Should the intentional desecration of the U.S. flag by burning, tearing, defacing, or by any other means be made illegal and subject to a criminal penalty?

I thought that it was a law.

No. People who support such a law have absolutely no grasp of irony whatsoever.

absolutely not. a piece of cloth is not more important than freedom of speech.

No. Were such a law to be proposed, I'd probably protest by burning a flag while singing the Star Spangled Banner, My Country Tis of Thee, and other patriotic songs. Why should a flag's rights be more important than a person's rights?

No.

would violate our 1st amendment rights!!!

While we're at it, lets set up a government commission that will issue an approval before any opinion can be stated on a public forum.

What is the big deal?
Do we protect our freedom
Or a piece of cloth?

What's so special about the American Flag? If they make a law like that, (and I'm not suggesting they should) it should include all flags.

Yes and it should be done in evry country!

It depends...does that mean that when U.S. citizens burn another countries flag, that they will face criminal charges for that as well? Or are they just not allowed to disrespect their own flag? Because personally I would never think of burning mine or any other countries flag, but...that's just me.

As long as a person is has their own flag to deface, I don't think it should be a crime (although I think it stinks). But a flag I was flying in front of my home was once burned, and that was very upsetting.

no way should there be a law.
being out of activist circles for a while now, i wouldn't really have a motivation for breaking it, except that were it passed it would be compelled.

Obviously not. Destroying your own property without harming others should never be illegal.

Probably burning foreign flags would be fine. I have heard there was a big flap about the flags flying outside the U.N. I guess there's some law that says the U.S. flag has to fly higher than any other flags it's near, but obviously the U.N. wanted its own flag to be highest. I don't recall what the solution was, exactly, but it seems like a really stupid issue to me.

Then again, there are a lot of people in this country who are very fond of our flag. I think a lot of them fought for the US in various wars and were trained to revere the flag. I'm glad they were out there fighting and dying for our interests, but I think the continued flag worship is a crutch to prevent them from facing the fact that they were really just fighting because somebody told them to, and not for some higher moral purpose.

One of the coolest things my late grandfather ever said to me was, "If anyone ever tells you I went to Europe to defend a f**king flag, you punch them right in the mouth."

Well I hope you don't punch me in the mouth! I'm actually glad to hear that. I've wondered a lot about whether I would have gone to Vietnam had I been 20 years older than I am - and I think I would have. But not to defend America or our beautiful flag, but to defend the Vietnamese. I don't even know what their flag looked like.

There's an international law that says that the US flag must fly higher than any other flags that its near?

Oh no, I wasn't saying I wanted to punch you! Sorry if I was enigmatic there. The point was that he was insulted by the whole thing. He heard some senator talking about the men who fought and died for this flag, and he got royally pissed off. He said he fought for freedom, and this guy could stick the flag up his ass. The fact that these politicians would not only capitalize on the blood of American soldiers, but would also pervert their sacrifice so blatantly, is as disgusting to me as it was to my grandfather. If someone is against flag-burning, fine, we can debate that. But anyone who justifies it by saying that good men died for the flag is a vampire.

No, that is incorrect. US law states, "When flags of two or more nations are displayed, they are to be flown from separate staffs of the same height. The flags should be approximately equal size. International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace." You can find more information about proper flag handling here.

Alright. I was going to say that that doesn't seem right.

Yes, I see they have a special exemption in 125 subsection C.

(c) No other flag or pennant should be placed above or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag of the United States of America, except during church services conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when the church pennant may be flown above the flag during church services for the personnel of the Navy. No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other national or international flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to, or in place of, the flag of the United States at any place within the United States or any Territory or possession thereof: Provided, That nothing in this section shall make unlawful the continuance of the practice heretofore followed of displaying the flag of the United Nations in a position of superior prominence or honor, and other national flags in positions of equal prominence or honor, with that of the flag of the United States at the headquarters of the United Nations.

But check out section 176, subsection k!
(k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.

When I was in boy scouts, we performed a 'dignified ceremonial' flag burning one evening. The flag above our school was in tatters after many years of flapping in Southern California smog, and heat and was replaced in this ceremony.

The whole thing was pretty creepy and bordered on a religious rite.

