Ok, so educate me a bit here. You country has 2 flags? What is the official flag of Britain, the Union Jack?


Don Cardi

DC, you might be interested in this: in India, the flag is protected ridiculously by the constitution. Burning is out of question(ofcourse some terrorists do it in spite of this). I cannot even hoist the flag on my roof. A few years ago, a law was passed to allow people to hoist the flags on Independence day alone. Flags cannot fly after evening. I cannot wrap it around my body (so, forget making bras and bikinis with them ). Ofcourse this is the theory. Many movies and clothes designers bypass these rules by not including the blue colored wheel in the middle of the flag and just using the tri-color(without the wheel, it is not the official Indian flag).
Since it is illegal to desecrate the flag in India, there is no question of tolerating such behavior. But if it were not banned by the constitution, I am all for doing whatever with it. I cannot be patriotic to a ridiculous extent. Patriotism is like religion... too much of it obscures your vision.

Flag burning is not against the law per se. Of course, the flag you burn must be yours to burn (in the sense that you own the actual piece of cloth or have the owner's permission)!

Burning it in public in a way likely to inflame racial hatred or to cause fear, alarm or distress will contravene the Public Order statutes, but this is not something specific to the British flag. It is just one way of commiting a public order offence.

As for the sentiments: pretty much the same as in the US, except more diluted (us Brits are less passionate about our flag. The English flag, however, is a different matter, and is capable of inciting partiotic passion amongst our proud soccer hooligans) It would probably be frowned upon, unless you had a "good reason" (e.g. opposing Iraq war).

We just wasted a load of legislative time over here banning the hunting of foxes with hounds. I would think that a law concerning flag burning would be considered just as illiberal and as much a waste of time.

Josie, SVSG & Doctor,

Thank you all for the information.


Don Cardi

What is more sacrosant -- 'freedom' or freedom under the law?
Without reference to law, freedom can be a rather abstract and not necessarily helpful concept. Burning a national flag does nothing to enhance freedom in a democracy and does, on the contrary, undermine the very notion of meaningful freedom under the law.

I have not seen any houses with our flag installed around yet. It was interesting to see so many Americans do it. The only occasion you see flags in people's hand is during a football (soccer) match when national team plays.
Flag is not that sacred and people are not that patriotic in that sense to the degree of the US, so we've not reached the point to burn our own flag just yet. Plus we have so many other countries' flags to burn. They usually don't get it right anyway, I mean they are going to burn it in a few minutes. They are idiots! :p

Bollocks.

The right to burn one's national flag is the epitome of liberalism.

Ritual attachment to livery is the hallmark of a primitive society.

I gotta say it ... all you folks from the Southern US sure are nice, but you are a couple of centuries behind the rest of the Western world.

Interesting response -- I'm something of a British liberal myself.

Nonetheless, I do feel flag-burning should constitute a criminal offence. The flag, for me, is an important symbol of nationhood that should not be taken so lightly.

Legitimate protest is an essential part of democracy; the right to differ over issues like Iraq is crucial and to take your protest to the streets should you wish to express your anger, perfectly acceptable. And yet flag-burning seems a grave insult to that hard won right to protest, to that very freedom.

Flag burning is an exercise of that hard-won right to protest!

You guys fought hard and successfully to free yourselves from the yoke of British colonialism, to have the right to express yourselves freely and in whatever form.

Its fine to tut-tut and disapprove of those who burn the flag, but not to criminalize such behaviour. That goes against the entire ethos of a free nation.

But good ol' southern folk, fine and upstanding, what's right is right. Southern folk who firmly believe that women have no right to abort their babies, even if they are pregnant by rape or incest. You defend vehemently the right to bear those arms that are so, so, unnecessary now that your government is the most powerful in the world. Yee-ha! Guns don't kill, people do... and them darn varmint flag burnin' f@ggots are just askin' for it, ain't they!

Women and blacks in poverty and disenfranchised! Public school funding cut, defence spending increased! Tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest 1 per cent of your fine ol' country.

But so long as that good ol' flag is a-flyin'... ol' liberty.

Okay so first thing first I am not the liberal elite; I am just one person trying to rationalize the world around him. I would say that I am a liberal but I’ve had a staunch conservative tell me that I can’t call myself a liberal because of a couple of my views. (gun control mainly) I’m not trying to “"here's-a-Christian-I-can-shock-and-piss-off"” as you said, you just lumped all people who are against a flag-burning ban together and I was stating that I personally am in fact not in that group. You placed your Christianity in this discussion; I’m just saying that we have different starting points walking into this.

Now in response to my statements you have said…
Your problem is that you guys have no middle ground for compromise. It's either "be like us, or go to hell."
And in the very next post
If you think it's that messed up, there are boats that both arrive and leave America.

So this middle ground you speak of, is me leaving my home?


