Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
What I get from the above is:
I still think the Constitution is unique in that it limits what the government may legally do and reserves all rights not given it to the people. Other documents of this sort may list what rights the people may possess, but any that aren't listed (or added later) don't exist.
Comments?
------------------
I prefer the company of those who aim low and overshoot the mark
to those who aim at heaven and shoot their fellow man in the head.
www.geocities.com/Area51/Shire/8641/
[Oops! Forgot to close the "ordered list" tags.]
[This message was edited by Baloo on May 23, 1999.]
It's basically a list of a whole bunch of constitutions (or the national equivalent), with links to their online versions.
------------------
"Don't call me at work again. Oh no, the boss still hates me. I'm just tired and I don't love you anymore, and there's a restaurant we should check out where the other nightmare people like to go...I mean nice people, baby wait, I didn't mean to say nightmare."
--
They Might Be Giants
------------------
I am selling only the concept of karmic realignment.
You can't sell that! Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos.
This becomes difficult when one considers how many laws originally came into being from a specific religion, for instance the bans on certain types of intimate behaviour between consenting adults.
Also by implication, the government is obliged to protect the rights of people who subscribe to unpopular beliefs in the face of opposition from the majority. This is why it is considered unconstitutional for any oath of office to mandate a certain religious conviction (Something Pat Robertson wants to change).
The government often fails to do this, but sometimes it succeeds, despite harsh criticism from the opposition (For instance, the removal of a mandatory time for prayer in schools).
------------------
You're just JEALOUS because the little voices talk to ME!
------------------
"It seems strange that I, Kudos, a doubter, should be given this luxurious window seat whilst you.... AGEING with age, rot away in that disgrace of an aisle seat. Ha, Hah!
Where is your God now old woman?!"
"Jesus, I'm sorry I asked...!"
- THE BIG BUS
------------------
'You want the moon on a stick, don't you?'
-Richard Herring
)But Baloo will get cross, so go on with your amendment discussion.
------------------
"It seems strange that I, Kudos, a doubter, should be given this luxurious window seat whilst you.... AGEING with age, rot away in that disgrace of an aisle seat. Ha, Hah!
Where is your God now old woman?!"
"Jesus, I'm sorry I asked...!"
- THE BIG BUS
------------------
WHERE NO MAN HAS GONE BEFORE
And of course, if they wrire blatantly untrue things, they're bound to get called on it. Unles they're a tabloid.
This doesn't seem to necessarily apply to books, as I've read a lot of books with blatantly untrue, scientifically invalid, and sometimes knowingly deceptive things in them. (Like astrology manuals, parapsychological books, and anything by "Dr. Duane Gish," Creation Scientist)
And of course, if you write fiction or humor, you can get away with just about anything, even the most thinly veiled digs.
------------------
You're just JEALOUS because the little voices talk to ME!
Anyone angry? Well, perhaps not yet, but I would rather start this here than in the OL, and then have to come here to see when it got interesting.
A classic first-amendment illustration of not-protected behavior: Yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded building.
------------------
It's good to stir the coals once in a while, if only to see if there's any fire left.
www.geocities.com/Area51/Shire/8641/
That's what it means anyway. When people are accountable, they may be more aware of what they are expressing.
Is it the Media responcibilty to tell us of Clinton's infidelaties? No. And I don't care. That's between the parties invovled--and not the Democrates and Rebulicans either!
Its not very responcibil to hell HIJACKING on a plane. It's illegal.
However one can yell fire in a crowded building if there is a fire.
I tend to think of the First Amendment as the cornerstone of American civil freedoms. It has always been something that the average Joe can look to and reference if the enumerated freedoms are in some way infringed by the government.
Further, I think that even that kind of act that people commit becase they have the written freedom in the Constitution to do it is a real strength of the Amendment. For example, and bringing the level up on the flames in here, on a freedom speech level I think that the right of the citizen to burn the American flag should be and is protected under the Amendment as a legitimate act of protest.
It's not a popular view, but the First Amendment is there to protect such unpopular views and allow the freedom to state such views. It is a paradox that the American people cry havoc when rights are abused or abridged somehow. And yet at the same time, one of the organizations that defend people when Constitutional rights are an issue, the ACLU, is seen as a fringe group.
