Of Arms and the Law has an interesting post up, titled “Looking to future Supreme Courts:

Prof. Robert Cottrol of George Washington Univ. college of law has raised an interesting question in an email, which I’d like to put up for discussion. He prefaced it with a running joke he has — the problem with advocating the right to arms is the liberals don’t like arms and conservatives don’t like rights.

Later, he quotes Prof. Cottrol:

So perhaps the discussion we might have is over the long run will the second amendment be best protected by people who are generally hostile to the right but who have shown a broader commitment to individual rights or by people who are at least nominally in favor of the right but who have shown a rather weak commitment to individual rights generally?

It’s becoming more and more obvious that the Republican version of conservativism simply isn’t a viable alternative to the liberal Democrats. Given that the Libertarian party has a few too many of their own unique brand of kooks, I’m not sure whether there’s any political party that really provides a good home for me anymore.

You know, it seems like it wasn’t that long ago that I was criticizing those who were taking the (alleged) desecration of a Koran too seriously. I acknowledged that Newsweek should’ve done a better job verifying their (apparently false) story on the “flushed Koran”, but that most of the blame lay with those who took a symbol so seriously that they were willing to kill for it.

Now, those who are taking a symbol a little too seriously are the people in Congress.

Flag Burning isn’t something I condone, but aren’t there more important issues for Congress to be dealing with? How about cutting some spending? How about doing something to help out our school systems (vouchers, perhaps….)? Why are we bothering with trying to ban a form of expression that is fairly ineffective anyway? Isn’t Freedom of Expression supposed to be one of the things that makes this country great? If some people want to earn themselves the right to be dismissed out of hand in my eyes, why should we outlaw their ability to do so? How about doing something to protect those Second Amendment rights that so many states are chipping away at, instead?

Really, if this is what our legislators are going to do, they’ll be better off just “playing House” down in the basement. (See the Day-by-Day comic on the “playing House” subject.)