Flags

[Ken]

Highly divisive Pride flags shouldn’t be on public property anywhere, period.

It wasn't a flag. It was a crosswalk painted in rainbow colors.

And yes, this country does have a long and rich history of art in public spaces, even art that some dislike. That fact that you or someone else doesn't like it doesn't give you veto power.

"Art" should not preempt the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which is where the proper striping for crosswalks is stipulated.

Oh, goodness! The "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices!"

We can't be messing with that now can we.

The horror.







On the other hand....

Art painted on crosswalks makes streets safer, group says: People drive slower and are more alert at crosswalks decorated with murals, study finds: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyl ... bloomberg/

[temporal1]

Highly divisive Pride flags shouldn’t be on public property anywhere, period.

"Art" should not preempt the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which is where the proper striping for crosswalks is stipulated.

i hope Florida HB901 passes, and becomes a trend.
Wording needs to cover flags AND logos, obviously, there will be those who want to test boundaries, bully their way, etc.
Count on it.

The focus is on achieving neutral gov spaces.
Not unlike keeping Christian crosses away from gov property.
If local governments want to allow temporary licenses for festive street occasions done by private citizens, maybe that should be allowed.

When i was about 10, walking home from school one day, there was a patch of fresh cement in the sidewalk.
i could not resist imprinting my initials with a stick - using my very best printing! i was so pleased.

That did not end well.
i learned some new words for my effort: DEFACING PUBLIC PROPERTY

It did not occur to me to go to City Hall to get a permit.
i presume the folks responsible in above street art got their permits.

In any event, temporary permitted art/graffitti is not the focus of the Florida bill, nor others elsewhere hoping to see gov properties stripped of extraneous political emblems/symbols/flags/logos. Too much was allowed, now to correct.

Save the double-talk. A painted flag is a flag.

[Ken]

The focus is on achieving neutral gov spaces.
Not unlike keeping Christian crosses away from gov property.
If local governments want to allow temporary licenses for festive street occasions done by private citizens, maybe that should be allowed.

Christian crosses are allowed on public property. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on that back in 2019. https://www.ncronline.org/news/historic ... ourt-rules Or do you disagree with that ruling?

[temporal1]

The focus is on achieving neutral gov spaces.
Not unlike keeping Christian crosses away from gov property.
If local governments want to allow temporary licenses for festive street occasions done by private citizens, maybe that should be allowed.

Christian crosses are allowed on public property. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on that back in 2019. https://www.ncronline.org/news/historic ... ourt-rules Or do you disagree with that ruling?

That’s quite an article. Mostly about historic cemeteries. “The cross does not endorse religion.”
The argument was made for allowing crosses because they are secular, not religious! What next?!
Not to mention, freedom of religion is written into U.S. documents. Religion is often its own category.
Try putting a Christian cross on your classroom wall. (careful not to burn your fingers!)

“The world is wacky - Change my mind” ..

This post could be added to “Good things: Trump”

[Ken]

The focus is on achieving neutral gov spaces.
Not unlike keeping Christian crosses away from gov property.
If local governments want to allow temporary licenses for festive street occasions done by private citizens, maybe that should be allowed.

Christian crosses are allowed on public property. The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 on that back in 2019. https://www.ncronline.org/news/historic ... ourt-rules Or do you disagree with that ruling?

That’s quite an article. Mostly about historic cemeteries. “The cross does not endorse religion.”
The argument was made for allowing crosses because they are secular, not religious! What next?!
Not to mention, freedom of religion is written into U.S. documents. Religion is often its own category.
Try putting a Christian cross on your classroom wall. (careful not to burn your fingers!)

“The world is wacky - Change my mind” ..

This post could be added to “Good things: Trump”

There are teachers in my school who have crosses in their classrooms and various inspirational Bible verses. Also stars of David, and various Islamic stuff. It is generally permissible if it is part of their desk area and not giving the appearance of being school endorsed by being front and center next to the US flag or something. My daughter’s HS band also does lots of Christmas music during the holidays and public performances of religious Christmas music downtown during various Christmas festivities.

This is the current Biden Administration Department of Education guidance on the subject and on the subject of prayer in school and other religious observation: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/rel ... dance.html

[temporal1]

i’m encouraged that people are THINKING and ACTING.
PREVENTION of problems is best. CORRECTION is second-best. Sober discussion is “supposed to be” U.S. SOP.

