, and are basicly degrading just about everything that Flag stands for.

Do you think all the executives and people actually putting the missiles and guns together created the war? Did Colt give Bush a lot of money so more M-4s and M-16s could be produced for the war? Did you know that the most recruited economic class is the lower 20%, the same people who work in those factories and make those guns? My dad works for a computer logistics company who makes some microchips which are featured in a few of the helicopters the army uses, is he a war criminal? What America does with the tools it buys from third parties can hardly be the companies' responsibility. If I buy a gun from you for personal protection, and shoot someone with it for no reason, how are YOU responsible?



But when people Burn it, then all hell breaks loose!

Not that its right, but it is the reality of the situation. People get pissed when you light a flag on fire, people do not get pissed when a company flies it in front of their building. We do what the people want, its called a democracy, and I am quite fond of it.



And its not a Problem of Riots - its the Problem of the Patriotism and what the Flag Represents.

Exactly, people put too much faith in the flag, and love it WAY too much, that is the reality of the situation, which is why you shouldn't do it, because some idiots can't handle it. The government is here to protect the well-being of its citizens, and if it decides that flag burning = you get your face crushed, then it has the responsibility to protect you not out of beneveolence, but because it is invested in you.



Belive me, if burning the Flag was already Illegal, do you think it would stop the People from doing it?


People in America would be much more hesitant if it were illegal, the same reason people in America are much more hesitant to smoke weed in public as opposed to in Amsterdam.



And I dont think burning down somebodys House or blowing up a Car is in the same Leage as burning a piece of cloth with paint on it, which you buy in a store for few bucks. Now, how does that Compare?

Its a Piece of Cloth!

Whats next?


Where do you draw the line? Just what is "free speech" what is a better test is called the "Free Expression" test, in which the government can not stop anything meant to express freely a concept or idea. If burning the flag was THE ONLY way to protest, then yes, it would be legal to do. The purpose of free speech was to maintain and aid in the free expression of ideas, not to protect specific instances of speech and action. If the idea of political dissent can still be conveyed, you have no foundation for your argument.



Will they pass a constitutional ban on pie throwing? Make it illegal to parody the president?

Welcome to the Police State.


Yes, I am very, very sure that a constitutional ban on pie throwing will be next. VERY SURE. THIS IS NOT SARCASTIC AT ALL, I THINK ITS GOING TO HAPPEN FOR SURE. WATCH OUT CLOWNS, YOU ARE THE NEW JEW.

All jokes aside, I don't think this will be the trigger for a slippery slope and erosion of our rights. Stop focusing on the little things, legally, factually and practically your argument holds no water. This was an interesting debate, and I agree with you usually, but in this instance I think we must part ways.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
flying airplanes into the wtc is not freedom of speech. i can not believe people can not see the difference between burning a flag and murder. its not rocket science. if you want to burn a flag and in doing so you under no circumstances harm others or their property you should be allowed to.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
Under the 1st Admendment, we as a people, can "voice" our opinion by burning the flag and nothing will come of it (as it stands now). BUT, if I were to burn the Qu'ran, urinate on it, Flush it (still want the toilet and plumbing that could do that), or even touch the Qu'ran, I would be demonized around the world. As recent events have shown, if I were to do any of the above acts against /to the Qu'ran other people would be killed.
What is the difference? It is more of a double standard here than anything else. If muslims, feel it is their right to desecrate the US flag as an expression of their freedom of speech, then why can they not accept the same offenses when performed on the Qu'ran?


The obvious answer here is that most Muslims hold the Quran in higher regard than most Americans hold the flag. There are a few Americans who love the flag as much as a Muslim loves the Quran, but not nearly as many.

Mass numbers + Religious fervor = big reaction
Few people + jaded public = apathy



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainJailew
Do you think all the executives and people actually putting the missiles and guns together created the war? Did Colt give Bush a lot of money so more M-4s and M-16s could be produced for the war? Did you know that the most recruited economic class is the lower 20%, the same people who work in those factories and make those guns?

I am talking about Corporations - I mean War Profiteers such as:

- Boeing

- Lockheed Martin

- Northrop Grumman

- General Dynamics

- Raytheon

- United Technologies

- Halliburton

- General Electric

- Science Applications International Corporation

- CSC/ DynCorp

...who Proudly Wave their flag infront of their HQ's, and in the meantime washing their Bloody hands and counting their Money, earned by dirty games of Geopolitics and Corporate Abuse.



Not that its right, but it is the reality of the situation. People get pissed when you light a flag on fire, people do not get pissed when a company flies it in front of their building. We do what the people want, its called a democracy, and I am quite fond of it.

