Flag-burning amendment: one vote away
posted at 4:00 pm on June 16, 2006 by Allahpundit
They’ve got 66 signed on in the Senate. The Judiciary Committee greenlit it yesterday; a floor vote is scheduled for later this month. If they push it through, it’s on to the states, all of which have passed non-binding resolutions in favor. According to the latest poll, 56% of the public supports the amendment, 40% oppose.
Eh. I oppose it on principle because it’s an incursion, however tiny, into free speech. But no one cares much about flag-burning anymore, even on the left; it’s a Vietnam relic, something they gave up around the time they started “supporting the troops” again in their own funny little way. The real anxiety here is over the slippery-slope potential, which, from what I can tell, is well-nigh zero. Here’s the text according to Wikipedia:
The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.
That’s it. If it had said “symbols of the United States” instead of “flag” I’d be worried, but there aren’t a lot of penumbras to be found in that bit of statecraft. It’s not even self-executing. It merely empowers Congress to pass a statute, which of course can be repealed by simple majority in the future should feelings change.
Long story short: peformance artists will have to squat over facsimiles of the Bill of Rights now instead of old glory. I give it about a 2 on the outrage meter.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
What a ridiculous waste of time and resources.
Labamigo on June 16, 2006 at 4:03 PM
I agree, but this is better then the gay marriage ban amendment.
Defector01 on June 16, 2006 at 4:12 PM
Well, it’s not like “artistes” were jamming Old Glory into urine-filled jars or anything like that.
Kid from Brooklyn on June 16, 2006 at 4:17 PM
It may be a contradiction to support free speech and a flag-burning amendment, but one I am fully willing to recognize and stand by. Exceptions to rules and all that.
tdau1997 on June 16, 2006 at 4:44 PM
We have one flag. Each country has one flag and ours stands for freedom. Its been carried into battle ahead of our troops. We stand at each venue for each event to honor our flag and what it stands for.
Ever since cub and boyscouts ( plus hitch-hiking thru 17 countries-some of them not free), I have honored the Flag of the United States of America and what it stands for. I always will respect that and those before me.
Burn or piss on something else, but not the US flag.
shooter on June 16, 2006 at 4:45 PM
On a scale of 1 to 10: about a 2. Amnesty is an 11.
dman on June 16, 2006 at 4:45 PM
“…there aren’t a lot of penumbras to be found in that bit of statecraft…”
What does “physical desecration” include? I know it means burning the flag…what about wearing it (it may look good on JLo but on some others it might be…you know…). What about painting your house in the colours? What about putting it where it can be damaged (e.g. flying outside your house in the rain, on the back of a destroyer etc).
Obviously, none of these things are intended…they are,in fact ridiculous. But when did that ever stop the left?
The problem is when the ACLU, or their fellow travellers get their paws on it. You know how words can be interpreted…or misinterpreted.
Where will it be in 20 years…I guarantee they won’t allow it to be included in the decoration of a public nativity scene.
Just some random thoughts on a Friday afternoon.
I think I need a beer.
Blaise on June 16, 2006 at 4:58 PM
I think the amendment should say it is okay to burn the flag but those doing it will be shown doing it on every newscast across the nation with their full names, home addresses, email addresses, workplace and political affiliation shown on the screen simultaneously. Oh, also their faces must be uncovered and unaltered, and their status as US citizens or not and criminal background (if any) shall be clearly shown as well.
NTWR on June 16, 2006 at 5:04 PM
At least now they can move on to more important things…
Hoodlumman on June 16, 2006 at 5:39 PM
Don’t count on it.
.
GT on June 16, 2006 at 10:58 PM
Y’all are taking this in the wrong way, this isn’t meant to erode freedom of speech, its meant to stop the desecration of our country’s flag. The same flag that brave men have fought, bled, and died for since before we were a nation.
