100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Students Stomp Out Flag Burning and Go After the Burner | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
So Harmony says its ok to burn it because its his property. You know in some countries once you are married the woman is your property. Would it be ok to burn her if you country says you have the right to? Like we are saying there is no positive to flag burning. You can easily protest in other ways. The point is he is doing it to piss people off. If you are doing something to purposefully piss people off and get beat its your own fault. Responsibility for ones actions. Thats what it means to be an adult. give this a rest, a FLAG is not a LIFE,,,comparing it to a woman is kind of preposterous being an adult is allowing others to act as 'foolish' as they wish with their own MATERIAL property, and not putting your hands on them My friends and I were at my friends house having a party outside and my band was playing and cops came and told us to stop. By your logic we are on our property and should be able to do what we want with our property (instruments). You can't just do anything you want all the time. I also wouldn't go to an Eagles game in Philly with a Dallas Jersey on and burn a Phillies jersey. I might get stabbed. Just because they are my property doesn't mean I should be dumb enough to do something just to piss people off that might get me hurt. its not JUST your property if it is ILLEGALLY disrupting the piece(air space) of others if there is a PUBLIC domain which has issued a PERMIT for an event, that is a different thing than people holding events on their pwn property but which also lend over onto OTHERS property we should be cautious of what endangers us, but not to the point of EXCUSING those who would cause physical harm to us it would be stupid of me to walk down a dark alley nude with jewelry around my wrists and neck, but that wouldnt mean anyone should be CONDONING or BOASTING about how willing they would actually be to assault me in such a case,,,, because violent people will find reasons to be violent, we should be cautious, but we shouldnt sink to the logic of those violent people we find ourself trying to be protected from in the first place i think his point is whenever someone starts screaming about rights, someone else loses there rights. so the people that are throwing the party loses their rights to have this party, because someone says they are infringing their rights to quiet. neither has broken any laws, but there is a problem. and if your dumb enough to walk naked in a dark alley with your jewelry, you deserve whats coming to you to pay for your stupidity. and you do not have the right to walk naked in a dark alley, nor does anyone have the right to assault you either. the constitution says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but not everyone can be happy because of these same rights. and it would be a much less happy place if more people actually felt THEY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT To assault those who merely 'offended' them in some way a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I defend the right of two people to live a swinging lifestyle too, that doesnt mean I would want or be able to stomach it myself likewise, many countries do have customs which place symbolism and idols and materials on equal footing with human life,, I defend their right to live that way if it is the way the majority have become accustomed to and comfortable with, but I dont wish to live that way myself its not hard to understand, adults should not in this country put their hands on other adults unless someone has been PHYSICALLY threatened,,,,period, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is where we are lost in translation, apparently, my point being YES I would protect PHYSICAL life with PHYSICAL effort, I will not lay my hands on someone over MATERIAL PROPERTY,,and dont understand anyone condoning such behavior,, You are missing my point. Your arguments are all about how they have the "right" to do something. Now we are talking about a country that has the right to beat someone you would act. Even though they have the right to do it. So you are acknowledging that even if someone has the right to do something and you find it morally wrong then you would act. In this case you find life something worth protecting even if someone else has the right to cause it harm. Why cant others have this same feeling for something else? Some people feel that the flag is more than a flag and it is something to be protected even if another has the "right" to destroy it. I am just trying to give you some perspective. I have perspective. I am not in another country. I am in AMERICA. people have had 'morality' issues with everything from flag burning to interracial dating and still had no RIGHT to put their hands on those who participate in either thing,,, BECAUSE this IS AMERICA, and AMERICAN law dictates we cannot put our hands on others in violence,,period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Harmony says its ok to burn it because its his property. You know in some countries once you are married the woman is your property. Would it be ok to burn her if you country says you have the right to? Like we are saying there is no positive to flag burning. You can easily protest in other ways. The point is he is doing it to piss people off. If you are doing something to purposefully piss people off and get beat its your own fault. Responsibility for ones actions. Thats what it means to be an adult. give this a rest, a FLAG is not a LIFE,,,comparing it to a woman is kind of preposterous being an adult is allowing others to act as 'foolish' as they wish with their own MATERIAL