Flag Burning

[thomaska]

Just wanted a few opinions...

In the U.S. you can burn the U.S. flag, some people may not like it, but ultimately it is a form of expression and is protected by the Constitution. But it is never considered or called hate speech. At least by the MSM.

Does anyone think that it is hate speech to burn this flag?

I was just wondering what people on here thought...

and heres where i got the idea to ask the question from. Please don't let the word "republican" in the story sway what you were originally going to say before you saw it.:happy11:

http://xpress.sfsu.edu/archives/news/007652.html

heres the story in case the link doesn't work

Preceding an ongoing investigation into SF State College Republican behavior, the Associated Students board unanimously adopted a resolution condemning the student group for purposely stomping on flags containing the Arabic symbol for God.

“Associated Students, Inc. deems the College Republicans’ actions as contrary to university values and feel they should be held accountable by the university for their actions,” the resolution says.

The Nov. 15 resolution comes on the heels of several student and student organization complaints at board meetings and the Office of Student Programs and Leadership Development, or OSPLD, which has also sparked a separate investigation and assembly of a special panel to decide if the College Republicans did indeed violate the university’s conduct rules.

The resolution cited a rule outlined in the university’s Strategic Plan saying, “SFSU facilitates teaching, learning and work experiences among students, faculty and staff that promote equity and social justice within a respectful and safe environment.”

Moreover, the resolution sets the stage for the College Republicans possibly losing official student group status and or ASi funding. Amid heavy campus police presence at an Oct. 17 anti-terrorism rally in Malcolm X Plaza, some members of the crowd turned angry when the College Republicans stepped on homemade Hezbollah and Hamas flags, though the student group claims they were not initially aware the flags contained the Arabic symbol for God.

After that, the College Republican-organized rally dissolved into a heated shouting match between the group and a mix of students, including some Muslim students, eventually resulting in formal complaints to student representatives.

‘They were voicing their concerns that this event was even allowed. They were offended,” said Kimberly Castillo, board member and chair of University Affairs, the committee that drafted the resolution. “We felt it our duty to respond.”

The College Republicans said they will take legal action against the university if sanctions are imposed upon them, citing their First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

 

[tracy]

I don't think it's hate speech to burn any flag. I don't think it's a good thing to do, but I don't think it should ever be illegal.

 

[Colpy]

I don't think it's hate speech to burn any flag. I don't think it's a good thing to do, but I don't think it should ever be illegal.

Exactly.

Although I would prefer to piss on the flag in question.

 

[tracy]

Exactly.

Although I would prefer to piss on the flag in question.

That's a boy thing obviously... It doesn't work for girls so well...

 

[Sassylassie]

I don't like to witness flag burnings or any other method of protesting that appears violent, however I'm a strong proponant for free speech so burn away.

 

[I think not]

Does anyone think that it is hate speech to burn this flag?

In the strictest sense, it is hate speech.

 

[gopher]

```Does anyone think that it is hate speech to burn this flag?```


The USA flag is sectarian and has no religious connotation whatsoever.

Hezbollah is a political-religious institution even though some in the West may not view it that way. Because of its religious context or connotation, burning that flag may well be said to be hate speech.

As one who values civil liberties I would have to side with the court decision which have ruled on the side of those who have either burned the USA flag or who have forged the peace symbol on it. This is free speech and must be protected by the courts and by all people of conscience.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

A flag is just a symbol. Damaging or destroying it is, in my view, a perfectly legitimate protest against what it stands for. It's not something I'd ever do, and it's not something I like to see done, but I wouldn't deny anyone the right to do it.

 

[Kreskin]

If the University wants to regulate campus behavior is there a reason they can't? They can make students wear uniforms can't they?

 

[gopher]

A flag is just a symbol. Damaging or destroying it is, in my view, a perfectly legitimate protest against what it stands for. It's not something I'd ever do, and it's not something I like to see done, but I wouldn't deny anyone the right to do it.

The difficulty I have with this issue is how the right wingers get up in arms over flag burning and demand a constitutional amendment to stop it, but fail to take the same actions against those extremist cranks who burn the Holy Cross during KKK rituals. The right wingers exploit the issue of flag desecration for politically selfish reasons but say nothing about the open display of hatred by the racist hate cult thereby showing ther hypocrisy and double standards.

 

[Tonington]

Haha, maybe they should try regulating it by calling it arson or vandalism. I mean, how long would it take campus security to kick me off the property if I want to roast some marshmellows on a fire? Maybe I could get around it if I burn a flag and roast the marshmellows on that fire...

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The difficulty I have with this issue is how the right wingers get up in arms over flag burning...etc.

Yeah, I understand where you're coming from with that. If you are a person of principle and you're consistent in your principles, if you object to burning the flag you'd raise the same objections to the destruction of symbols that are important to any group: flags, crosses, effigies, pictures, whatever. The conclusion I'd draw is pretty much the same one you did: a lot of people are not persons of principle, nor are they consistent in their principles.

And just as an aside, I've never understood why the KKK burns crosses. I'd expect it to be one of their own treasured symbols, and thus not something they'd deliberately destroy. Wasn't the KKK originally composed of white Christian "gentlemen" (in their view) from the Confederate States? Maybe a flaming cross has some particular mystic significance to them? I dunno. And I don't really care what the KKK thinks anyway.

 

[Colpy]

