Burning American Flag....

[Marion Morrison]

You dont know what the fuck you are talking about,Dude.

I know what he's talking about because I swore that same oath 5 times during my 20 year Naval career. We didn't swear an oath to the flag of the US, but rather swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

You qualify as one of the domestic enemies that I swore to defend the Constitution from. You want citizens to revere the flag over the Constitution. Sorry dude, but the Constitution is what formed this country and keeps it going, not some scrap of cloth that has 3 colors on it.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to th e Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all."

Yeah, maybe you never said that pledge, which would only indicate how fucked up our military discipline and morale have bec ome.

Did you say it at lest during school?

Is that allegiance over now, biker?

You really are quite the 'tard, aren't you? Here, let me help you out with some definitions.........................

pledge
[plej]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun

1. a solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something: a pledge of aid; a pledge not to wage war.
2. something delivered as security for the payment of a debt or fulfillment of a promise, and subject to forfeiture on failure to pay or fulfill the promise.
3. the state of being given or held as security: to put a thing in pledge.

​

oath
[ohth]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun, plural oaths [ohth z, ohths] /oʊðz, oʊθs/.

1. a solemn appeal to a deity, or to some revered person or thing, to witness one's determination to speak the truth, to keep a promise, etc.: to testify upon oath.
2. a statement or promise strengthened by such an appeal.
3. a formally affirmed statement or promise accepted as an equivalent of an appeal to a deity or to a revered person or thing; affirmation.

So, what you did in school was a pledge, not an oath, because it was a promise of allegiance to the flag, but was not sworn to a deity. An oath is a solemn promise that is sworn to something revered or a deity.

Yes, what I did in school was say a PLEDGE, not an oath.

What I did whenever I reenlisted was an OATH, not a pledge.

It would help if you understood the difference. And, I swore to God that I would support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and apparently....................you are one of the domestic ones because you don't believe in free speech.
​

Way to go if one wants to prove he's a hippie faggot.

Hippie, yes. Faggot no. Better educated than you? Definitely.

Besides, after serving this country for over 20 years in the military, I think I have the right to grow my hair long, and wear tie dye and sandals.

What I do is none of your business. What you do is none of mine. Don't piss me off, ****. I have various bullets in .30 cal to make sure you're not a problem. ok? I'm an American, don't fuck with me. I will absolutely make you sorry if you do.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I know what he's talking about because I swore that same oath 5 times during my 20 year Naval career. We didn't swear an oath to the flag of the US, but rather swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

You qualify as one of the domestic enemies that I swore to defend the Constitution from. You want citizens to revere the flag over the Constitution. Sorry dude, but the Constitution is what formed this country and keeps it going, not some scrap of cloth that has 3 colors on it.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to th e Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all."

Yeah, maybe you never said that pledge, which would only indicate how fucked up our military discipline and morale have bec ome.

Did you say it at lest during school?

Is that allegiance over now, biker?

You really are quite the 'tard, aren't you? Here, let me help you out with some definitions.........................

pledge
[plej]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun

1. a solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something: a pledge of aid; a pledge not to wage war.
2. something delivered as security for the payment of a debt or fulfillment of a promise, and subject to forfeiture on failure to pay or fulfill the promise.
3. the state of being given or held as security: to put a thing in pledge.

​

oath
[ohth]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun, plural oaths [ohth z, ohths] /oʊðz, oʊθs/.

1. a solemn appeal to a deity, or to some revered person or thing, to witness one's determination to speak the truth, to keep a promise, etc.: to testify upon oath.
2. a statement or promise strengthened by such an appeal.
3. a formally affirmed statement or promise accepted as an equivalent of an appeal to a deity or to a revered person or thing; affirmation.

So, what you did in school was a pledge, not an oath, because it was a promise of allegiance to the flag, but was not sworn to a deity. An oath is a solemn promise that is sworn to something revered or a deity.

Yes, what I did in school was say a PLEDGE, not an oath.

What I did whenever I reenlisted was an OATH, not a pledge.

