Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
I take a bath once a week, you know, to save Mother Earth from getting dehydrated.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Democrat "patriotism"
- Thread starter PrayingForWar
- Start date
I take a bath once a week, you know, to save Mother Earth from getting dehydrated.
PrayingForWar
Founder's Club Member
OC for ME
Regular Member
Jesus is a far cry from Obama for most folks, not so much for the remainder. Both instances are equally inappropriate considering the flag code. But, Jesus on a US flag is far less 'offensive' compared to Obama on a US flag for those who are easily offended.
DrakeZ07
Regular Member
Why is having Christ on a flag "less offensive" than our President? I'm sure Every other religion would take large offense at seeing the carpenter on the US flag, just as I'm sure you, and others of your perceived faith have taken offense to seeing Obama's Image on the US Flag. So, too, would it be more offending to people to see a compilation of religious mythos leaders, and historic political leaders, each of their head images, in place of each US star? Would it less offensive to see the Pagen Crux on the US Flag? Seeing as how it's largely seen, mistakenly, as a christian symbol.
I'm not trying to rile you up, or offend any religious belief you have, but it kinda struck a cord with me, that somehow it is less offensive to have jesus on the US flag, than our President... But hey, what do I know, this is a christian nation, founded by christian people, based on the christian faith, so of course it's less offensive. /sarcasm.
OC for ME
Regular Member
I did not state that I was offended.
DrakeZ07
Regular Member
Ah, well I apologize for misunderstanding you on that portion, wasn't paying much attention to it, distracted~
Still; I don't understand how it would be less offensive for some people to have christ's picture on it instead of obama's; shed some light on it please?
LOL! Right on both counts, I suspect.
By the way, one of the veterans said:
Frankly, I'm not sure what to think about someone who fights and dies for a flag rather than, say, freedom. Which includes, you know, the freedom of doing tacky and tasteless things with flags.
Sounds to me like such a person is fighting for a government (for which the flag is ultimately a symbol), rather than the ideas which our society cherishes (or used to cherish).
I might say that I find that a little disrespectful. Certainly no less disrespectful than some ridiculous Obama Messiah flag, which I find too hilariously stupid to really even think of as disrespectful.
It's kind of like, a retarded kid might give me the finger, but you know what? I'm not going to let that bother me. It probably doesn't mean to him what it does to me. He is, after all, a retard.
Ah! Now you've got me on board (now that we're talking about what the symbol is intended to represent).
And I agree completely. Citizen made an excellent post recently regarding the difference in perception of the office of President from the time of its inception to today.
People should be more concerned with electing representatives who actually consider the concerns of their constituency, rather than electing some figurehead who pretends to represent their "side" in the fictitious left-vs-right "debate". (The best part is the cute way in which everyone and all their friends are conveniently on the same "side". Politics isn't about thought anymore, it's about pretending you're smart and cool for your friends. Disgusting.)
My father and his two brothers all served in WW2 and would cringe at a flag with anyone's picture on it, they are dead now but the flag became an important symbol for them, sweating, bleeding and watching friends die in Iwo Jima, Okinawa, etc, then seeing the flag go up, must of been damn important to them. Some still love their country (but mistrust their gov).
OC for ME
Regular Member
You stated it, not me, that whole Christian nation thing.
Ya know, well maybe you don't know, but, God gave us our rights, or, at least that is what the Founding Fathers believed (I agree). So, if God don't want this one nation under Him to have our flag 'desecrated' then he'll do something about it, or not.
Likely, He is looking around and saying to Himself 'Ya know, maybe that free will thing ain't working out so good for some folks....oh well, no biggie, I'll just let them keep on keeping on and judge them individually later. Or I'll my kid judge them for me if I'm busy.'
I don't question anyone's patriotism simply because because everyone is a patriot unless they actively work against liberty. They may not be a patriot as I define it, but if they are for liberty and against anti-liberty, they aren't the issue. the anti-liberty folks are.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Ahh, I see, so you do question peoples patriotism. There is a prerequisite to your not questioning a person's patriotism, if it is not met, then you do question it.
You seem to be an Absolutist. Nothing wrong with it, just saying.
Last edited:
OC for ME
Regular Member
Question? No.
You, well, not you specifically, but the 'you' in a broad brush sense, are anti-liberty as a result of 'your' actions, there is no question, you are not a patriot.
You are a patriot if your actions, or inaction, are not anti-liberty.
I know anti-liberty actions when I see them.....absolutely.
You missed my point entirely
Nowhere did I call for a law against the vets' behavior, nor put words in your mouth.
I was simply pointing out that the vets should be celebrating the D group's freedom to wave their flag instead of demanding they take it down. The vets were demanding that the D's stifle their free speech in the form of waving their flag because they disagree with the form and content of the message.
Shun the local D's as they would the Westoro nutbags - that's all fine, and completely in the spirit of free speech in our society. But don't demand they stop expressing themselves.
Live and let live - that embraces the spirit of the freedom of speech in our country, along with the corollary that nothing slimy survives exposure to intense sunlight. Put the D group's flag on every local news station and in every newspaper. Talk about it on local talk radio. Express displeasure with the message flying the flag sends. Let the public know about it so people can make their own decisions whether to join or support the group and what the flag says it stands for.
But don't try to make them stop. How else can the message and messenger be exposed for what they are? That's the beauty of free speech - it allows everyone access to more information so they can better make an informed decision whether to join - or shun - people and organizations.
Nowhere did I call for a law against the vets' behavior, nor put words in your mouth.
I was simply pointing out that the vets should be celebrating the D group's freedom to wave their flag instead of demanding they take it down. The vets were demanding that the D's stifle their free speech in the form of waving their flag because they disagree with the form and content of the message.
Shun the local D's as they would the Westoro nutbags - that's all fine, and completely in the spirit of free speech in our society. But don't demand they stop expressing themselves.
Live and let live - that embraces the spirit of the freedom of speech in our country, along with the corollary that nothing slimy survives exposure to intense sunlight. Put the D group's flag on every local news station and in every newspaper. Talk about it on local talk radio. Express displeasure with the message flying the flag sends. Let the public know about it so people can make their own decisions whether to join or support the group and what the flag says it stands for.
But don't try to make them stop. How else can the message and messenger be exposed for what they are? That's the beauty of free speech - it allows everyone access to more information so they can better make an informed decision whether to join - or shun - people and organizations.
DangerClose
Regular Member
What's the punishment for breaking that law? Looks like nothing. As it should be.
Aknazer
Regular Member
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
Unconstitutional laws, especially those which have already been declared as such, have no authority.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
They have no Authority but you know the Government can still move forward acting as if the Law is Constitutional.