SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

View Poll Results: Is the church right in its stance?
Yes, as our pledge says - One nation, under God. 4 25.00%
No, but they should have the right to take the stance. 7 43.75%
No, it is insulting to the flag and it should be halted. 2 12.50%
No, what if it was an Islamicist or Pagan style flag, 3 18.75%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 07-07-15, 11:19 PM   #10
Aktungbby
Gefallen Engel U-666
 
Aktungbby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: On a tilted, overheated, overpopulated spinning mudball on Collision course with Andromeda Galaxy
Posts: 30,100
Downloads: 24
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
Well, if it isnt illegal then it should be.

btw, from what I've dug up. 'Should' means that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course.

The way I see it, spirits and ghosts telling people how to display the flag of the United States of America isnt what I would consider a valid reason.

Now, if on the otherhand 'may' was used in the wording it would truly be considered an optional rule. But it doesnt, so they should take it down and display it IAW U.S. Code and seek professional help.
Well just to fan the flame a little: the Pledge of Allegiance does say say "one nation under God..." Therefore throwing in so-called free speech and its offshoot, Freedom of Religion implications... the perspective of a church banner - a spiritual or holy ghost agenda reflection over a 'temporal' political banner..."Old Glory", in this instance, is not entirely unreasonable on the establishment's own flagpole. The Supreme Court ruled in the 70's that having the flag stitched to the seat of one's pants was permissible freedom of speech. Sheriff Smith vs Valerie Goguen: https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/US/415/415.US.566.72-1254.html And later dealt with outright flag-burning as an 'expressive form' of free speech Texas vs Johnson:http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/491/397.html Clearly, upon a given pole, priority of allegiance is an expressive form of free speech in a political context; I, Aktung, concur with Justices Powell and Brennan (respectively). Case dismissed.
__________________

"Only two things are infinite; The Universe and human squirrelyness?!!

Last edited by Aktungbby; 07-07-15 at 11:34 PM.
Aktungbby is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.