Interesting! It does seem to contradict the other statement. Perhaps I'm misreading the first statement, in that "flags of two or more nations" might only refer to non-US flags. That might work. Of course there's that UN exemption there, which clearly answers the original question. But I'm still confused about the seeming contradiction between "International usage forbids the display of the flag of one nation above that of another nation in time of peace" and "No person shall display the flag of the United Nations or any other ... flag equal, above, or in a position of superior prominence or honor to ... the flag of the United States at any place within the United States..." What's up with that, I wonder? I believe a letter to Cecil Adams is in order!

OK, you people can probably enlighten me, so I'll ask: I was told that the US flag should never be folded in the traditional "triangle" unless it's being used for a ceremony during a funeral... on the other hand, I keep seeing Martha Stewart-like people on TV telling everybody how to fold the flag triangle-style after you remove it from the pole... should the flag always be folded into a triangle or just for funerals?

This page seems to support the traingle-folding theory.

When I was in the Girl Scouts, we always folded the flag in a triangle. (And it was never because we were at a funeral.)

Thanks ILJ & Enheduanna... it's an interesting ceremony, I never imagined it had so much meaning to it.

I wouldn't be too sure it does have any meaning to it. Meaning can't just be assigned - rituals are in the minds of those who perform them. I don't think most Americans understand or care about the significance of any of these flag rules.

I think you are right that most people will probably just fold the flag without thinking about what the hell is going on. But I found it interesting that at least once someone thought about what each action meant.

We always folded the flag in a triangle when I was in Girl Sprouts, too. I always thought it was cool to be one of the flag bearers. Perhaps I was a strange child...

No--I liked to do it, too! (But you still might have been a strange child; or perhaps we both were! ) I remember at one camp, I got to do it on horseback. That was fun, although difficult to keep the horses in line when we were carrying the unfolded flag up to the pole.

We never had horses at camp. But I'm surprised that we never did a flag ceremony in canoes. I was in a canoe as much as possible at summer camp. There wouldn't have been room for a horse, so maybe it's just as well that we didn't have any. (Maybe I'm a strange adult, too! At least, chronologically I'm an adult.)

I think anyone should be able to speak their mind short of making an immediate threat, but descretating the flag is out of bounds. Personally, I would harbor no problem in giving significant jail time for such an offense

So, in other words, to you, the piece of cloth is more important than what the cloth is supposed to stand for? Freedom of exprssion. If you want to burn a flag, who cares? It is a piece of cloth. It's not like you're destroying what it stands for. Congress is doing a fine job of doing that and doesn't need any help.

Its not "just a piece of cloth". Tell that to the legions of people who have died defending what it represented. You can begin with my wife's father who was killed fighting with the 319th regiment of the 80th division in Germany on April 19th, 1945. Or maybe you can tell that to my dad who fought in Korea at the Chosin reservoir. I reserve the "right" ( isn't that what liberals love to "invent" to support their causes? ) to physically put an end to anyone who desecrates the american flag in my presence.

You forgot to capitalize "American," idiot!

I noticed you talk about people dying for what the flag represents, not for the piece of cloth itself. Yet you'd throw away what the flag represents (desecrate those sacrifices in my opinion) to put people in jail who have only burned a piece of cloth.

That's exactly where unbridled is going. And BTW, rights are what human beings, ALL OF THEM should have. Rights are not an invention of the Liberals.

Is this the best response I can get out of leftists, a lesson in spelling and distortion of my views? Oh well, keep trying. There is no "right" enumerated anywhere in the Constitution that protects freedom of defacing or burning the flag. In a republican democracy, rights are derived from God. All other freedoms are up for debate within those bodies charged with governing. You might go back and read a little of John Locke's second treatise on government.

Picking on minor typing erros? How mature. And BTW, the country was in no way founded on any religion. John Adams said that. Thomas Jefferson was very distrusting of religion, and rightly so. The fact is, if they could've seen what you and your party would be doing in their names, they would've surrendered to the crwon, choosing the monarchy over the alternative, a Dictatorial cake with Democracy frosting. And you know what? The frosting is the only part of this country worth keeping.

Let me put this another. Say, at gunpoint, I am given two choices. Abolish the Constitution, or burn a U.S. flag. And those are the only choices I get. I don't know about you, but I'd burn the fudging flag! I'll take the 1st, the 5th, and most of the others over the piece of cloth any day. Because what the cloth stands for is more important to me. If the only to save my country was to burn a thousand flags (a hypothetical, improbable situation), I'd ask what kind of accelerants(sp?) I could use.

