US Dep of Defense Limits Flag Use

[Jedi Council]

...because it represents the traitors to the Union who fought under that flag?
Lemme give an example; imagine a German embassy allowing its employees to fly swastika flags.

Germany doesn't have freedom of speech or expression however. We do.

What are you on about? The German constitution guarantees Freedom of Expression and Speech, like almost every other major developed democracy.

[The New California Republic]

...because it represents the traitors to the Union who fought under that flag?
Lemme give an example; imagine a German embassy allowing its employees to fly swastika flags.

Germany doesn't have freedom of speech or expression however. We do.

Odd that Germany ranks above the US in several freedom rankings then:

https://freedomhouse.org/countries/free ... d%20Status

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies ... index-2019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

[SD_Film Artists]

Germany doesn't have freedom of speech or expression however. We do.

Odd that Germany ranks above the US in several freedom rankings then:

https://freedomhouse.org/countries/free ... d%20Status

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies ... index-2019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

Generally I'd agree Germany is more free than America, but Germany does have some notoriously strict censorship with things like video games.

[Rusozak]

Odd that Germany ranks above the US in several freedom rankings then:

https://freedomhouse.org/countries/free ... d%20Status

https://rsf.org/en/ranking

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies ... index-2019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index

Generally I'd agree Germany is more free than America, but Germany does have some notoriously strict censorship with things like video games.

And the U.S. is notoriously lax on censorship (at least of the non-sexual kind), but it doesn't necessarily reflect the overall status of freedom. Sure, maybe as far as free speech and censorship go the U.S. may be ahead, but with things like a de facto two-party hegemony slaved to an electoral college, political freedoms leave something to be desired.

[Greed and Death]

Generally I'd agree Germany is more free than America, but Germany does have some notoriously strict censorship with things like video games.

And the U.S. is notoriously lax on censorship (at least of the non-sexual kind), but it doesn't necessarily reflect the overall status of freedom. Sure, maybe as far as free speech and censorship go the U.S. may be ahead, but with things like a de facto two-party hegemony slaved to an electoral college, political freedoms leave something to be desired.

That is the problem when you measure and compare the top of Democracies of the world. Do you count Germany's ( and western Europe's) restrictions on political speech against Germany or do you count the lack of US restrictions against the US( because minority voter fear) ? Does the right to bear arms get counted as a positive or a negative when measuring a country's freedom index ? Do traditional and perhaps antiquated systems of governance such as the electoral college, the Senate, and the House of Lords count for or against ? Because despite their problems they do indicate stability. Does having have an unelected judicial branch that cannot be overridden by the legislature count for or against the US ? Does lacking a social safety net with the resulting lower tax rate count for or against the US ?

The reality is the upper levels of these comparisons are less about actually comparing how free a society is and more about measuring the the personal policy preferences of whoever created the study.

[Katganistan]

As the discussions in this forum has evolved , the topic of why the Confederate States of America should be honored or dishonored has been brought up. Here are some points to consider.

1) Combined, President Abraham Lincoln and President Andrew Johnson gave full pardon for and restoration of property to all those on the losing side. The Compromise of 1877 is proof that the Former Confederate States were to be treated once again like regular States of the Union.
2) Respecting the losing side (the inferior) is considered honorable and true. The Confederate States of America and those who fought for it are honoured for their valor. The Confederate States of America did what the Constitution encouraged them to do, which was to rebel against a government which they believed was oppressive. This honour is seen as how the Union treat the dead Confederate soldiers till this day.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title38-section2306&num=0&edition=prelim
3) Flags are symbols that can be interpreted in a variety of ways. These interpretations are made by individuals whose ideas can contradict with other individuals.

How many different interpretations do you think the Flag of the United States of America has garnered over the years in the billions of people who have seen it? In how many ways has the Flag of the United States of America been used by groups and individuals, American and Non-American? Personally, I don't think I would be able to successfully count. What I do know, is that each interpretation and display of any flag is a right that individuals should be able to make. It is not my right to take, damage, or destroy another's property just because I find the flag they wave to be offensive.

Except we shouldn't honor them. They betrayed the United States. We don't honor Benedict Arnold for his valor. We shouldn't honor Confederates either.

Also, the military suspends any number of personal rights and liberties in pursuit of good order and discipline.

Fun fact: Benedict Arnold's plaque was indeed removed from its place of honor in West Point. Robert E. Lee's plaque was not.

That said I believe that limiting flags on military bases to the US flag, state flags, the flag of whatever troops are also on base from overseas, and MIA/POW flags is a sensible thing.

[Auristania]

1. Do you agree with the Department of Defense's decision to restrict what flags are permitted on their property or affiliations.
2. What do you think of the demand to allow Pride Flags and American Indian Flags to the list of acceptable flags?

#1 Department of Defence decides which flags fly at military bases; Department of Health decides which flags fly at Hospitals; Department of Education decides which flags fly at Universities; Town Councils decide which flags fly at City Halls; Union Halls and churches decide which flags etc etc etc.

