• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Guy standing on US flag to protest - 1st amendment right

Status
Not open for further replies.

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
The best way to deal with jack wagons like those who desecrate our flag is to simply ignore them. Denying them our audience solves the problem of their efforts to be offensive for no reason other than to offend.

Major league sports learned this lesson years ago during the era of streaking. Deny the children their 15 seconds of fame and they are far less likely to disrupt your televised game.

Notably, that would also be the best way to deal with the OP and this type of thread that has nothing at all to do with RKBA but is likely only to be disruptive to the forum.

My apologies to the forum for not following my own advice in this case.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
The best way to deal with jack wagons like those who desecrate our flag is to simply ignore them. Denying them our audience solves the problem of their efforts to be offensive for no reason other than to offend.

Major league sports learned this lesson years ago during the era of streaking. Deny the children their 15 seconds of fame and they are far less likely to disrupt your televised game.

Notably, that would also be the best way to deal with the OP and this type of thread that has nothing at all to do with RKBA but is likely only to be disruptive to the forum.

My apologies to the forum for not following my own advice in this case.

Who is this our of which you write?

The stars-and-stripes is literally a symbol of the federal government--not the nation, not the people who live here.

To call it "ours" is sloppy thinking. The illogic seems to say that government is equivalent to the society it rules, that both are one and the same. And, that the symbol of the government is then necessarily the symbol of the society that government rules.

I can differentiate between the two--between the government and the large group of individuals it rules, the society it rules. I reject your unstated premise that the government that rules a society is the same as the society it rules.

I'm not a big fan of George Carlin--he was a bit too foul-mouthed for my taste. But, he did have a comment I thought really sharp. He said the US flag is a symbol. And, he leaves symbols to the symbol-minded. (Readers, say it out loud to yourself several times.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Yours is sloppy thinking. Yours seems to say that government is equivalent to the society it rules, that both are one and the same. And, that the symbol of the government is then necessarily the symbol of the society that government rules.

I can differentiate between the two. I reject your unstated premise.

I think it is only the "symbol minded" who would claim the Stars and Stripes can only represent the federal government.

Many of us who are not blinded by "symbol minded" ideology can understand how a symbol might represent many different things, to different persons, depending on the context. Many of us do view the Stars and Stripes as the most universal symbol of our society, and our nation, of our honorable service members and first responders and their sacrifices on our behalf. It is the symbol which adorns the caskets of our honored dead, which we fly above our homes, which reminds us of our rights under our constitution.

I reject your overtly stated premise that the government "rules" society. In OUR nation (excluding any pinheads who reject association with the best nation, society, and government that has existed in the secular history of the world), society rules society. We get what we collectively want. Sometimes, some of us end up in the minority on certain decisions. So be it so long as wrongs can be suffered.

As for Carlin, not only was he foul mouthed, but in the interest of a joke, he rejects the importance of symbols and symbolism. Anyone who OCs for the purpose of normalizing the idea of regular folks being armed, should see immediately the contradiction in attacking symbols.

If you want to have an intelligent, civil, sincere discussion about an issue, I think we'd both enjoy it. I'm not at all interested in puerile claims about our government being vastly detached from our society, or nit picking about who is included in "our".

Charles
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I think it is only the "symbol minded" who would claim the Stars and Stripes can only represent the federal government.

Many of us who are not blinded by "symbol minded" ideology can understand how a symbol might represent many different things, to different persons, depending on the context. Many of us do view the Stars and Stripes as the most universal symbol of our society, and our nation, of our honorable service members and first responders and their sacrifices on our behalf. It is the symbol which adorns the caskets of our honored dead, which we fly above our homes, which reminds us of our rights under our constitution.

I reject your overtly stated premise that the government "rules" society. In OUR nation (excluding any pinheads who reject association with the best nation, society, and government that has existed in the secular history of the world), society rules society. We get what we collectively want. Sometimes, some of us end up in the minority on certain decisions. So be it so long as wrongs can be suffered.