property, and not putting your hands on them My friends and I were at my friends house having a party outside and my band was playing and cops came and told us to stop. By your logic we are on our property and should be able to do what we want with our property (instruments). You can't just do anything you want all the time. I also wouldn't go to an Eagles game in Philly with a Dallas Jersey on and burn a Phillies jersey. I might get stabbed. Just because they are my property doesn't mean I should be dumb enough to do something just to piss people off that might get me hurt. its not JUST your property if it is ILLEGALLY disrupting the piece(air space) of others if there is a PUBLIC domain which has issued a PERMIT for an event, that is a different thing than people holding events on their pwn property but which also lend over onto OTHERS property we should be cautious of what endangers us, but not to the point of EXCUSING those who would cause physical harm to us it would be stupid of me to walk down a dark alley nude with jewelry around my wrists and neck, but that wouldnt mean anyone should be CONDONING or BOASTING about how willing they would actually be to assault me in such a case,,,, because violent people will find reasons to be violent, we should be cautious, but we shouldnt sink to the logic of those violent people we find ourself trying to be protected from in the first place i think his point is whenever someone starts screaming about rights, someone else loses there rights. so the people that are throwing the party loses their rights to have this party, because someone says they are infringing their rights to quiet. neither has broken any laws, but there is a problem. and if your dumb enough to walk naked in a dark alley with your jewelry, you deserve whats coming to you to pay for your stupidity. and you do not have the right to walk naked in a dark alley, nor does anyone have the right to assault you either. the constitution says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but not everyone can be happy because of these same rights. and it would be a much less happy place if more people actually felt THEY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT To assault those who merely 'offended' them in some way a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I defend the right of two people to live a swinging lifestyle too, that doesnt mean I would want or be able to stomach it myself likewise, many countries do have customs which place symbolism and idols and materials on equal footing with human life,, I defend their right to live that way if it is the way the majority have become accustomed to and comfortable with, but I dont wish to live that way myself its not hard to understand, adults should not in this country put their hands on other adults unless someone has been PHYSICALLY threatened,,,,period, yea, well, to me, thats part of the problem.. a lot of lessons have been learned from an old fashion butt whoopin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is where we are lost in translation, apparently, my point being YES I would protect PHYSICAL life with PHYSICAL effort, I will not lay my hands on someone over MATERIAL PROPERTY,,and dont understand anyone condoning such behavior,, You are missing my point. Your arguments are all about how they have the "right" to do something. Now we are talking about a country that has the right to beat someone you would act. Even though they have the right to do it. So you are acknowledging that even if someone has the right to do something and you find it morally wrong then you would act. In this case you find life something worth protecting even if someone else has the right to cause it harm. Why cant others have this same feeling for something else? Some people feel that the flag is more than a flag and it is something to be protected even if another has the "right" to destroy it. I am just trying to give you some perspective. I have perspective. I am not in another country. I am in AMERICA. people have had 'morality' issues with everything from flag burning to interracial dating and still had no RIGHT to put their hands on those who participate in either thing,,, BECAUSE this IS AMERICA, and AMERICAN law dictates we cannot put our hands on others in violence,,period See now you are changing your story. In my other example you said if you were in a country where they had a right to beat their wife and you saw it you would stop it. You are a hypocrite by your own words. Its ok for you to stop someone from doing something that they have the legal right to do if you don't agree with it but noone else can. I understand your logic now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BECAUSE this IS AMERICA, and AMERICAN law dictates we cannot put our hands on others in violence,,period Thats not true. There are situations where violence is perfectly legal. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is where we are lost in translation, apparently, my point being YES I would protect PHYSICAL life with PHYSICAL effort, I will not lay my hands on someone over MATERIAL PROPERTY,,and dont understand anyone condoning such behavior,, You are missing my point. Your arguments are all about how they have the "right" to do something. Now we are talking about a country that has the right to beat someone you would act. Even though they have the right to do it. So you are acknowledging that even if someone has the right to do something and you find it morally wrong then you would act. In this case you find life something worth protecting even if someone else has the right to cause it harm. Why cant others have this same feeling for something else? Some people feel that the flag is more than a flag and it is something to be protected even if another has the "right" to destroy it. I am just trying to give you some perspective. I have perspective. I am not in another country. I am in AMERICA. people have had 'morality' issues with everything from flag burning to interracial dating and still had no RIGHT to put their hands on those who participate in either thing,,, BECAUSE this IS AMERICA, and AMERICAN law dictates we cannot put our hands on others in violence,,period See now you are changing your story. In my other example you said if you were in a country where they had a right to beat their wife and you saw it you would stop it. You are a hypocrite by your own words. Its ok for you to stop someone from doing something that they have the legal right to do if you don't agree with it but noone else can. I understand your logic now. your mistake is in assuming the focus was on law INSTEAD of right and wrong , when it was about right and wrong in CONJUNCTION with the laws it is never right to assault someone who has posed no physical threat to you, although in some countries it is a RIGHT in america it is not a RIGHT to do so, which corresponds to it not being morally RIGHT, which makes it all the more simple for me to understand,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this is where we are lost in translation, apparently, my point being YES I would protect PHYSICAL life with PHYSICAL effort, I will not lay my hands on someone over MATERIAL PROPERTY,,and dont understand anyone condoning such behavior,, You are missing my point. Your arguments are all about how they have the "right" to do something. Now we are talking about a country that has the right to beat someone you would act. Even though they have the right to do it. So you are acknowledging that even if someone has the right to do something and you find it morally wrong then you would act. In this case you find life something worth protecting even if someone else has the right to cause it harm. Why cant others have this same feeling for something else? Some people feel that the flag is more than a flag and it is something to be protected even if another has the "right" to destroy it. I am just trying to give you some perspective. I have perspective. I am not in another country. I am in AMERICA. people have had 'morality' issues with everything from flag burning to interracial dating and still had no RIGHT to put their hands on those who participate in either thing,,, BECAUSE this IS AMERICA, and AMERICAN law dictates we cannot put our hands on others in violence,,period See now you are changing your story. In my other example you said if you were in a country where they had a right to beat their wife and you saw it you would stop it. You are a hypocrite by your own words. Its ok for you to stop someone from doing something that they have the legal right to do if you don't agree with it but noone else can. I understand your logic now. your mistake is in assuming the focus was on law INSTEAD of right and wrong , when it was about right and wrong in CONJUNCTION with the laws it is never right to assault someone who has posed no physical threat to you, although in some countries it is a RIGHT in america it is not a RIGHT to do so, which corresponds to it not being morally RIGHT, which makes it all the more simple for me to understand,,,, We were talking about the law because you said they had "the right" which is by law. You can't argue about right and wrong because that is different between people. I know many that would say burning the flag is wrong. And even some would say killing a rapist who was declared innocent in court would be right or at least justifiable. In my example it was both morally right in the society to beat the person and legally right and you claimed you would do something physically to stop it because it conflicted with YOUR view of what is right and wrong morally even though it went against the law and morals of others. So others can have those same feelings. In this example I think burning the flag is wrong even though he had the right to do it. I wouldn't beat him, but it doesn't mean I would be upset if someone else did it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Thu 05/19/11 02:43 PM
|
|
this is where we are lost in translation, apparently, my point being YES I would protect PHYSICAL life with PHYSICAL effort, I will not lay my hands on someone over MATERIAL PROPERTY,,and dont understand anyone condoning such behavior,, You are missing my point. Your arguments are all about how they have the "right" to do something. Now we are talking about a country that has the right to beat someone you would act. Even though they have the right to do it. So you are acknowledging that even if someone has the right to do something and you find it morally wrong then you would act. In this case you find life something worth protecting even if someone else has the right to cause it harm. Why cant others have this same feeling for something else? Some people feel that the flag is more than a flag and it is something to be protected even if another has the "right" to destroy it. I am just trying to give you some perspective. I have perspective. I am not in another country. I am in AMERICA. people have had 'morality' issues with everything from flag burning to interracial dating and still had no RIGHT to put their hands on those who participate in either thing,,, BECAUSE this IS AMERICA, and AMERICAN law dictates we cannot put our hands on others in violence,,period See now you are changing your story. In my other example you said if you were in a country where they had a right to beat their wife and you saw it you would stop it. You are a hypocrite by your own words. Its ok for you to stop someone from doing something that they have the legal right to do if you don't agree with it but noone else can. I understand your logic now. your mistake is in assuming the focus was on law INSTEAD of right and wrong , when it was about right and wrong in CONJUNCTION with the laws it is never right to assault someone who has posed no physical threat to you, although in some countries it is a RIGHT in america it is not a RIGHT to do so, which corresponds to it not being morally RIGHT, which makes it all the more simple for me to understand,,,, We were talking about the law because you said they had "the right" which is by law. You can't argue about right and wrong because that is different between people. I know many that would say burning the flag is wrong. And even some would say killing a rapist who was declared innocent in court would be right or at least justifiable. In my example it was both morally right in the society to beat the person and legally right and you claimed you would do something physically to stop it because it conflicted with YOUR view of what is right and wrong morally even though it went against the law and morals of others. So others can have those same feelings. In this example I think burning the flag is wrong even though he had the right to do it. I wouldn't beat him, but it doesn't mean I would be upset if someone else did it. to each their own then, I still do not condone anyone causing physical harm to someone who has not threatened their own physical well being and I would be upset at hearing that someone felt they could,,,because,, if they felt they could do it to someone else, they feel like they can do it to me , and then we get into dangerous grounds because I will HURT someone who puts their hands on me in violence because they dont approve of my actions or words,,,, if they dont like my words, they should have the intelligence to counter act with words of your own,, if youthey dont like what I am doing with MY things, they should counteract with intelligence by using their words or actions with their own things but they should NOT, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, feel justified assaulting me when I have not touched them,,, they will have started a physical battle with the wrong person and in the former case, where you would not be upset that someone else beat someone who had not touched them, I would similarly not be upset if that someone they beat got the upper hand and put them in a hospital or a grave,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I think you need to read the Federalist Papers, which were penned anonymously by the same guys who wrote the Constitution. One theme that permeates those papers is the obligation of a republic to protect the rights of an unpopular minority against what the authors often refer to as the 'violence and mischief' of the majority. In other words, the majority can't vote to suspend the rights of the minority on prejudice alone. There are certain 'cards' that are always off the table. Knowing how you feel about organized religions from reading your posts elsewhere on Mingle 2, allow me to pose this question: What would you do if a fascist Christian majority in this country decided to do exactly what you propose above-- use their superior numbers to put a cross or the fish on the flag of United States of America? Would you openly rebel by any means necessary to such an abrogation of the Constitution, up to and including burning said flag in protest? Someone once said something to the effect that all that separates saints from sinners is the absence of adequate temptation. -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What a bunch of simple-minded children. Who cares if someone burns his own flag? This sort of mindless nationalism always makes me
 and  . As the Great George Carlin said of flags, "I consider them symbols, and I leave symbols to the symbol-minded".  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw0MripVxss 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Um.... Not that I condone flag burning but.... What the F**K happened to freedom of speech???? Not that I would ever do it cause I think it retarded and a waste of time, but if I was to burn the American flag it would be for one reason and one reason alone... The nation that created the flag is no longer the nation that should wave the flag. The three colors on the American Flag stand for: Red: Hardiness , valor,strength, and bravery We are a nation that is at war with countries we have no business being in. We are a country that cares not for our own homeless, but spends billions of dollars feeding the rest of the world's homeless.... White: peace and honesty Our politicians lie to us daily. Our own presidents can't keep their lies in order. We are AT WAR FOR 10 YEARS and apparently have no plans to withdraw... Blue: Vigilance, Perseverance, Justice, Truth, and Loyalty Oh sure, we are vigilant and persevere at killing and staying in war. We are vigilant at letting illegals take over our country and use our resources meant for the citizens. We let murderers free and wrongly execute innocent people http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty Our presidents and politicians lie to us, our government lies to us. We turn our backs on our own citizens and turn around and give the money and our military to places that don't want us or our help in the first place. Anyway, this is just my opinion. I'm not anti-American. I am just saying that we should have the right to express ourselves. After all, we can't say we are truly free if we don't have the rights to those freedoms. I am all for expressing yourself. Hell, if I saw a flag burner, someone slapping every man and woman who died for our country in the face, I would express myself and my opinions by beating the ever loving crap out of them. You're going to beat the crap out of them for doing something they have the right to do? You may not agree with it, but they certainly have the right to do so. Yup I would. Id say a marriage ring is pretty symbolic of a commitment of marriage, would you condone beating a spouse who in any way intentionally caused damage to their ring too? That's different. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What a bunch of simple-minded children. Who cares if someone burns his own flag? This sort of mindless nationalism always makes me and . As the Great George Carlin said of flags, "I consider them symbols, and I leave symbols to the symbol-minded". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iw0MripVxss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Harmony says its ok to burn it because its his property. You know in some countries once you are married the woman is your property. Would it be ok to burn her if you country says you have the right to? Like we are saying there is no positive to flag burning. You can easily protest in other ways. The point is he is doing it to piss people off. If you are doing something to purposefully piss people off and get beat its your own fault. Responsibility for ones actions. Thats what it means to be an adult. give this a rest, a FLAG is not a LIFE,,,comparing it to a woman is kind of preposterous being an adult is allowing others to act as 'foolish' as they wish with their own MATERIAL property, and not putting your hands on them My friends and I were at my friends house having a party outside and my band was playing and cops came and told us to stop. By your logic we are on our property and should be able to do what we want with our property (instruments). You can't just do anything you want all the time. I also wouldn't go to an Eagles game in Philly with a Dallas Jersey on and burn a Phillies jersey. I might get stabbed. Just because they are my property doesn't mean I should be dumb enough to do something just to piss people off that might get me hurt. its not JUST your property if it is ILLEGALLY disrupting the piece(air space) of others if there is a PUBLIC domain which has issued a PERMIT for an event, that is a different thing than people holding events on their pwn property but which also lend over onto OTHERS property we should be cautious of what endangers us, but not to the point of EXCUSING those who would cause physical harm to us it would be stupid of me to walk down a dark alley nude with jewelry around my wrists and neck, but that wouldnt mean anyone should be CONDONING or BOASTING about how willing they would actually be to assault me in such a case,,,, because violent people will find reasons to be violent, we should be cautious, but we shouldnt sink to the logic of those violent people we find ourself trying to be protected from in the first place i think his point is whenever someone starts screaming about rights, someone else loses there rights. so the people that are throwing the party loses their rights to have this party, because someone says they are infringing their rights to quiet. neither has broken any laws, but there is a problem. and if your dumb enough to walk naked in a dark alley with your jewelry, you deserve whats coming to you to pay for your stupidity. and you do not have the right to walk naked in a dark alley, nor does anyone have the right to assault you either. the constitution says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but not everyone can be happy because of these same rights. and it would be a much less happy place if more people actually felt THEY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT To assault those who merely 'offended' them in some way a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I defend the right of two people to live a swinging lifestyle too, that doesnt mean I would want or be able to stomach it myself likewise, many countries do have customs which place symbolism and idols and materials on equal footing with human life,, I defend their right to live that way if it is the way the majority have become accustomed to and comfortable with, but I dont wish to live that way myself its not hard to understand, adults should not in this country put their hands on other adults unless someone has been PHYSICALLY threatened,,,,period, That has nothing to do with this subject. What does swining have to do with crapping on every man or woman who has faught and or died for our country? Swining is neither disrecpectful nor offensive(Especially when it's a bunch of women going to town on eachother!  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Harmony says its ok to burn it because its his property. You know in some countries once you are married the woman is your property. Would it be ok to burn her if you country says you have the right to? Like we are saying there is no positive to flag burning. You can easily protest in other ways. The point is he is doing it to piss people off. If you are doing something to purposefully piss people off and get beat its your own fault. Responsibility for ones actions. Thats what it means to be an adult. give this a rest, a FLAG is not a LIFE,,,comparing it to a woman is kind of preposterous being an adult is allowing others to act as 'foolish' as they wish with their own MATERIAL property, and not putting your hands on them My friends and I were at my friends house having a party outside and my band was playing and cops came and told us to stop. By your logic we are on our property and should be able to do what we want with our property (instruments). You can't just do anything you want all the time. I also wouldn't go to an Eagles game in Philly with a Dallas Jersey on and burn a Phillies jersey. I might get stabbed. Just because they are my property doesn't mean I should be dumb enough to do something just to piss people off that might get me hurt. its not JUST your property if it is ILLEGALLY disrupting the piece(air space) of others if there is a PUBLIC domain which has issued a PERMIT for an event, that is a different thing than people holding events on their pwn property but which also lend over onto OTHERS property we should be cautious of what endangers us, but not to the point of EXCUSING those who would cause physical harm to us it would be stupid of me to walk down a dark alley nude with jewelry around my wrists and neck, but that wouldnt mean anyone should be CONDONING or BOASTING about how willing they would actually be to assault me in such a case,,,, because violent people will find reasons to be violent, we should be cautious, but we shouldnt sink to the logic of those violent people we find ourself trying to be protected from in the first place i think his point is whenever someone starts screaming about rights, someone else loses there rights. so the people that are throwing the party loses their rights to have this party, because someone says they are infringing their rights to quiet. neither has broken any laws, but there is a problem. and if your dumb enough to walk naked in a dark alley with your jewelry, you deserve whats coming to you to pay for your stupidity. and you do not have the right to walk naked in a dark alley, nor does anyone have the right to assault you either. the constitution says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but not everyone can be happy because of these same rights. and it would be a much less happy place if more people actually felt THEY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT To assault those who merely 'offended' them in some way a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I defend the right of two people to live a swinging lifestyle too, that doesnt mean I would want or be able to stomach it myself likewise, many countries do have customs which place symbolism and idols and materials on equal footing with human life,, I defend their right to live that way if it is the way the majority have become accustomed to and comfortable with, but I dont wish to live that way myself its not hard to understand, adults should not in this country put their hands on other adults unless someone has been PHYSICALLY threatened,,,,period, That has nothing to do with this subject. What does swining have to do with crapping on every man or woman who has faught and or died for our country? Swining is neither disrecpectful nor offensive(Especially when it's a bunch of women going to town on eachother! ) it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Harmony says its ok to burn it because its his property. You know in some countries once you are married the woman is your property. Would it be ok to burn her if you country says you have the right to? Like we are saying there is no positive to flag burning. You can easily protest in other ways. The point is he is doing it to piss people off. If you are doing something to purposefully piss people off and get beat its your own fault. Responsibility for ones actions. Thats what it means to be an adult. give this a rest, a FLAG is not a LIFE,,,comparing it to a woman is kind of preposterous being an adult is allowing others to act as 'foolish' as they wish with their own MATERIAL property, and not putting your hands on them My friends and I were at my friends house having a party outside and my band was playing and cops came and told us to stop. By your logic we are on our property and should be able to do what we want with our property (instruments). You can't just do anything you want all the time. I also wouldn't go to an Eagles game in Philly with a Dallas Jersey on and burn a Phillies jersey. I might get stabbed. Just because they are my property doesn't mean I should be dumb enough to do something just to piss people off that might get me hurt. its not JUST your property if it is ILLEGALLY disrupting the piece(air space) of others if there is a PUBLIC domain which has issued a PERMIT for an event, that is a different thing than people holding events on their pwn property but which also lend over onto OTHERS property we should be cautious of what endangers us, but not to the point of EXCUSING those who would cause physical harm to us it would be stupid of me to walk down a dark alley nude with jewelry around my wrists and neck, but that wouldnt mean anyone should be CONDONING or BOASTING about how willing they would actually be to assault me in such a case,,,, because violent people will find reasons to be violent, we should be cautious, but we shouldnt sink to the logic of those violent people we find ourself trying to be protected from in the first place i think his point is whenever someone starts screaming about rights, someone else loses there rights. so the people that are throwing the party loses their rights to have this party, because someone says they are infringing their rights to quiet. neither has broken any laws, but there is a problem. and if your dumb enough to walk naked in a dark alley with your jewelry, you deserve whats coming to you to pay for your stupidity. and you do not have the right to walk naked in a dark alley, nor does anyone have the right to assault you either. the constitution says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but not everyone can be happy because of these same rights. and it would be a much less happy place if more people actually felt THEY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT To assault those who merely 'offended' them in some way a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I defend the right of two people to live a