Those are metaphorical. What I posted was direct.
Besides which, your own link also reports:
>>
Definition of desecrate for English Language Learners
- : to damage (a holy place or object) : to treat (a holy place or object) with disrespect
<<
Funny how you left that part out.
Again, the prefix
de- negates the verb which refers to
sacredness (derived from
consecrate, to invest with sacredness)
... ergo it means to nullify or negate the
sacredness of (whatever). That sacredness didn't get there by itself and it didn't ask to be born. It was
put there. It was
invested. And that
is idolatry.
Well, I did have to go to another link to find what you were talking about.
I also found that YOU left something out of that link, but here it is for all to see.
— desecration
/ˌdɛsɪˈkreɪʃən/ noun [noncount]
Not at all --- that's exactly where this examination of the term "desecration" BEGAN. Hoss brought it up, and I took the ball and ran with it.
Once AGAIN ----
you cannot "desecrate" something until you invest it with sacred power. I'll just keep posting that until it sinks in. Take your time.
Get it?
Only "holy" objects can be desecrated, specifically because they have previously been consecrated.
THEREFORE --- if it is possible to "desecrate" a flag (or anything else) --- then that object *MUST FIRST* be regarded as "sacred".
And
THAT IS IDOLATRY. It's also called "fetishism" although the latter doesn't necessarily involve "the sacred". It's investing feelings, honor and deity-qualities into an
inanimate object. An object which obviously possesses NONE of those qualities, any more than a pencil does.
And there's no way around that.
Now what does all that mean?
It means that we have Congresscritter demagogues boldly trying to pass laws establishing a religion -- call it the religion of the sky-cloth god or whatever you want ---
in spite of the United States Constitution's specific PROHIBITION of that in its First Amendment. And the Supreme Court strikes it down citing exactly that Amendment. And then they try another end-around, and again the SCOTUS strikes it down.
But the demagogues don't give up, they continue to weasel their way into erecting a sky-cloth god with Appeals to Emotion inciting mob mentality e.g. "fire the sumbitches", e.g. "break their knees with baseball bats", e.g
demanding that a citizen "kiss a flag".
WHY do they persist with this demagoguery, trotting it out as a mandatory exercise before you can watch a baseball game played by Venezuelans and Dominicans and Japanese and Cubans and Canadians?
Because they know, as the "divine right" kings before Liberalism created that Constitution knew (and which is why Liberalism sprang up to oppose it) that when you impose a religion on the masses you can lead them around by the nose under fear of "blasphemy", "desecration", "fire the sumbitches", "kiss the flag" or whatever you'd like to call it. With a sacred object you can hoist and go "Look! Sacred object will get you! Booga booga!" -- you have
control.
THAT is why they do it. It's all about
control. It's all about
obedience to the State. And that's also why the penalty for defiance is always ostracism, "fire the sumbitches", "break their knees", or in Starr's case hard labor in prison for having the temerity to defy a mob of yahoos bent on mob mentality emotion.
JUST SAY NO to that bullshit. It ain't gonna kill you to honor the First Amendment to your Constitution instead of genuflecting before some demagogues sky-cloth god. Capitulating to that sort of demagoguery, however, just might.