Maybe these People should ask themselves, WHY are these guys burning the Flag? Is it because:

a.) They are Bored
b.) They are Angry
c.) They are Ignorant
d.) They are Payed to do it



People in America would be much more hesitant if it were illegal, the same reason people in America are much more hesitant to smoke weed in public as opposed to in Amsterdam.

Well I agree - but they still Smoke Weed in Public, and Laws did not stop that from happening.

Dont you think that by making some act illegal you actually increasing the probability for it to happen more often then before it was legal?



Where do you draw the line? Just what is "free speech" what is a better test is called the "Free Expression" test, in which the government can not stop anything meant to express freely a concept or idea. If burning the flag was THE ONLY way to protest, then yes, it would be legal to do. The purpose of free speech was to maintain and aid in the free expression of ideas, not to protect specific instances of speech and action. If the idea of political dissent can still be conveyed, you have no foundation for your argument.

Hey the line is Clearly Drawn in the Amendment itself!

Free speech and Freedom of Expression does not involve Shooting and Killing! IF it did, the Amendment would be entiteled THE FREEDOM OF KILLING AND SHOOTING EACH OTHER. And I belive that some BUSH passed a very similar act in the state of Florida - which is a far more scarier fact then any Flags being burne.



All jokes aside, I don't think this will be the trigger for a slippery slope and erosion of our rights. Stop focusing on the little things, legally, factually and practically your argument holds no water. This was an interesting debate, and I agree with you usually, but in this instance I think we must part ways.

Ok, then I guess we have to Agree do Dissagree then.

And Yes, It has been an Interesting Debate, and it has been Great to hear and feel your Opinion on this.

Thanks Dude!





[edit on 25/6/05 by Souljah]



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SportyMB
I may be wrong but in America isnt it legal to burn bibles and religious papers if you chose to?

Souljah, do you think it's ok to burn chrisitan bibles in America? should it be illegal?

No, I dont think thats OK to Burn Any Holy Books.

But People obviously have no Need to burn them - as opposed to the Burning Flag Crowds.

I guess people dont have problems with the Church but with the Goverment itself.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I don't know about flag burning but he was very keen on kicking over money tables. So if they had any of them lying around i think he would give them a kick.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
I am talking about Corporations - I mean War Profiteers such as:
- Boeing
- Lockheed Martin
- Northrop Grumman
- General Dynamics
- Raytheon
- United Technologies
- Halliburton
- General Electric
- Science Applications International Corporation
- CSC/ DynCorp


AH .. the companies that keep millions of Americans employed. That pay taxes .. taxes that pay for social programs and international aid such as tsunami relief. Companies that make products to keep America safe and more secure. Companies that make our lives better by making products such as airplanes and other household items. Companies that put people and machines into space to make our lives here better. Satelites for cell phones and TV shows, and weather alerts to save lives. Space programs ... where zero gravity crystals are grown for more accurate lazer surgeries, zero gravity cultures and drugs, where microwaves were invented and synthetics that make sneakers and velcro as well as spandex .... (well ... spandex came from the space program but perhaps we won't boast about it
)

You see 'war profiteers'. I see massive employment, huge tax payments from the corporations and/or the millions employed by them, the space program with all it's benefits, airplanes, science and technology that make America great ....



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Isn't burning an US flag similar to fliping a man off, Provoking violence.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
even if thats so its legal to flip someone off. and it should be legal too.



edit: if this law passes what will be next? the if you cant say anything nice dont say anything at all law? think about it. is that seriously a stretch?

[edit on 25-6-2005 by quietwar]



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   
jesus would burn the us flag



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
free speech is free speech, but it doesn't mean you can go around protesting how you like...burning a flag would be protest using violence...which isn't free speech. in england if deface money with the queens head on, lets say 'burn a £5 note' then thats supposed to be against the law...its nothing about free speech. you could say because of free speech you have the right to kick the s**t out of someone who's muslim, or black and so on if you're a white christian...whats the problem its free speech, i have the right to express myself how i want and freely. wrong.


that's assinine . burning a flag doesn't hurt anyone. it is certainly not an act of violence just because you're using fire and fire could burn you. if you burn a flag and throw it on someone, that would be an act of violence and going around beating people up because they don't believe what you believe would be too. you definitely should have the right to express yourself however you want to as long as it doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
You see 'war profiteers'. I see massive employment, huge tax payments from the corporations and/or the millions employed by them, the space program with all it's benefits, airplanes, science and technology that make America great ....

