LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 213
0 members and 213 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 06-22-2005, 05:45 PM   #914
notcasesensitive
Flaired.
 
notcasesensitive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Out with Lumbergh.
Posts: 9,954
flag-burning

Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
Succint, yet stupid. What were your reading comprehension scores again? The Flag Code deals with the proper means of destroying a flag. The Amendment deals with "desecration" of the flag.

In other words, it outlaws not the act itself, but the act and an intent which is not sacred. So, in addition to laying to waste a 200 plus year old tradition of freedom of speech, the proposed Amendment does so in the language of religion.

Were it not so fucking chilling, the irony would be delicious.

eta that it appears that there is a general consensus that your interpretation may have missed the boat. Nice view in that glass house, stupid?
I think when you posted, you failed to realize that the poster to whom you replied was not being serious or literal about the substantive content of his or her post, and by treating the post seriously, you have made yourself to appear the fool.
notcasesensitive is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:41 PM.