It would help if you understood the difference. And, I swore to God that I would support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and apparently....................you are one of the domestic ones because you don't believe in free speech.
​

Way to go if one wants to prove he's a hippie faggot.

Hippie, yes. Faggot no. Better educated than you? Definitely.

Besides, after serving this country for over 20 years in the military, I think I have the right to grow my hair long, and wear tie dye and sandals.

What I do is none of your business. What you do is none of mine. Don't piss me off, ****. I have various bullets in .30 cal to make sure you're not a problem. ok? I'm an American, don't fuck with me. I will absolutely make you sorry if you do.

Big fucking talk from a keyboard commando. You wouldn't know me from Adam if I passed you on the street. Besides..................bigots like you are people that I avoid in real life. No time for full blown retards.

As far as you making sure I'm not a problem? What problem do you have other than being a butt hurt lowborn Polish gutter slut? And, what am I to you? Nothing more than phosphor dots on a screen. And, you are pretty much the same thing to me.

But I don't get all butt hurt and upset when called out and threaten to shoot them. Me? I know you don't matter one way or the other, so all I do is laugh at you.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Whatever. Hippie Faggot is the OP here.

That ain't none of my my business.


Roll on, faggot.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Whatever. Hippie Faggot is the OP here.

That ain't none of my my business.


Roll on, faggot.

Apparently, you don't know the difference between Bonzi and myself. But, it's easy enough to check who the OP is by putting that arrow thingie on your computer screen that moves around on the square with the number "1" on it and click. It will take you to post 1 so that you can see who the OP is.

I provided this lesson for you because apparently you are too stupid to do it yourself. No, I'm not Bonzi. I'm ABikerSailor. While we have some of the same letters in our names, they also have different letters, and they aren't arranged the same way.

Hope that helps you ya scrotum sucking anus angler. (See? There is more than just one way to infer someone's sexuality other than by only calling them "faggot". Might help if you expanded your vocabulary sometime).

 

[Mousterian]

Let it go, Sailor!
Anyone who uses a Hollywood fantasy actor as his avatar is obviously a childish fool.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Let it go, Sailor!
Anyone who uses a Hollywood fantasy actor as his avatar is obviously a childish fool.

Ehhh........................he seems to have disappeared with his tail between his legs. He also tried to start something with me on another thread. Just letting him know that he can't get to me, and that I'm a hell of a lot more creative with my insults than he is.

All he's got so far is "faggot", and in the other thread he called me Mr. Anal Plumber. Dude has zero game.

 

[Jarlaxle]

So you think it should be illegal to give someone the finger?

No, but when I put 2 holes in your chest and 1 in your face for doing so, I should be able to claim self-defense.

You're adorable.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Wouldn't do it personally and the people that do are fools but it is a freedom of speech issue.

So is burning a cross; yuou OK with that too?

The fact is that some forms of speech should not fall under the category of protected speech, and the SCOTUS got it brain-dead wrong on this one.

I'm curious just which forms of speech you feel should not be protected, and why. Unpopular speech being protected is the only way the first amendment means anything, but there can clearly be exceptions.

I think that speech that incites violence, provokes violence or would predictably cause violence is not covered under the First Amendment similar to how shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater is not allowed under that amendment as well.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

unacceptable or acceptable as "freedom of speech"?

I find it to be "freedom of speech" and think it should be treated as such legally, but I personally do not find it acceptable so I could not cast a vote

 

[Montrovant]

Wouldn't do it personally and the people that do are fools but it is a freedom of speech issue.

So is burning a cross; yuou OK with that too?

The fact is that some forms of speech should not fall under the category of protected speech, and the SCOTUS got it brain-dead wrong on this one.

I'm curious just which forms of speech you feel should not be protected, and why. Unpopular speech being protected is the only way the first amendment means anything, but there can clearly be exceptions.

I think that speech that incites violence, provokes violence or would predictably cause violence is not covered under the First Amendment similar to how shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater is not allowed under that amendment as well.

