NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Three Yale University students were arrested and charged with arson and other offenses after they allegedly set fire to an American flag hanging from the porch of a New Haven neighborhood home.

The three were arrested early Tuesday after officers on patrol spotted the burning flag and tore it from the pole where it was mounted to the house on Chapel Street, police said.

Said Hyder Akbar, 23, Nikolaos Angelopoulos, 19, and Farhad Anklesaria, also 19, were arrested.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,263927,00.html

silly foreigners...you may burn a U.S. flag, but it has to be your flag!:lolhit:

I think its probably better to burn the american flag outside america,if your gonna do it at all.

Way back in the boy scouts they taught us that the proper way to dispose of an old flag is to burn it.

punk kids...

It doesn't matter that it was a flag - it belonged to someone else.

It doesn't matter that it was a flag - it belonged to someone else.
Exactly.

The fact that it was an American flag is just a way to add scandal to an otherwise boring story about young people vandalizing things.

plus, the american flag is held pretty highly to some people... it could incite something and disturb the peace.

I think the danger was that it might have burned down someone's house.

I think the danger was that it might have burned down someone's house. yup. Burn your own damn flag. These guys are from Yale...heh.

punk kids...
Yeah - punk camel jockey kids at that. And a goat-fucking Greek to boot. Wonders never cease, eh? :rolleyes:

Yet (and this concept is funny AND offensive at the same time), where do they live???

All I know is they're lucky I didn't see it. I would've beaten all three of 'em into a coma.

Before you run off and start beating kids,
is it not an offence in the US to burn da flag.

Before you run off and start beating kids,
is it not an offence in the US to burn da flag.
It may not be an "offense", Paul, but it is, however, offensive. It's proper, when disposing of a flag, to either burn it, or bury it, but somehow, I don't think those little fuckers were practicing proper flag etiquette.

Nothing would make me happier than to run them over in my cousin's F-350 powerstroke diesel with mudders and a lift kit. Because you don't have them in Ireland, here's a picture (however, this isn't his particular truck, but it's close):

http://www.rockymountainsusp.com/SL_99SDuty8.jpg

That aside, those punks WERE breaking the law.

Yes I can understand it being offensive, with the importance Americans attach to they're flag, I just thought it would have an offence.

It was only illegal because it was someone else's. We're free to burn the flag whenever we want as long as it's our personal property. ;)

It was only illegal because it was someone else's.
Which makes it even MORE offensive.

Which makes it even MORE offensive.
Of course. That offends me twice as much. Respect for other people and their property is, in my opinion, a much more important virtue than patriotism or object worship.

Every morning I wake up, brush my teeth, piss on the Bible, and then burn the flag. If I'm feeling particularly good that morning I may sacrifice an infant or rape a goat. On my way out the door I fire my rifle at any people passing by, especially if they're Mexicans mowing a lawn. That faggy negro FBI hasn't come knockin' on my door, let me tell you. But now I'm worried that Prae will run me over. ::heebiegeebies::

I think you should be able to burn the flag as long as it's your flag, but may I suggest wrapping yourself in it before igniting it? Love, Sheri

i think you should be able to burn money too!

i think you should be able to burn money too!
Wait, can't you?

Wait, can't you?

Money is federal property, therefore it is illegal to deface it in any way.

Tell that to all those George Washingtons with sunglasses and mustaches I have stashed in my wallet.

Tell that to all those George Washingtons with sunglasses and mustaches I have stashed in my wallet.
remember all the fun you had with that pen when you're trying to use those greenbacks in a vending machine.

These three seem to dumb to have been admitted to Yale. They are guest in our country and they go and publicly burn our country's flag. They not only burn it, they do so while it is attached to a building in which they are renting rooms.

If I were one of those at Yale with the power to decide, I would kick them out of school and send them back to their homelands. Of course that won't happen because the majority of the administration and faculty at Yale agree with what the students did.

Of course that won't happen because the majority of the administration and faculty at Yale agree with what the students did.I didn't know a survey had been taken.

Or maybe you're just talking through your hat.

These three seem to dumb to have been admitted to Yale. They are guest in our country and they go and publicly burn our country's flag. They not only burn it, they do so while it is attached to a building in which they are renting rooms.don't forget that they did it after interacting with police in the area as well. These guys are quite smrt.

