Flag Desecration Amendment Fails Again

[Accountable]

Good! Our Constitution should be about increasing our freedoms and limiting gov't, not the other way around.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Senate Rejects Flag Desecration Bill by One Vote

USA TODAY
Andrea Stone June 28, 2006
WASHINGTON -- The Senate fell one vote short Tuesday of passing a constitutional amendment that would have allowed Congress to ban desecration of the U.S. flag.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and other supporters vowed to try again next year, after a new Congress is elected in November. Since 1990, the measure has failed five times in the Senate to get the two-thirds vote needed to move to the states for ratification. The House of Representatives has approved the amendment seven times, most recently last year.
Hatch says the measure is needed to protect a symbol of freedom and counteract U.S. Supreme Court decisions in 1989 and 1990 that struck down state and federal laws. He cites polls showing public support and non-binding resolutions by 50 state legislatures endorsing the amendment.
"This is a setback, but it's not a final defeat," he said. "For protecting the Stars and Stripes, I will not give up."
Opponents said the measure would have curtailed First Amendment rights on speech for the first time since the Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791.
"While I take offense at disrespect to the flag," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, "I nonetheless believe it is my continued duty as a veteran, as an American citizen and as a United States senator to defend the constitutional right of protesters to use the flag in non-violent speech."
The amendment reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." According to the pro-amendment Citizens Flag Alliance, there were four cases of flag desecration in 2006.
The vote came a week before Independence Day and about five months before the fall elections, prompting both sides to charge the other with playing election-year politics. It was the second time this month the Senate failed to pass a constitutional amendment. The other was a ban on gay marriage.
"The Constitution has survived yet another round of election-year politicking," said Terri Ann Schroeder of the ACLU, which opposed the flag amendment.
Still, supporters were encouraged. In 2000, the Senate came up four votes short.

[LilacDragon]

It is infuriating to see the waste of time and resources that go into this bullshit while this country has some real issues that need to be addressed.

IMO the ultimate act of disrespect towards our flag is the use of it by politicians to purchase votes.

[Erinna1112]

Originally Posted by flopstock

IMO the ultimate act of disrespect towards our flag is the use of it by politicians to purchase votes.

Standing Ovation for Floppy!!!

Well said.

[Marie5656]

Check this link
http://www.eakles.com/95julyfourthpg.htm
It is a birthday greeting to America, but goes with the theme of this thread...sort of.

[cherandbuster]

Originally Posted by flopstock

IMO the ultimate act of disrespect towards our flag is the use of it by politicians to purchase votes.

SO TRUE!

There's even a comic about the Amendment in today's Doonsbury.

[Scrat]

IMO the ultimate act of disrespect towards our flag is the use of it by politicians to purchase votes.

Spoken like a true heroine.

There is hope. Not for the lowlife politicos though, just toss them off a pier.

Worthless bastards.

[Adam Zapple]

I'm not quite as cynical as some of you but I am glad the Amendment failed. Our constitution should not be toyed with. I love our flag and despise the abuse it is sometimes subjected to, but the constitution is the wrong vehicle with which to address the issue.

[Lulu2]

'Zapple...are you referring to "cynicism" toward members of Congress, who dig up this issue to deflect our attention from other matters? You know, I read two papers every day and see CNN and I'll be darned if I've seen a rash of flag burnings in the last few months.

So...why now?

I'll be REALLY cynical and say that, underneath all this, it's just possible that they're testing the waters toward the idea of even MORE Constitutional tinkering. And all to foster a certain agenda....

[Accountable]

She's got a point.