From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:34:24 +0800
To: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Subject: Re: Flag burning vote TOMORROW and government-imposed ratings
In-Reply-To: <199706121208.IAA16778@homeport.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.970612062228.5130A-100000@well.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Jut woke up, but I would argue "no." This would be the first
constitutional weakening of the First Amendment ever. Hardly a move that
strengthens free speech protections. 

-Declan


On Thu, 12 Jun 1997, Adam Shostack wrote:

> | 	http://www.allpolitics.com/1997/gen/analysis/counterpoint/
> | 
> |         Counterpoint: Ban Flag Burning?
> | 
> |         It's baaaack.....! The House is set to vote June 12 on
> | 	a proposed amendment to the Constitution that would
> | 	ban flag desecration. Democratic Rep. William
> | 	Lipinksi, a lead sponsor, says the flag is too
> | 	important a symbol not to be protected, while ACLU
> | 	executive director Ira Glasser warns against
> | 	weakening the First Amendment.
> 
> 	Would a Flag Burning Ammendment give the court clear guidance
> that other offensive speech, not ammended against, is now more ok?
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
> 					               -Hume
> 
> 
> 
>