I didn't know a survey had been taken.

Or maybe you're just talking through your hat.
Hats are worn on the backside now?

Geez, the fashion trends today.

Respect for other people and their property is, in my opinion, a much more important virtue than patriotism .....
Love of one's country is second to not scratching your neighbors car?

Are you being pedantically deep or satirically shallow?

Yes go back to your country and burn your own flag.

Love of one's country is second to not scratching your neighbors car?

Are you being pedantically deep or satirically shallow?
Isn't "love thy neighbor" one of the central tenets of Christianity? In addition to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's"? Thus, would you not be making all Christians, with your statement, either "pedantically deep or satirically shallow"?

Money is federal property, therefore it is illegal to deface it in any way.
yep, if those corporate fat cats get caught lighting their illegal Cuban cigars with $100 bills, they are gonna be so busted!:woohoo:

don't forget that they did it after interacting with police in the area as well. These guys are quite smrt.
i'm starting to wonder if there was a 4th man in the group...Mr. Too Much Beer?

Love of one's country is second to not scratching your neighbors car?
Patriotism can easily be subverted by politicians to serve their own selfish ends. A love and respect for the people immediately around you, should command a far greater respect than a love for a blind principle.

Patriotism is one of the most blind, unreasoning principles there is. It is good to love one's country, but it should not take even a number five place in the list of priorities a person has from day to day.

Patriotism can easily be subverted by politicians to serve their own selfish ends. A love and respect for the people immediately around you, should command a far greater respect than a love for a blind principle.

Patriotism is one of the most blind, unreasoning principles there is. It is good to love one's country, but it should not take even a number five place in the list of priorities a person has from day to day.
i'll go with that....#6 is pretty good compared to all the other crap people have to deal with in their lives.

Love of one's country is second to not scratching your neighbors car?
I'd say patriotism is penultimate on the list of thousands of virtues.

Would you put your countrybefore your family.

I didn't know a survey had been taken.

Or maybe you're just talking through your hat.

And maybe your one of those who doesn't believe the major news media have a liberal bias just as you seem to not believe the faculties and administrations of the Ivy League universities have one.

And maybe your one of those who doesn't believe the major news media have a liberal bias just as you seem to not believe the faculties and administrations of the Ivy League universities have one.Or maybe I don't like to make blanket assertions without any supporting evidence. Even if there is a liberal bias in Ivy League schools that does not mean that "the majority of the administration and faculty at Yale agree with what the students did." In fact, that's a pretty preposterous thing to assume.

And it's *you're*. :p

Money is federal property, therefore it is illegal to deface it in any way.
You're absolutely right, but explain this - why, at several theme parks and at various tourist attractions (i.e. Pikes Peak, Wall Drug, etc.), are there "amusement" machines that you can put a dollar into only to have the machine return a penny (after being mechanically cranked, or put under mild tonnage via hydraulics) with the name of the attraction on it? Have you ever wondered how that's legal?

http://www.pressapenny.com/photos/faneuil_hall.jpg

Would you put your countrybefore your family.
Anyone who would isn't much of a person.

Correct.Patriotism is a love of your country, unfortunatly its sometimes used to fool people into war.

Would you put your countrybefore your family.
Well, I think it really depends on the family....

On every one of those machines, Prae, there's a little sign explaining why the machine doesn't violate federal law. As the guys making those machines haven't seem to have been prosecuted, nor have the machines been ordered removed, it would seem to be a loophole in the law.

Isn't "love thy neighbor" one of the central tenets of Christianity? In addition to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's"? Thus, would you not be making all Christians, with your statement, either "pedantically deep or satirically shallow"?
Couldn't have said it better myself.

treat others how you would like to be treated is often claimed by christians but has been a major tenant of every religion and civilisation in the history of man.

You're absolutely right, but explain this - why, at several theme parks and at various tourist attractions (i.e. Pikes Peak, Wall Drug, etc.), are there "amusement" machines that you can put a dollar into only to have the machine return a penny (after being mechanically cranked, or put under mild tonnage via hydraulics) with the name of the attraction on it? Have you ever wondered how that's legal?

http://www.pressapenny.com/photos/faneuil_hall.jpg
it's counter-inflationary. it takes money out of circulation, as opposed to trying to change a $5 into a $50.

