I hardly think Antonin Scalia is one of those 'commie pinkos' the uniformed foam at the mouth about as having 'legislated from the bench'.

If you'd have done due diligence, you would have found that he voted WITH the majority in BOTH decisions that struck down laws prohibiting flag desecration. Those cases are Texas v. Johnson and United States v Eichman.

In Texas v. Johnson, Justice Brennan, writing for the majority to strike down the statues said this:




_



Here again, I doubt that anyone, much less an avowed Democrat as yourself, would accuse Mitch McConnell (who if memory serves correctly, is the Senior Senator from your home state) of being one of THOSE PEOPLE for voting against it.

You're also forgetting that 3/4 of the states' legislatures would have to ratify it, so it was not as close as you're claiming here.

Another quote from Brennan:



And lastly, a quote from a Viet Nam war veteran, so that you can't use the argument that my having never been in the military negates any possible understanding of the issues on my part:



-Kerry O.

First, I don't idolize others as you. Any man can be wrong and Scalia is not my favorite SC Justice.

Second,

2/3! and I'm not from KY.
As the article stated and most 7 grade civic students know that.

Third, That is the opinion of only one vet. I can point you to a lot more than that who still think Bush was right in invading Iran.



Question;

Why would you want to burn the flag?
Burning Cloth means nothing, right?
If your wish is to inflame the passions of other more respectful and appreciative people, then you are in fact inciting violence.
If you want to burn cloth burn your drawers.

Wrong. Read it again-- I said to have the amendment RATIFIED required 3/4 of the state legislatures voting to affirm. Here is the text of Article 5, proving that your facts are faulty:




_



You apparently didn't.



I never said he was the only vet who felt that way. Sure, I haven't talked to ALL of them, but I doubt that you have either.




Now who's being disrespectful? I've only made the same arguments that such august company as Supreme Court justices have made-- jurists who, btw, expounded logically on why these laws and an amendment would be a very BAD idea. You disagree? Fine. But don't think for a minute that your little snipes are anything but snarky comments that would be ruled OUT OF ORDER in a court of law.

That is why you guys usually lose in court. You argue on pure emotion and, as the error in your understanding of the ratification requirements points out, you often get your facts WRONG.

More often, the rhetoric resembles this nursery rhyme:




-Kerry O.

Did you know that Laughner's favorite Video is of a man wearing a smiley face walking towards an American Flag standing in the desert and lighting it on fire?

interesting


I cant think of what my favorite video would even be,,lol


maybe Thriller,,,

2/3 of both houses to propose amendment
3/4 tof State legislators to adopt the amendment. KerryO

The article,
The one vote short was in the Senate.
The House had already passed it.

For a State gov to join one side or the other,(pro or con), takes only a majority.

Ummmm, President Bush didn't invade Iran.

There is no piece of cloth or book that is worth a human life.

And those who believe so have been brainwashed into false idolization.

"We do not consecrate the flag by punishing its desecration, for in doing so we dilute the freedom that this cherished emblem represents."

This says it very well...

Short sweet and to the point.

Look, I quoted Article 5 of the Constitution word-for-word to show that you made a mistake. You further compounded your mistake by insulting my intelligence with the '5th grade Civics' left-handed slam.

You dropped the ball. Admit it and apologize instead of spinning this into Patriots vs. The Evil Legal System and those who support it.

The amendment was D.O.A. Get over it. The Founding Fathers knew that these instances would arise ad nauseum-- that's why they made it so damnably hard to amendment the Constitution capriciously. They knew that political grandstanding would be as perennial as the grass and made the mechanism to separate the legal grain from the political chaff as foolproof as possible.


-Kerry O.

I did not make a mistake.
It would have taken only one more vote in the senate to send the bill to the states for a 3/4 approval. It was very close.
Whether or not 3/4 of the states would have voted to ratify is a different question.

A question that only 1 more vote would have answered as it only takes 2/3 of each house to put the choice before the individual states.

First of all,

Kids are susceptible to the influence of their parents. They are not mature enough to make the decisions to govern through all the problems and issues that face the country. This is why we have an age limit to vote.

Obviously you don't understand what it means to give all you have to the maintenance of our freedom. When you are ready or willing to give the ultimate sacrifice then, you're own or your children's life, then you have truly given. Otherwise you have only reaped what others have sacrificed to give.