Food for thought. Hmmm. . . .
------------------
I am selling only the concept of karmic realignment.
You can't sell that! Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos.
So, when you get down to the real nitty-gritty, are there any parts of the first Amendment that don't have equivalent laws in the UK? Or in Australia, France etc? Does the Church of England qualify as a state religion for example?
And what is this whole thing about flag-burning anyway? Is there a historical reason why it is considered such a big deal in the US?
------------------
'His limbs flail about as if independent from his body!'
-Chandler Bing on Michael Flatley.
Much like the Cross is the main symbol for Christianity.
We all know what burning crosses signify, and we know just how much enjoyment Christians get out of it when you treat their symbols with disrespect (just ask Robert Mappelthorpe)
IMHO, Burning the flag essentially says "I don't like what's going on for some reason, and rather than discussing my disagreement in written or verbal form, possibly because I lack the intellectual capacity or verbal skills required for rational discourse, I'm going to instead attempt to desecrate the memories of a bunch of people who died fighting for what this symbol stands for by physically destroying its representation. Duh. Bongo do good."
The flag is not the symbol of the US government, but of the country and the people and their ideals. Insult it and you insult all of us.
In the Boy Scouts they taught us to respect the flag as a living thing. How to care for it, and how to properly dispose of it when it's worn out. Despite my split from Scouting over the whole religion thing, I still hold true to this treatment.
------------------
"... Then you'll see me do some MAJOR dancing on your face!" -- Cosby
------------------
'His limbs flail about as if independent from his body!'
-Chandler Bing on Michael Flatley.
1.) Opening up the Constitution in the current political climate is an insane proposition. Who knows what sort of screwy riders we'd see tacked on.
2.) The proposed amendment, as I understand it, is extremely vague. What constitutes a flag? Does the full page image of the flag in the newspaper every July 4th count? And if so, does that mean I can never throw away that issue? Or those little tags on clothes that say "Made in America"? All I've heard is along the lines of "thou shalt not desecrate the flag", with no definition of what a flag is, or what constitutes desecration.
3.) This is a minor issue at best. Unless I'm missing something, this nation isn't being plagued by millions of malicious flag-burners. If you have to make a law against it, why does it have to be an amendment? Of course, this one has an easy answer, to be found in number four.
4.) It's blatently unconstitutional. Nothing in this country is sacred. No institution is above criticism, and no symbol is above defacement. Our President is called "Mr. President," not "Your highness." The flag is no different. Elevating it beyond a symbol turns it into an icon. Aside from the free speech issue, that could be viewed as violating the seperation of church and state. After all, if you give the state an icon which cannot, under pain of imprisonment, be defaced, are you not, in effect creating a state religion around flag worship?
Violating the fundamental tenets of the Constitution seems like a far greater insult to those who have given everything for our freedom then burning a flag would be.
------------------
"Should have changed that stupid lock. Should have thrown away the key. No no, not I, I will survive, right down here on my knees."
--
They Might Be Giants
[This message was edited by Sol System on May 27, 1999.]
As an ex-defender of Constitutional Rights. Burn all the Flags, we'll make more.
I don't particulary care if anyone burns a flag unless I'm wrapped in it.
If you couldn't burn the symbol of America in America, that would defy the whole 1st Admendmant. The Military is called upon to defend the Constitution, and that means flag burning is allowed. No matter what it symbolisizes.
However, I don't think that burning the flag constitutes free speech, either, not beyond the statement I made in the quote above. It's a statement of poor debate skills.
I think it should be reclassified to fall under the speech commonly considered as "Fighting words", or "You can say it, but don't be suprised if you get knocked on your ass for it."
------------------
"... Then you'll see me do some MAJOR dancing on your face!" -- Cosby
------------------
'His limbs flail about as if independent from his body!'
-Chandler Bing on Michael Flatley.
My immediate reaction when I see such behavioural examples is disgust and contempt.
Like I'm really going to pay serious unbiased attention to the merits of the point of view of someone who elicits those reactions in me.
------------------
"... Then you'll see me do some MAJOR dancing on your face!" -- Cosby