UTAH / Utah House kills bill banning LGBTQ+ Pride flags and political views from classrooms
https://apnews.com/article/utah-educati ... b7b9b9a43d

TENNESSEE / Pride flags would be largely banned in Tennessee classrooms in bill advanced by GOP lawmakers
The GOP-led Tennessee House has passed a bill that would largely ban displaying pride flags in public school classrooms
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/pri ... -107568218

o.look.
the argument to eliminate extraneous flags+logos from government property, domestic+foreign, is made more clear:

Utah Pride Flag (double sided)
Please consider buying a
Utah Theocracy Pride Flag which is an indulgence from the Church of the Sacred Whale of 9th and 9th.
https://rileyadamson.com/products/utah-pride-flag

related: Justice Alito foresaw the pitfalls

JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO / Alito says he was right to fear that opponents of gay marriage would be treated as bigots
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said he'd anticipated that Americans would be called bigots unless they hid their religious views on homosexuality.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 672733007/

^^This is quite evident on this very forum. Open allegations of bigotry.
Pride is a grave sin. All are vulnerable.

[Jazman]

Step in the right direction!

Symbolic... does 0 to address any real problems. If I were a Floridian, I'd be disappointed that my reps in the legislature are being paid to time waste like this...

[Ken]

JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO / Alito says he was right to fear that opponents of gay marriage would be treated as bigots.Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said he'd anticipated that Americans would be called bigots unless they hid their religious views on homosexuality.

Words have meanings. In particular, bigotry is defined as "prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group"

If people don't want to be labeled "bigots" they should probably avoid behaving like them. In a free society that values free expression, one place to start might be to avoid using the coercive force of government to CENSOR the ideas of others that you might with.

And frankly, Alito is wrong. No one much cares what his or anyone else's PERSONAL views are on gay marriage. They only care if/when he tries to selectively IMPOSE and ENFORCE them on other Americans who may not share them.

[Josh]

JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO / Alito says he was right to fear that opponents of gay marriage would be treated as bigots.Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said he'd anticipated that Americans would be called bigots unless they hid their religious views on homosexuality.

Words have meanings. In particular, bigotry is defined as "prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group"

If people don't want to be labeled "bigots" they should probably avoid behaving like them. In a free society that values free expression, one place to start might be to avoid using the coercive force of government to CENSOR the ideas of others that you might with.

And frankly, Alito is wrong. No one much cares what his or anyone else's PERSONAL views are on gay marriage. They only care if/when he tries to selectively IMPOSE and ENFORCE them on other Americans who may not share them.

We had foreign views of gay marriage forced on my state.

The same happened in California. The people spoke and passed Prop 8. Then the state Supreme Court overturned it.

The lgbt lobby has forced this on everyone.

[Ken]

JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO / Alito says he was right to fear that opponents of gay marriage would be treated as bigots.Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said he'd anticipated that Americans would be called bigots unless they hid their religious views on homosexuality.

Words have meanings. In particular, bigotry is defined as "prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group"

If people don't want to be labeled "bigots" they should probably avoid behaving like them. In a free society that values free expression, one place to start might be to avoid using the coercive force of government to CENSOR the ideas of others that you might with.

And frankly, Alito is wrong. No one much cares what his or anyone else's PERSONAL views are on gay marriage. They only care if/when he tries to selectively IMPOSE and ENFORCE them on other Americans who may not share them.

We had foreign views of gay marriage forced on my state.

The same happened in California. The people spoke and passed Prop 8. Then the state Supreme Court overturned it.

The lgbt lobby has forced this on everyone.

Nonsense.

Show me ONE SINGLE PERSON who was forced to get gay married against their will. In your state or any other state. Gay marriage hasn't been forced onto a single American anywhere. That is about as dumb as saying that rural one room schoolhouse 8th grade religious educations were FORCED on the country simply because of Wisconsin v. Yoder.

And in any event, it was a Republican majority Supreme Court who ruled that marriage equity was a constitutional right under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. This so-called "LGBT Lobby" had absolutely nothing to do with it. None of it was done through legislation which is where lobbying actually has an effect.