I don't think burning a flag falls under that sort of qualification. It would be closer to "fighting words." I'm not a big fan of that concept, either; it implies a lack of responsibility for a person's own actions.

As long as the person doing the burning owns the flag, and does it in a safe and otherwise legal manner, I say it is legally acceptable speech. From a legal/social standpoint: burning the flag is not (on its own) sedition or treason. It's important for politically divisive speech to be allowed. From a personal standpoint: in the end it's a piece of colored cloth. I understand it has symbolic meaning, but no one else's rights are being damaged if someone burns a flag. One of the most important reasons to have freedom of speech is to be able to say "I don't like something about the country." That's what burning the flag is doing IMO, if in an extreme fashion. In the end it should be legal for someone to say "F the United States."

 

[Correll]

An American citizen exercising their freedom of speech to burn a flag is evil to many cons, but a US president prostrating himself before a North Korean general and saluting that piece of shit gets a pass from them.

These are people that are clueless about what America is and what the Constitution is. They don't think these things important, they think their feelings regarding these things are important. Ignorance incarnate.

An American citizen who burns the American flag is an Anti-American asshole.


FUCK THEM ALL.

An American citizen who burns the flag is an anti-American asshole.

 

[Pogo]

BS they did not die defending the "flag". They died defending the America and the Constitution, which includes the right to freedom of speech

You dont know what the fuck you are talking about,Dude.

I know what he's talking about because I swore that same oath 5 times during my 20 year Naval career. We didn't swear an oath to the flag of the US, but rather swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

You qualify as one of the domestic enemies that I swore to defend the Constitution from. You want citizens to revere the flag over the Constitution. Sorry dude, but the Constitution is what formed this country and keeps it going, not some scrap of cloth that has 3 colors on it.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to th e Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all."

Yeah, maybe you never said that pledge, which would only indicate how fucked up our military discipline and morale have bec ome.

Did you say it at lest during school?

Is that allegiance over now, biker?

That ain't an "oath", Oaf. The military Oath is what I posted up there in 363 to bust your ass into a fine powder.

What you have here is a worship prayer to a fetish. One which pledges fealty to an inanimate object and shoves the country to a subordinate position so it could sell flags --- which is exactly what it was written to do in 1892. And it AIN'T the Oath that military inductees take.

Good god you must be living on a spring of Stupid, in the city of Clueless, the capital of the state of Ignoramia.

Pogo, I think everyone here knows you have no allegiance to our Republic or its flag.

You c an go back to your antiTrump chew toy now.

What I have allegiance to is the Truth. That's why I bust dishonest lying hacks like you in the way I just did.

DEAL with it, Hack.

 

[Pogo]

An American citizen exercising their freedom of speech to burn a flag is evil to many cons, but a US president prostrating himself before a North Korean general and saluting that piece of shit gets a pass from them.

These are people that are clueless about what America is and what the Constitution is. They don't think these things important, they think their feelings regarding these things are important. Ignorance incarnate.

An American citizen who burns the American flag is an Anti-American asshole.


FUCK THEM ALL.

An American citizen who burns the flag is an anti-American asshole.

Or perhaps they're simply not a fetishist idolatry graven-image type.

What's most illustrative about knuckledragger comments like this is not the fetishism itself. It's the ideological fascism that thinks "since I'm a fetishist, everybody else has to be too".

Whelp ----- hate to break the bad news but no we don't. That's your hangup. You're welcome to it but you're not welcome to force it on others.

Just as I keep saying about the standing-for-the-anthem thing.... you don't force me to stand and I don't force you to sit. Works both ways, like it or lump it.

 

[Correll]

An American citizen exercising their freedom of speech to burn a flag is evil to many cons, but a US president prostrating himself before a North Korean general and saluting that piece of shit gets a pass from them.

These are people that are clueless about what America is and what the Constitution is. They don't think these things important, they think their feelings regarding these things are important. Ignorance incarnate.

An American citizen who burns the American flag is an Anti-American asshole.


