Flag Burning

Tuesday, June 27, 2006
OpinionJournal - Best of the Web Today: "Burning the flag is a stupid and ugly act, but there is something lovely and enlightened about a regime that tolerates it in the name of freedom. And of course it has the added benefit of making it easier to spot the idiots."

5 comments:

terrye said...

I don't like to see the flag burned any more than anyone else does, but I am not sure that an amendment is the right thing to do.

erick said...

The problem with the Johnson decision, was that it legitimated
the equivalent of public graffitti
as speech; this falls out of a long
line of speeches including Tinker
v. US. Speech is Speech, either verbal or written (or blogged)this
stunt shouldn't be considered speech

gumshoe1 said...

erick makes a good point.

it's the "performance art
as political speech" worldview.

the twisted
experimental musician Karlheinz Stockhausen saw 911 as an "art performance".

"The greatest work of art".

in the sense that "art"
is about "getting attention for one's pitiful little ego".

Link:
Google Search: Stockhausen,911

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Stockhausen%2C911&btnG=Google+Search

Syl said...

gumshoe and erick

Speech is expression. I find it abhorrent that you would take the word 'speech' literally to mean the spoken word.

You can disagree with the motives/sentiment/whatever of art, performance art, graffitti but they are still expression.

You don't agree with what's being expressed? That's fine. Argue. Or put on your own stupid show.

But to actually consider banning it feels terribly undemocratic to me.

There's a line that's crossed when expression turns to violence. Performance art, no matter how abhorrent, does not cross that line.

gumshoe1 said...

"But to actually consider banning it feels terribly undemocratic to me."

syl -

i believe i made an observation.
i don't recall suggesting
"banning expression".

i think letting crazy people identify themselves is a good thing.