Brian, If and when you go off to college and study the foundations of aour republic, you will find recognition of God central to the tenets of freedom and democracy. As you can see for yourself if you read, there is nothing about "religion" in what I said. Again, look up Locke's treatise on government. You might actually learn something beyond what you think you know. Remember, it requires an open mind. As for the flag, it is easy for young people to sit back in the comfort of their freedom and act like patriotism is silly. That is one of the luxuries afforded by a free society and the people who provided it for you. I work with teenagers everyday and hear the same tired arguments. In World War II there was a popular saying, " there are no atheists in a foxhole..." I don't portend to know anything about you , your experiences in life or anything else, but I do know something about my own. In 1980 I visited the Soviet Union for four months on business. This was at a time when they had just invaded Afghanistan and relations between our countries were at an all time low. Having seen first hand the atrocious ways soviet citizens under the bootheel of communism lived, I can safely say our way of life is represented by our flag, and its colors have inspired many who defended it. Our national anthem was inspired by the colors, the most famous picture in world war two portrays marines raising the flag on Mt. Suribachi, and countless veterans will gladly tell you of the pride and dignity they derived in presenting the flag on battlefields across the globe. So when I hear some drivel from a young person who is still wet behind the ears about how unimportant the flag is, I just laugh. Tell the hostages in Tehren the flag wasn't important when Iranian students stormed the embassay there in 1979. Tell the men who held the line under General Hancock at Gettysburg the flag was "just a piece of cloth". Tell the men at Bataan in WW II the flag means nothing after they watched Japanese forces unfurl it and trample it into the ground in the beginning months of that conflict. There was a time when stupidity like that you spew caused anger in me. Now that I have lived long enough, I realize it is simply the rantings of undereducated young people who have never known what it means to put their life in the hands of a cause greater than themself. If this is not enough, ask those millions of people that Ronald Reagan freed behind the iron curtain what it meant to raise the flags of their respective countries in the wake of the Soviet collapse. Consider what it meant for the people of Poland, Czechoslavakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, the Baltic nations, Georgia, Ukraine, Khazakstan (sp?)and countless other nations freed as a result of American efforts and ideals, all of which are symbolized in the flag. When I hear people like you infer flag burning is some kind of protected speech I have to laugh. I guess having sex with baby goats on the White house lawn would be o.k. as well if we claim its protected political speech? Taken to its natural conclusion, there is nothing that could be limited in the way of behavior if any criminal offender chooses to assert his actions were political speech. Hell, I guess Oswald killing Kennedy was just a form of free speech in defiance of the government. Think about it before you end up as just another confused member amid a group of sheople.

Ps...please forgive the typos. This is not a doctoral dissertation.

If you think the only rights people have are the ones enumerated in the US Constitution, perhaps you need to read the 9th amendment a few more times. The writers obviously didn't agree with you. The design of the federal government was supposed to be that of a list of enumerated powers (see article I section 8), a very short list, and everything else is beyond their legitimate authority.

*Laughing her ass off at the idea that Ronald Reagan (that bumbling Nancified monkey hugging actor)single handedly freed the Russian people from communism*

What was going on in Russia wasn't Communism. neither is what's going down in Cuba and China. having read the Essential Works of Marx, I know that Communism is ver pro worker. In fact, the very first U.S. union workers would've been considered commies, because they wanted more than the rich greedy fudges running thing were giving them. Dictators just claim they are communists to gain favor with disenfranchised workers.

dabs...You disappoint in referencing the ninth amendment you leave out any mention of the tenth. The authors of the constitution never intended to enshrine each and every right the people shall enjoy. Aty the same time, they very much intended people, through local control and state legislative bodies to have considerable say in how their lives are governed. Thats why we have laws in most states forbidding desecration of the flag. While the Supreme Court at the moment disagrees with this long held tenet of "state's rights", judicial interpretation of the constitution is not constant.

twister, Your response is entirely predictable and I harbor no ill will toward you. Still, its was Reagan's leadership, determination to negotiate from strength and his silent resolve to protect American interests and free enslaved people all over europe and asia that one the day. I did not mean to infer he did anything alone. It was his foresight and convictions that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. In 1987 he challenged chairman Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin wall. Two years later it came down. This matter is not in dispute...I acknowledge and supported his ballooning federal deficits because it financed this vision of ending the cold war. What a deal! Instead of sending troops overseas to fight another war, we bankrupted our enemies and are the only super power left on the planet. Freedom in the countries I mentioned in earlier message was secured thanks to this kind of leadership.