FUCK THEM ALL.

An American citizen who burns the flag is an anti-American asshole.

Or perhaps they're simply not a fetishist idolatry graven-image type.

What's most illustrative about knuckledragger comments like this is not the fetishism itself. It's the ideological fascism that thinks "since I'm a fetishist, everybody else has to be too".

Whelp ----- hate to break the bad news but no we don't. That's your hangup. You're welcome to it but you're not welcome to force it on others.

Just as I keep saying about the standing-for-the-anthem thing.... you don't force me to stand and I don't force you to sit. Works both ways, like it or lump it.

Nope.


Just because they don't share the respect for the symbols of this Nation that Americans do,


does not mean that they do not know what they are doing when they burn the Flag.


They are actively insulting their fellow citizens, and stating the they are not loyal to their group.


THey remain MEMBERS of the group of course. Because renouncing their citizens ship would be a hardship for them.


They want the BENEFITS of being a member of the group, but have no respect for or loyalty to the group.


They are assholes.


And in a healthy society they would be ostracized and despised.

 

[Montrovant]

An American citizen exercising their freedom of speech to burn a flag is evil to many cons, but a US president prostrating himself before a North Korean general and saluting that piece of shit gets a pass from them.

These are people that are clueless about what America is and what the Constitution is. They don't think these things important, they think their feelings regarding these things are important. Ignorance incarnate.

An American citizen who burns the American flag is an Anti-American asshole.


FUCK THEM ALL.

An American citizen who burns the flag is an anti-American asshole.

Or perhaps they're simply not a fetishist idolatry graven-image type.

What's most illustrative about knuckledragger comments like this is not the fetishism itself. It's the ideological fascism that thinks "since I'm a fetishist, everybody else has to be too".

Whelp ----- hate to break the bad news but no we don't. That's your hangup. You're welcome to it but you're not welcome to force it on others.

Just as I keep saying about the standing-for-the-anthem thing.... you don't force me to stand and I don't force you to sit. Works both ways, like it or lump it.

Nope.


Just because they don't share the respect for the symbols of this Nation that Americans do,


does not mean that they do not know what they are doing when they burn the Flag.


They are actively insulting their fellow citizens, and stating the they are not loyal to their group.


THey remain MEMBERS of the group of course. Because renouncing their citizens ship would be a hardship for them.


They want the BENEFITS of being a member of the group, but have no respect for or loyalty to the group.


They are assholes.


And in a healthy society they would be ostracized and despised.

I'm confused. If they "don't share the respect for the symbols of this Nation that Americans do," how can they remain members of the group? The group is Americans.

Perhaps you should clarify the terms and designations you are using. You seem to be saying that people who burn the flag remain Americans, but you don't consider them to be acceptable Americans.

Also, I think you may be overestimating the universality of respect for symbols of America. Considering how often I've seen the flag commercialized, used as a marketing tool, used to score political points, left to wear out on a pole outside of a home, put on clothing, left as a bumper sticker to be ravaged by the elements, etc., I think there is a hugely wide variety of respect levels for the flag. Is there a minimum level of respect for someone to be an acceptable American? Can one wear the flag on their underwear if they stand during the National Anthem at sporting events, and still be acceptable? Is remaining sitting while the anthem plays and the flag is shown acceptable if one is watching on television? What is the metric for determining which Americans are acceptable and which are not (or who is anti-American and who is not)?

I think this issue is far too often discussed in pretty vague terms.

 

[Correll]

An American citizen who burns the American flag is an Anti-American asshole.


FUCK THEM ALL.

An American citizen who burns the flag is an anti-American asshole.

Or perhaps they're simply not a fetishist idolatry graven-image type.

What's most illustrative about knuckledragger comments like this is not the fetishism itself. It's the ideological fascism that thinks "since I'm a fetishist, everybody else has to be too".

Whelp ----- hate to break the bad news but no we don't. That's your hangup. You're welcome to it but you're not welcome to force it on others.

