Stars and stripes forever/never

(Moderators please move if this is not the correct forem for this topic)
Stars and stripes forever/never
Having heard about this, I went and looked for this story. The issue here is the right to fly the American flag. One the side of Caltrans, is the issue of public safety, as the would claim that it represents a danger to those driving and it would impede the drivers who are on the highway. On the other side are those for which this flag is flying, a monument to those who have served in the US military. While the safety concern is valid, it is absolutely wrong to deny a city or even at a monument for the US flag from being flown, in recognition for those who have served this country. It is non religious in nature, and thus the question is who would ultimately be insulted by this site?
At what point or line should be drawn in the sand, where national pride and recognition is no longer something we can turn to? A flag is a symbol of a country, and should be looked with pride, especially in the country for which is represents. While some of the issues may be that other groups would want to fly a different flag, however, are there not rules that would permit such? If the Nazi/white supremacists group can clean up a highway and get their name on a sign stating such, would not it be equal that a monument dedicated to veterans’ hold equal weight?

I'm going to agree with Caltrans on this one.
From what I seeSteve LeBard can fly his flag or erect his monument in any one of billions of different places, but he seems hell bent on wanting to built a monument in one particular specific Caltrans-owned place.

Its like me asking to build a monument in YOUR living room, and you knowing that if you agree to my monument it sets a precedent where everyone else is allowed to put a monument in your living room as well.
If you deny me my request, is that an impingment on free speech? I dont think so.

reply to post by sdcigarpig


Mixed opinions for me on this one. I'd have to get better views of the site, but sounds like it's a public safety matter, and I can understand the reasoning behind the decision.

I didn't see anything here indicating that anyone else had been able to put anything else of differing ideology up - in which case, as they reasoned, I'd have to call fair play and side with him - and if it DOES obstruct views, etc., the decision appears justified.

NOW...in other cases where people in offices and so forth have been told to take the flag down because it's offensive (or we can't have the ten commandments up, or nativity scenes, etc.) - well. PISS OFF! As long as others with different views can put up their own icons fairly, then even if I disagree with their icons or what they represent, so-friggin-be it.

Not enough information provided, but with what has been given, I think it's Ok.