13 Responses

1. But selling Chometz on Pesach is ok…

2. A very classic “sedition” law – just like we had in the United States in the 18th century (you know, before the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights).

3. Finally a law that makes sense.
   #2 A constitution is needed.

4. zionist thought police

5. #1) irrelevant argument;
   #2) USA has the same law. Desecrating the flag is an offence.
   #4) truth twisting; no one is forbidden from thinking of burning the flag.
   Personally; I see nothing wrong with this law. The only people objecting are those advocating the destruction of Israel (with the unavoidable murder of its inhabitants).
   I don’t believe the satmer rebbe obm would have allowed the burning of the Israeli flag. Yes he had philosophical disagreements and felt the founding of the state of Israel was not the right move, but i am convinced he would shout down anyone giving aid and comfort to any enemy of the current state of israel.
   Anyone who feels the arabs are justified in their desire to murder as many jews as possible should seek to live under their generous protection.
   Why do you seek the protection of someone you hate and vilify?

6. Interesting that 2 and 5 disagree and yet both have their facts wrong.
   2- The Sedition Act was passed during the Adams Administration (19th Century and, more relevant to this conversation, after the Bill of Rights)
   5- Flag burning is legal everywhere and has been since the Supreme Court found it to be constitutionally protected speech in Texas V. Johnson in 1989.
   Just so we’re clear here, in an debate facts do matter. We agree on that right?

7. ?#6)
   FIRST; the sedition act if you want to be technical was passed in 1918. That makes it the 20th century. (and officially it is known as the espionage act applicable only during times of war. (which i would assign to the current situation in Israel)
   FIRST also: When i said relevant #1 referring to selling chometz, how is that relevant?
   SECOND; If u read my words accurately you’ll see i stated “Desecrating the flag is an offence” i purposely did not use the word burn. (Burning is what you saw in YWN’s picture)
   THIRD; I agree facts do matter, so does accuracy.
   FOURTH; Anything to say about the meat of the argument

8. PS
   here is a quote from wikipedia.
   It is an offence although not punishable.
   The United States Flag Code establishes advisory rules for display and care of the flag of the United States. It is Section 1 of Title 4 of the United States Code (4 U.S.C. § 1 et seq). This is a U.S. federal law, but there is no penalty for failure to comply with it and it is not widely enforced — indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that punitive enforcement would conflict with the First Amendment right to freedom of speech. (A Flag Desecration Amendment has been proposed from time to time and, if ever passed into law, would override Supreme Court rulings on this matter.)

9. Baal Boose,

   I was assuming Akuperma was referring to the Alien and Sedition Act, not the World War I era Sedition Acts that were part of the Espionage Act. Getting his history wrong by a few decades (while being substantively wrong (because either way the Act was post-Bill of Rights) seemed to me to be a better assumption than believing that he was both wrong, and referring to an act that only applied during World War I. I guess he’d know for sure.

   My point about your post stands unless you take quite a broad view of the word offense (to include the US Flag Code, which the Wikipedia page you quote refers to as being advisory) or a very narrow view about what unconstitutionality means. Still, there is no distinction to be made between burning and desecrating a flag. Both would be Constitutionally protected speech under the Johnson case.
   But, if you really meant in your original post that Israel’s law which would be unconstitutional in the United States (as it provides for a penalty) is a lot like a different, constitutional, law that the US does have. Then I just don’t see your point.
   As for the meat of the argument, no I have nothing to say, beyond that I like when people research their posts before posting. Thanks

10. Actually I was thinking of the law against sedition that existed in what is now the United States prior to independence, and continued until the early 19th century (the ill fated Sedition Act in the Adams adimnistration merely made it a federal offense). One was not allowed to criticize or disparage the monarch. Americans never were too happy with this, which is why the First Amendment came along, and why any anti-government activities short of armed insurrection are quite legal in the US.

    The Israeli law goes well beyond flag burning (which in the US has never been a serious offense – usually along the lines of urinating in public). It would make many types of criticism illegal. It would probably ban those who argue that the the medinah was contrary to on halacha, or who promote the view that the Israeli Supreme Court is acting in an illigitimate way. It is aimed as much at Orthodox Jews (both the Hareidim and the Religious Nationalists) as much as it is aimed at the Arabs.

    Remember whose Supreme Court gets to interpret the law. And note that the leading backers are from an anti-Torah party.

11. Fair enough. I saw sedition and thought Sedition Act. I still don’t think it’s correct to say it’s like the sedition laws we had before the Bill of Rights, since that leaves the impression those laws did not continue afterwards, but considering that they’d certainly be considered unconstitutional now, I’ll concede that that’s just nitpicking.

12. The US Supreme court is supposed to clarify the law not make up anti constitutional rullings and by decree make up new laws.

    And the court was wrong in claiming ‘burning’ is ‘speech’, free or otherwise.

13. hereorthere,
    You make 2 excellent points, but neither has anything to with the question of whether there are currently laws making flag desecration an offense.