161

of course they do.

just google “trump american flag”

Allan

162

You’re way behind.

163

So the code “stands,” but they “can’t punish anyone for violating it”?

Why is that? Is it possibly because it’s……

Unconstitutional?

If that’s not the reason, why can’t they punish people for violating it?

Also, did the governor of Alabama violate his oath of office every time a black man married a white woman in that state in, say, the year 1999? And if he had married a black woman himself? That’s a super hot take.

164

The intent

165

Content discrimination

Viewpoint discrimination.

All very, very British.

166

“I like how you defaced the flag there, sir, to honor the armed agents of the state.”

167

Unless of course Libs are the ones violating the Constitution, then it’s ok.

168

Why would they when they already live in Lib Utopias? Wouldn’t moving to a Red State with all its icky conservative values tend to keep them where they are, or do you just want some brave Libs to hold their noses and take one for the team? And why would they sacrifice the golden years of their lives having earned their rightful spot in the paradise they worked to create?

Good Lord the reasoning you Libs use is seriously retarded.

169

Guns are inanimate objects too, yet you Libs treat them like living things complete with their own self will to act…

2 Likes
170

Excellent point.

We see the double standard. It is remarkable the dedication and tenacity they have.

They should appreciate our host’s popularity and longevity to provide us a venue to be tenacious with while transforming what should be left alone.

2 Likes
171

I treat them like inanimate objects that humans use to blow holes threw things, animals, and each other.

That’s about it. That’s what they do. It really sucks when the holes are in people, especially kids.

Flags don’t do that. They are very different inanimate objects.

172

I guess the argument would be that what was ruled unconstitutional was its applications to a citizen as opposed to a government official. Not sure I find it convincing though. Could further be argued it wouldn’t be a restriction of her fundamental right to speech as it is an obligation freely entered into when being sworn into office.

173

Are you really this thick? The Code is not unconstitutional. Punishing an individual for violating that Code is unconstitutional. But it is still the US Code and it still defines the rules and etiquette for the National Flag. The Code is a Statute, i.e. a Law. The Mayor took an Oath to uphold that law. She violated her oath when she did not uphold that law. Censuring her for violating her Oath does not violate her 1st Amendment right of free speech.

1 Like
174

Did you seriously just cite etiquette as a basis for your position now? This gets better and better.

An extant statute that is unconstitutional does not, despite its unconstitutionality, establish “etiquette.” That is absurd.

Those interracial couples in Alabama were just rude as hell I guess.

175

To be clear - 18 U.S.C 700 is not part of the “flag code.”

As you’ve already said, the “flag code” is codified in Title 4 - not Title 18. Title 18 is the “criminal code.”

176

Yes … Flag etiquette. Were you never a Boy Scout?

But that’s not my position. My position is that the USC is set in Statute and the Mayor took an Oath to uphold that Statute, but she did not. She violated her Oath of Office.

1 Like
177

Don’t be a nit-picker. That Statute is the basis for flag etiquette. Read that Code … She violated that Code, thus she violated her Oath to uphold it.

2 Likes
178

The Flag Code can’t be “violated.” It mandates nothing.

The “Flag Protection Act” (18 USC 700) is an entirely separate law from the Flag Code - and as I’ve already said many times, the “Flag Protection Act” was found to be unconstitutional.

179

6jtycp

180

That’s not the issue. What part about violating her Oath of Office are you not understanding?