Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 835
    MEMBERS
  • 47312
    MESSAGES
  • 57
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Symbolic Speech   America - all of it

Started Jun-1 by jra2750; 172 views.
jra2750

From: jra2750

Jun-1

The year is 1989 and the date is June 21.  The place is Dallas Texas.  The 'actor' is a young man named Gregory Lee Johnson.  He is in the Texas city awaiting the arrival of Pres. Ronald Reagan.  Mr. Johnson disapproves of Mr. Reagan.  To show that disapproval Mr. Johnson sets the American Flag afire.  The state of Texas sues.  The case goes to the Supreme Court.  First Amendment Free Speech issue.  

After deliberation a decision is handed down...5-4 in favor of Mr. Johnson:  Mr. Johnson did not speak a word during that burning so how could this B a free speech issue?  The Court decided that burning the flag with not a word uttered was SYMBOLIC SPEECH.  Interestingly conservative Originalist SC jurist Antonin Scalia concurred.  

And now 4 my point:  Witness the above and compare IT with what we R seeing now for 7 days with the burning/destruction of American cities in connection with the George Floyd story.  R not those demonstrators/looters just observing the same First Amendment rights as Gregory Lee Johnson:  SYMBOLIC SPEECH?  

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

Jun-1

While I accept your message to a point. In your example if the flag burner burned a flag that was his personal property, the court was correct in supporting him. However if the flag belonged to some level of government or another person the freedom of speech clause does not work.

As to what is happening now, there are two aspects.

The freedom of speech aspect is a message to some level of government, therefore to burn homes, shops, etc. is not protected because the focus of the burning is not only inappropriate, but because it is depriving the owneers of the destroyed property of their right to go about their lives unmolested. Besides it is stupid and negative, because the net result is usually more prejudice, and they are depriving themselves of an infrastructure that is in their best interest.

On the other side when it comes to a police station, since it represents the institution against which they are protesting and not getting any relief by peaceful means, it is as American a tradition as the Boston Tea Party.  In this case 1-4 cops are responsible for the anger caused by their over reaction to a possible 20$ counterfeit, ignorance, and insensitivity. In addition the various governent levels up the food chain are guilty for ignoring the fact that this is an ongoing problem of long standing that they have chosen to ignore.

Note, that while I understand the frustration, resentment, etc. that resulted in the destruction, I don´t approveof it and would do everything in my power to encourage a Ghandi and King non violent approach. The problem in this case, is often the active or passive suppression of even this approach simply moves the fringe of otherwise logical protestors into violence. An example being the obvious discrimination against the Black reporters on site as opposed to the white ones.

Having looked at some of the clips and pictures, the destruction was not all Black rage against the police, because there were both white and Black opportunists using this as an opportunity to not only work off their own possibly unrelated frustration but to loot and harm their innocent neighbors.

CzoeMC

From: CzoeMC

Jun-2

Well yeah, that's what I've saying for days, Mr. Know it All. Here with my family at ground point, you offer nothing but pseudo remarks, and have no point in the conversation about what we are experiencing now.

In reply toRe: msg 3
RGoss99

From: RGoss99

Jun-3

Funny, to me "pseudo" remarks are exemplified in your posts of which his one is typical. In point an inspecified remark is by definition a pseudo remark, as in the lack of specifing whatever it is that you are experiening now.

G=G+1

Jenifer (Zarknorph)
Host

Yes, some of these people are using the protests to loot and burn and plunder.

But a lot of these protests are peaceful UNTIL the police show up.

There is a difference between idiots throwing stuff around and police driving SUVs through protestors.


George Floyd protests: New York police cars filmed driving into crowd

Footage of two police SUVs driving into a crowd of demonstrators in Brooklyn has been widely shared on social media. The incident involving NYPD vehicles occ...

CzoeMC

From: CzoeMC

Jun-3

RGoss99 said:

lack of specifing whatever it is that you are experiening now.

You are kidding, right? We are at ground point here in Minnesota, The feelings of everybody are high charged right now, so get off your high horse for a change, and have some empathy.

TOP