```Does anyone think that it is hate speech to burn this flag?```


The USA flag is sectarian and has no religious connotation whatsoever.

Hezbollah is a political-religious institution even though some in the West may not view it that way. Because of its religious context or connotation, burning that flag may well be said to be hate speech.

As one who values civil liberties I would have to side with the court decision which have ruled on the side of those who have either burned the USA flag or who have forged the peace symbol on it. This is free speech and must be protected by the courts and by all people of conscience.

PLEASE tell me you are not saying it is OK to burn the US flag......but not that of Hezbollah......please.

 

[missile]

Burn all the flags you want..but, touch any that might be flying on my property and face my wrath!

 

[I think not]

The USA flag is sectarian and has no religious connotation whatsoever.

Hezbollah is a political-religious institution even though some in the West may not view it that way. Because of its religious context or connotation, burning that flag may well be said to be hate speech.

This is a prime example of attempting to define hate speech. It's open to interpretation, more often than not, by the government.

Gopher upholds the decision of the Supreme Court in Texas vs. Johnson;

If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.

And yet he proceeds to deconstruct and "analyze" that decision into something more "PC", like Hezbollah's flag, because it has religious connotations.

This is the danger we face when hate speech laws and "responsible" free speech become the name of the game. We leave situations open to interpretation.

Personally I'm all for yelling fire in a crowded theater and all that, when it comes to free speech.

From Answers.com

Hate speech is a

controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, moral or political views, etc. The term covers written as well as oral communication. It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport's scale which measures prejudice in a society.

http://www.answers.com/topic/hate-speech

The burning of a flag, is intended to make a political statement, or just a display of hatred.

Like I mentioned earlier, in the strictest form, it can easily be seen as "hate speech".

And yeah, I have burned the American flag in protest, multiple times. I'm a patriot, but my sense of civil liberties prohibit me to object to flag burning.

 

[thomaska]

The difficulty I have with this issue is how the right wingers get up in arms over flag burning and demand a constitutional amendment to stop it, but fail to take the same actions against those extremist cranks who burn the Holy Cross during KKK rituals. The right wingers exploit the issue of flag desecration for politically selfish reasons but say nothing about the open display of hatred by the racist hate cult thereby showing ther hypocrisy and double standards.

Nice hijack attempt, so on behalf of all Facist Right-wingers, We officially deplore and strongly condemn(i borrowed that from Kofi Annan, I'll give it back shortly) the Klan's "lighting" of crosses as a method of terrorizing minorities in the U.S.

So back to the real question...you may see only 50 stars for 50 states, and thirteen stripes representing thirteen colonies, but there are many many people who see the U.S. flag as sacred and that it represents much more than this government that you all hate so much. But I can handle it, after all I can have my own opinion of those people who burn the flag, and nothing they ever do or say will change it.

Is this god that the muslims worship so weak, that he can't take a little flag burning?

 

[gopher]

```We leave situations open to interpretation.```

And that's the job of the courts to decide, not us.

There are certainly more civil ways of demonstrating dissent rather than by burning the flag, the Cross, or any religious symbol. But it is up to the courts to measure the means used to demonstrate dissent versus the need for society to maintain order. Each method must be weighed on a case-by-case basis and the legality of each act determined therafter.


As for the question of why the KKK burns the Cross, it has been said that they started out as a Masonic group and that they use Christianity to mask their hatred for Divinity.

 

[I think not]

```We leave situations open to interpretation.```

And that's the job of the courts to decide, not us.

That's only if it becomes challenged.