more on more on Andrew Tobias on Flag Burning

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: L Jean Camp <ljeanc () gmail com>
Date: June 29, 2006 6:45:43 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on more on Andrew Tobias on Flag Burning
Reply-To: ljean () ljean com

Political debates are about ideas; but also about the real lives of
real people who could be affected. You forgot about them in your
listing of things about which I might care.

An important part about PASSING A LAW is that it implies it will be
enforced against some unfortunate soul.  Like laws against "drugs" and
'terror" the law is not against the idea of flag burning. It is
against the act of a person who might burn or dishonor a flag. When
such a law is passed this expands the power of the state to arrest,
imprison or otherwise harm someone. You appear to be hoping that the
law is pointless, it will alter nothing. Are you sure? That this law
would never ever be used?

I was once a foolish young student who might walk right into some such
law. I care for those people who still are, or who might yet be. Why
do you want to hurt them?

Politics is above all about individuals, if we choose to help or harm
ourselves and each other.  My core obejction to both this law and the
Bush Administration is the consistent investment in the sheer
meanness, from the petty to the great.

thanks,
Jean

On 6/28/06, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:
> perhaps to the Bill of Rights and our freedom
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Munro, Neil" <NMunro () nationaljournal com>
> Date: June 28, 2006 4:55:53 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: RE: [IP] more on Andrew Tobias on Flag Burning
>
>
>
> Just a few minor questions;
>
> Given that complaints about the constitutionality of a properly
> accomplished constitutional amendment are logically ridiculous (Here's
> the short version; The constitution specifically allows the Senate to
> forward amendments to the states), then I'd like to ask;
>
> Is the dislike of a flag-burning amendment powered by opposition to  
> the
> amendment's moral claim - that our personal freedom of expression  
> should
> be limited for the good of the collective?
>
> Is the dislike of the amendment powered by fear than any victory by  
> the
> collective-faction will lead to more victories by that faction and  
> thus
> result in practical, tangible limits on our freedom of expression?
>
> Is the dislike of the amendment powered by a desire not to grant  
> even a
> symbolic victory to another sector in society, in this case, to the
> socially conservative Republican voters?
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 4:20 PM
> To: ip () v2 listbox com
> Subject: [IP] more on Andrew Tobias on Flag Burning
>
>
> sys something about our Senate
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Gabe Goldberg <gabe () gabegold com>
> Date: June 28, 2006 12:25:33 PM EDT
> To: dave () farber net
> Subject: Re: [IP] Andrew Tobias on Flag Burning
>
> And this morning Sen. Orin Hatch was on NPR opining that yes indeed,
> passing a don't-burn-the-flag constitutional amendment *is* the most
> important thing for the senate to do right now.
>
> David Farber wrote:
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: Ralph <rs () his com>
> > Date: June 28, 2006 6:46:50 AM EDT
> > To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
> > Subject: Andrew Tobias on Flag Burning
> >
> > http://www.andrewtobias.com/newcolumns/060628.html
> >
> > Flag Burning
> > Published on June 28, 2006
> >
> > Oh, for crying out loud.
> >
> > The whole point of America is that you can burn the flag.  Nothing
> > sums up her greatness so succinctly.  And it is precisely this -
> > that in America you should be free to do any damn thing you please
> > so long as it does not impinge on the rights of others - that leads
> > most of us to abhor the idea of burning it in the first place.
> >
> > And one thing you should absolutely be free to do in America is
> > criticize your country and express outrage at its behavior - even
> > if you're wrong.  We call that the Bill of Rights.
> --
>
> Gabriel Goldberg, Computers and Publishing, Inc.          (703)  
> 204-0433
> 3401 Silver Maple Place, Falls Church, VA 22042         
> gabe () gabegold com
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as nmunro () nationaljournal com
> To manage your subscription, go to
>    http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at:
> http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as Jean_Camp () harvard edu
> To manage your subscription, go to
>   http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
> people/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/