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, The Great American Dream!

Such Great and Wonderful benefits, Airplanes, all the Science and Technology.

When I mentioned the Top Military Contractors I did that with good planning. Those are the Prime War Profiteeres that get MOST of the Half a Trillion Dollars Military Budget, that US Goverment Approved for the 2005. How Wonderful that these Corporations will get even More Money and will produce even MORE deadly Aircraft and even more deadly Smart Bombs and even more Powerful Tanks.

Ahhhh, to see such Evolution of Human Development and Research in Killing each other is just too good to be true.

So lets go throught the RAW FACT SHEET, shall we?



The following companies are the top recipients of U.S. military dollars.

1. David J. Lesar, CEO, Kellogg, Brown & Root (subsidiary of Halliburton)

2003 military contracts revenue: $3.9 billion
Runs US military bases in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Djibouti, Georgia, Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey and Uzbekistan, built Guantanamo Bay, Cuba prisons, South Vietnam & Diego Garcia military bases


2. Vance D. Coffman, CEO, Lockheed Martin of Bethesda, Maryland.
2002 Salary: $25.3 million

Campaign Contributions in 2002: $9.7 million, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $69.1 billion,
Products: F-16, F/A-22 jet fighters, C-130J air transport, Hellfire, Javelin missiles


3. Philip M. Condit, CEO, Boeing of Chicago, Illinois
2002 Salary: $4.1 million

Campaign Contributions in 2002: $1.6 million, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $60 billion
Products: F-15 fighter, C-17 air transport, Apache Helicopter, JDAM "smart" bombs


4. William H. Swanson, CEO, Raytheon of Lexington, Massachusetts.
2002 Salary: $8.9 million, Military contracts 2000-2002: $27.5 billion
Products: Patriot & Tomahawk missiles, "Bunker Buster" bomb


5. Ronald Sugar, CEO, Northrop Grumman of Los Angeles, CA
2002 Salary: $1.5 million, military contracts 2000-2002: $34.6 billion (including TRW)
Products: B-2 stealth bomber, amphibious assault ships


6. Nicholas D Chabraja, CEO, General Dynamics of Fall Church, Virginia
2002 Salary: $15.2 million

Campaign Contributions in 2002: $1.64 million, Military Contracts 2000-2002: $25 billion
Products: Abrams M1 tanks, Trident submarines


7. George David, CEO, United Technologies of Hartford, Connecticut
2002 Salary: $9.7 million, Military contracts 2000-2002: $9.8 billion
Products: Black Hawk, Sea Hawk, Comanche helicopters


8. John F. Welch, Jr., CEO, General Electric of Fairfield. Connecticut
2002 Salary: $15.1 million

Campaign Contributions in 2002: $221,350, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $7.7 billion
Products: Aircraft engines, nuclear reactors, NBC news, msnbc.com


9. Paul V. Lombardi, CEO, DynCorp
Owned by Computer Sciences Corporation of El Segundo, California
Campaign Contributions in 2002: $221,350, Military Contracts 2000-2003: $5.5 billion
Products: Rent-a-cops in Afghanistan, Bosnia & Iraq, US-Mexico border, defoliation missions in Colombia.

www.warprofiteers.com...

When wars start these guys just cant stop the flow of money into their bank accounts.

Such great Business!

Wonderful!

Terriffic!

Marvelous!



If you are the Boss...



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   
jesus would not burn any flag...he has no need to..he would treat others as he wanted to be treated

my tuppence



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Which Flag Would Jesus Burn?

Would that be like asking:
What Flag Would Muhammad burn?
What Flag Would Buddha burn?
What Flag Would Confucius burn?
What Flag Would Moses burn?
What Flag Would Lao Tzu burn?
What Flag Would Mani burn?
What Flag Would Zoroaster burn?
What Flag Would Mahavira burn?
What Flag Would Krishna burn?


Simply ridiculous and using a religious name to make a political point about a political decision......amounting to irrelevant semantics meant to be used by one side against another. Pointless.



seekerof



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   
ok it needs to be said. i believe that the author who originally came up with the title was trying to make a comparison to the phrase "what would jesus do?" the point of what would jesus do was asking what was the moral answer to whatever problem. therefore by combining that with the topic makes the title "which flag would jesus burn". i think that the title is the least of our worries. why dont we discuss the flag burning topic.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
free speech is free speech, but it doesn't mean you can go around protesting how you like...


According to the last ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court you are incorrect.



U.S. Constitution: First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com...


Burning a flag is not violent in itself, although it is offensive to many.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join