The American flag is meaningless without the right to desecrate it. What purpose is served by a symbol of freedom, when real, tangible freedom is not respected in conjunction with that symbol?
The U.S. Senate will vote this week on a proposed constitutional amendment “authorizing Congress to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.”
The timing of this proposed amendment is curious for two reasons; namely that the 4th of July is little more than a week away, and secondly that, according to The Seattle Times, a mere three flag defilings have even occurred within the past year. It seems that spearheaders of the flag amendment – i.e. House Republicans – are hoping to bank on holiday patriotism while conveniently skirting the very relevant issue of necessity.
The Seattle Times also humorously pointed out that one of the three flags was desecrated by someone who had had a little too much to drink. The flag was not burned in a fit of anti-American rage; an intoxicated citizen simply thought it would be a good idea to tear down a couple of small flags from a sailor’s monument. I’m sure that we have all experienced similar impulses.
Because flag desecration appears to be close to, if not at an all time low, it is reasonable to question why Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and others are so intent on giving Congress the constitutional right to prohibit an act that rarely occurs, and in 1 out of 3 instances is accompanied by alcohol. Perhaps Frist and others consider flag desecration prohibition a mostly innocuous issue that Republicans can comfortably rally behind in order to win the support of patriotic, middle American constituents?
Politicians continually delude themselves into thinking that less freedom of speech equates to a more patriotic America; just yesterday it was reported that someone on the Homeland Security Committee wants to prosecute newspapers that report on government surveillance. However, the flag desecration amendment is outrageously bold not just for the fact that it is contrary to the First Amendment, but because the wording of the flag amendment does not actually prohibit flag desecration; it simply gives Congress the right to do so.
No government body has the right to a carte-blanche written into the U.S. Constitution guaranteeing the ability to prohibit freedom of expression. Although the flag desecration occurring today appears to be less about expression and more about intoxication, the right to show one’s disapproval of American actions has traditionally been tied with the desecration of the flag. Limiting the right to desecrate – or, in this case, passing an amendment that might someday limit the right to desecrate – is a pointless political ploy, which encourages the kind of empty, rabid patriotism oft seen at right-wing evangelical conventions and at Wal-Mart.
America doesn’t need another glitzy, red, white and blue token of patriotism, and America certainly does not need a flag desecration amendment. I would, however, be interested in the possibility of a constitution desecration amendment. That way, neither an anti-gay marriage amendment, nor an amendment limiting abortion, nor the flag amendment, would be permitted to desecrate the U.S. Constitution.
[email protected]