swinging lifestyle too, that doesnt mean I would want or be able to stomach it myself likewise, many countries do have customs which place symbolism and idols and materials on equal footing with human life,, I defend their right to live that way if it is the way the majority have become accustomed to and comfortable with, but I dont wish to live that way myself its not hard to understand, adults should not in this country put their hands on other adults unless someone has been PHYSICALLY threatened,,,,period, That has nothing to do with this subject. What does swining have to do with crapping on every man or woman who has faught and or died for our country? Swining is neither disrecpectful nor offensive(Especially when it's a bunch of women going to town on eachother! ) it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent It's not disrespectful if both parties consent to it as well as both the husband anbd wife. I have read that over 95% married couples relationships improved and got stronger because of swinging. Not to mention that polls and surveys show that it saves marriages that are on the rocks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Harmony says its ok to burn it because its his property. You know in some countries once you are married the woman is your property. Would it be ok to burn her if you country says you have the right to? Like we are saying there is no positive to flag burning. You can easily protest in other ways. The point is he is doing it to piss people off. If you are doing something to purposefully piss people off and get beat its your own fault. Responsibility for ones actions. Thats what it means to be an adult. give this a rest, a FLAG is not a LIFE,,,comparing it to a woman is kind of preposterous being an adult is allowing others to act as 'foolish' as they wish with their own MATERIAL property, and not putting your hands on them My friends and I were at my friends house having a party outside and my band was playing and cops came and told us to stop. By your logic we are on our property and should be able to do what we want with our property (instruments). You can't just do anything you want all the time. I also wouldn't go to an Eagles game in Philly with a Dallas Jersey on and burn a Phillies jersey. I might get stabbed. Just because they are my property doesn't mean I should be dumb enough to do something just to piss people off that might get me hurt. its not JUST your property if it is ILLEGALLY disrupting the piece(air space) of others if there is a PUBLIC domain which has issued a PERMIT for an event, that is a different thing than people holding events on their pwn property but which also lend over onto OTHERS property we should be cautious of what endangers us, but not to the point of EXCUSING those who would cause physical harm to us it would be stupid of me to walk down a dark alley nude with jewelry around my wrists and neck, but that wouldnt mean anyone should be CONDONING or BOASTING about how willing they would actually be to assault me in such a case,,,, because violent people will find reasons to be violent, we should be cautious, but we shouldnt sink to the logic of those violent people we find ourself trying to be protected from in the first place i think his point is whenever someone starts screaming about rights, someone else loses there rights. so the people that are throwing the party loses their rights to have this party, because someone says they are infringing their rights to quiet. neither has broken any laws, but there is a problem. and if your dumb enough to walk naked in a dark alley with your jewelry, you deserve whats coming to you to pay for your stupidity. and you do not have the right to walk naked in a dark alley, nor does anyone have the right to assault you either. the constitution says we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. but not everyone can be happy because of these same rights. and it would be a much less happy place if more people actually felt THEY SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT To assault those who merely 'offended' them in some way a lot of countries do...most of the countries your always defending are like that... remember an eye for an eye?the US is supposed to be majority rules, but it is more of those with power rule and make the laws... i never voted on flag burning being legal or not, someone else decided it for me I defend the right of two people to live a swinging lifestyle too, that doesnt mean I would want or be able to stomach it myself likewise, many countries do have customs which place symbolism and idols and materials on equal footing with human life,, I defend their right to live that way if it is the way the majority have become accustomed to and comfortable with, but I dont wish to live that way myself its not hard to understand, adults should not in this country put their hands on other adults unless someone has been PHYSICALLY threatened,,,,period, That has nothing to do with this subject. What does swining have to do with crapping on every man or woman who has faught and or died for our country? Swining is neither disrecpectful nor offensive(Especially when it's a bunch of women going to town on eachother! ) it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent It's not disrespectful if both parties consent to it as well as both the husband anbd wife. I have read that over 95% married couples relationships improved and got stronger because of swinging. Not to mention that polls and surveys show that it saves marriages that are on the rocks. and there is your IF,, and that IF exists as well when it pertains to the 'offense' of a flag being viewed as too sacred to demolish or desecrate,,, IF I Dont feel that way when I buy it, because I care about PEOPLE and not THINGS, than its inexcusable for someone else to INSIST to the point of threatening bodily harm,, that I do |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Chazster
