Do you support anti-flag-burning laws, OR are you a capitalist?

Question

You can't have it both ways. You either believe in private property rights, or you are NOT a capitalist. There is no middle-ground between the two.

Laissez-faire capitalism advances the belief that any law against flag burning is not only a law against free speech, but is also a law against private property rights. If I own a flag (or Qu’ran, or Bible, or house, or marijuana, or whatever), it is MY private property, and I should be free to burn it, AS LONG as I don’t infringe upon anybody else's property rights in the process, according to capitalism.

So my question is this: are you a capitalist who opposes laws against flag-burning, or an America-hating commie? :)

(Personally, I'm a pretty hard-core capitalist: I oppose ALL forms of slavery, including taxation. But that's just me.)

Answer 1

I'm a Free Marketer. Capitalism is a term coined by Marx that he used as a pejoritive, and I refuse to play along.

A flag is an abstract symbol that represents the nation, and is not the nation itself. I oppose anti-flag burning laws, because it just draws attention to the protesters. I prefer to deny them the attention that they seek.

Answer 2

Laissez-faire could care less flags and it care less about such politics. about politics. Laissez-Fare is about our markets hands off to goverment contorl (or minimizing it).

As long as flag burning laws don't interfere with an economy, it's of no worries. Capatislism is not patriotism. It's the opposite of semi-socialist economics (where the government controls all means of production). Flag burning is about patriotism. There are plenty of Qu'ran worshippers and haters and pot smokers and sworn enemies who are patriotic and some who aren't.

Being patriotic in America most likely makes you a capitalist, but being a capitalist does not make you patriotic.

Do you know how many capitalist countries could care less about our own patriotism? They're patriotic about there system.

Answer 3

Flag burning is protected by the First Amendment, so any laws restricting it can only be for such purposes as safety, the way I see it. Incidentally, the proper way to dispose of a worn flag is to burn it.

And yes, I'm a capitalist.

Answer 4

the guts of the bill is there. new child screening is serious for early detection and long term viability of youngsters born with inborn errors in metabolism and different detectable genetic illnesses. So increasing this methodology is enormously plenty a solid subject. inspite of the undeniable fact that, i might trust Dr. Paul in that any information gained from software might desire to be amassed anonymously and that the privateness rights and affected person records of any baby that comes up constructive for a genetic affliction might desire to be risk-free and could under no circumstances be released w/o the confirm's consent. solid question. the concern comes into play in that refusing the baby screening is resembling refusing lifesaving scientific look after your baby. in the journey that your baby occurs to have a metabolic affliction that would desire to be picked up with a $5 genetic try which you refuse, your baby might desire to go through irreparable recommendations harm from that affliction or finally ends up dying. and since the baby won't be in a position to settle for or deny therapy of its very own accord the state steps in. because of the fact of this i think you won't be in a position to refuse the genetic exams. i think this basically applies to the state/federal standards although. some hospitals run much extra problems and that i think you are able to refuse those considering its on a hospital by using hospital foundation. might desire to you be waiting to maintain all semblance of privateness with regard to the effect of those exams? actual.

Answer 5

It is a symbol of our freedom and our country. In no way does it represent necessarily the people in office or the situation the country is in. It simply is our countries standard that many, MANY good people died protecting so, out of respect, it should only be burned ceremonial, not out of protest as it stands for so much more than the people burning it realize. Thank you for a great question.

Answer 6

I don't believe in flag burning but I believe American citizens have a right to do it but I don't think illegal aliens and naturized citizens should have that right. Those of us born in America are fortunate but those who chose to live here should have a bigger obligation because they made the decision to leave their country and come to ours and therefor should have absolute respect for it or be sent back.

Answer 7

yes i'm capitalist and I oppose anti-flag-burning laws.

Answer 8

you, my friend, are absolutely right. anti-flag-burning laws are idiotic. if you paid for it, you should be able to burn it thanksverymuch. and if you haven't already... you should check out the libertarian party; they'd agree with you about this (I myself am a member)

Answer 9

I don't grant your premise that capitalism is involved here. But it is a very creative argument. My compliments.

Answer 10

you are correct sir. burning a piece of cloth doesn't infringe on anyone else's rights. so to make it illegal is wrong.