Burning the Canadian Flag?
- Thread starter EastSideScotian
- Start date
RE: Burning the Canadian
I understood what it said in that quote you posted. It says that the government can't stop someone from expressing their opinion just because society disagrees with it. I'm saying that the flag of any country should be prohibited from being destroyed for any reason. When someone destroys a flag, it is like they are destroying a piece of that country. The flag represents that country. Its like your destroying that country's identity.
I understood what it said in that quote you posted. It says that the government can't stop someone from expressing their opinion just because society disagrees with it. I'm saying that the flag of any country should be prohibited from being destroyed for any reason. When someone destroys a flag, it is like they are destroying a piece of that country. The flag represents that country. Its like your destroying that country's identity.
Ridiculous, last year there was a group of Muslims burning the Stars and Stripes, where do you think? Ground Zero. Did it piss me off? Hell yes, but it's their right.
The most amusing aspect of the protest was that they called it a "flaw" in American society the right to burn the flag, the joke was on them.
The most amusing aspect of the protest was that they called it a "flaw" in American society the right to burn the flag, the joke was on them.
I would suggest that Section 1 of our Constitution Act, 1982 would not have its requirements met to prohibit burning the National Flag of Canada. I don't think that anyone can demonstrate to our courts that burning the National Flag (while it is, indeed, a rather vile and reprehensible act) is contrary to the safety and security of Canada.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian
That's ridiculous. Is it some type of magical act? The american flag has been burned thousands of times and I'm not sure what part of the country was destroyed. Is it like the magician burning a piece of paper but then...ABRACADABRA...it's whole again?
Then again, why fight the Nazis in WW2 with bullets and bombs? We could have just manufactured Swastika flags and had big Nazi flag burning party while the Third Reich slowly melted away. Then again, afterwards we would have had to have arrested eachother because burning a flag, as you would have it, would have been prohibited.
JonB2004 said:
That's ridiculous. Is it some type of magical act? The american flag has been burned thousands of times and I'm not sure what part of the country was destroyed. Is it like the magician burning a piece of paper but then...ABRACADABRA...it's whole again?
Then again, why fight the Nazis in WW2 with bullets and bombs? We could have just manufactured Swastika flags and had big Nazi flag burning party while the Third Reich slowly melted away. Then again, afterwards we would have had to have arrested eachother because burning a flag, as you would have it, would have been prohibited.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian Flag?
Vile and reprehensible? Who are you kidding?
Slaughtering Jews is vile and reprehensible. Beheading hostages in order to have your demands met, that is vile and reprehensible. Burning a piece of colored synthetic material is vile and reprehensible? Come back to Earth!
It's a rag, for heaven's sake. Have you ever driven around your city and witnessed the number of Canadain flags that fly high, all the while being in a condition of tattered shreds? That's unpatriotic!
Burning a flag as a gesture of protest is not in the least bit vile or reprehensible. Flying a tattered old flag is disrespectful, but even that fails to meet the standard of what would qualify as vile and reprehensible. Pull your head from your rectum and put your hand down; the Fuhrer is dead!
I mean, it's typical of people like Josef Stalin to suggest that flag burning is vile and reprehensible. You know, the whole "enemy of the state" thing... And your family and friends are guilty too.
FiveParadox said:
Vile and reprehensible? Who are you kidding?
Slaughtering Jews is vile and reprehensible. Beheading hostages in order to have your demands met, that is vile and reprehensible. Burning a piece of colored synthetic material is vile and reprehensible? Come back to Earth!
It's a rag, for heaven's sake. Have you ever driven around your city and witnessed the number of Canadain flags that fly high, all the while being in a condition of tattered shreds? That's unpatriotic!
Burning a flag as a gesture of protest is not in the least bit vile or reprehensible. Flying a tattered old flag is disrespectful, but even that fails to meet the standard of what would qualify as vile and reprehensible. Pull your head from your rectum and put your hand down; the Fuhrer is dead!