You also seem to have a particular disdain for the inconsistencies of a liberal viewpoint. We’re for killing babies but against killing the last of a species right?
You call me a cowboy but you come out blazing a statement like that. Doesn’t have much to do with “flag burning” but I’ll bite.
“Killing babies” I won’t even bother to argue the point on that phrase, I’ll keep with your language. Killing babies is a short-sided solution to an epidemic problem that needs to be addressed and corrected. Pregnancy is a strain and at times unwanted. Babies take resources from both the state and the parents. Sometimes the parents don’t have what it takes to raise a baby. Sure they should have not got pregnant if they can’t devote the resources it takes to raise the result but if you ban abortion then what. You will crops of kids with parents that neither wanted nor can afford them. It will be the poorest neighborhoods that are affected to. The rich who could afford to take care of them will just fly to a foreign country to get the procedure. I hear a lot of people talk against abortion but how many of them would take on the bills of the pregnant woman and then the child for the next eighteen years. Not just one either like I said there will be crops (yeah probably not the best term but it works to illustrate the massive amounts) of children that will end up being raised by people who think that having a child was the worst mistake they ever made. If you want a real solution you’d have to go a little Sci-Fi for it. Something like a sterilizing agent admitted to every child when they are born and the only way they can reproduce is to take an inhibiting drug (both sexes too). Then yes ban abortion all you want.


The speech issue
(Using Indian names for ball teams offends some people. So does calling fat people "fat," the insane "insane," midgets "midgets," and some I can't even mention here because of our moderator's censoring. )
I’m Indian and you know what my mom hates that term, you should see the look in her eyes as she grits her teeth and corrects it to “Native American”. I’m also fat if you call me that I’ll agree because I am. O that’s right I grew up in a “post-whatever” world and have no beliefs. Actually I was a weakling smartass in the public school system, that is where I learned all I needed about free speech. If you want to use such terms I think you should be able to, I am for free speech and all. Being for free speech doesn’t mean that I’m for speech that only I like, it means all speech. If you want to express yourself by calling me a fat Indian than by all means help yourself. I’m for free speech not popular speech. If you want to sound like an idiot I don’t see a reason to protect you from yourself. (now with some control I mean no inciting riots or anything) People get offended too easily these days, “oh they offended me” I say “Shut the F up and go on” like being called a name is really that bad. If you are going to have delicate sensibilities than yes they are going to get offended, welcome to life.

The flag.
To me people did not fight and die for a flag, they did it for a country. A country that was founded on certain principles, on of which being that government shouldn’t control speech. We are not going to see eye to eye on this and I’m fine with that. To you the flag means more than it does me, I’ve stated why I think this is so.
I’m not an extremist where everything has to go my way or all is lost. Extremism on either side is stupid.


My favorite comment so far though is “I'm not accountable for what you believe... you are.” Very subtle.
On a serious note where do you get all these KICK ASS avatars Snake?

Why did you keep directing your comments towards the people from the south? You seem to have a jones for the southerner's of the U.S.A.


Don Cardi

I myself am a Southerner -- of the English variety, I must add.

I have objected in equally strong terms to flag-burning in this country, the United Kingdom; carried out as it was, by Islamic extremists at the time of the second Gulf War.

Whatever people's misgivings about that war -- and I myself share some of those concerns -- burning the Union Jack was an affront to our very democracy and the right to protest. It demonstrated a lack of respect for our nation by a minority of Muslims, towards a nation-state that is nominally their home. To prohibit flag-burning does not, in my view, undermine the right to protest; rather, the right to protest is enshrined in proper respect for the flag.

In US terms I would be considered a liberal, if not a left-liberal and yet it seems I am with the forces of conservatism on this issue -- I entirely understand why an amendment to prohibit flag-burning is sought.

Maybe because Southerners come out with oxymoronic little gems like this:

The very essence of liberalism is freedom ... freedom to dessicrate livery with impunity. Maybe someone right of the NRA would consider Wiseguy 1872 and his biblebelt ilk to be liberal, but no objective political scholar would share this opinion.

Ever heard of "I disagree with what you say but I defend to the death your right to say it"???

Like I said, I like Southern folk ... they are genteel and have excellent social skills. They are the salt of the Earth ... etc. But they are generally politically very primitive in their single-mindedness.

Maybe because Southerners come out with oxymoronic little gems like this:

The very essence of liberalism is freedom ... freedom to dessicrate livery with impunity. Maybe someone right of the NRA would consider Wiseguy 1872 and his biblebelt ilk to be liberal, but no objective political scholar would share this opinion.

Ever heard of "I disagree with what you say but I defend to the death your right to say it"???

Like I said, I like Southern folk ... they are genteel and have excellent social skills. They are the salt of the Earth ... etc. But they are generally politically very primitive in their single-mindedness. [/b][/quote]First I think Wiseguy 1872 is from the UK not the US and second you lose all credibility when you say "Southerners" say this. So ALL southerners share that view? You obviously just made this up in your head so I'm wondering what you think is going on.

Your generalizations do not make you look like you know what you're talking about, it's quite the opposite.

