Posted on 07/02/2006 1:48:08 PM PDT by Mark
THERE'S something unseemly about banning flag burning, let alone amending the Constitution to make a ban possible. And the unseemliness extends beyond the obvious concerns over freedom of expression.
Now, I love the flag. One flies on our front porch, not just on Fourth of July weekend, but year-round. I'm appalled by those who would burn the flag, as well as by those who do the intellectual equivalent by buying into the pernicious blame-America-first ideology.
Yet a flag-burning amendment, like the one the U.S. Senate narrowly rejected last week, takes us to the opposite extreme. Instead of profaning Old Glory, we make an idol out of it.
I say this not as some ACLU-type of anti-religionist, but as someone who like many of the legislators who backed the flag-burning amendment thinks of myself as both a Christian and a conservative.
But consider the oddly religious tone of last week's debate: The amendment would have permitted Congress to outlaw “desecration” of the flag. This was necessary, supporters said, because the flag is “sacred,” a “venerated object,” according to the Texas flag-burning statute that the Supreme Court struck down nearly two decades ago.
Desecration? Sacred? Venerated? These are words usually reserved for the divine, for holy books, churches and synagogues. And while the amendment's backers surely don't intend to make the flag an object of worship, such language sounds eerily like secular-statist religiosity.
Yes, the flag is a powerful, proud image, a great symbol of a great nation. But no, it's not “sacred,” like, say the cross, a consecrated communion host, scrolls of the Torah sacred scripture.
Not even objects that truly are sacred enjoy the sort of protection that the amendment's supporters want to extend to the flag. No one, for example, proposes a ban on “Piss Christ.” America's traditional support of free expression is so broad that we tolerate even the most vile and profane artistic and political expression, rather than give politicians the authority to decide what sort of commentary is acceptable and what isn't.
The net effect of a flag-burning amendment would be to elevate the Stars and Stripes to not just the level of the holy, but even higher. The flag would be the most sacred symbol of all, the lone exception to the First Amendment's protections of unfettered political speech.
I love the flag, but not that way.
When Muslim fanatics screamed for punishment and retribution over inflammatory Muhammad cartoons, we in the West collectively said, relax. Their hurt and offense were valid, but not their wrath. Living peacefully in a civilized world means putting up with those who would scorn, defile and mock even the things we hold most dear.
Surely the flag is no exception.
As it stands, flag burning is a very rare phenomenon in the U.S. There was just one reported case of it in all of last year, which suggests that this isn't exactly an overwhelming public concern.
That's because even though flag burning is legal, most people realize that destroying the nation's most beloved symbol is no way to win support for one's cause. Which is to say, there are already powerful cultural incentives in place to dissuade flag burning.
Unlike laws, these incentives don't have the effect of making flag burning a form of “civil disobedience,” whose practitioners can then claim they're victims when they're sent to jail. And unlike censorship, these incentives don't run afoul of the proper role of government in a free society.
A law that allows for the burning of some flags, but not America's, or a law that permits burning a flag to properly dispose of it, but not to make a political statement, clearly discriminates on the basis of political content. This is exactly the sort of meddling the First Amendment is supposed to prevent which is why amending the First Amendment is a prerequisite for banning flag burning.
But the flag doesn't need its would-be protectors' protection.
The flag will continue to fly, and fly proudly, as long as the country remains true to the ideals the flag represents.
Old Glory must remain the symbol of America's highest values, not the idol to which we sacrifice them.
Chris Weinkopf is the Daily News' editorial-page editor. Write to him by e-mail at chris.weinkopf@dailynews.com.
But the libs will ban the 10 Commandments. Pictures of Jesus. Praying in public...
Go figure.
When we were protecting the Eagle, the liberals reminded us it was an important symbol (it is) of the United State. Why can't we protect our flag?
Not all symbols are created equal...
I can see this point of view. Making it illegal would probably cause more of the burnings, just to draw attention. "cultural incentives in place to dissuade flag burning. "
Tell ya what - repeal every "Hate Speech" and "Hate Crimes" law on the books and I'll go along with you.
Prosecute flag burning as "Hate Speech" or a "Hate Crime" and I'll go along with you.
But keep up with the "I can offend you but you can't offend me" tack and I'll support a ban on flag burning. Just because it drives you nuts.
You forgot /sarcasm.
But I'm not for banning the 10 Commandments, praying in public, and/or pictures of Jesus, either :)
It depends whose ox is gored. Liberals have eagerly passed laws criminalizing racist words, for instance, but they eagerly defend the right of "artists" to blaspheme. So you have a constitutional right to insult the Son of God but you will be punished if you use racist language publicly.
Clearly it would be preferable to live in a decent, civilized society where people don't blaspheme, insult their neighbors, or otherwise behave with intolerable rudeness. But unfortunately we don't.
Miss Manners has pointed out in an important essay that liberals have passed all sorts of laws banning behavior that would earlier have been avoided out of simple politeness. Liberals, of course, demand that they can be as rude and nasty as they like about other people's values, but that their own values should be protected by the criminal law.
So, you can blaspheme if you like, but you will be arrested for smoking in public. Homosexuals demand the right to lewd behavior on public beaches and in parks, but God help you if you take a religious message into a public space.
I will say that I don't think a constitutional amendment should be needed for flag burning. If you pass a new amendment every time an activist judge distorts the law, there would be no end of it, and you'd have a 300-page monstrousity of a constitution like the one that the members of the European Union have so far refused to ratify. A better solution would be to expel these sick judges and replace them with something better. Which, of course, means voting conservative politicians into power at every level and demanding that they should stop appointing unqualified nutcases to the bench.
