Is flag burning, and rioting OK when your candidate doesn’t win but thuggish if done in response to cops shooting minority suspects or an unpopular war?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
33 Answers
In my opinion, it is never okay to have rioting and burning over anything. A peaceful march is acceptable. But that will never happen.
Protesting, up to and including burning the flag, is our Constitutional right, over any kind of oppression.
And I’m pretty sure the same people are whining about both protests.
I know that people who burn the flag honestly believe they are making a persuasive point. But they are preaching to the choir. I think they would be disappointed or surprised to know how many people regard them as losers, whether those people will say it publicly or not.
Do they really believe that they are going to garner respect or sympathy from the people who disagree with them?
Some folks, I know, were in a quandary about how to vote in the last election.
Some of them no doubt voted for Donald Trump with a degree of reluctance.
Does seeing people acting out and burning a flag make reluctant Trump voters regret their choice, or does it reinforce their belief that it was the right choice?
Are the flag burners attracting admirers and sympathizers, or are they simply enlarging the constituency that has begun to grow a little tired of it, and that wonders why they don’t do something constructive with their lives. Do most people admire them, or do most people secretly think they are uncivilized, or immature, or spoiled, or wonder what kind of great job is it that you can take time off and burn the flag.
If I knew such folks, I would coach them that they me be overplaying the hand.
@josie Circa 1974: I sewed an American flag on my back pocket as so many kids were doing in those days. I was walking out the door and my dad grabbed my pocket and ripped it off. He told me he did not fight in WWII to see his daughter sit on the American flag. I was so ashamed.
Peaceful protest is always okay and encouraged, in both of the situations you cited. Rioting violently is never okay. I’m on the fence about flag burning. It doesn’t hurt anyone but seems like it could anger enough to incite violence. Of course the violence would then be the fault of the people who got violent, not the flag burners who may have “provoked.”
@josie I agree with your point about flag burning, but I disagree with your assertion that protesting is not constructive. Of course people should be protesting this presidency.
@josie So, why do unhappy conservatives burn down black churches?
It’s never OK to riot. But I hope I get the chance to one day.
Got my list planned.
1. Liquor store
2.Best buy
3.Another Liquor store
4.Overturn and burn police cars
5.Wake up in prison
6.Hope I hid all my new Best Buy stuff well
7.Bond court
8. Back to rioting
9.Liquor store
10. Repeat steps 1–10 ;)
Protesting, screaming your lungs out, hand waving and jumping up and down for whatever reason is perfectly acceptable…smashing car windows and other displays of juvenile lack of better judgement are not.
Burning the flag is never ok, not because flags are precious, but because it is always done to provoke, insult and enrage, not to simply show disatisfaction or anything similar.
Potesting is one thing; destroying the city and burning national symbols is another.
They will just make people enraged and trust them even less.
@filmfann
Couldn’t tell you. Plus, I don’t know any to ask. But you can refer to my previous answer if you want to know what I think about it.
The vast majority of the protesters are acting peacefully. If you get a large enough turnout, there will always be a few who misbehave. Flag burning is protected by freedom of speech. It is just a symbol. In the meantime, Trump has appointed Stephen Bannon as one of his advisers. Holy cow!
Why do people assume protesters are there to convince and persuade people to their cause? It’s not called a “persuade ” it’s called a protest.
So, why do unhappy conservatives burn down black churches?
If we gleaned all of history we will never, ever find a case where a liberal defaced or burned down a black church?
Go ahead and try. I’ll wait.
HC, In answer to your question, certainly not in the last 50 years.
@Cruiser Why do you think this is the work of a liberal?
Yes, liberals would not likely paint “Vote Trump”.
Sorry guys, I missed the liberal reference.
goes to not understanding who emancipated you. Those nasty liberal progressives…. how dare they free those slaves.
^ Those nasty liberal progressives…. how dare they free those slaves.
Those nasty liberal progressives that wanted to free the slaves and give them equality was the Party of Twiddle Dumb, the party of Twiddle Dee, wanted to keep slavery and expand it. You won’t hear that much in history books though….
HC, the definitions of the parties change over time. Democrats and Republicans are not now what they were in the 1800’s. The history books do talk about it.
^ The history books do talk about it.
Maybe history books caught up, I never read it in school, they tried to portray the Democrats as the saviour and friends of Blacks, never saying they were the ones who were doing the terrorizing not only of Blacks but of the tribe of my friend the Choctaw Nation with the Trail of Tears. I guess the party of Twiddle Dee can attempt to rebuild themselves or hide their devilment better than the present party of Twiddle Dumb.
You must have read a very strange history book. All the children in public school from my generation know that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican president, that at the time the Democratic party was mostly represented by poor southern farmers who supported slavery. Obviously the times have changed and maybe even reversed the parties, as shown easily by any electoral map. The name being the same as its ancestor party is basically meaningless now. No modern Democrat supports slavery or the Confederacy.
^ No modern Democrat supports slavery or the Confederacy.
They denounce the Confederacy to garner support for their new form of bondage called welfare, that once they get people on they make it easier to put the cart before the horse and push the whole team up a slippery muddy hill that it is to get off welfare. If they want to help so much, why penalize the very people they wish to help when they try to work part time or even go back to school to get any form of training? Maybe investing some of that money into training and retraining will teach their constituents to fish over merely waiting on the shore until Christ the government brings on the loaves and fishes.
I’m pretty sure we’re not just pretending to disagree with the Confederacy in order to look good, but okay.
I don’t see welfare as slavery. But I agree it’s not user friendly. It’s in need of further reform.
The Democrats, in the time of slavery were NOT liberal progressives. As mentioned, everyone with a decent education learned that. I’m not saying it was the democrats that freed the slaves. I’m saying it was the liberals and progressives. The ‘leftists’.
There is so much convoluted double think in American politics that the parties have somehow re-branded themselves to such an extent their poles switched.
^^ I don’t see welfare as slavery.
Remember, I never said it equaled slavery, I said it was a form of bondage, which it is, because it is often a quagmire that sinks a person deeper in as much as it is supposed to keep them from sinking.
^My bad HC. My only difference of opinion ,in this matter , is motivation. I don’t think it’s on purpose.
The places most poor people work are mostly responsible. They expect someone to work whenever the company needs them, but only give employees like 16 hours a week. But they can’t get another part time job because their main job expects flexibility in their availability.
If they would cooperate more with their employees, many wouldn’t need government help because they could work two jobs.
Corporations are the worst contributors.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
