<flame-suit on>  (get it? flames? burning? oh, well...)

For me, this falls into the same category as flag burning.  And, I'm sure some of you will disagree, but I think that's a free speech issue as well.

This has nothing to do with running into a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!" when there is no fire. That sort of "free speech" is outlawed (or should be outlawed) because it needlessly incites panic, which could result in human harm or death.  Burning a cross/flag/bra/symbol-du-jour at a public gathering is a political/religious/social statement.  As long as the fire complies with all federal, state, and local laws (did you get that burning permit?) and nobody gets hurt, I don't see anything wrong with it.

Intimidating or scaring people?  That may already be illegal, and, if not, maybe it should be.  But if me and my posse of narrow-minded zealots gets it in our heads to scare and intimidate a specific group of people, we can do that pretty easily without burning crosses.  Eliminating forms of expression does nothing to address the underlying hatred and intolerance.

My opinion, not my employer's, blah, blah.

Art Frank

>>> Larry Barnes <[log in to unmask]> 05/30/02 08:27AM >>>
I find it interesting that the U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear a case on
Cross Burning because it deals with free speech.  The plaintiff argues that
s/he has the right to burn a cross, under the guise of free speech, to
intimidate people.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of this argument then I should be
allowed to enter a movie theatre and yell 'FIRE' because I want to
intimidate/scare people.

Where will common sense take hold again?


just my opinion, and I'm interested in yours.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *