MoH Receipient Can't Fly A Flag

[Zipper5 74]

There is justice in this world. Great to hear.

[cjsoques 0]

Common sense prevails! Rare, but it is a joy to see when it happens.

[Shadow NX 1]

Nice to hear that.

And also nice that certain people wont need to discuss democracy itself for 20 more pages with unrelated examples ;)

[vilas 473]

unrelated ?

when a person has problem with law system of country where he lives, than it is important how law system of country works in many areas

it is the same as when you do police job, you don't look only narrow at one act, but on whole person deeds, previous acts and how many such acts and etc.

problem for people appear when they see things separate, not look at whole system or whole actions performed by someone

cause other way you (at least me) treat someone who lied once and other someone who done it five times to five other persons (but i know people who have problem with this and "forget" multiple lies)

there is wrong "freedom" if retired officer cannot raise flag of his own country while others have right to deface such flag

also there is something wrong if private organization (hoa in this case) can forbid citizen to use flag of his country

it would mean that individual private association is over/higher than state, this would be sick, cause h.o.a. is placed on US territory, and US flag cannot be prohibited by one or other house members, when they not like their own flag, they should emigrate

simply - flag of country, as national value, should be respected on territory of such country, not defaced or forbiden to wave by anyone

Edited December 10, 2009 by vilas

[gabe_ruckus 5]

Thing is, you're allowed to display a flag when you live in a neighborhood that has a HOA. Just not on a 21 foot pole. You can get a mount that goes on the front of your house at almost any large store in the states, and display your flag on there.

You seem to be having a tough time grasping that the HOA isn't prohibiting flags, and there are probably many houses in the neighborhood in question displaying them. The HOA is prohibiting 21 foot flagpoles. Somehow, you're ignoring this fact and trying to make it out as if we Americans don't actually enjoy freedom because of home owners associations, which is a silly argument.

If an American absolutely CANNOT live without a flag pole, they have the right to live wherever they want, and there are plenty of neighborhoods without home owners associations.

[Zipper5 74]

And you're having difficulty grasping just how little of an impact having a flag pole in this man's yard is having on the lives of his neighbors. Seriously, the flag is having such a bad impact on the aesthetic view of the neighborhood? To me it sounds like they're living in the wrong country if they're that hostile to it's own flag.

I mean Jesus! What asshole bitches about a 90 year old war veteran and Medal of Honor recipient wanting to display his country's flag on a proper flag pole? There is no other definition for a person like that. It's heartless. Let the man have his flag pole for the last few years of his life, it's the least that the American people can do for him. Then you can remove it if it's such a huge goddamn deal.

Thank God they backed off.

(And I'm Canadian by the way, since I realized this sounds pro-American.)

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

Thing is, you're allowed to display a flag when you live in a neighborhood that has a HOA. Just not on a 21 foot pole. You can get a mount that goes on the front of your house at almost any large store in the states, and display your flag on there.

You seem to be having a tough time grasping that the HOA isn't prohibiting flags, and there are probably many houses in the neighborhood in question displaying them. The HOA is prohibiting 21 foot flagpoles. Somehow, you're ignoring this fact and trying to make it out as if we Americans don't actually enjoy freedom because of home owners associations, which is a silly argument.

If an American absolutely CANNOT live without a flag pole, they have the right to live wherever they want, and there are plenty of neighborhoods without home owners associations.

edited out

[Scrub 0]

He. Can. Fly. A. FLAG.

He agreed to the associations rules when he moved into the place. It's the POLE. The flag is not the issue.

The people claiming what NEEDS to happen rather than what SHOULD (and did) happen are the ones restricting freedoms by legislating actions. We are free to agree or not to terms. For it to be fruitful, it is the individuals -not government- that need to make the disagreements (HOA) come to an honorable, sensible conclusion. Glad he got his wish.

As for debating democracy, that is exactly what is at issue here.

[Pathy 0]

So the people who actually own the land got pressured into abandoning their right to say what they allow on that land, because they got shouted out by people complaining about freedom.

And all this is judged a victory for freedom. Or something. I love Americans...

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

So the people who actually own the land got pressured into abandoning their right to say what they allow on that land, because they got shouted out by people complaining about freedom.

And all this is judged a victory for freedom. Or something. I love Americans...

What gives you the impression that it isn't his land?

Don't worry, we love you too.