It is not illegal to deface U.S. coinage or currency. It is illegal to deface it with the intent to defraud.

exactly:thumbs:

It is not illegal to deface U.S. coinage or currency. It is illegal to deface it with the intent to defraud.
So you're telling me that it's not illegal to burn money....

is it your money?

For argument's sake, yes.

then you're punishing yourself more than the Feds care to.

now if you go and throw paint on a pile of in a bank, that would be a different story.

like Frogger said, the intent of the law is to protect the money supply from fraud, not to protect the money itself.

it's not the only law like that...a couple of years ago, in the next town over there was a big fuss over this guy burning his own house down so his ex-wife couldn't get it in the divorce (it wasn't community property), but the locals couldn't charge him with arson because he did it, didn't deny it, and didn't file an insurance claim....but they did take him to court for the fire dept fees to protect the neighbors.

Burning money...
I and some Japanese know the answer, but it's early to launch.

Well, I hope decreasing government debt too. Though we have some goverment bonds, our domestic finance is tight too.

1. Isn't "love thy neighbor" one of the central tenets of Christianity?
2. Thus, would you not be making all Christians, with your statement, either "pedantically deep or satirically shallow"? 1. I disagreed that patriotism was a less important virtue than caring about your neighbor's property.
I have no idea what your response means.

2. Maybe. So?

Thats funny...

someone asked if they would put their country before their family.. which is a good question... and was met with "no" for an answer.

Yet, many "patriots" put america before their families in fighting the british, the germans, etc... and it's the reason they are here able to SAY "no"...

just ironic...that's all.

1. Patriotism can easily be subverted by politicians to serve their own selfish ends.
2. A love and respect for the people immediately around you, should command a far greater respect than a love for a blind principle.
1. That's true, it can. But I didn't read that in the original post, so I assumed the neutral dictionary definition.

2. I think assuming it is necessarily a "blind principle" reads more into the post than what was originally written.

Jesus,I see the Easter Break didnt help then.

Couldn't have said it better myself.As long as someone is running interference for you you don't have to.

1. That's true, it can. But I didn't read that in the original post, so I assumed the neutral dictionary definition.

2. I think assuming it is necessarily a "blind principle" reads more into the post than what was originally written.
To place patriotism higher than altruism on the scorechart of virtues would indeed turn patriotism blind. Consider Cold War America, where citizens were encouraged to report their fellow Americans whom they suspect are communist.

A nation is an exceedingly abstract concept, far removed from the day to day life of it's citizens. We come in contact with our local governments far more frequently than our national government. Having the local cops pull you over is quite a different animal from having the feds knock on your door. One arouses annoyance, the other fear.

I think only Americans think about their national governments more than their local government. But the effect it has on one's life is vanishingly small compared to the effect felt on one's life by their neighbors. It seems like a twisted state of affairs to me. Why should we love it first, and respect our neighbors second, especially when such gross abuses of that love abound, both in present day and throughout history?

As long as someone is running interference for you you don't have to.
Oh come on Brooks, by the time I saw your post he had already replied and I didn't feel it necessary to repeat what he said. Does that make me unable to defend myself or something?

You've deride patriotism by giving an isolated example of how it can be perverted. Patriotism is not a bad concept in and of itself.

If someone acts unselfishly on behalf of his neighbor is that a good thing.
What if a Dutch neighbor, in order to improve the neighborhood for his friends, turns hidden Jews over to the authorities during their occupation.

Is loyalty a virtue? What about a loyal Nazi?

If I think patriotism is a greater virtue than respecting a neighbor's property (as the blanket statement said), don't cite twisted examples of patriotism to prove me wrong unless you want to defend twisted examples of altruism.

Does that make me unable to defend myself or something?If you're cool with it, more power to you.
Actually, less.

If you're cool with it, more power to you.
Actually, less.
I don't know exactly what you're trying to say but I assure you that I am more than capable of defending my own viewpoint. I don't see Borg coming to my rescue every time someone disagrees with me, and on the other hand he defends more views than mine anyways.

What exactly are you trying to say to me?