Just as I keep saying about the standing-for-the-anthem thing.... you don't force me to stand and I don't force you to sit. Works both ways, like it or lump it.

Nope.


Just because they don't share the respect for the symbols of this Nation that Americans do,


does not mean that they do not know what they are doing when they burn the Flag.


They are actively insulting their fellow citizens, and stating the they are not loyal to their group.


THey remain MEMBERS of the group of course. Because renouncing their citizens ship would be a hardship for them.


They want the BENEFITS of being a member of the group, but have no respect for or loyalty to the group.


They are assholes.


And in a healthy society they would be ostracized and despised.

I'm confused. If they "don't share the respect for the symbols of this Nation that Americans do," how can they remain members of the group? The group is Americans.

Perhaps you should clarify the terms and designations you are using. You seem to be saying that people who burn the flag remain Americans, but you don't consider them to be acceptable Americans....

Do you consider it acceptable to be a member of a group, to benefit from member ship in that group, but to not only feel no loyalty to that group but to feel such hostility to that group, that you insult them all, by desecrating a shared symbol of that group?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Wouldn't do it personally and the people that do are fools but it is a freedom of speech issue.

So is burning a cross; yuou OK with that too?

The fact is that some forms of speech should not fall under the category of protected speech, and the SCOTUS got it brain-dead wrong on this one.

I'm curious just which forms of speech you feel should not be protected, and why. Unpopular speech being protected is the only way the first amendment means anything, but there can clearly be exceptions.

I think that speech that incites violence, provokes violence or would predictably cause violence is not covered under the First Amendment similar to how shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater is not allowed under that amendment as well.

I don't think burning a flag falls under that sort of qualification. It would be closer to "fighting words." I'm not a big fan of that concept, either; it implies a lack of responsibility for a person's own actions.

As long as the person doing the burning owns the flag, and does it in a safe and otherwise legal manner, I say it is legally acceptable speech. From a legal/social standpoint: burning the flag is not (on its own) sedition or treason. It's important for politically divisive speech to be allowed. From a personal standpoint: in the end it's a piece of colored cloth. I understand it has symbolic meaning, but no one else's rights are being damaged if someone burns a flag. One of the most important reasons to have freedom of speech is to be able to say "I don't like something about the country." That's what burning the flag is doing IMO, if in an extreme fashion. In the end it should be legal for someone to say "F the United States."

Everything depends on context. If you do it respectfully, even burning a flag is permitted to 'bury it'.

But try walking up to a black man in public and calling him a n1gger and see how many people would fault YOU for instigating the violence to ensue, bubba.

That is my point, some provocations are justifiably beaten down.

Burn my nations flag and that is what you would get if you try to use physical force to stop me from rescuing that flag.

 

[Pogo]

Wouldn't do it personally and the people that do are fools but it is a freedom of speech issue.

So is burning a cross; yuou OK with that too?

The fact is that some forms of speech should not fall under the category of protected speech, and the SCOTUS got it brain-dead wrong on this one.

I'm curious just which forms of speech you feel should not be protected, and why. Unpopular speech being protected is the only way the first amendment means anything, but there can clearly be exceptions.

I think that speech that incites violence, provokes violence or would predictably cause violence is not covered under the First Amendment similar to how shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater is not allowed under that amendment as well.

I don't think burning a flag falls under that sort of qualification. It would be closer to "fighting words." I'm not a big fan of that concept, either; it implies a lack of responsibility for a person's own actions.

As long as the person doing the burning owns the flag, and does it in a safe and otherwise legal manner, I say it is legally acceptable speech. From a legal/social standpoint: burning the flag is not (on its own) sedition or treason. It's important for politically divisive speech to be allowed. From a personal standpoint: in the end it's a piece of colored cloth. I understand it has symbolic meaning, but no one else's rights are being damaged if someone burns a flag. One of the most important reasons to have freedom of speech is to be able to say "I don't like something about the country." That's what burning the flag is doing IMO, if in an extreme fashion. In the end it should be legal for someone to say "F the United States."

