Xell101

Need to rephrase this...

Darkblack

I don't think he was a saying nationalist in a bad way, I think it was the scary part he added to the front of it.

And to that I say, Damn Straight.

thedrake

Homeschool your children if you don't like the flag in the school.

smooth

Nice try, thedrake.

Read the article again--these children are being homeschooled!

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

TawG

lol, go ahead its in norway, travel costs for anyone outside of europe will be about 1k euro so i would hate to make you travel invain

Phaenx

Home school in a different state, or Canada. They also may not have to go there to turn in work to the state, I was homeschooled and never had to do such things. This sounds more like a public Sylvan learning center of sorts. Which wouldn't suprise me, teaching yourself algebra from some of the books they give you is insanely difficult.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

Uocom

"Then the flag represents the right to ask to not have to see a flag ?
Seems possible to me, no?"

It makes sense to me. No matter how disrespectful it might be, in America we have that option. If you take it away, and then try to call that freedom, you are no different than Iraq or any other state similar to it.

seretogis

*hug*

They don't have to display the flag at their home. They can burn it at home if they like.

Well well well, funded by tax dollars you say? If the state wants to put up a flag, they have the right to do so. If the parents are frightened of their child seeing the nasty nasty American flag, they can cover their eyes while they walk them into the building.

Now, are you debating whether or not the flag should be able to be flown at tax-dollar-funded buildings, or whether or not Oregon is in the right by forcing home-schooled kids to take tests at a public facility? I'm all for home-schooling, and I think it's ridiculous to have to take your child to a public facility merely to take a test. It's nonsense. The parents should be contesting that, not whether or not the state has a right to display its nations flag at a facility which it pays for.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

smooth

seretogis,

Your analysis is flawed--re-read the article. The parents aren't contesting the right of the state to fly a flag on a public building. They are voicing their (majority) opinion against the (minority) opinion of a kid who requested the flag be flown at the building.

You seem to agree with my underlying point--either allow the parents to have complete control over where their children have to be educated (presuming they have to go to the facility) or allow their wishes to be met in regards to what they are subjected to once they attend a state mandated facility.

Also, this story doesn't affect anyone except possibly two people (evidently Mikey feels justified in dictating what people see or don't see on their local, public buildings because he pays roughly one penny of the taxes it takes to run the building) posting in this thread.

I was mainly commenting on the contradiction between conservative claims to restrain national government intrusion on local affairs and the hatred almost all of the posts were spouting towards a local, majority opinion demanding control over one local, public building.

I'm arguing that a local majority should have the right to decide what they want to do in regards to state/community public buildings. I'm not arguing, and neither are these parents, that states don't have the right to fly flags at tax funded buildings.

I can only assume you either missed part of the story or you are deliberately building a straw-man--the state already has a law that schools must fly flags on their premises. This building isn't considered a school by both the state of Oregon or the local community (despite the opinions of internet posters' from various states and countries) or it would have a flag already present. This wasn't even an issue until kid got it in his head that flying a flag on this building would be really patriotic. I can't remember if the story stated whether the kid even utilized the facility.

Now a few people are pissed because the rest of their community is saying "Hell no, we don't want your fucking jingoism in our faces"

and all the rest of the jingoistic idiots come screaming to the rescue..."get the fuck out of our country"

problem is, they disregard the very basic fact that this is their country, too. They don't have to leave. They can sit in beautiful Ashland and burn the flag, refuse to fly it, and do whatever else their nappy heads want to do with it because, not only is it their country, it's their community. Not one of them, to my knowledge, has stepped outside of Ashland and asked any of you to stop flying your banner in your town--yet this couresy isn't extended to these people (who pay a significant portion of the tax bill--far greater than one cent).

If majority rules, it should be allowed to be spoken. This has made clear that the majority rule is only legitimate when it agrees with your opinion--what a farce.

__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

jumpingbeans

Ahhhh..........Stooooop the Insanity....
Boo Hoo....
Chant with me,,,,,,USA, USA, USA....
Much better

__________________
USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,USA, USA,

debaser

Flying the American flag is jingoism now?!?

__________________

smooth

Look, I already explained that I had been living in that region for the past five years.

Flying the flag is not jingoism--and that's not what I said.

Placing the flag in every conceivable public location despite popular opinion and then telling people to get the fuck out of the country if they don't like it is jingoism.

Printing a flag that takes up both sides of the local paper so people can hang it in their storefront isn't jingoism and, although one might argue whether it's tacky, neither is placing wierd "patriotic" slogans on the other side along with your advertisement as an endorsement of the large flag on the front cover. However, if someone comes in to your store with a peace sign on his or her lapel, telling them to get the hell out of the store and maybe even a good dose of get the fuck out of the country does become jingoism.

When people burn flags that is likely to cause disruption and, even I agree, since it is likely just an attempt to anger others, is in bad taste and timing. However, flying banners (not flags, btw, according to the rules of flag flying) on your bumper, throwing things at cars that don't have such banners, and yelling things like where's your flag you fucking commie are all instances of jingoism.

Each of these things has happened and continues to happen in the Rogue Valley. This forms the political context that you are unaware of and, frankly, doesn't involve you. The kid's desire to raise a flag at the facility was an outgrowth of the growing political polarization in that basin. These people don't hate the US nor do they even hate its national standard. Of the ones I have spoken to, they have all stated their deeply held respect for our flag and the values it symbolizes. They abhor, however, the misuse of something so valuable. They feel that it has come to be misused and abused by corporate entities and utilized in such a way as to demonstrate to the world that our society condones their inappropriate behavior--when, in fact, the entire society does not condone such behavior.