I've not derided patriotism. Why must it always be for or against? I simply said what happens when you seriously place patriotism above altruism. You can say, "meh, it's an extreme event," but it's not the only one by far. History is rife with examples of gross nationalism taken entirely too far.

And it wasn't that extreme of an event, the McCarthy era. It was actually rather tame, as such things go.

I merely said that love for one's country should not get out of hand. Placing patriotism above altruism does exactly that. It is altruism that makes life easy for Americans. No amount of patriotism could do that for us.

Think about it this way. Your telephone is ringing. You need to pay the phone bill. Which do you do first? Sure the phone bill is more important in the long run, but you answer the phone first. You're saying that because I say you should answer the telephone, I don't care about the phone bill.

History is rife with examples of gross nationalism taken entirely too far.
I merely said that love for one's country should not get out of hand.
As the proctor said at the SAT's, "Don't read into the question".
This is from the original post, "a much more important virtue than patriotism."
Pretty neutral, non-gross and non-out of hand stuff.
This is from the dictionary: "love for or devotion to one's country".
Again, I don't see anything negative.

Now if I compare respect for a neighbor's property to patriotism as you describe it then I certainly agree with you.

But I don't see patriotism as you describe it anywhere in the original post or in the dictionary.

What I am trying to say, Brooks, is that if you were to place patriotism so seriously as to consider the pursuit of it a greater thing than the pursuit of altruism, you have a serious problem with your priorities. As fifth or sixth down the list of virtues, patriotism is a benign, benevolent thing. DarkFantasy is correct when she places love and respect for the people around you as more important, perhaps even vastly so, than patriotism. If you choose patriotism as a virtue, personally, I do not, I would hope you don't take it too seriously.

1. ....pursuit of it a greater thing than the pursuit of altruism,
2. DarkFantasy is correct when she places love and respect for the people
3. If you choose patriotism as a virtue, personally, I do not, I would hope you don't take it too seriously.1. Neither can actually be pursued. It's like trying to love someone. If you have to try it's safe to say you don't.

2. If that's all she said I would agree with her. She placed respect for people's property as more important than loving one's country. That's all I've been addressing since the beginning.
Your embellished definition of patriotism and your arguing against points I have not made is extremely frustrating.

3. This has been a personality test in a way.
Someone Rorschachs us with an utterly neutral word and our subconscious, our personalities, fill in the definition.
The twisted negative meaning of patriotism came from within you, not from the original post.

You can't make up definitions of words. Patriotism encompasses a lot of different aspects of love for one's country. You can't look at me and tell me that excessive nationalism was just spontaneously brought into the debate by me. It's inherent in the meaning of the word. You choose to take it [patriotism] as a virtue. Fine by me. I choose not to, and I explain the reasons why. You seem to be trying to sideline the debate over a simple point (whether altruism should take primacy over patriotism) by turning this into me against my country.

Fine. Let's forget about all the gross negative bad stuff we like to pretend doesn't exist. For the purpose of debate, let's live in a fantasyland where America is the be all and end all of great nation-states. I won't bring it up again, I promise.

Argue to me again, why should patriotism take primacy over altruism. All I have from you is the rather snide comparison of altruism to not scratching your neighbor's car. Which if you want to get psychological, that statement could provide a wealth of plush couch musings. What is so great, so moral, so fantastic about the love for one's country, that it should take place over even the part of the argument that you want to suddenly latch on to out of the blue, respect for another person's property?

You can't make up definitions of words. Patriotism encompasses a lot of different aspects of love for one's country.
I didn't make anything up. In fact I went to the dictionary.
Those other emcompassed items, whatever they may be, were not part of her original post. You inserted them into our discussion.

You can't look at me and tell me that excessive nationalism was just spontaneously brought into the debate by me. It's inherent in the meaning of the word.
No it's not.

You seem to be trying to sideline the debate over a simple point (whether altruism should take primacy over patriotism) by turning this into me against my country.
You're sounding a little paranoid here. I said you have pre-conceived negative notions about patriotism, not your country.

Fine. Let's forget about all the gross negative bad stuff we like to pretend doesn't exist.
Within the context of her original post it DIDN'T exist.

For the purpose of debate, let's live in a fantasyland where America is the be all and end all of great nation-states.
I never said that.