Brian, Communism is a lie bred and retold for the purpose of having people believe their freedom is a subordinate concern to their daily subsistence. That is why communism is on the way out. It doesn't work, suppresses political speech, results in a welfare state and is incapable of dealing with large social problems. You would do much better to about the merits of free society and free economic markets.

and...your response is entirely predictable also and I harbor no ill will toward you, either.

Reagan was and will always be a monster in my eyes.

In my eyes as well. We may be worlds apart in amny areas but Twist and I do think alike.

As for communism, you only repeated rhetoric I've heard my entirte life. What was happening in Russia under Stalin, and the men who followed WASN'T COMMUNISm! It was dictatorship, cliaming to be communism to appease the masses and prevetn revolution. It's their own damned fault for not realizing that they were getting fudgeed up the ass by the government, much like the people who voted for Reagan.

Here's what I'd like to say about the subject of flag "desecration":

1) The US Constitution does not guarantee protection from desecration to the US Flag.

2) The US Constitution does guarantee Freedom of Expression to the American Citizen (and other Citizens as well, I think) while said citizens are physically on American Soil.

3) I've been informed by friends that the intentional desecration of the American Flag has been declared illegal federally at least 3 times (the last one during the Reagan/Bush era) and every single time has been struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Several states have also prosecuted people for flag desecration under their "anti-flag-desecration laws" and have been ordered by the Supreme Court to release the "offenders". I haven't looked this up for correctness, but I assume that anyone that cares a lot about those laws and contributing to lobbying for those laws will be able to run a web search before they waste their money and time, as well as Tax Dollars to have the Supreme Court strike the laws down yet one more time.

4) The Flag, which happens to be a piece of cloth, paper or other similar material, does not have infinite life span; in fact, its life span is quite limited and its very existence is intended to remind us of Freedom enjoyed in US -- Freedom, however is an eternal concept while at the same time being more fragile than the physical flag in that while Freedom will live forever, one can fail to maintain Freedom and lose it while people in other Countries will enjoy it, happily unaware that you lost yours.

5) Last, but not least, I'd like to point out to y'all, "Unbridled" included, that in allCommunist countries, the desecration of their flags is verboten, often punished with death or long imprisonment. That is not reserved for Communist countries only, but it's certainly present in all dictatorial regimens -- I should know, I lived in Brazil during the military government. Brazil, at the time, shared with other bad governments around the world the fact that we had neat flags flying proudly everywhere to remind us that we did not have freedom and that some of our finest citizens were rotting in jail because they said something the government did not like, whether or not it involved desecrating a flag. Do you know what was the first thing they did when they kicked the military government out and wrote a brand-spanking-new constitution in Brazil? They put right at the beginning that Censorship in any form is prohibited, and the Freedom of Expression is guaranteed under all circumstances, including flag desecration. If that doesn't tell you anything important, I have nothing else to say to you. Thank you.

Hear, hear!

I don't think there's any question that burning the flag can be considered a terribly offensive act. In times of war, flags are important foci for morale and aggression - trampling the enemy's flag is a sign of disrespect. Burning the flag of one's own country is also a sign of disrespect, and if one doesn't happen to respect one's country, it's perfectly appropriate.

pcpr...No one suggested the constitution prevents people from burning the flag. Statutory law is where you will find the flag protected. Your reference to freedom of "expression" being protected by the Constitution illustrates an important point. In telling a part of the truth, you seek to accomplish what telling what the entire truth would jeopardize. In fact, the Constitution recognizes freedom of religious expression, speech, press, assembly and organized petition. All of these can be limited by statutory law, and are in every jurisdiction of the United States. Sure, the supreme court has ruled laws prohibiting flag desecration as unconstitutional based on some mysterious "right" that every Supreme Court prior to the Rehnquist gan6g failed to find. Oh well, the Supreme Court has been famous for its folly. Just ask Dred Scott *L*...Hell beyond slavery being sanctioned, the court had a 70 year period when they approved of segregation. Thats what happens when you give nine old folks in black robes a lot of power over you. God forbid we should allow the intended democratic processes of state legislatures and Congress decide these important issues...Who knows, one day Congress may wake up and recind ( or at least amend ) the powers of the federal courts. After all, the courts were created by Congress.