As for Carlin, not only was he foul mouthed, but in the interest of a joke, he rejects the importance of symbols and symbolism. Anyone who OCs for the purpose of normalizing the idea of regular folks being armed, should see immediately the contradiction in attacking symbols.

If you want to have an intelligent, civil, sincere discussion about an issue, I think we'd both enjoy it. I'm not at all interested in puerile claims about our government being vastly detached from our society, or nit picking about who is included in "our".

Charles

I notice you didn't actually differentiate between the government that rules a society and the society--numerous individuals.

And, since that government imposes itself on people who do not consent and never consented, "rule" is the correct terminology.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident...unalienable rights...Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness...to secure these rights, government are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

I never consented. In fact, government has passed up some thirty-four chances to ask my express, individual consent--tax returns. They know who I am. They know where I live--they mailed the paper work to me in my name with my social security number on the label many, many times. But, nooooo. On the most important social question of all--according to their lights, government--they couldn't be bothered to include a line at the bottom for me to sign my express individual consent. But, they could find room on the tax form to ask whether I wanted a dollar or three of my refund to go the presidential election fund. Yeah, right.

When government comes to my fellow human beings as an equal sincerely seeking their genuine consent, and those individuals gives their consent, then "govern" will be the correct term. Until then, rule is the correct terminology.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
I notice you didn't actually differentiate between the government that rules a society and the society--numerous individuals.

And, since that government imposes itself on people who do not consent and never consented, "rule" is the correct terminology.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident...unalienable rights...Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness...to secure these rights, government are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

When government comes to my fellow human beings as an equal sincerely seeking their genuine consent, and those individuals gives their consent, then "govern" will be the correct term. Until then, rule is the correct terminology.

I notice you are still using the juvenile tactic of misapplying the standard in the DoI in a way that its authors and contemporaries never intended nor imagined. I did give a rat's rectum whether some scum criminal never consents to respect my rights. If he violates them, I will happily have the government impose penalties on him and consider that to be entirely just and appropriate.

You also continue to engage in the puerile game of trying to differentiate between an imperfect, but democratically selected government and the people who elect that government as if we are being imposed upon by some entirely external force.

I'm just not interested in seeing every thread turn into a proselyting effort against our government, or in favor of some fanciful notion of Utopian Anarchy where unicorns puke up rainbows and fart out gold. I didn't start any attack on your fantasy. You are the one who felt compelled to respond to my post by trying to make me an offender for a word.

If you don't see anything in the Stars and Stripes, so be it. Your problem. Not mine.

Again, if you'd like to engage in a thoughtful, sincere, mutually respectful discussion of some topic, I think it would be great fun. I'd suggest anarchy not be the topic.

Charles
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I notice you are still using the juvenile tactic of misapplying the standard in the DoI in a way that its authors and contemporaries never intended nor imagined. I did give a rat's rectum whether some scum criminal never consents to respect my rights. If he violates them, I will happily have the government impose penalties on him and consider that to be entirely just and appropriate.

You also continue to engage in the puerile game of trying to differentiate between an imperfect, but democratically selected government and the people who elect that government as if we are being imposed upon by some entirely external force.

I'm just not interested in seeing every thread turn into a proselyting effort against our government, or in favor of some fanciful notion of Utopian Anarchy where unicorns puke up rainbows and fart out gold. I didn't start any attack on your fantasy. You are the one who felt compelled to respond to my post by trying to make me an offender for a word.

If you don't see anything in the Stars and Stripes, so be it. Your problem. Not mine.

Again, if you'd like to engage in a thoughtful, sincere, mutually respectful discussion of some topic, I think it would be great fun. I'd suggest anarchy not be the topic.

Charles

Unfortunately, your argument is directed against a former US Marine.

I wore the uniform. I saluted the national ensign (the Flag). I swelled with pride at the National Anthem.

It was my damn good luck that I never had to shoot another young man duped by his government. It was my damn good luck that I never had to duck shrapnel or flying lead. But, pal, I was there, ready and willing to go. Hell, at a few points, I was eager to go. So, I rate. Meaning, I stood that post, rifle in hand, bayonet on the belt, ready to go. I didn't; but not because of any lack on my part.