All I have from you is the rather snide comparison of altruism to not scratching your neighbor's car.
She never said altruism. She never said altruism. She never said altruism. She compared patriotism to respect for someone else's property.
Stop changing the argument

What is so great, so moral, so fantastic about the love for one's country, that it should take place over even the part of the argument that you want to suddenly latch on to out of the blue, respect for another person's property?
Do I have to repeat her original phrase? I guess so.
Respect for other people and their property is, in my opinion, a much more important virtue than patriotism or object worship.
To which I replied
Love of one's country is second to not scratching your neighbors car?
This "out of the blue" latching to which you are referring took place during my very first post.

This is getting really dumb. This is the bottom line.
Before you re-defined the argument, it consisted of one person saying that respect of property is a more important virtue than love of country and someone else disagreeing.

Any talk of altruism, twisted patriotism, love and respect of people, feds knocking on your door, Cold War fears, McCarthy and phone bills was introduced later by you.

I think you made good points and I agree with just about 100% of what you've said.

It just doesn't happen to be what we were talking about.

You agree with me, fine.

At the end of the post, I asked you to go back to what you want to debate. What about that? Why don't you make some arguments concerning that?

If you want to argue something, you should make arguments concerning it. To give attention to the parts of the argument you're not interested in contesting, only invites others to disagree with you more on those topics. How am I to read your mind? Yes, using Brook's interpretation of DarkFantasy's original post, and Brook's interpretation of his reply, you did indeed only contest the property part of her argument. I didn't know that until two posts ago. So I tried to get back to it. You ignored the pertinent part of my argument, the last statement, and continued on with the bickering you are deriding. Help me out here, man. It's not like I don't want to debate.

To make it easier for you: I still do not believe that patriotism is a greater virtue than the respect of another person's property. I still think that it should be placed on a lower level. I'm asking you to argue towards this.

For the purpose of debate, let's live in a fantasyland where America is the be all and end all of great nation-states.
If America was a nation state from the get-go we'd all be calling dinner "Tea Time" and saying "Jolly good!" right now. Imus wouldn't have been fired in this place, what a great country.

Let's all watch Birth of a Nation and join hands!

LOL, "Birth of a Nation" is about the Confederacy.

Speaking of flags, the carpetbagging senator from New York has told the good folks of South Carolina that their own state flag should come down.

Speaking of flags, the carpetbagging senator from New York has told the good folks of South Carolina that their own state flag should come down.
LOL!

Speaking of flags, the carpetbagging senator from New York has told the good folks of South Carolina that their own state flag should come down.

Did she say that using her fake southern accent?

LOL, "Birth of a Nation" is about the Confederacy.

Speaking of flags, the carpetbagging senator from New York has told the good folks of South Carolina that their own state flag should come down.

Why?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Flag_of_South_Carolina.svg/744px-

Has anyone got a pic of a south Carolina flag,for the foreigner.

Has anyone got a pic of a south Carolina flag,for the foreigner.
i'm one step ahead of you...:lolhit:

Yea my timing sucks

Havnt said thatthe flag wouldnt look out of place in the middle east.

Sorry folks, my bad.

She called for a removal of the Confederate flag which flies on the South Calincky Statehouse grounds.


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8ND1C200&show_article=1

PS. A Republican governor of this state lost a re-election bid in part because he too, called for this flag's removal.

Heh, at least he was FROM there.

PS. A Republican governor of this state lost a re-election bid in part because he too, called for this flag's removal.

Heh, at least he was FROM there.
a state's flag is as about a state issue as you can get...if the ppl of SC wanted it gone, it'd be gone.

Calinky,what a cool name.
Rather her than me taking the southern cross down in that neck of the woods.

Calinky,what a cool name.
Rather her than me taking the southern cross down in that neck of the woods.

ooooops

South Calincky, first state to secede from the Union and foremost in heroic activities during the War of Northern Aggression as they call it in those parts.

"Heritage, not hate."

its true..

if the flag merely waves, and the state doesn't take on the characteristics of what the flag stood for... is it a problem?

You know, a poster on another thread referred to the Stars and Bars as "evil "and said it should be burnt--to never fly again.

