4 ms·

> President George H. W. Bush and the US Senate in 1989 who voted to outlaw the piece from being displayed. One of a number of falsehoods throughout this piece

> President George H. W. Bush and the US Senate in 1989 who voted to outlaw the piece from being displayed. One of a number of falsehoods throughout this piece which is typical of such groups. (The President does not make laws and the Senate cannot make laws on their own and cannot outlaw display of art.)

hluska 8y ago
If you're going to criticize a piece as 'typical of such groups' at least be honest enough to quote it properly: > Dread Scott is well known for his political and protest artworks such as “What is the Proper Way to Display a US Flag?”, which garnered the attention of not only the art world, but also President George H. W. Bush and the US Senate in 1989 who voted to outlaw the piece from being displayed. The sentence says that it garnered the attention of the President and US Senate. The Senate passed legislation to protect the flag, which effectively made Scott's illegal.
- fuzz4lyfe 8y ago
  That seems to be a very clear first amendment violation to me. Isn't the primary purpose of the first amendment to allow criticism of government?
  - mikeash 8y ago
    Yes, but nothing stops the legislature from passing unenforceable laws.
  - hluska 8y ago
    I'm neither American nor a lawyer, but yeah, it seems pretty clear to me. More educated/experienced people should weigh in - I would love to learn why this happened.
- sureaboutthis 8y ago
  I don't know how much better I can do than copy/paste the exact statement as I did but the quote has nothing to do with my point and that is his claim Bush enacted a law and the Senate passed a law that disallowed an art display. Neither of these are possible or true and, in fact, the article gives no reference to this. EDIT: I am unable to find any reference for the statement. It is said that George Bush called the art installment "disgraceful". Some US Senators said it would justify changing the law about desecration of the flag but no such change in the law was enacted (that I could find).
  - mikeash 8y ago
    It’s absolutely possible for the Senate to pass such a law. It wouldn’t be the law of the land unless it also passed the House and was signed by the President, and even then it would be unenforceable, but that doesn’t mean they can’t pass it.
  - hluska 8y ago
    First, if you want to do better, copy and paste entire sentences. The original sentence did not say that GHW Bush enacted a law. It says that the US Senate (in 1989) voted to enact a law. I'm struggling to find a source for the President's original statement. President GW Bush unfortunately made a statement about Dred Scott, and I'm only finding references to that statement. I'll keep digging and update this when I find the original statement. Everything started in 1968 when the original Flag Protection Act was passed in response to protests against the Vietnam War. In 1989, the Supreme Court of the United States released the Texas v Johnson decision, which held that burning a US flag was a form of speech protected under the US constitution. In response, Republican lawmakers introduced two measures. They introduced a flag desecration amendment to the constitution and the Flag Protection Act of 1989. The Flag Protection Act did pass, but the constitutional amendment didn't receive enough votes. I couldn't find one particularly good resource, but if you google "Flag Protection Act", the front page of results does a good job of telling the whole story from both Democratic and Republican sides. I'd recommend reading both sides of arguments because honestly, they're quite compelling on both sides. Here are WaPo stories about the votes, but they don't give the same kind of context that you'll find with better searches: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/10/06/senate-votes-to-outlaw-flag-desecration/1387da07-b338-4cb2-b107-46eb7aacb706 https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/10/06/s... https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/20/us/senate-rejects-amendment-outlawing-flag-desecration.html https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/20/us/senate-rejects-amendme...
    - sureaboutthis 8y ago
      Again, you are not paying attention to what I'm pointing to but you are finding out the problem I have with his statement by yourself. You and I both can't find anything to back up this guy's statements and you would think such an outrageous thing would be easily findable and it's not. Thus, we have a problem here.
DanBC 8y ago
Bush said he was "very wary" of passing a law. https://owlcation.com/humanities/Dread-Scotts-What-is-the-Proper-Way-to-Display-a-US-Flag-and-Art-Censorship https://owlcation.com/humanities/Dread-Scotts-What-is-the-Pr...
masonic 8y ago
In 1989, Democrats controlled both the House and Senate (12-vote advantage in the Senate).