But I wasn't being sarcastic :(
Wish I could fit all that into a tagline.
Weinkopf?---sounds like his name is Dumbkopf. Consider the source, pass your hand(LA Times) once lightly over your head and forget it.
vaudine
He is pretty conservative. It's the DAILY News, not the slimes.
Today, I learned another important reason why.
Flags can show respect and unite people, some I thought would never have a chance in hell of being united.
=========== Berlin ===========
In Berlin, players from the team of Israel (with Palestinians) celebrate after together beating Poland
in the 'Street football world Festival 06', Sunday, July 2, 2006.
Personally I am against the amendment. However, this argument is specious. The author is appealing to a judeo-christian ban on idolatry as his basis for disagreement.
First any symbol can become idolatry, its not an either or thing. Second, the desire to protect something from destruction is not by itself idolatry. We endeavor to protect all sorts of objects. Adding the flag to a list of things to protect is as much idol worship as adding bald eagles or Gore's environment to the list.
I'd suggest he find a different country ~ quickly.
Why? Then they could just go out and burn the Constitution which is what doing something like that is all about anyway.
There should be a ban on burning the flag. It's what the good ole red, white and blue stands for and the people that gave the ultimate sacrific to keep the flag waving. I still remember Sally Field's reaction in the movie "Not Without My Child" when she finally hears and sees the red, white and blue waving in the wind after escaping from her Iranian captors. Or the flag being raised over Iwo Jima or the flag being raised after 911. It's like saying "HOME" in capital letters. "Free at last".
I'm waiting for a Constitutional amendment that would ban the desecration of The New York Times. I wonder how long the debate would be over that.
Go to China if you want a country where you go to prison for burning the national flag.
I'd venture to say that most soldiers who have defended this country would say they did so for freedom. Including the freedom to offend. Which is what the 1st ammendment is all about.
People respect things/people when it is their choice to. Not when they are forced to by the state. It cheapens its value.
Yes.
People wish to ban flag burning simply because it is extremely offensive. Liberals ban things for being offensive, not us, we ought to be above that.
I must confess to having changed my mind on this issue. For a very long time, my line of reasoning has been that, as the flag symbolizes American freedoms, including that of free speech, then if you burn the flag you are symbolically throwing away your right of free speech; much as burning one's airline ticket in protest of high air fares will have the effect of keeping you off the flight.
However, given recent worldwide events; as disgusted as I am by the childish stupidity and hypocrisy of flag-burners, I can't help but call to mind the insane reactions by Muslims to any hint - fact-based or not - that someone has mistreated a Koran. Consequently, I now feel so strongly about distancing our nation and society from that sort of idolatry that I'm willing to forego protection for the flag just as a way of showing that we know the difference between an object and that which it represents; something the Islamists are clueless about.
Even so, this is just my thought process. I'll make no great effort to win others to that point of view, and I won't be bothered if such an amendment someday passes. As stated, I think there are legitimate arguments to be made for banning flag-burning.
I agree. I would like to be on a jury for an assault case against a flag burner,though. Then I could exercise my right.
I respect the flag without having the government tell me I have to respect it. I totally agree with editorial, and I'm staying right here in the USA.
Your second paragraph says it all. The author seems to agree.
Pander & Placate the illegals in print. Let 'em illegally come into the U.S. and burn our flag. The Patriotic, LA Daily News does a mighty fine job, at that...
§ 8. Respect for flag
(j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations. The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on the left lapel near the heart.
§ 10. Modification of rules and customs by President
Any rule or custom pertaining to the display of the flag of the United States of America, set forth herein, may be altered, modified, or repealed, or additional rules with respect thereto may be prescribed, by the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, whenever he deems it to be appropriate or desirable; and any such alteration or additional rule shall be set forth in a proclamation.
I'm sure you'll be sending an irate communication to the President requesting "The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living thing." provision of '§ 8. Respect for flag' be immeadiately repealed by proclamation.
"I'd like to see what happens to anyone who burns a "rainbow" flag at the San Fracisco Homosexual Pride parade."
I think you should try it! I can think of nothing more likely to make flag-burning illegal...
Freedom of speech is yelling at the flag.
That is different than burning the flag.
This flag they are so eager to burn is the symbol of what Americans died for, freedom. As a person whose father came here from Eastern Europe, I learned , from my father, the importance of the flag in America. This flag means to me , the best America stands for. The soldiers who gave their lives, the founding fathers, many of whom died without a penny to bury them and most of all the people who worked to build this nation through industry and hard work. The flag is just a piece of cloth to some, that is true. But to me ,it is the sign of a history and men that I am so proud of. Long may she wave in the breeze.DON'T BURN THAT FLAG AROUND ME!
And who is it that is so eager to burn the flag that you refer too?
It is a very rare event as far as I can tell.
And those who do do it, risk bodily harm in doing so in most places here, which is as it should be.
You have me confused with someone else.
You think it's okay to burn, something considered by federal law to be, a living thing.
george, I wonder if anyone going to the NY Times Freep has thought about setting fire to a copy of the Times? That might make a real good photo op. Or maybe a poster that says we need a Constitutional Amendment to protect the times or some such...
But a very good use for any, old fishwrap.
Best bet in all this is to hold folks exempt from any legal restrictions if they are protecting the flag from an assailant.
No you didn't. We'll all just move to China.
You don't need a Constitutional amendment to protect the flag. A law could do that.
And soon the Constitution would look like our tax code; or the 20,000 gun control laws already on the books that aren't being enforced.
I re-read your post.
8-))
The NY Freep should burn the NY Slimes in effigy.
Pictures to post here and a video.
Our freedom of speech.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.