I mean, it's typical of people like Josef Stalin to suggest that flag burning is vile and reprehensible. You know, the whole "enemy of the state" thing... And your family and friends are guilty too.
RE: Burning the Canadian
I don't think Five needs to be verbally attacked for something as minor as a poor choice of words. He does have a point though (even though is wording is a bit extreme). I am somewhat concerned with you equating FiveParadox to a NAZI (or Neo-NAZI), especially considering that if you knew him and his political views, you'd not have said such a crass remark.
I don't think Five needs to be verbally attacked for something as minor as a poor choice of words. He does have a point though (even though is wording is a bit extreme). I am somewhat concerned with you equating FiveParadox to a NAZI (or Neo-NAZI), especially considering that if you knew him and his political views, you'd not have said such a crass remark.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian
My apologies to FiveParadox. Also, my apologies to Mogz and Jersay, my comments were a little over the top.
I am deeply concerned when people attempt to inhibit freedom, as guaranteed under the Charter, with the cloak of meaningless, and often exagerated, nationalism. It's all fine and good to have respect for the flag of your country, but let's remember that it is just a piece of fabric with pretty colors. It is not a life.
Secondly, I am deeply concerned with this whole notion of labelling people as unpatriotic because they happen to have a constitutionally guaranteed difference of opinion. Last time I checked, the emblem of this country, the maple leaf, appeared at the top of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well. Let us take pride in our flag, and remember that the only flag we shall not burn, is the printed version that appears atop the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Charter of Rights gives us the freedom to have an opinion, and the freedom to express that opinion... even if such expression is manifested in the burning of the Canadian flag. It is neither vile nor reprehensible to partake in such an activity, it is our constitutionally guaranteed right, and, arguably, the purest form of Canadian patriotism.
Mogz said:
My apologies to FiveParadox. Also, my apologies to Mogz and Jersay, my comments were a little over the top.
I am deeply concerned when people attempt to inhibit freedom, as guaranteed under the Charter, with the cloak of meaningless, and often exagerated, nationalism. It's all fine and good to have respect for the flag of your country, but let's remember that it is just a piece of fabric with pretty colors. It is not a life.
Secondly, I am deeply concerned with this whole notion of labelling people as unpatriotic because they happen to have a constitutionally guaranteed difference of opinion. Last time I checked, the emblem of this country, the maple leaf, appeared at the top of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well. Let us take pride in our flag, and remember that the only flag we shall not burn, is the printed version that appears atop the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Charter of Rights gives us the freedom to have an opinion, and the freedom to express that opinion... even if such expression is manifested in the burning of the Canadian flag. It is neither vile nor reprehensible to partake in such an activity, it is our constitutionally guaranteed right, and, arguably, the purest form of Canadian patriotism.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian
Well sure, no one should be executed or sent to prison for life for burning the flag, we need to keep things in perspective. Just deport them.
Simpleton said:
Well sure, no one should be executed or sent to prison for life for burning the flag, we need to keep things in perspective. Just deport them.
Simpleton, perhaps you misinterpreted my post — if I was ambiguous or unclear, then I apologize. Section 1 of the Constitution Act, 1982 states that the rights and freedoms granted in that Act are guaranteed if they can be justified in a free and democratic society. I was arguing that — while in my own opinion, burning the flag is disrespectful (perhaps I did exercise poor wording in my original post) — it is indeed justified, and therefore Section 1 would not limit a person's right to burn the National Flag.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian
Just cited that little bit so y'all would know what I was responding to.
Good on you Mogz, you're a thinking patriot. Yes, there is value in being Canadian, you need only go overseas to discover that. Yes there is value in symbols like flags, and they should be respected, which is why I personally would never burn or otherwise disfigure one, no matter what I might think of the nation it represents. That's just a gratuitous insult, too easy; in my view there are better ways to make your point, if you have one. Like reasoned argument, for instance.
But I believe there are higher values too. I do not, for instance, believe there's any legitimate "Us versus Them." There's just Us, us humans here (plus all the other critters we share the planet with), and the sooner we all figure that out, the better things will be.