on
Fri 05/20/11 09:01 AM
|
|
it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent I never saw vows that said you could have only have sex with 1 person. If you are still with them for better and worse and respect them and they both agree to do it I see nothing wrong with it. Also swinging has nothing to do with the general population while flag burning does. People swing because of personal reasons. People burn flags because they know it pisses people off. If noone cared if people burned flags then they wouldn't want to burn flags. You think that guy at LSU would have burned it if no one was around? No he wouldn't. That's why he was doing it in a public place. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent I never saw vows that said you could have only have sex with 1 person. If you are still with them for better and worse and respect them and they both agree to do it I see nothing wrong with it. Also swinging has nothing to do with the general population while flag burning does. People swing because of personal reasons. People burn flags because they know it pisses people off. If noone cared if people burned flags then they wouldn't want to burn flags. You think that guy at LSU would have burned it if no one was around? No he wouldn't. That's why he was doing it in a public place. no, in YOUR interpretation flag burning has to do with the general population just like, in MY interpretation, marriage has to do with the general community there is no ABSOLUTE value here of what marriage represents for EVERYONE, nor what the flag represents,,, I took vows 'forsaking all others' which I and millions like me interpret to mandate FIDELITY and MONOGAMY and even when people 'do things to piss people off' it gives noone a right to react with VIOLENCE against their person and I would never be boasting about an intention to do so because someone 'pissed me off' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent I never saw vows that said you could have only have sex with 1 person. If you are still with them for better and worse and respect them and they both agree to do it I see nothing wrong with it. Also swinging has nothing to do with the general population while flag burning does. People swing because of personal reasons. People burn flags because they know it pisses people off. If noone cared if people burned flags then they wouldn't want to burn flags. You think that guy at LSU would have burned it if no one was around? No he wouldn't. That's why he was doing it in a public place. no, in YOUR interpretation flag burning has to do with the general population just like, in MY interpretation, marriage has to do with the general community there is no ABSOLUTE value here of what marriage represents for EVERYONE, nor what the flag represents,,, I took vows 'forsaking all others' which I and millions like me interpret to mandate FIDELITY and MONOGAMY and even when people 'do things to piss people off' it gives noone a right to react with VIOLENCE against their person and I would never be boasting about an intention to do so because someone 'pissed me off' No sorry weddings are private. I can't just go into someones wedding etc. A flag burning is a protest. Its not private at all. Its meant to be public and meant to be seen. \ definition-Flag desecration is a term applied to various acts that intentionally destroy, damage or mutilate a flag IN PUBLIC, most often a national flag. Often, such action is intended to make a political point against a country or its policies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it is disrespectful to the monogamous vows of marriage, just as much as burning a flag is supposedly disrespectful to the people and freedoms the flag is said to represent I never saw vows that said you could have only have sex with 1 person. If you are still with them for better and worse and respect them and they both agree to do it I see nothing wrong with it. Also swinging has nothing to do with the general population while flag burning does. People swing because of personal reasons. People burn flags because they know it pisses people off. If noone cared if people burned flags then they wouldn't want to burn flags. You think that guy at LSU would have burned it if no one was around? No he wouldn't. That's why he was doing it in a public place. no, in YOUR interpretation flag burning has to do with the general population just like, in MY interpretation, marriage has to do with the general community there is no ABSOLUTE value here of what marriage represents for EVERYONE, nor what the flag represents,,, I took vows 'forsaking all others' which I and millions like me interpret to mandate FIDELITY and MONOGAMY and even when people 'do things to piss people off' it gives noone a right to react with VIOLENCE against their person and I would never be boasting about an intention to do so because someone 'pissed me off' No sorry weddings are private. I can't just go into someones wedding etc. A flag burning is a protest. Its not private at all. Its meant to be public and meant to be seen. \ definition-Flag desecration is a term applied to various acts that intentionally destroy, damage or mutilate a flag IN PUBLIC, most often a national flag. Often, such action is intended to make a political point against a country or its policies if the wedding is in a public place, you most certainly can and if a flag burning is in a public place, you can go and if you dont want to see the wedding you dont HAVE to go to it and if you are OFFENDED At the site of a flag burning, you dont have to go to it either... |
|
|
|
|
