Perhaps you didn’t read much of what I shared. If one does, it will be seen that flag pins are considered flags and are open to all of the rules and regulations associated with the flag. The following is a short bit from: http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html#q031
Are flags on T-shirts, ties, etc., really flags? Yes. According to the Flag Code, a flag is anything "by which the average person seeing the same without deliberation may believe the same to represent the flag." The words "flag, standard, colors, or ensign", as used herein, shall include any flag, standard, colors, ensign, or any picture or representation of either, or of any part or parts of either, made of any substance or represented on any substance, of any size evidently purporting to be either of said flag, standard, colors, or ensign of the United States of America or a picture or a representation of either, upon which shall be shown the colors, the stars and the stripes, in any number of either thereof, or of any part or parts of either, by which the average person seeing the same without deliberation may believe the same to represent the flag, colors, standard, or ensign of the United States of America. Source: Flag Code, Section 3 Therefore, a flag includes any representation of it of any substance, with stars and stripes of any number. This would include T-shirts and ties. The Flag Code states that the flag should never be worn. (Section 8d): "The flag should never be used as wearing apparel." So you can ‘see where I’m coming from’, here is a long list of rulings about the flag. http://atheism.about.com/od/flagburningdesecration/a/FlagTimeline_2.htm If one looks long enough at this, you will come to what happened in the 60s and 70s when I watched people get arrested for wearing stars and bars as a shirt even though the cloth never was a flag. Also, the same happened for those who wore flag patches, painted it on motor cycle helmets etc. When you say “I see nothing wrong with sporting a flag pin to identify nationality and perhaps show a little pride in the first democratic country to preach separation of Church and State.” – clog I will say that I agree with your thought that one can wear whatever the heck one wants. I’m making a different claim and that has to do with legal use of the ‘flag’. Later you say “If I didn't feel proud to be an American, I wouldn't be here, and I've no plans to become a fanatical patriot or to support any military advances. All my points were aimed at life in the USA.” – clog In the 60s and 70s, the radical right constantly were shouting that they were ‘proud to be an American’ and, at the same time, were putting people in jail who wore the flag because they saw it as being unamerican! By the way, the term fanatical as I used it did not imply military advances. I’m pointing at a state of mind, a way of thinking. And, whenever one begins down the slope of saying how much one likes something or dislikes it, the seeds have been planted. More to the point, when you say that your points were ‘aimed at life in the USA’, when I used the German analogy, my point was that things change within countries and nationalism of any level can arise and ‘take control’. (anywhere at all) Later you say “I have a differing view on business.” I’m not sure we have different views about business at all. I implied that they are in no way a democracy. Your comment about your expectations support this fact. I too have had and have businesses so am in no way a stranger to the ‘animal’. As to the way you link freedom and the right to work for others and/or self, I can see how you have arrived at this assumption. At least in a general way so will not criticize it. However, when you say you don’t believe the government’s unemployment numbers, I agree in a sense. The sense that they have become and are greatly understated. Today, it does seem like work ethics and other areas of ignorance do result in less desirable slave….er, employees! : - ) Of course, we live in different areas of the country. Oregon has been 50th and 49th most of the last decade when it comes to employment. So, for me, the idea of computers to receive employment applications does nothing for me. You now ask me why I take such a hard line on businesses. I wasn’t aware that I was doing this, however, after hearing your bad experiences with businesses, I can see how you would see everything through that lens. When I said that most businesses were run as dictatorships, this is mere fact. Most businesses are run from the top down as you have already stated. Businesses are in no real way democratic. At least, not the vast majority of them. You next conflate your past experience with paperwork and regulation with the current topic again. Overall, in many ways we see things quite the same. In this case, we both think that there are too many ‘rules’, at least for the small businessman today. We both see that business owners have it hard. We both