Weblog
07/17/01 12:10 PM: Letter to the Editor
I wrote a letter to the editor of the local newspaper today. I also wrote a letter to my Congressman, both of these in regard to House Joint Resolution 36, the proposed Constitutional Amendment which would give Congress the power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag. My letter pretty much sums up what is in my essay under the writing section, but I thought I would post it here also.
Dear Editor,
Currently being debated in the House of Representatives is H.J. Res. 36, a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution, which would give Congress the power to prohibit the “physical desecration of the flag.” I am writing this letter to urge all American’s who enjoy and treasure the First Amendment to act to protect one of our our greatest freedoms, the freedom of speech.
This Amendment is of course aimed at stopping the practice of “flag burning,” which has, for many years, been a way that people protest the policies of the United States government. The issue of flag burning has become almost a perennial issue for Congress, with the House passing the resolution each time, but it falls short in the Senate. However, if the resolution were to pass the Senate, it would almost certainly be ratified by the states, as 49 of the 50 support such an amendment.
Over the past years however, the problem of flag desecration that the amendment is aimed at stopping, has not been growing. It has been estimated by the Citizen’s Flag Alliance that there are an average of 15 instances of flag desecration each year in the United States . This is hardly a serious problem, and hardly warrants an amendment to the Constitution.
The reason Congress is attempting to amend the Constitution is because the Supreme Court struck down laws created to prevent the desecration, especially the burning of the flag. In the case Texas v. Johnson (1989), the Court ruled that the burning of a flag is considered “expressive conduct” that is an attempt to convey a “particularized message.” To many in Congress, this ruling is flawed , and to bypass the Court ruling, an amendment is necessary.
The first problem with the proposed amendment is the wording. With the use of the word “desecrating”, it implies that the flag has become a sacred object. The definition of the word desecrate is “to damage something sacred, or do something that is offensive to the religious nature of something.” This creates religious issues, and some may interpret the flag as now becoming a religious icon. Almost every major religion teaches its followers not to worship icons or graven idols. With the flag now being a sacred object, what happens when students refuse to participate in the flag salute? By not respecting the flag, that could be considered desecration, and they could be prosecuted under the new Constitution.
The supporters of the amendment believe that it is necessary to protect the flag “for those individuals who have fought to preserve our freedom and for those individuals who are interested in the future of our country.” Congress claims that we need to protect the flag for which so many have died fighting for. The individuals who fought for our freedom, were fighting to protect the principals of the Constitution of the United States, which they held so important. When we dishonor those principals by altering the Constitution to protect the flag, we dishonor their memories. They were not fighting literally for a piece of cloth. The flag in and of itself is just a piece of cloth; it is the ideals behind it that have the greater meaning. If one wants to burn their own property, their own flag, they are not doing anything that harms the country, or that harms other people. While the act may upset, or enrage others who view it, it is an expression of opinion that should not and cannot be outlawed. It is a powerful statement to the rest of the world that we value our freedom so much that we allow the symbol of our nation to be destroyed. To be a strong country, we must accept criticism. Whether that criticism is through vocal protest, or through the desecration of a flag.
This amendment, if passed would have a very negative effect on the nation. It would show that freedom of expression is only allowed when it is not offensive to others. As said by Representative Goss, “I think quite often the flag is so much part of our life that when somebody desecrates it in any way most Americans are outrageously offended
