If burning a flag is legal, how come cross burning is not?

Are you for or against flag burning and why.

Published on June 23, 2005 By Moderateman In US Domestic

The way I seee it flag burning is a disgrace, and should be punished the same was cross burning is.

What say you?

Comments

Sir Peter Maxwell

on Jun 23, 2005

You should have just E-mailed Little Whip, she is an expert on cross burning.

Dr Guy

on Jun 23, 2005

There is nothing illegal about burning a cross, provided it's done on your own property or with the property owners consent, and is not in violation of any standard open burning laws.

It depends upon the state. In some states it is seen as a hate crime and is not legal even on your own property.

bakerstreet

on Jun 23, 2005

It isn't burning the cross that is the point, though, it is "ethnic intimidation", so if you say, made a dummy and hung it from a tree it would amount to the same thing if your motive was clear enough.

Brings up a good point, though. If burning a cross is ethnic intimidation, wouldn't flushing a Koran be the same thing? Maybe it is time to discount all these silly symbolic acts and realize a flag is a rectangle of cloth, a book is a book, and a cross is just a couple of pieces of wood.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Reply By: Sir Peter Maxwell(Anonymous User)Posted: Thursday, June 23, 2005You should have just E-mailed Little Whip, she is an expert on cross burning

you sir are a pig, I am willing to bet whip could kick your ass.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Reply By: little_whipPosted: Thursday, June 23, 2005There is nothing illegal about burning a cross, provided it's done on your own property or with the property owners consent, and is not in violation of any standard open burning laws

since most public burnings of flags happen out front, if you burned a cross under the same circumstances what would happen then?> arrest i BET.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Reply By: Dr. GuyPosted: Thursday, June 23, 2005There is nothing illegal about burning a cross, provided it's done on your own property or with the property owners consent, and is not in violation of any standard open burning laws.It depends upon the state. In some states it is seen as a hate crime and is not legal even on your own property

OK 2 GUYS IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE, ONE BURNS A FLAG ONE BURNS A CROSS, DO THEY BOTH GET ARRESTED? i THINK NOT.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Reply By: BakerStreetPosted: Thursday, June 23, 2005It isn't burning the cross that is the point, though, it is "ethnic intimidation", so if you say, made a dummy and hung it from a tree it would amount to the same thing if your motive was clear enough.Brings up a good point, though. If burning a cross is ethnic intimidation, wouldn't flushing a Koran be the same thing? Maybe it is time to discount all these silly symbolic acts and realize a flag is a rectangle of cloth, a book is a book, and a cross is just a couple of pieces of wood.

Baker> people I knew and loved fought for the flag and what is symbolizes, and died, it pisses me off to see a flag burning when done by an american, I could care less about idiots from other countries burning the american flag.

latour999

on Jun 23, 2005

Flag burning is okay by me. It would be naive of me to think my nation is perfect, and naive of me to think that there aren't a few people we pissed off (Native Americans and Japanese-Canadians come to mind immediately). I don't blame them for burning the flag, and I don't blame them for being pissed at my country. What we did was inexcusable.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

People keep saying that interfeering with flag burners is stifling there free speech, why don't the same rules apply to cross burning?

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Reply By: latour999Posted: Thursday, June 23, 2005Flag burning is okay by me. It would be naive of me to think my nation is perfect, and naive of me to think that there aren't a few people we pissed off (Native Americans and Japanese-Canadians come to mind immediately). I don't blame them for burning the flag, and I don't blame them for being pissed at my country. What we did was inexcusable.

what did canada do? I do not know much about canada.

A person can protest and make thier feeling know, without flag burning. that's my opinion. I find that act disrespectfull, bordering on treason. If someone hates my country bad enough to burn her flag < I say move to another country.

dynamaso

on Jun 27, 2005

I feel much the same way about flag burning as I do cross burning and effigy burning. As a form of a protest, I don't have any problems with people doing. From a legal standpoint, I don't think it should make any difference.

But if you burn my steak, look out...

zinkadoodle

on Jun 27, 2005

Kind of simple really. Burning a cross is a symbol of hate, meant to incite more hatred. Burning the flag is a symbol of protest against what our country is doing. Of course, this is only in the US. And, God knows how often flag burning occurs. Cripes, one case of burning one in over two decades. If ever we needed that Constitutional Amendment...............

Thing is, crosses get burned way more often (statistics anyone?). And, they are not benign symbols of protest. However, do you see our fearless leaders putting together an amendment for that? Oh wait....... when this government becomes Christian, it just may come up. Nah, it's not about disdain for Christians; it's about hating people of color, usually black. Nah, no need to ban that via the Constitution. Nahhhhhhh......

In other countries, American flag burning is a symbol of hate, meant to incite more hatred. But, we have no control over that, do we? Well, I suppose if the neocons decide we should, they could just may start burning cities that condone American flag burning. Damn straight. Nuke 'em. Let God sort it out.

drmiler

on Jun 27, 2005

I REALLY doubt this since MOST southern states were this might happen have laws AGAINST burning a cross. This is the first of many that I found

High Court Upholds Cross-Burning Ban

WASHINGTON, April 7, 2003

"The ruling is likely to encourage other states that endure cross-burning to enact similar laws like the one Virginia enacted over half a century ago."
CBSNews.com Legal Analyst
Andrew Cohen

(CBS) A divided Supreme Court upheld a state ban on cross burning, ruling Monday that the history of racial intimidation attached to this symbol outweighs the free speech protection of Ku Klux Klansmen or others who might it.

A burning cross is an instrument of terror, and government should have the power to stamp out or punish its use, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote.

"The protections afforded by the First Amendment ... are not absolute," O'Connor wrote for herself and four other justices.

"The essence of this ruling is that cross-burning is different from other forms of symbolic speech," said CBSNews.com Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen. "The way it has been used in American history puts it almost uniquely into a category that allows the government to punish people who choose to communicate a message in this fashion."

Justice Clarence Thomas, the court's only black member, dissented, but made clear his reasons have nothing to do with protecting free speech rights of the Klan.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!