Doll Is Mine wrote:

Vox ‏@voxdotcom
Trump’s call to ban flag burning isn’t about patriotism. It’s about silencing dissent.

Everyone should be concerned about this.

Brantt wrote:
Jail would be more fitting IMO, but a year is probably a tad too long. Maybe 6 months.

Brantt wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Brantt wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Brantt wrote:

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Vox ‏@voxdotcom
Trump’s call to ban flag burning isn’t about patriotism. It’s about silencing dissent.

Everyone should be concerned about this.

I agree. I think defending those who burn the flag is a great cause for the left to take up immediately.

Maybe they can get to it right after they take a break from praising Fidel Castro.

You probably voted for Trump.

Of course I did. Didn't you?

I know. Let's burn the flag and see if Trump takes away our citizenship.

Jail would be more fitting IMO, but a year is probably a tad too long. Maybe 6 months.

traderdave wrote:Well surely you can understand how I could question whether or not somebody suggesting six months of jail time for burning a piece of cloth is serious.

traderdave wrote:Well surely you can understand how I could question whether or not somebody suggesting six months of jail time for burning a piece of cloth is serious.

pacino wrote:Rp is a reasonably moderate dude, Brantt voted for Donnie, i have no life and doc is a prickly old guy.

Any other questions, dave?

CalvinBall wrote:Eh?

traderdave wrote:Well surely you can understand how I could question whether or not somebody suggesting six months of jail time for burning a piece of cloth is serious.

pacino wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:Eh?

Federal judge deemed the lines were created unconstitutionally. They focused way too much on race when trying to gerrymander the perfect way.

Werthless wrote:

traderdave wrote:Well surely you can understand how I could question whether or not somebody suggesting six months of jail time for burning a piece of cloth is serious.

He's serious. Many people agree with him. People forget, or never learned it in school, why the first amendment is such a critical aspect of a functioning democracy. And I'm afraid that there are fewer and fewer people in this country that can effectively articulate a defense of a principle that has, until recently, been assumed to be an essential characteristic of our country.

Werthless wrote:

traderdave wrote:Well surely you can understand how I could question whether or not somebody suggesting six months of jail time for burning a piece of cloth is serious.

He's serious. Many people agree with him. People forget, or never learned it in school, why the first amendment is such a critical aspect of a functioning democracy. And I'm afraid that there are fewer and fewer people in this country that can effectively articulate a defense of a principle that has, until recently, been assumed to be an essential characteristic of our country.

Political scientists have a theory called “democratic consolidation,” which holds that once countries develop democratic institutions, a robust civil society and a certain level of wealth, their democracy is secure.

For decades, global events seemed to support that idea. Data from Freedom House, a watchdog organization that measures democracy and freedom around the world, shows that the number of countries classified as “free” rose steadily from the mid-1970s to the early 2000s. Many Latin American countries transitioned from military rule to democracy; after the end of the Cold War, much of Eastern Europe followed suit. And longstanding liberal democracies in North America, Western Europe and Australia seemed more secure than ever.

But since 2005, Freedom House’s index has shown a decline in global freedom each year. Is that a statistical anomaly, a result of a few random events in a relatively short period of time? Or does it indicate a meaningful pattern?

Support for autocratic alternatives is rising, too. Drawing on data from the European and World Values Surveys, the researchers found that the share of Americans who say that army rule would be a “good” or “very good” thing had risen to 1 in 6 in 2014, compared with 1 in 16 in 1995.