UK, US, whatever. Wiseguy 1872's domicile is not the lynchpin of my argument. As for my generalizations of Southerners as gun-toting pro-lifers, I set a challenge. If one person from the southern US posts here saying that they are in favour of Roe v Wade OR in favour of repealing the 2nd amendment, I will offer my unreserved apologies and hang the Confederate flag outside my window.

Seriously, though: I don't know how anyone can profess to be remotely liberal or in favour of freedom of expression if they are in favor of criminalizing acts that are inconsequential, when there are so many real, greater ills in American society.

UK, US, whatever. Wiseguy 1872's domicile is not the lynchpin of my argument. As for my generalizations of Southerners as gun-toting pro-lifers, I set a challenge. If one person from the southern US posts here saying that they are in favour of Roe v Wade OR in favour of repealing the 2nd amendment, I will offer my unreserved apologies and hang the Confederate flag outside my window.
[/b][/quote]well let's try and find them, since EVERYONE from the south is a member of this board. :rolleyes:

Do you have any idea what you sound like?

Here is a picture of the US election results...you see anything weird about the "south"

here is a hint.....some counties are colored BLUE meaning LIBERAL meaning they are not all Conservative blah blah blah as you would like to say

I await the apology :rolleyes:

There's something wierd about your last two elections.

In 2000, there was the small matter of the hanging chads ... and the fact that the Democratic candidate received more votes nationally than the Republicans!!!!

In 2004, it all hung on one state again ... it was close, and the number of electoral college votes was DECISIVE of victory. Surely a good democratic country would at least wait until all the votes has been counted??? I mean, it's only polite, isn't it? But that annoying little thing called "democracy" didn't appeal much to the Bush re-election team. "Stop moaning," the said, "and accept defeat." Accept defeat! With votes still to be counted! DECISIVE votes!

I do apologize ... I am DEEPLY sorry that since 2000, you good Americans have not had a democratically elected leader, and will not do so until 2008 at the earliest.

Mind you, it's no better in the UK, where Labour (our "Democrats") won power despite getting less votes than the Conservatives in England!

Sorry if I sound like Micheal Moore on a bad day, and I don't want this interesting discussion to get personal and off-topic. I enjoy a good debate and hope everyone else takes it in the same vein.

yeah way to change the subject, you gave me a good laugh there :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Be a man of your word and apologize, don't go changing the subject into something else to try and bash the U.S. Be a man, is all I ask.

Actually you have your facts a little backwards here. It was the Kerry team who released the early polls while the elections were still going on. It was Kerry's camp claiming that Kerry was winning by a landslide!


Don Cardi

Actually you have your facts a little backwards here. It was the Kerry team who released the early polls while the elections were still going on. It was Kerry's camp claiming that Kerry was winning by a landslide!


Don Cardi [/b][/quote]ummmm this is directed at DR. The Bush team never said "stop moaning and accept defeat" you are using quotes and putting words in their mouth. Bush had 120,000 vote lead with approximately 70,000 votes left to be counted..do the math.

Also Kerry said he lost, it was Edwards who wanted to keep going to be in the spotlight more.

What's next, you slap me with a duelling glove and say "I demand satisfaction"!?

I strongly believe in the democratic process and in personal freedom so I do not retract my remarks about the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections or about the appalling illiberalism of a flag-burning amendment.

Having said that, I don't want any bad blood and I apologize for generalizing about Southerners.

That's fine, you can have your own opinions about the elections as I'm sure everyone else does. I just didn't appreciate the subject being changed when you were cornered.

No bad blood, never bad blood. We'll live to argue another day

Phew! After arguing with an underboss, I thought I was gonna get clipped

Phew! After arguing with an underboss, I thought I was gonna get clipped [/b][/quote]Nah, I taught DMC to "keep his friends close, but his enemies closer!" j/j.


Don Cardi

Thank you for making me an honourary US Southerner.

I am most honoured.

Surely, the British spelling was a give away though.

How did this turn into a discussion about the south? YEEEEEE HAWWWWW.

As for the 2004 election, I will be the first to say that something stunk to high heaven in Fla and in Ohio. Just as it did in Fla in 2000. However as anyone who knows me on these boards will tell you I am a die hard Deomcratic Liberal, and I will be the first to say the real reason Gore and Kerry both lost is that they did not come across as genuine people.

Gore with his sighing and his holier than thou attitude and
Kerry ---in that stupid duck hunting suit....Yeesh.

If the dems pick Hilary in '08 I predict the Repubs will pick George Allen of Virginia as a compromise, and he will clean her clock. The Dems best hope IMHO right now is Joe Biden, cause like him or not he calls them like he sees them.

I didn't know you lived in the South? I mean you must, since you know us all so well right?!?
:rolleyes:

This is the exact reason why I beg Geoff to give us an "Ignore User" button. Please Please Please Geoff?????

Looks pretty purple to me.

and your point is

That it was a close race? YES
That even though it was purple Bush still won the popular vote? Yes
That even though it was purple Bush still won the Electoral votes? Yes

If you read the thread, the point of the picture was to show that the entire south was not conservative.