hluska 8y ago

If you're going to criticize a piece as 'typical of such groups' at least be honest enough to quote it properly: > Dread Scott is well known for his political and protest artworks such as “What is the Proper Way to Display a US Flag?”, which garnered the attention of not only the art world, but also President George H. W. Bush and the US Senate in 1989 who voted to outlaw the piece from being displayed. The sentence says that it garnered the attention of the President and US Senate. The Senate passed legislation to protect the flag, which effectively made Scott's illegal.

fuzz4lyfe 8y ago
That seems to be a very clear first amendment violation to me. Isn't the primary purpose of the first amendment to allow criticism of government?
- mikeash 8y ago
  Yes, but nothing stops the legislature from passing unenforceable laws.
- hluska 8y ago
  I'm neither American nor a lawyer, but yeah, it seems pretty clear to me. More educated/experienced people should weigh in - I would love to learn why this happened.
sureaboutthis 8y ago
I don't know how much better I can do than copy/paste the exact statement as I did but the quote has nothing to do with my point and that is his claim Bush enacted a law and the Senate passed a law that disallowed an art display. Neither of these are possible or true and, in fact, the article gives no reference to this. EDIT: I am unable to find any reference for the statement. It is said that George Bush called the art installment "disgraceful". Some US Senators said it would justify changing the law about desecration of the flag but no such change in the law was enacted (that I could find).
- mikeash 8y ago
  It’s absolutely possible for the Senate to pass such a law. It wouldn’t be the law of the land unless it also passed the House and was signed by the President, and even then it would be unenforceable, but that doesn’t mean they can’t pass it.
- hluska 8y ago
  First, if you want to do better, copy and paste entire sentences. The original sentence did not say that GHW Bush enacted a law. It says that the US Senate (in 1989) voted to enact a law. I'm struggling to find a source for the President's original statement. President GW Bush unfortunately made a statement about Dred Scott, and I'm only finding references to that statement. I'll keep digging and update this when I find the original statement. Everything started in 1968 when the original Flag Protection Act was passed in response to protests against the Vietnam War. In 1989, the Supreme Court of the United States released the Texas v Johnson decision, which held that burning a US flag was a form of speech protected under the US constitution. In response, Republican lawmakers introduced two measures. They introduced a flag desecration amendment to the constitution and the Flag Protection Act of 1989. The Flag Protection Act did pass, but the constitutional amendment didn't receive enough votes. I couldn't find one particularly good resource, but if you google "Flag Protection Act", the front page of results does a good job of telling the whole story from both Democratic and Republican sides. I'd recommend reading both sides of arguments because honestly, they're quite compelling on both sides. Here are WaPo stories about the votes, but they don't give the same kind of context that you'll find with better searches: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/10/06/senate-votes-to-outlaw-flag-desecration/1387da07-b338-4cb2-b107-46eb7aacb706 https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/10/06/s... https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/20/us/senate-rejects-amendment-outlawing-flag-desecration.html https://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/20/us/senate-rejects-amendme...
  - sureaboutthis 8y ago
    Again, you are not paying attention to what I'm pointing to but you are finding out the problem I have with his statement by yourself. You and I both can't find anything to back up this guy's statements and you would think such an outrageous thing would be easily findable and it's not. Thus, we have a problem here.

DanBC 8y ago

Bush said he was "very wary" of passing a law. https://owlcation.com/humanities/Dread-Scotts-What-is-the-Proper-Way-to-Display-a-US-Flag-and-Art-Censorship https://owlcation.com/humanities/Dread-Scotts-What-is-the-Pr...

masonic 8y ago

In 1989, Democrats controlled both the House and Senate (12-vote advantage in the Senate).