Which would you find more offensive: someone burning an American flag, or urinating on the US Constitution?

I'm so sick of his crap...I have been writing to my senator a lot lately...I hope others are as well....he has no idea what he's doing.

I personally would never burn a flag unless it was in some sort of ceremony, but I suppose some will burn it as protest...but because I love the Constitution---it tells ME that burning the flag is legitimate protest---I will allow for others burniong the flag...but someone who destroys the document of our democracy and ensures the freedoms of our grandchildren...I might kill him and do my punishment.

I wonder what the Marines will do with their flags if such an amendment is passed.

I just watched a special on the Discovery Chanel about the Marines. An official flag that touches the ground is required to be burned and buried. There is an entire ceremony for this.

I'm not sure about other branches of the Military, or if it is just a military custom.

That's actually quite interesting. Personally, I find insulting the Constitution more offensive than anything you can do to an "American" flag, which on occasion isn't even made in America.

That's a tough one.

Burn the symbol that represents your rights and freedom to do it - or urinate on the constitutional document that guarantees these rights.

I guess either act pretty much says volumes about the intelligence of the person performing the act.

you have two different points one actually and the other "theory"

I believe that both the flag and all documents historical or present should be protected from obvious misuse/abuse

this based on the respect of all those who gave and presently giving their lives in protecting these very same items... further i find it appalling .. and each act should carry considerable fines/ community service (cleaning historical items) and or prison.

on your second point it sad and true that by actions and or deeds the intent of these same documents is being abused not only by those on high but those on low also...while the use of an ethical committee raises hairs on my neck.. some form of protections should also be afforded in cases like these

finally.. thought out the 220 years these documents/symbols have stood the abuse and test of time// i believe that on that bases it will continue.. "We hold these truths to be self-evident"

I would find urinating on the US constitution offensive because no political statement is being made. The person or people are just being disgusting.

The flag is a piece of cloth.

I would say pissing on the constitution is far more offensive.The constitution is what keeps America free.

Bush of course! His latest is to open 1st class mail without a warrant, clearly violating the US Constitution. I guess he never heard of being "secure in their papers"!

That Rodriguez has one warped mind in his interpretation of the Constitution! Has he EVER won a case before the Supreme court?

Pissing on the Constitution would be harder to do than burning a flag. And I have no problem with anyone burning an American flag, as long they are wrapped in it when they do it.

Excuse me but that is downright RUDE! I believe that both are as bad but if you want to diss our president move to Canada for gawd sake. You can say you disagree with his views, you can say you don't like him, but for the sake of all people, do not make fun of him!!! HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE THE PRESIDENT?!? Every day people are watching to see if you make one little mistake and then they will call you on it and put it in the news and harass you!!! He is just trying to do what is right. I disagree with everything the Democrats stand for but you dont hear me going around acting like I could do a better job. I know I couldn't. I am no where near as smart as you, most likely since I am 13, but you are putting your brains to waste by making fun of someone who is trying his hardest to make our country better for us to live in it!!!

Also, people...It is against the constitution for Bush to open 1st class mail, listen in on phone convo's, and many other things, but the way the Constitution is interpreted and SHOULD BE interpreted is that in time of WAR or in time of ATTACKS, the government may do what it believes is necessary to the safety of our country