Yet look at it this way--the flag in my own avatar is the Gadsden flag, a Revolutionary symbol named after General Gadsden, of South Carolina. It was also flown by our infant Navy in 1775.

To the British, this flag in all probability was seen as evil and probably still is--only flown by treacherous traitorous lowbred Colonial dogs.

Evil is in the eye of the beholder, is that not so?

Video of the flag debate (south park style) (http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=77885&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_comedian=none&ml_context=show)

You know, a poster on another thread referred to the Stars and Bars as "evil "and said it should be burnt--to never fly again.

Yet look at it this way--the flag in my own avatar is the Gadsden flag, a Revolutionary symbol named after General Gadsden, of South Carolina. It was also flown by our infant Navy in 1775.

To the British, this flag in all probability was seen as evil and probably still is--only flown by treacherous traitorous lowbred Colonial dogs.

Evil is in the eye of the beholder, is that not so?
I used to be a treacherous traitorous lowbred.Its not that bad.

Video of the flag debate (south park style) (http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=77885&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_comedian=none&ml_context=show)
That was hilarious. Thanks for the laugh. :)

To make it easier for you: I still do not believe that patriotism is a greater virtue than the respect of another person's property.
I'm asking you to argue towards this.
I don't agree with you.

End of debate I guess.

C'mon now, stick with it!

Why do you feel this way?

C'mon now, stick with it!

Why do you feel this way?
com'on!, you can't fight with someone that doesn't want to.

C'mon now, stick with it!
Why do you feel this way?
The objective answer is that the undefined "property" in this case could be the neighbor's half-read newspaper. Not a real respect issue if you ask me.
And the undefined "patriotism" in this case wasn't described as anything bad.

More subjectively (and probably what you're looking for here) is that possessions and property are tomorrow's garbage. Gone. Transient worship.
What you feel for your country will always be with you. It unites disparate people.
What I feel when I watch a a documentary about D-Day or the space program or the Revolutionary War or Abraham Lincoln or the F4U Corsair or the Berlin Airlift moves me more than my neighbor's pool toys.

Patriotism doesn't make me think of the last refuge of a scoundrel, it makes me think of Sullivan Ballou's last letter to his wife:
"Sarah my love for you is deathless, it seems to bind me with mighty cables that nothing but Omnipotence could break; and yet my love of Country comes over me like a strong wind and bears me unresistibly on with all these chains to the battle field."
(Please read the whole thing)
http://www.pbs.org/civilwar/war/ballou_letter.html

Certainly, the love for one's country can do amazing and moving things. It is a great feeling to be a part of something so much greater than yourself. But I have seen that such things can happen from many such greater things. Submission to God, for instance, can provide one with a similar satisfaction and inspire great works. In fact, throughout history, the love for one's country has often been synonymous with love for one's God.

As an athiest, I am forced to dispense with the pursuit of fulfillment by aligning myself with a God. As a humanist, I am forced to take a closer look at the things that move humans to do the things they do. I require it of myself to understand the forces that cause people to do the things they do.

What I have found is that the great things in life, great purposes, lofty aims, impassioned actions, they don't mean nearly as much as the simple, bread and butter interactions of day to day life. God does not knit people together, even though He seems so powerful on the surface. People come together for the smallest of reasons even more so than the largest of them. To punish criminals, to divide and apportion wealth, to bring to people the things they desire and that they need for life. These are daily actions and they happen on orders of magnitude more than anything ever done for country.

Possessions, the material ones, cannot be separated from life. We require certain possessions to live, food, shelter, clothing, and to be happy in our society, you must have a certain level of material comfort. Not everyone can go without a car and just with a bike. Our society, our country, revolves around materialism. It's an inescapable part of the American spirit. Respect for property, respect for the things we work hard for, respect for the principles that the country stands for, should take precedence over the country itself. Americans are an idealistic bunch. We would die for our ideals. Why should we put the cart (America) before the horse that drives it? (economic freedom)

I say patriotism is blind, because it's not necessarily connected to any other principles. It's a love for something that can mean anything. Anybody can love anything about America. Anybody can pursue anything in the name of patriotism. Our material possessions, even the iPod many of us carry around, become part of who we are. Respect for those, is respect for people. Patriotism can be (and often is :rolleyes:) love for baseball.