see that business owners set the rules for employees and when they are not followed, they are fired. We both think that people should be able to wear anything at all, flag or not. I suspect that most apparent ‘differences’ are either misunderstandings and/or different motivations for the same actions/beliefs. On Oct 9, 5:54 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi y'all - thanks for the differing view which I don't completely > agree with. > > First on the flag. I took your comment to be on flag pins. I do know > about rules governing use of the flag. I see nothing wrong with > sporting a flag pin to identify nationality and perhaps show a little > pride in the first democratic country to preach separation of Church > and State. If I didn't feel proud to be an American, I wouldn't be > here, and I've no plans to become a fanatical patriot or to support > any military advances. All my points were aimed at life in the USA. > > I have a differing view on business. My wife runs a small business and > I've been involved in plenty. We tried many times during our first > decade here to hire staff but non lasted more than a week. We didn't > enforce a dress code but we did require punctuality and a fair day's > work. Eventually we quit, and my wife remained as a one woman business > - she is doing very nicely thank you. Business owners in this country > have my sympathy. > > Freedom includes the right to sell one's labor or the right to labor > for oneself. I see these freedoms spread liberally around this country > and no reason to revolt against them. Every large store that I walk > into has a computer and keyboard set up to take instant applications > for employment. I tend to avoid the many restaurants that have the > "now hiring" sign up, as I know they are short of staff. I don't know > how the Govt. comes up with the unemployment figures - I do not accept > them. I do believe that many people make themselves unemployable > either by their work ethic (lack thereof) or their personal habits. > > I wonder why we have such diametrically opposed views? Why do you take > such a hard line on businesses? The unpaid time spent on unnecessary > paperwork alone should be enough to deter anyone but a commited > masochist. > > On Oct 9, 6:02 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Yes clog, this is what ‘common sense’ comes up with. It also > > represents the blind spot found within any specific sense of identity. > > (nationalism, theological and/or wage slave in this case) > > > Taking your points one by one, and continuing to admit they are common > > memes, let us do an analysis. > > > 1. “permissible” – Most workers do submit to the authority of their > > employers, thus in this sense you are absolutely correct. Yet, even > > here, IF the culture were one that did not submit so easily, any > > pretense of a ‘right to make a uniform mandatory…’ disappears in > > smoke. Cultures differ, memes differ, businesses differ. Even though > > there is a movement afloat to unify most cultures into a global one, > > even this need not be submitted to. > > > 2. “reasonable” – To state that it is reasonable to insist on no > > symbols “religious or otherwise” in one breath and then in another > > breath say that flags are fine, expected by you and believed to be a > > sign of pride and respectability by you highlights how relative this > > notion of being ‘reasonable’ is. > > > 3. “freedom” – The old saw of “no one is forced to….”, again is > > commonly believed and supported. Yet, when examined further, > > currently, within our specific cultures, most people do and must work. > > In this sense, to be able to eat and have clothing and shelter, a job > > is a necessity. So, there is less freedom here than first imagined. > > Looking even more closely, your supposition that there is and will > > always be a rainbow of differing business models, tastes and > > motivations is also commonly believed. Yet, it is clear that even > > today many countries (cultures) are experiencing upheaval of differing > > amounts when it comes to religious tolerance and control of cultural > > mores, laws and memes. Small example, in some muslem states, to wear, > > expose or even own most if not all religious icons is more than > > frowned upon. So, even though this is a specific and limited example, > > my point is that this sort of change can easily occur. This can easily > > be extended to nationalism and whether it is found to be respectable > > or not. Pick any country, say china and then pick any theology and see > > if there is a ‘fit’ or not. And, no, in most cases, the citizens do > > not have the ‘freedom’ to move to a different country let alone > > renounce the commonly held views of the day. > > > 4. “logical conclusion” - So, yes, your ‘logical conclusion’ of any > > business being able to say ‘no’ to anything at all does follow your > > premise. This is one reason I oppose this. In our culture, most > > businesses are run as dictatorships in practice if not in theory. So, > > any draconian urge at all can and will be supported as long as there > > is compliance. Again, why I revolt. > > > 5. “point of view” - Since the US is not your native country as I > > remember, I won’t go into the history and legal precedencies that run > > in opposition to your beliefs about the promotion of religion, > > politicians, nationalism etc. Also, I remember days when even being > > ‘off duty’ required a very limited choice of uniforms. > > > 6. ‘code’ – See:http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html > > andhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Flag_Code. > > Such things are easily forgotten and ignored when nationalistic fervor > > approaches fever pitch. Also, if you have not been in the USA for more > > than the last decade or two, you may not have been privy to inner > > strength and sober nationalistic pride. Sadly, this sense of > > equilibrium no longer is the norm. As an analogy, I have heard that > > the majority of people in Nazi Germany felt their sense of > > nationalistic pride was just that and had nothing to do with > > fanaticism. It is all too easy to get swept up in the moment and > > emotions. > > > So, while not the ‘norm’, I present a differing view along with some > > of the ‘whys’. > > > On Oct 9, 2:32 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi y'all - I think the question to be asked is if it is permissible > > > for a representative of a business to be wearing religious symbols > > > during work time and when servicing a customer. The business has the > > > right to make a uniform mandatory and that uniform reflects the image > > > of the company to customers or prospective customers. When looked at > > > from this perspective, it seems reasonable that the business should > > > insist on no symbols (religious or otherwise) as they may promote an > > > image that the business doesn't wish to. If we take this to its > > > logical conclusion, businesses should be able to say no turbans, veils > > > or burkas. I think I have to agree with this - no one is forced to > > > take the job. There will be some businesses that wish to promote a > > > particular religion or politician and thus appropriate regalia will be > > > permitted or even compulsory. > > > Of course, off-duty, dress is a matter of personal choice. > > > I'm not sure which code it is against to wear the flag and why it > > > should be described as fanatical nationalism. I would have thought > > > that any respectable business would be proud of their employees > > > wearing a flag if only to identify their nationality. > > > > On Oct 9, 2:29 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > The article isn’t so much ‘in your face’ as is the group headed by one > > > > person mentioned therein. > > > > > “The Rev Brian Allenby, national director of Christians at Work which > > > > promotes Christianity in the workplace, says displaying the cross is > > > > an important part of some Christians’ faith.” > > > > >http://www.christiansatwork.org/ > > > > > Christians at work. There exist UK associated sites and others. > > > > > Another person quoted at clog’s original site: > > > > “David Cannings, chairman of Christians in Politics, which encourages > > > > people in public office to make their faith part of their work, said > > > > religious imagery was becoming marginalised.” > > > > > I contemplate this stuff quite a bit. While on the surface, I don’t > > > > want others to ‘falunt’ their theology at least not in an evangelical > > > > way towards me, I’m not sure that wearing a piece of jewelry falls in > > > > this category. I do know that I don’t like the gratuitous cards placed > > > > on the food trays on one of the airlines, Hawaiian I believe. They are > > > > embossed with christian words of the day. I didn’t purchase a ticket > > > > for this. > > > > > On the other hand, for atheists and/or evolutionists, would being > > > > asked to remove one of the Darwin pins or necklaces be similar? How > > > > does the notion of universality enter into this? I wear a couple of > > > > symbols on a chain around my neck that some would call occult. I don’t > > > > mind keeping them in my shirt, but would feel a little imposed upon if > > > > asked to be sure to do so or remove them. > > > > > What about flag pins? Not only is it against code to wear the flag, > > > > (of the US) but it appears to be a form of fanatical nationalism. > > > > Should this be stopped? > > > > > It all seems to be cyclical and subjective. At least until the > > > > ultimate water boarding found in Salem of yore returns. > > > > > On Oct 9, 11:54 am, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi y'all - in your face religion > > > > > or..............?http://www.ivanfoster.org/article.asp?date=11/1/2006&seq=3-Hidequotedtext > > > > > - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