Everything depends on context. If you do it respectfully, even burning a flag is permitted to 'bury it'.

But try walking up to a black man in public and calling him a n1gger and see how many people would fault YOU for instigating the violence to ensue, bubba.

That is my point, some provocations are justifiably beaten down.

Burn my nations flag and that is what you would get if you try to use physical force to stop me from rescuing that flag.

Here's ^^ a guy who justifies his being a fascist thug by advising if you don't do as he coerces, he'll fuck you up like a fascist thug.

Hardly anything need be added to that.

 

[Pogo]

An American citizen exercising their freedom of speech to burn a flag is evil to many cons, but a US president prostrating himself before a North Korean general and saluting that piece of shit gets a pass from them.

These are people that are clueless about what America is and what the Constitution is. They don't think these things important, they think their feelings regarding these things are important. Ignorance incarnate.

An American citizen who burns the American flag is an Anti-American asshole.


FUCK THEM ALL.

An American citizen who burns the flag is an anti-American asshole.

Or perhaps they're simply not a fetishist idolatry graven-image type.

What's most illustrative about knuckledragger comments like this is not the fetishism itself. It's the ideological fascism that thinks "since I'm a fetishist, everybody else has to be too".

Whelp ----- hate to break the bad news but no we don't. That's your hangup. You're welcome to it but you're not welcome to force it on others.

Just as I keep saying about the standing-for-the-anthem thing.... you don't force me to stand and I don't force you to sit. Works both ways, like it or lump it.

Nope.

Just because they don't share the respect for the symbols of this Nation that Americans do,does not mean that they do not know what they are doing when they burn the Flag.They are actively insulting their fellow citizens, and stating the they are not loyal to their group.THey remain MEMBERS of the group of course. Because renouncing their citizens ship [sic] would be a hardship for them.They want the BENEFITS of being a member of the group, but have no respect for or loyalty to the group.They are assholes.And in a healthy society they would be ostracized and despised.

Still-yet-another demonstration that mob mentality jingoists can only argue from emotion.

 

[Correll]

So is burning a cross; yuou OK with that too?

The fact is that some forms of speech should not fall under the category of protected speech, and the SCOTUS got it brain-dead wrong on this one.

I'm curious just which forms of speech you feel should not be protected, and why. Unpopular speech being protected is the only way the first amendment means anything, but there can clearly be exceptions.

I think that speech that incites violence, provokes violence or would predictably cause violence is not covered under the First Amendment similar to how shouting 'FIRE!' in a crowded theater is not allowed under that amendment as well.

I don't think burning a flag falls under that sort of qualification. It would be closer to "fighting words." I'm not a big fan of that concept, either; it implies a lack of responsibility for a person's own actions.

As long as the person doing the burning owns the flag, and does it in a safe and otherwise legal manner, I say it is legally acceptable speech. From a legal/social standpoint: burning the flag is not (on its own) sedition or treason. It's important for politically divisive speech to be allowed. From a personal standpoint: in the end it's a piece of colored cloth. I understand it has symbolic meaning, but no one else's rights are being damaged if someone burns a flag. One of the most important reasons to have freedom of speech is to be able to say "I don't like something about the country." That's what burning the flag is doing IMO, if in an extreme fashion. In the end it should be legal for someone to say "F the United States."

Everything depends on context. If you do it respectfully, even burning a flag is permitted to 'bury it'.

But try walking up to a black man in public and calling him a n1gger and see how many people would fault YOU for instigating the violence to ensue, bubba.

That is my point, some provocations are justifiably beaten down.

Burn my nations flag and that is what you would get if you try to use physical force to stop me from rescuing that flag.

Here's ^^ a guy who justifies his being a fascist thug by advising if you don't do as he coerces, he'll fuck you up like a fascist thug.

Hardly anything need be added to that.

So, if someone called a black man a "n****r to his face, would you blame the black man for fighting him? Or blame the guy calling him out with "fighting words"?