Flag-burning amendment could pass Senate scrutiny This week's decision may come down to two votes By LAURIE KELLMAN Associated Press WASHINGTON - A constitutional amendment to ban flag desecration is headed toward its best chance of passage in 15 years with a cliffhanger vote later this week in the Senate. As debate opened Monday, supporters and opponents alike said the amendment is within two votes of being sent to the states for ratification. Supporters called the debate a week before Independence Day a chance for Congress to salute veterans. "I think of the flag as a symbol of what the veterans fought for, what they sustained wounds for, what they sustained loss of limbs for, and what they sustained loss of life for," said Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa. Opponents, who include the Senate's second-most senior Republican and Democrat, say a flag amendment would violate the First Amendment's free speech protections as the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in 1990. And some Democrats called the debate just the latest example of the Republican majority spending Senate time on an issue with the aim of scoring points with conservative voters in the midterm elections. Earlier this month, the Senate spent three days debating a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriages to see it fall 11 votes short. The proposed amendment, sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, reads: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." "The Constitution is too important to be used for partisan political purposes; and so, in my view, is the American flag," said Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the senior Democrat on Specter's committee. "This is most especially not the time for the Senate to vote to limit American fundamental rights or to strike at the heart of the First Amendment." To become the Constitution's 28th amendment, the bill must be approved by two-thirds of those present in each chamber, then ratified within seven years by at least 38 state legislatures.
more wastes of time. make someone's life better. life is too short spent burning energy on crap like this.
Max, you need to run for office!! I would, but I'm too busy running after orifice to even consider running for office!
War in Iraq War in Afghanistan Record Deficit Record High Oil Prices and we have Senators debating this garbage...
I'm a fan of the "more laws, more crime" philosophy. Especially in America where freedom reigns, and isn't taken lightly. But, if you burn a flag - unless you're just cold and all out of wood - you're making a statement. And, clear as can be, that statement is "F*** America". So why should America protect your freedoms if you've disavowed it?
So why should America protect your freedoms if you've disavowed it? because it is the American thing to do.
well aside from other considerations.... why should America waste time and money passing a frigging constitutional amendment against you to protect a piece of cloth? America is not made of polyester, thankfully, and is much stronger than a bunch of symbols or gestures.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/27/flag.amendment.ap/index.html <I>"Our country's unique because our dissidents have a voice," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, a World War II veteran who lost an arm in the war and was decorated with the Medal of Honor. "While I take offense at disrespect to the flag," he said, "I nonetheless believe it is my continued duty as a veteran, as an American citizen, and as a United States senator to defend the constitutional right of protesters to use the flag in nonviolent speech." </I> The amendment failed by 1 vote.
While I don't agree with a flag-burning amendment I do have a question to ask. Why do so many people refuse to see the significance of the flag? It's not just a piece of cloth. It stands for something and means something to a lot of people. That's why people burn it.
personally im just not that nationalistic and dont understand why nationalism appeals to people still in the 21st century when i really do believe we're headed to being just part of a global village - and for the better. however i think even people who might not themselves see the significance on a personal level understand that it is significant for others. i however have a huge problem on adding constitutional amendments for things such as flag burning or banning homosexual marriage. the constitution should have significance for people and it should mean something more than ink on paper. it should be valued more than simply be a lil document which we can backspace and insert random new things which really dont flow with the original intent of the document. what do you think jefferson and madison think about these fickle trivial political ploys?
If this amendment ever makes it through on one of the million pre-election times it pops up, I will be wiping my ass with little American flags the next day.
I understand that the flag means something to a lot of people. It is obviously THE symbol of the country itself. But the flag means something only because, despite its faults, people take pride in all the good things about this country including rule of law, and guarantee of civil rights, liberties, and freedoms, including that of speech. Now IMHO, the very act of restricting this form of speech diminishes what the country stands for. There are many countries where you cannot burn the flag of that country but also can't criticize its leaders, can't insult them, burn them in effigy, write negative articles about them, etc. etc. By enacting this amendment we have moved one small step towards being like those countries. By allowing the flag to be "desecrated" and therefore affirming free speech, the flag itself has further esteem in my eyes. By passing such an amendment thereby taking a small tiny step towards being like North Korea, only dimishes the flag by diminishing the very things that make the flag such a proud symbol in the first place.
I just heard on NPR that it did not pass. I don't like seeing the flag burned, but if we put an amendment into our constitution the freedom that the flag stands for would have been damaged even though nothing was done to the flag. The senate made the right decision today.
it means something that it transcends. Therefore some burned polyester (by the way, how many flag burnings happen per year? When was the last one you witnessed?....I thought so) do not interrupt that for me, which I think is important. I also think its stands for an ideal, wheras if you want to burn a piece of polyester (within existing fire codes) it's fine for you to do so. without it being an unconstitutional offense as the level of other things, such as discriminating on the basis of race, treason, etc.