[Pathy 0]

Well put it another way, if he's not leasing it, then he at least signed an agreement that he has to abide by, that places the legal right to decide whats acceptable and what isn't in the hands of the HOA. He signed that. Nobody forced him to. He then ignored it. Loads of mouthbreathers then complained that he couldn't fly the flag, despite the issue actually being a 22ft flagpole planted in a lawn he had no legal right to plant it in. HOA backed off its legal right to complain after being bullied into it.

This is a victim for freedom! Or maybe as South Park will put it "They took our flags!"

[Takko 10]

Finally! He can erect his flag! Let it wave!

Let it wave at all times and don't let it stop!

Let the flag wave!

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

Well put it another way, if he's not leasing it, then he at least signed an agreement that he has to abide by, that places the legal right to decide whats acceptable and what isn't in the hands of the HOA. He signed that. Nobody forced him to. He then ignored it. Loads of mouthbreathers then complained that he couldn't fly the flag, despite the issue actually being a 22ft flagpole planted in a lawn he had no legal right to plant it in. HOA backed off its legal right to complain after being bullied into it.

This is a victim for freedom! Or maybe as South Park will put it "They took our flags!"

I don't see it as an issue of "freedom". I see it as an issue of respect. Further, why is the flag, on any flagpole, "aesthetically unappealing"? People disagreeing with you are not "mouth breathers".

[Pathy 0]

People disagreeing with you are not "mouth breathers".

No, but people turning it into a "He can't fly the flag!!!111" issue are. He could always fly the flag. It was never about the flag. It was about the 22ft flagpole.

I find the whole presentation of the subject highly exploitative. Changing it from "he isn't being allowed to put a 22ft flagpole onto land he was told not to put it onto" to "he can't fly the US flag outside his home" is designed to be emotive i'm sure, because it's either ignorant or it's exploitative and I'm damn sure the people who made that headline knew what they were doing. It's just a shame most people don't read far enough, nor attempt to comprehend, that there has never been anything stopping him flying a flag.

The title of this thread is misrepresentative of the actual issue, too.

Lets do a thought exercise. I'm going to remove it from America so that you can get a better perspective.

You move to the fictional nation of Freedomania. It turns out your next door neighbour is a veteran of a war in which he won the highest medals for his valor.

It also turns out the land infront of his house actually belongs to you, but you don't mind him using it, so long as he keeps it tidy.

He then asks to erect a 22ft flagpole on the land, acknowledging your right over that decision. Being the reasonable sort you are, you've no objection to him flying a flag as you're aware he must be a proud man, but all the same, you aren't so keen on the flagpole on your land (just go with this, even if you'd let him) so you say 'sorry mate, no'.

You wake up one morning, look out your window, and find he's gone and done it anyway - theres now a 22ft flag pole on your land, that you told him he couldn't have. You naturally object - he has no right to erect that flagpole there.

Suddenly, everyone across the country is up in arms - how dare you deny this veteran the right to fly a flag outside his house!? Everyone gets so upset about the actual flag that they completely forget it was your land to begin with, that you have no objection to the flag, and that the issue is a 22ft pole. But, after getting hate mail, nasty calls and scorn from people all across the nation, you feel your only option is to back down.

Even so, you're now branded unpatriotic and disrespectful, and your right to say what you want and what you don't want on your land is effectively worthless. All the whilst, everyone who complained is saying this is a victory for freedom.

This isn't meant to be an accurate summation of the events here, it's just meant to make you think about the issue from another perspective.

Edited December 10, 2009 by Pathy

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

I get their perspective and their legal argument. If it were me, I wouldn't bother with the place and would simply move. Why waste time and be around people like that?

[maturin 12]

I don't see it as an issue of "freedom". I see it as an issue of respect. Further, why is the flag, on any flagpole, "aesthetically unappealing"? People disagreeing with you are not "mouth breathers".

So we freak out over a lack of respect but not a lack of honesty and breach of contract/law?

Nice to know that blowing up a tank is actually an indulgence so you can go back on your word and ignore the rules. I guess Chesty Puller could have robbed a bank if he wanted.

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

So we freak out over a lack of respect but not a lack of honesty and breach of contract/law?

Nice to know that blowing up a tank is actually an indulgence so you can go back on your word and ignore the rules. I guess Chesty Puller could have robbed a bank if he wanted.

Cool story, bro!

[abs 2]

Cool story, bro!

Cool story, bro!

Abs