During the recent reconquista uprising in CA there were numerous cases of “Old Glory” being desecrated, burned, and otherwise treated like garbage. I seem to remember a case of an American (in America) being arrested for burning a mexican flag though.
http://www.patriotdefensefund.com or buy Savage’s new book at http://www.michaelsavage.com and he’ll donate $5 for every book to them.
Duty, Honor, Country
(in THAT order)
Rowane
Rowane on June 17, 2006 at 12:54 AM
This thread makes me feel like I hit the twilight zone and suddenly was at Kos. (Keep On Screaming) (Kill Our Soldiers)
Perhaps those offended by the ban should comfort in knowing it’s still ok to burn the white flag and it still represents surrender as most of the posts here have.
I’m offended by those who don’t support a symbol of freedom and our country. Burning a flag is not speech, it’s arson.
RolandHall on June 17, 2006 at 2:05 AM
It is about time! Respect for our nation is an essential value for the survival of the United States.
This small amendment is a definite step in the right direction. We must realize that freedom of speech is not an absolute right without any boundries. Sedition has been a common practice for about the last 50 years, especially on the left. This Sedition erodes support for issues of national interest and unity. This Sedition also encourages identification with, and support for, groups who do not identify as American Citizens (example Aztlan).
Respect for the nation by it’s citizens is fundamental for it’s survival. It is obvious that many, especially on the left, do not have this respect. This ammendment is a step to insure that basic decency and respect for our nation is enforced and is a solid step in the right direction.
omegaram on June 17, 2006 at 3:11 AM
In the latest Fox News poll on issues (don’t have a link, I saw it on FNC, you know, television) the flag burning amendment was listed and was so low it just got two hyphens.
rightwingprof on June 17, 2006 at 9:02 AM
Bread and circuses. Take a look at the Congressmen/women supporting this. Realize they hold you in contempt.
honora on June 17, 2006 at 9:37 AM
I’m all for protecting the flag. It’s just that this issue is being used as a red herring to distract us from the more important immigration concerns.
dman on June 17, 2006 at 11:33 AM
I agree with Roland Hall. Since when does burning our flag have anything to do with “free speech?” If it represents any speech it’s “hate speech.” Our flag represents a symbol of freedom for the entire world. We need to protect it. Besides, this will piss the moonbats off.
moonsbreath on June 17, 2006 at 1:24 PM
“Burning a flag is not speech, it’s arson.”
It’s neither – it’s simply a way to get attention, much the same as, say, wetting one’s pants in public.
And we don’t have any plans to amend the Constitution to prevent the latter, so why the former? As one wise wag somewhere recently repeated, “We need to ensure freedom of expression, otherwise we won’t be able to tell who the assholes are”.
Patton on June 17, 2006 at 2:59 PM
Get real fools! Just more pandering by our (gag) elected representatives and you fall for it hook, line and sinker.
So, who does a Constitutional Amendment stop from burning our flag?
Not the Iranians, not the Iraqis, not the Syrians, not the North Koreans, nor the English, nor the Australians, nor the Swiss, nor anyone else who so chooses. And besides, for those wishing to burn one in the US, aren’t there enough laws already on the books governing open fires in public?
Then, who’s to define exactly what is and what’s not a US flag! Must it be made by the Valley Forge Flag Company, or the Eastern Flag Company? Or can it be one that I draw on the inside of a refrigerator carton or color on a handkerchief or, for that matter, on a pair of Haines boxer shorts?
Look! The flag of every nation in the world is nothing more than cotton and dye. So what make ours different! I’ll tell you.
Our flag represents us, our way of life, our beliefs and our values. So when the flag of the United States of America is burned in protest – here or anywhere else in the world – its ashes contain the essence of free speech and the act of burning it only increases its value in my eyes.
In fact, take the ashes and hold them high, for those who would burn our flag only acknowledge and embrace its true meaning without even recognizing what they’ve done. So, let’s remind the flag burners each and every time they burn one and maybe, just maybe they’ll understand what it is they’ve truly accomplished.
Dread Pirate Roberts VI on June 19, 2006 at 11:22 AM