Good argument, never looked at it that way. > -----Original Message----- > From: Russel Madere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 12:18 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: The Fairness Doctrine > > Because as the emblem of our country it deserves protection from > desecration. I only support the defintion of purposeful burning of the > flag outside of of disposal ceremonies as desecration. That is an act, > not speech. It is associated with NON peacful demonstrations as the act > of starting an open fire in an inappropriate place is a breach of the > peace. Because of the breach of peace in the act, it is not afforded > First Amendment protection in my interpretation. > > >But why, Russ? The flag is one hell of an important symbol to me too man, > >but what it represents has to be MORE important, doesn't it? > > > >On 10/20/06, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> The only restriction I support is a ban on the purposeful burning of a > >> flag not associated with proper and respectful disposal ceremonies. > >> > > > >-- > >"If I had a million dollars, I'd buy you an exotic pet...like a llama, or > an > >emu." > >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:218043 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
