• Facets (new session)
• Description
• Metadata
• Settings
  • Rule: ActivityStreamsMapasEquivalentb3sb3sifpdbprdf-labelfacetshttp://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/dbpedia#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/opencyc#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/umbel#http://dbpedia.org/resource/inference/rules/yago#http://dbpedia.org/schema/property_rules#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/SUMO#http://www.ontologyportal.org/inference/rules/WordNet#http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#ldpoplwebskos-transurn:det:rdf:labelvirtrdf-labelvirtrdf-urlNone
    
  • Inverse Functional Properties: Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects
  • "Same As": Disabled (fastest) Apply to subjects only Apply to objects only Apply to both subjects and objects (recommended) Apply to subjects, objects and predicates (not recommended on big datasets) Apply to predicates only (special use cases only)

About: Flag Desecration Amendment     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : yago:WikicatProposedAmendmentsToTheUnitedStatesConstitution, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)

Type: yago:Abstraction100002137yago:Act100030358yago:Action100037396yago:Amendment101250101yago:Change100191142yago:ChangeOfState100199130yago:Controversy107183151yago:Correction100258854yago:Disagreement107180787yago:Dispute107181935yago:Event100029378yago:Improvement100248977yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntitycomicyago:SpeechAct107160883yago:WikicatFlagControversiesInTheUnitedStatesyago:WikicatProposedAmendmentsToTheUnitedStatesConstitution New Facet based on Instances of this Class

The Flag Desecration Amendment (often referred to as the Flag-Burning Amendment) is a proposed addition to the Constitution of the United States that would allow the U.S. Congress to prohibit by statute and provide punishment for the physical "desecration" of the flag of the United States. The concept of flag desecration continues to provoke a heated debate over protecting a national symbol, preserving free speech, and upholding the liberty said to be represented by that national symbol. While the proposal has been passed by the two-thirds majority required in the House of Representatives several times, it has not passed the Senate by the same super-majority and has often not come to a vote in the Senate despite its introduction several times.