Patriotism doesn't make me think of the last refuge of a scoundrel, it makes me think of Sullivan Ballou's last letter to his wife:
"Sarah my love for you is deathless, it seems to bind me with mighty cables that nothing but Omnipotence could break; and yet my love of Country comes over me like a strong wind and bears me unresistibly on with all these chains to the battle field."
(Please read the whole thing)

Reading sentiments such as that fills me with a tremendous sadness.......for me, it serves only as a reminder of what the great and wise Mark Twain said--


""He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism -- how passionately I hate them!""

1. Americans are an idealistic bunch. We would die for our ideals. Why should we put the cart (America) before the horse that drives it? (economic freedom)
2. even the iPod many of us carry around, become part of who we are. Respect for those, is respect for people.
3. Patriotism can be (and often is :rolleyes:) love for baseball.
1. It's funny how "freedom" can be abused in much the same way you think "patriotism" is.
When all else fails use freedom as your argument. It worked for abortion, it may work in this argument.
IOW, I think you're stetching to the point of snapping here.

2. All your deep hoopla about being a humanist goes out the window with semtiments such as this. I hope you're kidding and you don't really believe this.
When a fireman risks his life running in, it's not for ipods.

3. No it can't be (look it up).
You just can't keep making up your own definitions in order to make your point.



I think bringing up atheism in the context of this argument was your most salient point. A belief in God also forces one to realize that there are things bigger than themselves. It's what makes a fireman run into the second tower after the first one has collapsed and it's what made Washington's men put their lives and those of their families at risk.

When I read your post and Freethinker's it's clear that this notion is just not a part of you.

I've read other, very candid, posts of yours in which you sound disillusioned, depressed and just plain unhappy. Maybe putting so much validity in material and equating your neighbor's barbecue with "freedom" has made you look at life and think "is that it?"

Reading sentiments such as that fills me with a tremendous sadness.......for me, it serves only as a reminder of what the great and wise Mark Twain said--As much as I respect Mark Twain he forgot about those that died several decades before his birth, thus giving him the freedom to be critical of his country.

Fortunately for him, those men he hated were willing to risk everything for him.

I think bringing up atheism in the context of this argument was your most salient point. A belief in God also forces one to realize that there are things bigger than themselves.
Being an atheist does not preclude one from making this realization. Suggesting such is backwards and offensive.
It's what makes a fireman run into the second tower after the first one has collapsed and it's what made Washington's men put their lives and those of their families at risk.
So an atheist wouldn't run into a building to save someone or put their lives down on the battlefield? Perhaps you need to take a survey of America's fire squads, or consider the religious climates of Revolutionary America. The men who signed the Declaration of Independence were not irrelgious or atheist in minorities, yet they laid their lives down on the line for something greater.

Patriotism, I believe, is a value much well-regarded in this country because of our history of politicians' using it as we progressed through time, and that has greatly transmuted for the worse where our society stands. Americans fighting the British needed to take stock in something that was satiating to their desire for justification in both armed conflicts with Britain. With the flood of immigrants in the Antebellum period, Americans were being thrust in a world of outsiders that was quickly outnumbering them, taking their jobs and accomodations. During the war Lincoln predicated the cause for the entire campaign for several years on the belief that we must preserve the Union; a jingoistic justification. In the following decades America became the industrial and agricultural power of the world, and so had something to be proud of in their laissez-faire market, and these prides worked into our spirit as we crossed over into the World Wars. After that, as Winston Churchill said, we stood at the summit of the world.

Now we still stand there, and look at our people. This patriotism has become a way for people to justify their bigotries and crimes. The horrors that came in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the mass globalization caused by our titanic corportions that exploits the third world, or even our history with legislation. Christianity worked its way into the patriotism, and helped justify hatred against negroes, the Irish or Italians, communists, and homosexuals. Patriots all too often ignore the great mishaps of America in favor of the cushy idealism offered by the "Land of the Free, Home of the Brave." How funny that this Christian America patriotism likes to say the country is more important than loving your neighbor (ie, respecting their possessions).

I suppose the "Love thy neighbor as thyself" or the no greater love than to lay one's life down for a friend bored the True Americans (a phrase callers like to use on Hannity's or Savage's shows) in Sunday school.