Flag Burning...

When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
flag have never served in the military or for our country.  

Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
and liberty?

Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!

At 10:20 PM -0700 6/12/97, RS wrote:
>When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
>symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
>symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
>essentially displaying our freedom being burned.
>
>Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
>writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
>flag have never served in the military or for our country.
>
>Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
>soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
>for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
>and liberty?
>
>Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
>burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!

You ought to get off this list, then, because you'll surely find our
anarchist, anti-government, tax-evading ideas alien to you.

"Against the law" is not just a nicety of phrasing: it means someone who
"insults a symbol" goes to jail. Hardly consistent with a free society is
it?

As for Bush being a veteran and Clinton not being a veteran, what the hell
does this have to do with their political positions? Did you vote for
George McGovern in 1972 because he was a veteran (a bomber pilot, in fact)
while Richard Nixon was a guy who finagled his way out of joining the
military?

Jeeze, the bozos who wash up on our list. Where's Bell when we really need him?

--Tim May



There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In <199706130521.BAA13934@ren.globecomm.net>, on 06/13/97 
   at 01:20 AM, "RS" <panther@writeme.com> said:


>When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow
>our symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right. 
>It's a symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn
>a flag is essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

>Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
>writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn
>the flag have never served in the military or for our country.  

>Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
>soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
>for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for
>freedom and liberty?

>Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one. 
>Don't burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!

The flag is a symbol (aka a form of speech). If you dissagre with that
speech the you have every right to counter it with more speech (aka burn
the flag).

The consequences of dissalowing this or any form of political protest
outways any statisfaction blindly wrapping ones self in the flag may
provide.

- -- Veteran of more than one shit-hole we had no business being in.

- -- 
- ---------------------------------------------------------------
William H. Geiger III  http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii
Geiger Consulting    Cooking With Warp 4.0

Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice
PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail.
OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html                        
- ---------------------------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000

iQCVAwUBM6Df9o9Co1n+aLhhAQEBHQP7B3CAQQ9/8iIiYaXhj9mmXiRyrEt0HLnZ
BnET2/VPnjbWxZzAoDJAittm9Nn5lrStQil1jl/vLMoqR+o2+XEuiwY6hm3Ojm4V
8pZLTrLPczMUKTyDvAJ3H8CcpEFeVnTVWCuGsXWvAOQEEFjZh4JlDRkxGmVxV+P1
EMSHX1iAXW0=
=m0RZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

At 10:20 PM -0700 6/12/97, RS wrote:
>When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
>symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
>symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
>essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

When I was in Boy Scouts, they taught us that the only proper way to
dispose of a flag which was worn beyond use was to burn it.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

> >When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> >symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> >symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> >essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

This is an ill thought out and emotional response. A flag, just as any 
other object, it someones private property. If I choose to but 1000000 US 
flags and burn them on my property, or on property I have permission to 
use for this purpose, it is no business of the state or anyone else.
Realise first and foremost that all law is based on property.

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

At 1:56 am -0400 on 6/13/97, Tim May wrote:


>  Did you vote for
> George McGovern in 1972 because he was a veteran (a bomber pilot, in fact)
> while Richard Nixon was a guy who finagled his way out of joining the
> military?

Uh, Nixon spent WWII in the navy(?) in the Pacific.

About the only finagling he did was win enough in poker to fund his
congressional campaign on returning home.

I am not a crook,
Bob Hettinga

-----------------
Robert Hettinga (rah@shipwright.com), Philodox
e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

On 13 Jun 97 at 1:20, RS wrote:

> To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is essentially displaying our
> freedom being burned.

This may seem counter-intuitive, but allowing someone to publicly 
burn a flag is _demonstration_, not destruction,  of the freedom we 
celebrate.  In fact, supporting other's right to utter speech that we find 
distasteful is the purest form of "freedom and liberty."  

Tag

On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, RS wrote:

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

You're missing the point.  Burning the flag, the symbol of this nation, is
a protest that the government is doing something that you find absolutely
reprehensible.  (Or at least should be)  To prevent this burning of the
flag goes so strongly against what the First ammendment sought to do as to
completely ignore it.  

Sure, some people will burn the flag because they like to burn things, or
because they like to cause trouble, but isn't this hard to tell apart from
non-violent protest, one of the fundamental things in this country?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Anderson - <Pug Majere>     "Who knows, even the horse might sing" 
Wayne State University - CULMA   "May you live in interesting times.."
randerso@ece.eng.wayne.edu                        Ohio = VYI of the USA 
PGP Fingerprint - 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57  E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

panther@writeme.com said:

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's
> a symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag
> is essentially displaying our freedom being burned.

Some people believe that the freedom that the flag once symbolized is
already gone.  Burning the flag can be a representative way of saying "Our
Freedom has already been burned".

Of course, banning the burning of the flag only proves their point.

rgds-- TA  (tallard@frb.gov)
I don't speak for the Federal Reserve Board, it doesn't speak for me.

On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, RS wrote:

> When it comes down to flag burning, It really bothers me that we allow our
> symbol of freedom to be burned.  It's more than a flag and a right.  It's a
> symbol of the freedom we have.  To allow someone to publicly burn a flag is
> essentially displaying our freedom being burned.
> 
> Bush was a veteran, and Clinton was not.  I take it the ones who are
> writing on this subject about how we should have the "freedom" to burn the
> flag have never served in the military or for our country.  
> 
> Being a veteran myself, I find it very distateful to allow anyone on our
> soil to be allowed to "BURN" our symbol of freedom.  Think about the flag
> for a moment and what it really stands for.  Does it not stand for freedom
> and liberty?
> 
> Sorry, I just had to let this out.  I stand behind Bush on this one.  Don't
> burn the flag unless you would like to live under another flag!
> 

Being a veteran, you should be aware of the freedoms for which you
risked your life.  You are assuming that burning of our flag is intended
to insult the tenets of freedom our country used to be based on.
(unfortunately only for europeans)

Maybe what the person is saying is that "our freedom is going up in
flames".  Considering the barbeque at Waco I would consider this the
ultimate political statement.

"Church burning.  Its not just for racists anymore!"

(sorry i digress)

Political speech.  Love it or shut the hell up.

Just because you find it offensive doesn't mean you should change the
constitution.  Should we amend the constitution to prosecute people
who pick their noses in public, say the f-word or insult your favorite
religion?

Man!  Time to take a civics 101 class.

Jim Burnes
son and nephew of people who
thought they were risking their
lives for freedom