Actually, the debate about whether corporate behavior and our administrations' behavior is inappropriate or undesirable for our long-term interests has not fully occurred because of this misuse of our national symbol to choke off public debate and political discourse. I can't imagine how you reconcile such displays of "patriotism" with the fundamental values our country was founded on--the free expression of political opinion.

Chanting obediance and subserviance to a nation's symbol is fine if that's your thing to do. Shouting down opposing opinions and ending profitable discourse on the policies and beliefs of all the citizens in this country is inappropriate jingoism.

Edit: since you asked whether flag waving, in and of itself, is jingoism, I suggest you look up the term because you don't seem to understand it's meaning. If you disagree with my assessment post the definition as you understand it and explain your perspective as to why such activities are not jingoism.

hiredgun

Jesus Christ.

I try to temper my liberal side, and while this nation is definitely not perfect, we're talking about a flag outside a school facility. The flag means something different to each and every person, and that's the beauty of it: it's the ideal to which we hold ourselves and our country, to which we aspire. It doesn't have to represent whatever you may or may not think is wrong with America today, or at any time in the past.

These anti-flag parents need to chill the F''' out.

debaser

Hey guy, don't get catty.

Your post specifically refered to fly the American flag (in this case over a government building) as jingoism:

I was just looking for clarification, not your high horse rant.

Now, allow me to tell you my perspective. On returning home from an overseas deployment in early 2002, the very first person who talked to me after I got off the plane was some woman berateing me for not having a flag on my car at the gas station. That, my friend, is jingoism.

Saying love it or leave it, that is jingoism.

But lets cut to the chase, and do away with all of the moral relativism: If you have a problem with a government building flying a government flag in a dignified manner, then the problem is with you. At the very least you are not smart enough to pick your fights, at the worst you are being a pain in the ass just for the sake of doing so. Hell, some people never grew out of the sixties, they have to protest something.

I am not condoning the acts of the equally idiotic "patriots" who don't know that you aren't supposed to wear the flag as clothing, nor print any manner of message across it. It is not to be used as advertising, period. If flown on a car, it should be affixed to the right fender (as on the presidential limo), but try telling them that. It's the same morons who wear the "love it or leave it" shirts, but don't take their ball cap off during the national anthem.

Both sides of the coin annoy to no end, but see them both for what they are: morons.

Response to edit:

jingoism

n 1: an appeal intended to arouse patriotic emotions [syn: flag waving] 2: fanatical patriotism [syn: chauvinism, superpatriotism, ultranationalism]


I fail to see how flying a flag above a government building qualifies as either of those definitions. No appeal is being made, and I would not describe flag display as fanatical...

__________________

seretogis

From the article: "While Oregon law requires that both a U.S. flag and state flag fly at every "public school building," it was unclear to district officials whether or not the learning center – technically not a "school" – fell under the requirement. According to the report, officials decided the building, since it was supported by district funds, was subject to the regulation. "

It was unclear. Now they are clear, and so a flag should be there. The fact that it wasn't before doesn't mean that it wasn't subject to the regulation in the past.

It's ridiculous for responsible adults to not have control of their child's education. Forcing them to go to a public facility to take tests is unnecessary. I'm more in favor of giving the parents the choice of mailing/faxing in tests than taking down a US flag at a publicly funded facility.

If a community is going to rely on state/federal funding in any way for their facilities, they are subjecting themselves to the rules of the state/federal governments. It is dangerous to start suggesting that although the government gives money to organizations, it should have no say in how that money is spent or how it is represented by the organization.

Instead of giving people more power over government-funded facilities, I would rather that the people take back control of the education system and get off of the government dole.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

smooth

My "high horse rant" ?:

"The Ashland School District decided it would erect the flag and flagpole this fall after 13-year-old Jesse Stanton asked that Old Glory fly outside the learning center, the Ashland paper said.

According to the report, the teen first contacted the facility's director, Debi Pew, about putting up the flag.

...

Stanton says he is "one of the only ones who speaks out on my views that support patriotism and pro-Americanism," said the report.

smooth

I didn't specificall refer to flying the American flag as jingoism--you incorrectly inferred it.

My "rant" was to give you the context so please quit insulting me if you want to learn something about the region at issue.

debaser

You may want to edit your initial post, then, because on re-reading it I found it could be construed no other way.

And how did I insult you?

__________________

The Bolshevist

Sigh...

Well, my two cents is this: the flag should be there (why was it not to begin with) and the people should be allowed to protest. I don't know what the state of the US law is regarding flag burning, but in Canada it is legal, although people who have done it have had their cars burned, houses vandalized, etc.

One thing I don't understand is the sentiment of being against "a citizen of the world." What is wrong with that? Take away borders and we are all humans, anyway.

The UN? Black helicopters? I think the UN would love some nice new black helicopters; it could replace all the shitty broken down Russian ones they have to use in Africa and Asia for peacekeeping and food distribution.

__________________
Workers of the world, UNITE! You have nothing to lose but your silly uniforms and paper hats!!

mikecc

It's that flag and the constitution that give you the right of speech and the opportunity to talk trash & not be killed for it. So if you don't like the flag ---then you have the right to leave and go somewhere that is not governed by our constitution. Try giving your oppinion in that country.

The flag stands for freedom---------- If you take that flag away you no longer have the right to gripe about the flag you were complaining about int the first place.