Mogz said:
Just cited that little bit so y'all would know what I was responding to.
Good on you Mogz, you're a thinking patriot. Yes, there is value in being Canadian, you need only go overseas to discover that. Yes there is value in symbols like flags, and they should be respected, which is why I personally would never burn or otherwise disfigure one, no matter what I might think of the nation it represents. That's just a gratuitous insult, too easy; in my view there are better ways to make your point, if you have one. Like reasoned argument, for instance.
But I believe there are higher values too. I do not, for instance, believe there's any legitimate "Us versus Them." There's just Us, us humans here (plus all the other critters we share the planet with), and the sooner we all figure that out, the better things will be.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian Flag?
No, I fully understood your post. I resented your opinion.
It was not your interpretation of the law that I disagreed with. I was offended by your choice of words, in offering your opinion, or, rather, your condemnation, of those who would exercise their constitutional right to burn the flag.
In choosing to describe flag-burning as vile and reprehensible, I assumed, and justifiably so, that such an act, in your opinion, would have to have been committed by a person deemed to be equally vile and reprehensible. My objection was to the implied contempt you displayed toward those who would celebrate their constitutional freedom by offering legitimate and peaceful protest, by means of symbolic destruction, and its implied rejection of state conduct.
FiveParadox said:
No, I fully understood your post. I resented your opinion.
It was not your interpretation of the law that I disagreed with. I was offended by your choice of words, in offering your opinion, or, rather, your condemnation, of those who would exercise their constitutional right to burn the flag.
In choosing to describe flag-burning as vile and reprehensible, I assumed, and justifiably so, that such an act, in your opinion, would have to have been committed by a person deemed to be equally vile and reprehensible. My objection was to the implied contempt you displayed toward those who would celebrate their constitutional freedom by offering legitimate and peaceful protest, by means of symbolic destruction, and its implied rejection of state conduct.
My disdain for the act does not mean that I don't recognize one's right to perform it.
I think you're just looking for confrontation. Listen, I freely and openly recognize that if one wishes to desecrate the National Flag of Canada, then one has the right to do so in a free and democratic society. Yes, my choice of words was indeed over-the-top, I can see that now.
I would remind you that when one disagrees with someone's opinion on Canadian Content, one should address the argument with which one disagrees, rather than attempting to insult the member who posted such an argument in the future.
I think you're just looking for confrontation. Listen, I freely and openly recognize that if one wishes to desecrate the National Flag of Canada, then one has the right to do so in a free and democratic society. Yes, my choice of words was indeed over-the-top, I can see that now.
I would remind you that when one disagrees with someone's opinion on Canadian Content, one should address the argument with which one disagrees, rather than attempting to insult the member who posted such an argument in the future.
I'd be more concerned about the other obvious and much more prevalent abuse of the flag: flying one in tatters. If burning a flag is a concern, and it is to many, then why isn't there also attention paid to the many that fly a flag that's torn, segmented, sunbleached or simply kicked the hell out of? There are two prominent Canada flags less than a mile from here that are barely recognizable and yet greet passersby daily. I can't think there's any pride of country shown in flying them.
Re: RE: Burning the Canadian Flag?
I believe my apology to you was very clear, and I meant the apology in the spirit in which it was offered.
I did not "misinterpret" your post, as you allege, I merely found your "vile and reprehensible" description of the act to be rather offensive. I'm sure you can understand that your contempt for the act implies a considerable disdain for those who protest in such a manner. Clearly, you can comprehend how one may construe your remarks as a personal attack on one's character and worthiness as a human being.
FiveParadox said:
I believe my apology to you was very clear, and I meant the apology in the spirit in which it was offered.
I did not "misinterpret" your post, as you allege, I merely found your "vile and reprehensible" description of the act to be rather offensive. I'm sure you can understand that your contempt for the act implies a considerable disdain for those who protest in such a manner. Clearly, you can comprehend how one may construe your remarks as a personal attack on one's character and worthiness as a human being.