Now, if simple humanity isn't good enough for you, by God! that had better be. I rate. I deserve. If for no other reason than I played the fool and allowed myself to be deceived.

And, my statement--my testimony--is that "the flag" is just a part of the jingoism. It is a symbol. It is used against you, gentle reader. It is used as a symbol--because symbols don't have explanations to accompany them--to get you to connect in your mind 1776 with government today. It is used--because symbols operate without a written explanation--to get you feeling all patriotic about what government is doing today.

Mark Twain explained that he disagreed with the idea "my country, right or wrong." He held a higher standard. He said (paraphrase) that my country if it is right. If it is wrong, I will work to change its opinion.

One cannot evaluate the correctness or wrongness of imposed policy by falling prey to symbolism.

Why would anyone need a symbol? Why would anyone need a symbol to swell them with pride as a substitute for rational thought?


Footnote: Google War is a Racket by Smedley Butler. The text is now in the public domain. Butler was a USMC General. A daggone General!! And, he finally recognized that his entire career had been spent--well, read it for yourself; I won't spoil the ending for you. And, check his Wikipedia entry. Butler actually proposed an amendment to the US Constitution. It was called the peace amendment. This was by a decorated warrior.
 
Last edited:

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Unfortunately, your argument is directed against a former US Marine.

Your service rates my thanks and gratitude for your service.

But it no more makes you an expert on what the flag is or isn't a symbol for than it makes you an expert on open heart surgery. You may be an expert on all three. But not because of one or the other. And your emotional appeal to your authority based on military service is nothing more than jingoism itself. The irony is not lost on me.

The correctness or wrongness of any US government policy is not the question of this thread. Nor does recognizing the Stars and Stripes as a symbol of the nation and culture prevent proper evaluation of said policies, disagreement with those that are in error, or proper support for those that are appropriate. turns out I was smart enough NOT to get duped into taking orders from someone who would happily send me to kill or be killed just to divert public attention from his adulterous dalliances. So who has more credibility to discuss rationally what a given flag does or doesn't represent?

Meanwhile your repeated, emphatic assertion belies an emotionalism beyond rational thought on the subject. Ditto your 14th reference to General Butler's book and the sneaky way your drill sergeant turned you on to it. Or maybe it is just guilt over being duped and being so willing to take orders from immoral politicians that has clouded your ability to discuss the issue rationally.

In any event, I say again. If you don't see anything of value in the Stars and Stripes, that is your problem, not mine.

Now, perhaps you should let this drop before your emotion turns uncivil.

Charles
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Now, perhaps you should let this drop before your emotion turns uncivil.

Charles

his emotion becomes uncivil...oh wait...i forgot mate posted this...

his normal modus operandi...

ipse

profoundly apparent
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Compliment then turn right around and insult.

Wrong on both fronts. A thanks is not a compliment.

And I did not insult. I merely turned his arrogant claim of authority on its head to demonstrate why his claim to authority doesn't actually provide any more expertise in divining the meaning of symbols than does my experience.

Let us remember, it was the anarchist who turned this thread into an exercising in sniping and being unpleasant. I've simply returned his tone back to him.

Not every thread needs to be turned into an anti-government, pro-anarchist proselyting sessions.

Charles
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Wow.

Compliment then turn right around and insult.
.

I did not get "duped" .... I joined for the adventure ! See the world ! Good times.

I wonder how many forum members served just 1 term v. multiple terms of enlistment ...

And no, not interested in any "thank yous" ... I got paid when I was in..pretty good too IMO.

Now they are way way way overpaid with too many benies.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Even in the Social Lounge, there are limits.

What was intended to be a discussion has turned into an attack-fest.

Rather than butcher the thread with edits and deletions, I am locking it.

You are welcome to open the subject again, but personal attacks or negative references to other forum members will not be tolerated.


Agree or disagree this is what the courts have said:
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/flagburning.htm

http://thelawdictionary.org/article/is-flag-burning-illegal/
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top