I disagree with you there. Everybody should have the same access to the engines of power / government-- but it is incumbent upon those of us who love Freedom, Liberty and the rights and privileges afforded to us under the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the other founding documents, to safeguard those values, to hold them dear and to fight for them vigorously every time somebody comes along to challenge them. Freedom isn't free and it isn't something that can be given. It can only be taken-- fought for with the blood and the spirit of good citizens who are willing to uphold its principle and defend its honor.

@jwhitten So you think those in their actions that have denied others the right to the security and safety of person and property should be involved in the decision making process of a nation? A nation founded upon the individual's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

@FrankZeleniuk I believe if you build a nation that professes to be free that you must defend the action of burning the very symbol of that nation in protest of that nation-- as perverse-sounding as that may be. That the censorious act is ultimately the more pernicious and corrosive element.

@jwhitten The perverse-sounding conundrum you describe is one that has been debated probably since the revolution. I asked the question in my initial post.
You have to be very specific when discussing this. You mention the "symbols of a nation". What are those and are they the same symbols of the government? Are people so conditioned to think that they are the same? I believe you have the flag in mind as a symbol of the nation which you feel freedom should afford the right to destroy. Is it allegiance to your nation you wish to protest? Then it is the founding principles of establishment that you protest. I think the patriot would defend and protect the symbols of the nation established at its founding along with its principles of freedom and liberty. You seem to have attached the symbol to the government itself? Some see the protest as a rejection of freedom and liberty itself. Is it truly the idea you wish to destroy and perhaps the symbol of another nation is the one you prefer. Is the hammer and sickle a better symbol? Some believe so.

Unfortunately, today all governments, not just the US government has taken away several means by which they were supposed to be held to account and remain the servants of the people. The Constitution intended to keep government limited by the separation of powers. But the people became accustomed to government, they have been taught to turn to government in their need. They granted it more power over their lives, and the government's hands have become untied. The people were hoodwinked into giving bankers power over the issuance of their money and thus the direct control of their wealth was transferred to the government. The people are left with only the illusion of wealth in their pockets and a far reduced ability to maintain the government as their servant. The only means is the vote. Protests and appeals to restore limits on government, as it grows, fall increasingly on deaf ears. You do no service to the nation by attacking symbols of the nation when government should be the target. You see government permit and even encourage the destruction of the nation's symbols from its founding because - freedom.

@FrankZeleniuk Yes, I was perhaps not as clear in communicating my thoughts as I could have been.

I don't know if all instances of burning the flag equate to questioning one's allegiance to the nation. I personally am quite upset when I see people doing it. I think one can voice one's displeasure with the-- government... yup, I see sorta where you're headed with this-- in burning the flag without being against the nation it stands for. But I'm not sure what/why you're splitting the hair? No offense intended in referencing it that way-- I'm intrigued and would like to hear more.

The whole bit about being hoodwinked by government and bankers-- I completely agree with all of that.

I like your question about 'Symbols of the Nation' versus 'Symbols of the Government'. I'll have to think about that for a bit.

I would like to ask you for your opinion on that same subject. What do you think is the difference between the symbols of the government versus the symbols of the nation? In my mind symbols of the government might include things such as coinage, notes, stamps, passports, etc. Symbols of the nation would be things like the flag, the national anthem, respect for the offices (irrespective of the people in them) of government, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Military insignia and whatever heraldry goes along with it.

What else? You made an interesting comment and I'm interested in hearing more.

@jwhitten All I was saying is that the target of one's disaffection should be clear. Politician's would rather you not target the government by attacking or trying to overthrow it. They would prefer to deflect and allow people to confuse the issue and attack each other or something else. So identifying the target one may be protesting is important. Government, most likely through political parties, may even foster dissent and discontentment that splits individuals into voting blocs but they will shut down activities that target government as a whole.

Foreign or external threats to a nation from within stem from individuals that wish to "fundamentally transform" the nation. That means changing the founding principles of the nation by introducing ideological concepts other than those that formulated its origin.

@FrankZeleniuk >> "Foreign or external threats to a nation from within stem from individuals that wish to "fundamentally transform" the nation. "

Well we definitely have some of those going on right now.