namelesstavern.net

arlos, from your posts your sounding more and more light a libertarian and less like a socialist... government regulation of people lives is bad. come to the dark side and join the libertarian party

Dammuzis, I've always agreed with the Libertarian party's positions about keeping government out of people's personal lives. What consenting adults want to do in the privacy of their own homes is none of the government's business whatsoever. I've never agreed with some of the people on the left who want to regulate away anything that is bad for you. I've never been for banning guns, and I'm definitely in favor of some kind of flat tax plan replacing our current nonsensical income tax system. Hell, a good friend was going to run for Congress around here as a Libertarian, and I helped out with his campaign for a while before he had to drop out.

What I don't agree with is the Libertarian position on the government funding the various social safety nets. I think things like unemployment insurance, social security, and yes, real universal health insurance, and so on are critically important. I believe that any succcessful society needs to provide a means to keep the less fortunate from slipping through the cracks.

So, sorry, but not going to be joining the dark side. rofl.

-Arlos

vonkaar wrote:

Narrock wrote: How apropos.

Apropos doesn't fit in that context.

Sorry, it's a big pet peeve of mine... people always use it as a substitute for appropriate in an effort to sound smarter (than they really are). Ooh, a French word. Impressive. It's no different than the pompous fuckers who constantly throw in Latin in completely unnecessary circumstances. In your case, it TOTALLY stands out.

Rust

Harrison wrote:

vonkaar wrote:

Narrock wrote: How apropos.

Apropos doesn't fit in that context.

Sorry, it's a big pet peeve of mine... people always use it as a substitute for appropriate in an effort to sound smarter (than they really are). Ooh, a French word. Impressive. It's no different than the pompous fuckers who constantly throw in Latin in completely unnecessary circumstances. In your case, it TOTALLY stands out.

Rust

haha yeah

brinstar wrote:

Narrock wrote:

Mindia does brinstars sig offend you ?

M A L A Y S I A

brinstar wrote:

Narrock wrote:

Hasselhoff wrote:

brinstar wrote:

Narrock wrote:

I MEAN:


<img src="http://www.globalnetstores.com/icon_hiphop.gif">

fuck yah tables have been destroyed... I am a war wizard!

hahaha giant smileys are teh win

I guess you flag-burning supporters can rejoice now...

do you know how many flags have been burned in protest within the last year?


three.


what a fucking crisis

Personally 1 is to many for my tastes. That being said I'm not a big fan of modifications to the constitution in general, it's stood the test of time in part because it's not situationally specific. This is not to say it is vague, but it's structure is more of guidelines, not a micromanaged instruction book. To decide we need to add specifics for things that quite frankly all ready addressed in in the general spirit is a dangerous path. Like it or not the precedence has been set, scotus has already addressed the use of burning effigy in protest.

Although it infuriates me to see brinstars sig, or things like this:



A closer look incase you missed it:



Note this was at a high school in the US.

Yes it makes my blood boil, but in considering preventing this sort of thing caution must be used and the future must also be considered, and this is where the danger of modifying our constitution can result in folly. Although I don't believe anything happening in the here in now warrants or justifies the desecration of the symbol of my country in "protest" that is not to say that sometime in the future will not warrant it.

Frankly there is an alternate avenue to protest anything that some feel need to protest with flag desecration, that avenue is the ballot box. Who knows what the future will bring however, and there very well may come a time when it would be appropriate.

I see it all as a lack of respect for our flag and what our nation stands for, I see it as ignorant, or as a desperate act for those who can not accept that they are in the minority, and due to not being able to have things their way do this sort of thing displaying attitude and action not unlike a belligerent child screaming because they don't get their way.

The answer to the lack of respect shown for the symbol of our country is NOT to try and force respect via legislation. Respect cannot be truly forced, or even beaten into someone (although admittedly if faced with this sort of thing in my presence, I would sure feel the urge to try that route). The root of the problem lies not in lack of legislation but in problems well beyond the scope of my current musings, and therefore the "answer" to the problem will not be in legislation, but in restoring respect for the flag and the ideals which it represents. This can not be accomplished by politicians in Washington, but by we the individuals.

Oh and Brinstar you little shit, I know the pictures are tempting to you, don't even fuggen thing about it :P.

brinstar wrote:do you know how many flags have been burned in protest within the last year?


three.


what a fucking crisis

THANK YOU, ALL SEEING EYE

Maybe you should try and figure out why people are burning all these flags before you try and censor them.

Just my crazy liberal thought of the day.

Lueyen wrote:A closer look incase you missed it:

Hey all you liberal, flag h8in' left wingers: this violates international law, which is what you all said we should be using as a litmus for our own laws.

suck it.

[quote="the citizens' flag alliance"]Flag Desecration Acts 2006

June 23, 2006> Brooklyn, NY: Hooligans set American flags on fire in the fron
yards of seven homes on a patriotic stretch of Brooklyn, including that of a family
who tragically lost their firefighter son on September 11. Vandals struck at around
4:00 a.m., setting Old Glory on fire in front of homes in Marine Park. “I’m hoping
it’s just kids doing this. Regardless, they should be prosecuted,â€

...and for the record, i don't hate the flag nor would i ever burn one

i just hate people that try to destroy free speech

See, most of the incidents Brinstar posted about aren't even what we're discussing in all this. They're acts of vandalism against other people's property. That is, and should be illegal, but it's not the fact that they did it to a flag that makes it so, it's the fact that people are damaging the property of other individuals or entities.

I don't see one case in there about the burning of a flag as a protest action on a parade or march or some such. So, even though there's what, 8 or 10 incidents, none of them are of the type the Supreme Court ruled about. So, it's even MORE a temptest in a teapot than what Brinstar indicates.

-Arlos

if u can't flag the tag, leave the fucking guild..that's my opinion

/wave u anon fuckers