It may be akin to heresy, but I just don’t think we need an amendment against flag-burning. And my reason has nothing to do with the rarity of the practice or the sanctity of the First Amendment. Rather, my opposition has to do with the question of property rights.
Unfortunately, some in Congress don’t see it that way.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-7 this month to send the constitutional amendment to the full Senate for consideration. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., has said the measure will get a Senate vote this month. That vote is expected in the week before the Fourth of July.
The amendment, which would protect the American flag from desecration, has been rejected before, but its chance of passing is improved this year. — Associated Press
There is no legitimate reason to ban an individual from burning their own flag, provided they do so in a safe manner, for one has the clear right to destroy one’s own property. On the other hand, the burning of someone else’s flag without permission is something which should always be punished under criminal law, for it violates their property rights.
In addition, the proposed amendment goes much further than preventing flag-burning: “The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.”
What constitutes a flag? Does it include the picture of the flag printed each day on the front of the Chicago Tribune? Are you in violation when you toss the paper in the garbage? What about that stars and stripes designed Speedo swimsuit on that fat woman at the beach? Is it a flag, and does her wearing it constitute desecration? And let’s not even get into the question of flag-festooned tablecloths, napkins and paper plates like Aunt Betty gets for the family Fourth of July get-together. Desecration or celebration?
Yes, I know that men and women have fought and died under that flag — but that flag was not what they were defending. They were defending this soil, this people, and the freedoms enshrined in our founding documents. At best, the flag serves only as a representation of those things. And so while flag-burning may be offensive and enraging — I’d personally like to beat the crap out of anyone who does it within my reach — banning it protects nothing of significance but does undermine very basic freedoms.
After all, if they can prevent you from disrespecting the flag you bought for $9.95 at Wal-Mart, what other items of personal property do they wish to make you hold sacred?
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works license.
Video published by this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Sampling+ license.
Bad Behavior has blocked 3010 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Facebook
Digg
del.icio.us
reddit.com
Newsvine
Paul Forgey
Jun 26, 2006
In my area there are special programs that help residents dispose of hazardous waste that can’t be taken to the dump or disposed of in the garbage service. I suppose they’ll need to create one for those $9.99 flags (made in China, by the way) from Wal-Mart once we’re done with them?
Asking what other items to hold sacred is a very good question. The backers of this have broader ambitions to “take back the constitution” with court stripping restricting the gov’t branch which has so far served us well to protect religious minorities and restricting the desecration of religious symbols too. Don’t throw out that bible!
Jun 26, 2006
Rhymes With Right
buff daddy
Jun 27, 2006
My problem with this issue is NOT with the “intentional” but the “unintentional”…
How do they (or have they!) interpret an “accidental”, “unintentional” and/or “no fault” desicration of the flag to protect those who might innocently break this law? What if one of those mini 4th of July lawn flags is destroyed and flies away during a thunderstorm? Even worse, what happens if someone else’s destroyed flag lands on YOUR lawn? What if it was a real flag instead? Who’s in violation of the law, how many wasted tax dollars will it take to have a court deciede it and is the penalty for the guilty party worth it?
But the most irresponsible and merciless thing about this legislation, though, is that you need only be ACCUSSED of violating the law in order to be punished with a “life sentence”… The penalty of having to bear the stigma of “The Flag Burner” for the rest of your life… Now, it wouldn’t be that bad if your family and friends didn’t have the same cross to bear as well. Imagine the “Your dad’s a traitor!” burden little Timmy must bear throughout his childhood! What if he wants to join the Army when he turns 18? Will his father’s crime of burning the flag be what burns his chances of acceptance in the Armed Forces?
In other words, is punishing the person who breaks this law worth sacrificing those who must pay the penalty imposed by society’s perception of “guilt by association” as the unintentional “side effect” that will result?
Steve
Jun 27, 2006
If a Brit may be permitted to comment on this.
I think you make some good points there. The reality is that there is no difference between a napkin and a flag except the material it is made of.
Surely it would be just as offensive to actually put a bit of cake on a napkin or wipe your mouth with it.
It’s surely all about respect and I would hope that, that respect would apply to anyone else’s flag too.
That is, after all, what freedom and democracy are all about.
Steve
Michael Hampton
Jun 28, 2006
Fortunately, it looks like the amendment failed to pass the Senate.
Jun 28, 2006
Rhymes With Right
buff daddy
Jun 28, 2006
In the most generic context behind it, all I can say is Thank God for
that!
Seriously, though… I say this without a spec of political bias (to be fair, I will fully disclose that I am just like Bill Clinton… A Liberal Conservative! Now, even though GWB was a MAJOR factor behind my present “economic prosperity”, so to speak, it’s wasn’t worth the cost!), but just like his father before him, George Bush doesn’t give a crap one way or the other if this new amendment actually passed or not; it’s a VERY clever way to deflect the focus off of more important things that are currently going on.
Alright, maybe my choice of words were sprinkled with a touch of self-bias, but at least it’s a breath of fresh air compared to the usual ad nausem regurgitation of opinions expressed by those afflicted with the “Robotic Sheep Mentality” for a change! For those who think otherwise, George Bush’s modus operandi in giving this insignificant issue this much attention has had results that were BETTER than he could ever have imagined; The number of US citizens that actually fell for it was a mathmatical impossibility!
I apologize if I’ve abused my privledges for this forum with my comments, but if it’s any conselation, the point I’m trying to convey is that this Anti-Flag Burning Amendment is a sham to defelct attention away from IMPORTANT issues like Personal Data Theft and ANYTHING negative about the War in Iraq. Honestly, I will only voice my opinions regarding those issues in the appropriate forums; but since they’re relevant to this issue, it’s mention is required. My modus operandi is to make the Flag Burning issue a NON-ISSUE.
Jul 04, 2006
Rhymes With Right
tyler snyder
Feb 08, 2007
First off, the flag of the united states of america is not only one persons property. it is the national symbol of the U.S., it is OUR flag, everyones that lives in this great country. and people that do it inside the boundaries of this country should leave, now. just because you bought a flag for $9.95 at Wal-Mart doesnt mean you have the right to burn it. the flag isnt something that is an every-day item, its our symbol. people buy the flag to fly and to show our great respect for this country. if the people dying in war for this country werent fighting for the flag, why did they fly the flag on every battleground that was won by the american soldiers? why do they drape it over the coffin of those who lost their lives in the service? burning our flag is the exact same thing as burning the constitution, which the flag stands for, or killing a bald eagle, which is our national bird. our flag is a symbol of our beliefs, our rights, and our freedom. burning it is a disgrace to our nation and should never be allowed.
Michael Hampton
Feb 08, 2007
So, you’re saying the flag is more important than the Constitution and the liberty you say it represents? I think you’ve got it backwards there. If you ban burning the flag, then you have disgraced our nation and dishonored the people who died fighting for your freedom.
Anonymous
Mar 09, 2007
duh
Anonymous
Mar 09, 2007
well i think that DUH
MIMS
Mar 16, 2007
this is why im hot
aaaaaaaa
Dec 07, 2010
buuuuuuuuuuuurn buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurn! haha jk