#2 Yeah why not?

[Thermodolia]

1. Do you agree with the Department of Defense's decision to restrict what flags are permitted on their property or affiliations.
2. What do you think of the demand to allow Pride Flags and American Indian Flags to the list of acceptable flags?

#1 Department of Defence decides which flags fly at military bases; Department of Health decides which flags fly at Hospitals; Department of Education decides which flags fly at Universities; Town Councils decide which flags fly at City Halls; Union Halls and churches decide which flags etc etc etc.

#2 Yeah why not?

The Department of health and the department of education decide no such things. Hospitals themselves decide what flags can fly there, same with universities. HHS and DEDU don’t have any say in the matter

[-Astoria-]

Germany doesn't have freedom of speech or expression however. We do.

Explain.

[SD_Film Artists]

And the U.S. is notoriously lax on censorship (at least of the non-sexual kind), but it doesn't necessarily reflect the overall status of freedom. Sure, maybe as far as free speech and censorship go the U.S. may be ahead, but with things like a de facto two-party hegemony slaved to an electoral college, political freedoms leave something to be desired.

The reality is the upper levels of these comparisons are less about actually comparing how free a society is and more about measuring the the personal policy preferences of whoever created the study.

I'm just guessing as I haven't seen the Freedom Foundation's criteria but I suspect that it balances 'freedom to do things' against 'freedom to live your life away from other people's actions'. For example Canadian and Swiss gun rights would be a plus as you can go to shooting ranges- something that you can't do in Britain; whereas US gun rights would be a negative as it comes with all the weird political/sexual/religious baggage of US gun culture.

[Atheris]

...because it represents the traitors to the Union who fought under that flag?
Lemme give an example; imagine a German embassy allowing its employees to fly swastika flags.

Germany doesn't have freedom of speech or expression however. We do.

Huh?

[The New California Republic]

Germany doesn't have freedom of speech or expression however. We do.

Explain.

I don't think you'll get an explanation. I think he realised what an asinine comment it was, so its purpose has been retconned into a dump-and-run post.

[-Astoria-]

Explain.

I don't think you'll get an explanation. I think he realised what an asinine comment it was, so its purpose has been retconned into a dump-and-run post.

Then that's a fast dump, that.

[Fartsniffage]

The reality is the upper levels of these comparisons are less about actually comparing how free a society is and more about measuring the the personal policy preferences of whoever created the study.

I'm just guessing as I haven't seen the Freedom Foundation's criteria but I suspect that it balances 'freedom to do things' against 'freedom to live your life away from other people's actions'. For example Canadian and Swiss gun rights would be a plus as you can go to shooting ranges- something that you can't do in Britain; whereas US gun rights would be a negative as it comes with all the weird political/sexual/religious baggage of US gun culture.

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org ... sitor1.htm

[The New California Republic]

I'm just guessing as I haven't seen the Freedom Foundation's criteria but I suspect that it balances 'freedom to do things' against 'freedom to live your life away from other people's actions'. For example Canadian and Swiss gun rights would be a plus as you can go to shooting ranges- something that you can't do in Britain; whereas US gun rights would be a negative as it comes with all the weird political/sexual/religious baggage of US gun culture.

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org ... sitor1.htm

Hell, I was a member of a shooting club for some time.

[SD_Film Artists]

I'm just guessing as I haven't seen the Freedom Foundation's criteria but I suspect that it balances 'freedom to do things' against 'freedom to live your life away from other people's actions'. For example Canadian and Swiss gun rights would be a plus as you can go to shooting ranges- something that you can't do in Britain; whereas US gun rights would be a negative as it comes with all the weird political/sexual/religious baggage of US gun culture.

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org ... sitor1.htm

"Due to the spread of the Corona virus the Club is closed to new members until further notice."

So it's true that you can't go to a shooting club in Britain. Ha! Hoist by his own petard!

[Fartsniffage]

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org ... sitor1.htm

"Due to the spread of the Corona virus the Club is closed to new members until further notice."

So it's true that you can't go to a shooting club in Britain. Ha! Hoist by his own petard!

The ranges are now open for pre-booked visits with effect from Sunday 2nd August

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org.uk/

What is the date today?

[-Astoria-]

"Due to the spread of the Corona virus the Club is closed to new members until further notice."

So it's true that you can't go to a shooting club in Britain. Ha! Hoist by his own petard!

The ranges are now open for pre-booked visits with effect from Sunday 2nd August

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org.uk/

What is the date today?

Ouf.

[Risottia]

1. Do you agree with the Department of Defense's decision to restrict what flags are permitted on their property or affiliations.
2. What do you think of the demand to allow Pride Flags and American Indian Flags to the list of acceptable flags?