May God have mercy on you and pretend you never said those words. You, who have probably never lived (and I don't mean visit for two weeks, I mean lived, worked, paid taxes, learned the culture) anywhere but under the cushy freedom this fine country has provided you, want to strip that freedom and turn this country into a dictatorial and/or communist country. What a joke. Big clue for you, travel a bit -- my impression is that people like you are eroding the freedom in US because you have no idea how good it is here, American citizens should be required to spend a couple of years elsewhere (doesn't even have to be military/communist government) at least once in their lives before you are allowed to live here. The very act of protecting your flag from desecration is an attack to your very freedom. Please let me try just once more: the Constitution is the most important law, and it gives people freedom of expression -- any other law is a lesser law and can only remove your rights under very especial circumstances and, three times now, the Supreme Court has ruled that desecrating the flag is a right (I agree with Joachim -- it's is offensive, but it's just as much of a right as it is for you to go shout obscenities at the politicians/judges you so love to hate). If the Constitution does not *prohibit* burning the flag *and* it *prohibits* any government in US from punishing someone for burning the flag, there's no discussion, the lesser laws are at fault and should be ignored/removed from the books. Why don't you go to Peru (or is it Chile?) and scream some obscenities in front of the federal government building to see what's freedom (or lack thereof)? Maybe you'll share a cell with Lori Berenson, an American Citizen who is jailed for "treason" there. Then you can write to me telling me how bad the Supreme Court is here. Sir, I suppose that if you had to pass the same test foreigners take here before they can be naturalized, you'd fail miserably and would probably be asked to leave the country. And I say that with all due respect. Besides, it's a free country, if you don't like it, please move out, there are plenty of countries that will take you in as a mass propaganda against the Capitalist Pigs of America, "see, one of them saw the light and moved in here with us!" -- they'll be devastated when you tell them stories about how barbaric the Americans are, they even burn their own flag. You have the right to say whatever you want, but you don't have the right to make us listen to you or agree with you and I so obviously disagree with you -- must be because I used to live under a government just like the one you want instituted here and I'm just one of them durn furiners who are too stoopid to do anything useful here except for maybe collecting garbage or fixing the sewers. Like I said before, if my words don't tell you anything important, I have nothing further that would be even remotely decent and/or polite to tell you on this subject and I will shut up now on this subject.

Thanks for distorting my views while inflating your own sense of self worth. Your lack of understanding the original intent of the founding fathers and the provisions set forth in the constitution is comical. Having lived in Spain, Mexico, visited and worked in the former Soviet Union and Great Britain, I have to laugh at the absurdity of your comments. Please feel free to research the origins of American government. Its not what you think it is...its a lot better. In the meantime, you might want to learn to distinguish between physical acts and speech. They are not one in the same thing, though I can see where you might be confused. BTW... How long have you suffered from such irrational dementia? *just curious* :)

One more thing, the supreme court was never designed or intended to dole out what is or is not a "right". Burning the flag is not a right...even the supreme court agrees with that proposition. I wouldn't expect you to understand.

Look, we Americans have forgotten that under the 1st Amendment, we can also petition for a redress of greivances. So, why is it we only sit back and dog and moan when Congress passes a law most decent Americans disaprove of? We should be able to petition to have it changed. We need to remind the Presidnet and Congress, and the Senate that they work for us, not the other way around. It pisses me off when I see elected officials selling out their constituants(sp?) whenever the Tobacco or Gun lobbies pay them massive checks. So go ahead and pass the flag burning law. After all, if the American people are smart enough to see what's wrong with it, they'll petition to have it taken down. I mean, the desecration law would also probably prevent patriotic Americans from making a t-shirt out of their beloved flag. And people have done that. I've met a few. They took one or two full sized American flags, and made a shirt for themselves to show how much they loved this place. But because the flags were cut by scissors, pierced by needles, and mending by string, this man would be thrown in prison. And much as I dislike the supposed Democracy of this once well-meaning country, I would still fight to the death to defend that man.

Brian, Give me an example of a better place to live...As Americans we enjoy the highest standard of living, the best form of government and a free society.

