Scared of the wreath

[hokeshel]

I am sure many of you saw this on AOL. http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_...n/20061126205309990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
What do you think?
While I agree that this is a private entity and they can make these decisions and the homeowner should abide, it is one of the most ridiculous things I have heard about. It is a peace sign for crying out loud. I wonder if they will ban any music there that contains the words "Peace on earth".

 

[framed]

Wow thats just...sad.

I'm not up to speed on the legalities of an HOA. If you own the land I think the law would be strongly in your favor to refuse the HOA's request on many grounds, not the least of which are free speech, and basic property rights. Does anyone know how HOA's legally enforce their requests and what the limits are?

It mentions in the article that the HOA originally sided with the people displaying the wreath, but then the HOA president fired all the people who sided with allowing the wreath to stay. It sounds like one guys vendetta, I have a hard time believing it will stand up.

 

[dong]

That president's head is gonna roll, but not before the ripples spread through the public.

 

[tater03]

I had not seen this yet. I find this just plain stupid. I mean she is right that the peace sign does not just have to do with war. Not only that but to think it has something to do with satan is just beyond ridiculous.

 

[mamab]

This is the first time I've seen this. I would think that peace of any kind at this time of year would be great. Why does everything have to do made to be a protest against the war in Iraq? And I've definitely never heard of a peace symbol being satanic. wow

 

[mtatum4496]

Absolutely asinine. How could anyone in this day and age not know that a peace sign was a peace sign? I think some nosy neighbors have way too much time on their hands. If they want to honor loved ones, they can go some visiting in a veteran's hospital - woops, sorry, that would actually require doing something other than whining - my mistake.

 

[Plumley]

I've got to think there's more to this than just someone feeling "offended." Regardless, it's ludicrous. I'm glad she's standing up for her right to decorate.

 

[FourBear]

This is absolutely outrageous. Peace symbol...satanic? Wow. Last I checked there was an amendment that had something to do with "freedom of expression." Oh my gosh, somebody is doing something different...outlaw it! Ridiculous. Props to her for keeping that up.

 

[Brandon]

It makes me wonder if Americans actually read the Bill of Rights.

 

[dong]

I think the answer to that particular question is no, not really.

 

[mtatum4496]

It makes me wonder if Americans actually read the Bill of Rights.

You know, a friend of mine were talking the other day about so many of the things we were taught in school that are no longer highlighted in the curriculum. Both of us had to learn the contents of the Bill of Rights at an early age, as well as be familiar with the Consititution - including the amendments. It is the rare situation when a teenager these days can discuss either with you without a lot of blank stares on their part.

 

[sarah]

This is just one of the most useless and irritating things I have ever seen. Who the hell actually gets offended by stuff like this?? Sign of Satan? Or it could just be a peace symbol, imagine that!
I just cannot compose the words needed to express my distaste for the people offended by things like this.

 

[hokeshel]

Unfortunately, our schools are haivng to do so much teaching of other things at shcoll that should have been taught at home that they are nto learning these things, i.e. Bill of Rights. For instance, schools have to teach about sex, self esteeem and effects of drug use because of an increasingly growing number of failing parents. But, I digress, yet again.

 

[FourBear]

I really think people's time would be used more constructively if they stopped fretting about the littlest things in life. Jeez! It's decoration. Nowhere does it say in the Bill of Rights that people have to totally agree about what modes of expression they choose.

 

[dong]

On that note, I think that people should be made to be more aware of the implications of displays and their intent: it is unreasonable to react to something which was not implied beyind reasonable doubt, and unreasonable thus to react to something which does not constitute a direct expression of prejudice and antagonism.

Furthermore, one should really do something about the attempt to divide people into diametric oppositions through the BS of a disjunction "either you are for us, or you are against us." It has to be one of the stupidest phrases I have ever seen, and I can tell you why, if asked (but the explanation is highly technical).