1.Yes.
2.The military and the government should be as neutral as possible. Only the US flag, the flag of alliances of which the US is part, the flags of countries whose military or officials are being hosted, the insigna of branches, corps and similar, and the flag of the country that is hosting the US unit in its territory (you don't want to enter another country's port without displaying their flag, do you).
Pride flags? No. Not really the place for a political statement, even if highly positive and inclusive.
American Indian flags? Only if the place where it is exposed is within American Indian territory, alongside the flag of the State or of the territory.

[Outer Acharet]

Alright, NS. Now that that intro is over- I can get to the point.

1. Do you agree with the Department of Defense's decision to restrict what flags are permitted on their property or affiliations.
2. What do you think of the demand to allow Pride Flags and American Indian Flags to the list of acceptable flags?

1. Maybe? I think there's a bit of a slippery slope there. I mean, there is context behind symbols, and protections of freedom of expression are enshrined in the Bill of Rights:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, from that we glean a blanket protection on speech for civilians. Military personnel aren't civilians, but I'm not well-versed on their different rights, so I won't comment.

We know symbolic speech is a form of protected speech under US law from Tinker V. Des Moines:

Also decided during the Vietnam War was Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), a case in which a school district attempted to prohibit students from wearing black arm bands to protest the war. The Court rejected the school’s argument that it needed the regulation to maintain order. The Court held that the ban was a suppression of student expression and therefore a First Amendment violation. Critical here was the fact that students were peaceful and nondisruptive in their use of armbands as symbolic speech; wearing the armbands was no more disruptive than other symbols and jewelry that students were permitted to display.

Therefore, a symbol that's not harmful or disruptive is permitted to be shown under US law. One could argue that banning a confederate flag, a symbol of a dead state gone for 180 years, is unnecessary repression of free speech. But, at the same time, there's context behind the modern-day symbol, and it's colored by the fact a significant minority if not a majority of its users today are groups that advocate for, among other things, racial segregation, eugenics, the dissolution of the United States, and the perpetration of violent acts against minority groups. As such, one could say that by representing groups with such a goal, you're innately making a violent, disruptive statement, and your symbol is not protected.

tl;dr, it's a slippery slope, but I think symbols like the Confederate flag don't really qualify for protections under the first amendment, and as such it's a-OK to ban them. Especially when you, as a member of the US military, represent the nation itself and are generally on a different level than a civilian in terms of your rights and protections.

2. See above, a flag is a symbol, those symbols aren't disruptive or advocating violence, and therefore are protected as free speech. I would even say things like the "thin blue line" flag are protected under the First Amendment, but it doesn't extend so far as to protect the Confederate or other flags co-opted by groups one step short of being labelled domestic terrorists.

[SD_Film Artists]

Alright, NS. Now that that intro is over- I can get to the point.

1. Do you agree with the Department of Defense's decision to restrict what flags are permitted on their property or affiliations.
2. What do you think of the demand to allow Pride Flags and American Indian Flags to the list of acceptable flags?

1. Maybe? I think there's a bit of a slippery slope there. I mean, there is context behind symbols, and protections of freedom of expression are enshrined in the Bill of Rights

But it's important for places such as military baracks to have proper identification.

"Due to the spread of the Corona virus the Club is closed to new members until further notice."

So it's true that you can't go to a shooting club in Britain. Ha! Hoist by his own petard!

The ranges are now open for pre-booked visits with effect from Sunday 2nd August

http://www.marplerifleandpistolclub.org.uk/

What is the date today?

[Outer Acharet]

1. Maybe? I think there's a bit of a slippery slope there. I mean, there is context behind symbols, and protections of freedom of expression are enshrined in the Bill of Rights

But it's important for places such as military baracks to have proper identification.

That's true, I was just thinking more along the lines of single-family or two-family houses on base where people lived full-time, not barracks themselves. Those places are also more often identified by building number or name, from my experience, though I mainly know of Air Force bases in the US.

[Novus America]

1. Do you agree with the Department of Defense's decision to restrict what flags are permitted on their property or affiliations.
2. What do you think of the demand to allow Pride Flags and American Indian Flags to the list of acceptable flags?

#1 Department of Defence decides which flags fly at military bases; Department of Health decides which flags fly at Hospitals; Department of Education decides which flags fly at Universities; Town Councils decide which flags fly at City Halls; Union Halls and churches decide which flags etc etc etc.

#2 Yeah why not?

The US department of health only determines what flags fly at hospitals it owns, the vast majority of US hospitals are owned by other federal agencies like the DoD and VA, state and local governments, the Catholic Church, other non profits, and sometimes for profit companies.
Each which determines which flags to fly on their property.

The US Department of Education does not own universities, which are owned by the DoD, state governments, the Catholic Church, other non profits, and a few as for profits.

That being said the DoD does have a right to control the flags flown on its property, within reason (federal constitutional law is complex on the issues, but the federal government can restrict things on its property it could not restrict off its property but it has to make them generally politically neutral).

Which is where #2 comes in. Official Native flags should be fine if the official flags of other local governments are allowed. But pride flags are political and nature, so saying you can use one political flag but another is a bad idea.
So pride flags should be out. Because they are endorsing a specific political viewpoint.