Jump to content

I Pledge Allegiance......


TasDom

Recommended Posts

 

I know that most of the people on this forum understand . . . history, our national character, our source and our strength. It is ourselves only to the extent of our obedience and our faith in, and our love of God.

The deliberate pollution of the facts is our "great" undoing.

"Education", or "right emotions", nor ignorance will ever deliver us from ourselves, if we do not understand the Source of our nationhood. It is not Fate, or some happy coincidence or convergence. It happened to be Godly people 2.5 centuries ago who were so much smarter than we today, evidently.

We say "God bless", or we ask God to bless our nation, or we ask God to be on our side. We have it BACKWARD. We must be a people who bless God, as individuals. He will bless the people and nation who bless Him. NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

I hope this is not overstepping the posting rules or boundaries. but, the Truth is the Truth, and must be said.

So I guessing yor are one of those that believe that the crew that came up with the Constitution did so by praying for guidance and inspiration?

Or that Thomas Jefferson sat in a room and prayed to God and the words just flowed forth?

History? Last time I checked there weren't any accounts of GW parting the Potomac in order to surprise the enemy.

Godly people? They were either Diests or Unatarians who firmly believed that religion has no place in government, along with being adamant that there be no religious test to hold office.

They were smart, very smart, they said keep religion, and thus God, the hell out of government.

 

I'm all for keeping the government out of religion (along with most other things).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm sorry.. and its just MHO but Old Glory should not be painted on a speaker.

 

Small point perhaps, today, with the selective "justice" which is/is not enforced, but, is it not also against the law to represent the American flag on articles of clothing, and other items . . . ?

 

 

No, I'd be surprised if it is against the law, given that during the senior Bush's administration the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag is protected under the Constitution.  A friend of mine commented "That's America at its best."   I believe that justice Scalia was one of the justices who protected the right to burn the flag.

 

dwilawyer?

 

 

BRENNAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, SCALIA, and KENNEDY, JJ., joined.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

 

 

I'm sorry.. and its just MHO but Old Glory should not be painted on a speaker.

 

Small point perhaps, today, with the selective "justice" which is/is not enforced, but, is it not also against the law to represent the American flag on articles of clothing, and other items . . . ?

 

 

No, I'd be surprised if it is against the law, given that during the senior Bush's administration the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag is protected under the Constitution.  A friend of mine commented "That's America at its best."   I believe that justice Scalia was one of the justices who protected the right to burn the flag.

 

dwilawyer?

 

 

BRENNAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, SCALIA, and KENNEDY, JJ., j

With this particular decision, the Court did not split based upon ideological lines.  This is often true with freedom of speech/expression cases.  What is just as telling about the decision is who was NOT in the majority.  From left to right (there is fairly uniform understanding among scholars of the Court as to where particular justices sit on an ideological scale in general terms relative to one another) the dissenters were: Stevens, White, O'Connor and Rehnquist.  I can't think of a case prior to this where you had Stevens and White dissenting with Rehnquist.  It did occur again, two years later in U.S. v. EichmanEichman was a flag burning case that involved the federal flag burning statute that was passed in response to Johnson ​a state flag burning criminal statute.  The result was the same in Eichman, ​with the exact same four justices in dissent.

 

In Johnson the highest court in Texas overturned the conviction and the prosecutors were trying to get SCOTUS to reinstate the conviction.  In Eichman the defendant was trying to have his federal conviction reversed.  The Eichman court struck down the federal law.  Eichman and Johnson were both argued by William Kunstler on behalf of the criminal defendants.  Kenneth Star argued the case on behalf of the government as Solicitor General.

 

If anyone is interested in listening to the oral arguments in either Johnson or Eichman I can post links to the Oyez.org website where you can listen to what the lawyers argued and the questions the Justices asked of them.

 

Travis

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's ludicrous to think it a crime to burn a flag, or a book, or any other symbol, provided it is yours or you have the owner's permission and it can be safely done without exposing others and their property to a risk of fire.

 

As to the question about US copyrights of the flag, there are none.  The US government cannot own copyrights.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, any dumb azz p rick that wants to burn an American flag can.....big whoop. These same stupid turds do  much worse each and every day, along with their ilk. If the SCOTUS ever outlaws idiots then we got somethin.....although they may have to start on the bench.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

It's ludicrous to think it a crime to burn a flag, or a book, or any other symbol, provided it is yours or you have the owner's permission and it can be safely done without exposing others and their property to a risk of fire.

As to the question about US copyrights of the flag, there are none. The US government cannot own copyrights.

They can't own copyrights? I never thought about it before.

What about: The few, the proud . . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An apology is in order.

 

A couple of weeks ago I responded to some comments (about a couple of my comments) in a deliberately insulting way.

 

For me to talk about the subjects of decent behavior, shared values, and, most importantly, God’s grace, and not live them is hollow and hypocritical.

 

So, dwilawyer and mungkiman and other readers, I do apologize in earnest.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

An apology is in order.

A couple of weeks ago I responded to some comments (about a couple of my comments) in a deliberately insulting way.

For me to talk about the subjects of decent behavior, shared values, and, most importantly, God’s grace, and not live them is hollow and hypocritical.

So, dwilawyer and mungkiman and other readers, I do apologize in earnest.

None necessary from my end, but I appreciate the sentiment just the same. It is I that owe an apology to you. In my zeal to clarify what we actually know historically, I was condescending when it was unnecessary to make my point. For that, I sincerely apologize.

Travis

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, any dumb azz p rick that wants to burn an American flag can.....big whoop. These same stupid turds do  much worse each and every day, along with their ilk. If the SCOTUS ever outlaws idiots then we got somethin.....although they may have to start on the bench.....

 

What do you think of the comment of Norman Thomas (made during the Veitnam War) that the flag didn't need to be burned, but should be laundered?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's ludicrous to think it a crime to burn a flag, or a book, or any other symbol, provided it is yours or you have the owner's permission and it can be safely done without exposing others and their property to a risk of fire.

As to the question about US copyrights of the flag, there are none. The US government cannot own copyrights.

They can't own copyrights? I never thought about it before.

What about: The few, the proud . . . .

 

 

Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.

 

17 U.S. Code § 105 - Subject matter of copyright: United States Government works

 

 

No trademark by which the goods of the applicant may be distinguished from the goods of others shall be refused registration on the principal register on account of its nature unless it—

 

...

 Consists of or comprises the flag or coat of arms or other insignia of the United States, or of any State or municipality, or of any foreign nation, or any simulation thereof.

 

15 U.S. Code § 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration

Edited by Jeff Matthews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...