Canada. OK, I'm no big fan of the language laws, but they do have the best health care system in North AMerica (despite the lies the Gov. would have us believe), and the best gun control laws in the Western Hemisphere. And not gun BANNING, like the NRA makes gun control out to be. Common sense stuff, like no automatic weapons, handgun licenses, etc. And, it's quiet, AND my faovrite comedians are from there.

Highest standard of living? Since when? We are all victims of economic slavery. There is no logical reason why an apartment, a car, a fudging Butterfinger, would cost more today than it did 30 years ago? We are all slaves to those green pieces of paper.

Given that it doesn't really have to do with flag burning/freedom of expression, I suppose you have a fair question ("How long have you suffered from such irrational dementia? *just curious* :)") -- since about the time of my conception, altho that doesn't tell you how long... I suppose, by reading your comments here and other surveys, that I have either been alive for about 3 times longer than you have, or about two thirds to half of your age, depending on if you remember Reagan for a shorter or longer time than I do. And I wouldn't say I have "suffered from" it, rather I have enjoyed it immensely...

Canada??? Please...Ask Canadians about their healthcare and tax rates. Hell, they lost their own game of hockey to America because of the intrusive nature of their government. The place is beautiful, and the people there are great, they are a reliable ally and have immense resources. Still, Canada has never had the burden the United States has had to bear throughout WWII and the subsequent cold war. In fact, they have benefitted greatly from the fact we provide the lion's share of defense for this continent ( amd the rest of the free world ). In regards to gun control, there is no such thing as a "common sense" gun control. Gun control should be debated at the state level where the founding father's intended for citizens to decide such issues. The federal government has no right to restrict the sale of firearms. Everyone around here is so ready to hand over their input to the federal government. That is a curious manifestation of the "sheople complex". For so long we have allowed liberals and soccer moms to run things, we have forgotten the genius of our own constitution. Are you really trying to seriously dispute the United States has the highest standard of living in the history of mankind? I am about to lose interest in this nice little chat. I don't mind disagreeing, but to make such a fallible statement really lessens my hopes for you. :)

BTW... I am not ready to hand my healthcare over to the same people who take three days to get a letter from Dallas to Fort Worth!!!

pc...the enjoyment of it will wear off sooner than you think.

Are you now suggesting that the United States doesn't have, hands down, the most efficient postal service in the world? I know we like to complain, but I never thought anyone believed that crap. Don't believe the hype!

OK. I may have already done this, but let me put a hypothetical situaion to you.

You have a gun to your head. Choose one of these options, or else you die, and so does your family.

1: Burn an American flag in the privacy of an open field where none can se eyou.
2: Undo the Contstitution, essentially taking away all the rights granted to the American people by our Founding Fathers. No one will be allowed to speak their mind, police won't have to get warants, and the NRA will be disbanded (not neccesarily a bad thing, but I digress).

Which one do you choose?

I don't think that flag-defacing is a serious enough problem in the U.S. to warrant outlawing it. In fact, I haven't really seen any good evidence that it's a problem at all, never mind a serious one.

The American flag no. The Dutch one yes!

I would say that criticism of ideas and ideology, no matter how distressing, is valid where no-one suffers bodily harm or pain.

whatever. it's a flag. get over it.

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.

How does burning the flag or the act of desecrating the flag get considered a right under the first amendment? This only for the freedom of speech. Note 'peaceably assemble' The act of burning an object is generally not considered peaceable. Please don't respond with the protocol of flag burning for the purpose of retiring it..
Yes the flag is only an object. not something to be worshiped. However as an American I thank God every day that I was lucky enough to be born in this great country, I've never had to be concerned with mortar shells falling around my house. Or a war being fought on American soil. I'm not talking about the civil war or any others before that. I'm only speaking for my life time. I pray that my children will not ever have to worry about wars fought on this land.

When the American flag is allowed to be burned, I think it diminishes peoples respect for this country and everything we stand for. Not allowing everyone to do what they want when they want. If someone wants to use the argument that this is an act protected by the first amendment as 'freedom of speech' Then on the same token, why do we incarcerate people? couldn't they use the same argument as well?

But burning a flag doesn't hurt anybody. We don't incarcerate people who haven't hurt anybody. Even if they diminish people's respect for the country. Should I go to jail for burning the Great Seal of the President of the United States? Even if I think he's a lying satyr who couldn't govern his way out of a wet cigar wrapper? Should I be arrested for burning my social security card? My 1040 form?

Isn't that a freedom of speech issue - sort of?