House OKs ban on Flag Burning

So the most recent bill to pass in the House of Representatives is a Constitutional Amendment to ban the burning of US flags.

The House yesterday approved a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power to ban desecration of the American flag, a measure rejected twice by the Senate in the past decade but expected to get a closer vote this year. By a 286-130 vote, House members approved the amendment after a debate over whether such a ban would run afoul of the Constitution's free-speech protections.

Now, I am very often aligned with more conservative views on things, but this is a big exception. I am a moderate supporter of the idea of Limited Government, meaning I support the notion on most things but I realise there are some things the Government must have power over. That being said, this is not one of them. I read an opinion article on the notion of a constitutional amendment for flag desicration, and what follows is my take on the situation as compared to an obvious liberal.

To start off, motions like this have been brought up before and passed before in the House. It still needs to pass in the Senate, which the newspaper article thinks will happen, but after that it still needs to be ratified by 37 states in 7 years. So we aren't in any trouble just yet. Now, I'm not saying the proposed Amendment can't be allowed to pass. On the contrary, if it passes I will follow it just as I follow the other Amendments because it will have been passed by the majority of Americans so that means America thinks it is neccessary. I just don't think it should pass. My goal is just to get people to think for themselves. And that goes for everything I write on this site. Follow a logical processes in thinking about things and come to a well thought out conclusion. Nothing should ever be decided completely along party lines.

Anyways, more on the subject, a Constitutional Amendment making burning American flags unconstitutional is, in itself, unconstitutional as many people seem to think. The the editorial titled "Still a bad idea,"

It should infuriate true patriots when opportunistic politicians put on a star-spangled show to demonstrate what noble Americans they are by rushing to the defense of a flag that needs none. What it embodies simply can't be destroyed by a match.

But what can be undone by an act of Congress is a constitutionally protected right to free speech that gives citizens the liberty, among other things, to protest through fliers or flag burning, regardless of how reprehensible the latter may be to most of us.

Everyone has heard the free speech stuff before, and I agree whole heartedly with free speech and the notion that flag-burning is not a crime according to the Constitution, but I don't believe people should be able to go around flag-burning whenever the hell they feel like it without any consequences. We don't allow people to go around burning churches or public buildings or similar things whenever they feel like it just because they don't agree with what they stand for, and I think flag burning is not any different. You may say they are different because the church is owned by a private entity (one person or a community), while the Flag is just a symbol, open to everyone. My belief, however, is that there are some people that worship the flag and respect it as a sacred symbol just as people do churches, and they have a Constitutional right to be protected from such actions (considered crimes). They deserve just as much protection from their flags as churches/private/public buildings recieve from being defaced/desicrated. So?

My point? Flag-burning should definatly be an act of free speech, not a crime, but the flag being burned must belong to the person burning it. You may think this is obvious but I argue it is not. I think that the person burning the flag should hold a permit and proof of ownership of the flag to be burned before such burning takes place. This would prove that they are not burning someone elses' property, which is a crime. Here is an interesting web discussion about the same issue (be sure to read the 'Code for Flag Protocol'), and it seems a few people at least are thinking like me:

Its a private property issue. You have worked to earn the money to purchase a flag. If you believe in private property, that flag is then yours to do with what you wish. It is that simple.

I remember arguing about this with my father when I was a kid back in the 60's. I didn't understand what the problem was back then, and I still don't today. Whose property is it? If the owner of a piece of cloth chooses to burn that cloth, it's no one else's business.

Both fairly true; the flag being burned must belong to the person burning it and, I believe, he must be able to prove it is his/her flag. Then there is this:

Flags are a special case in my opinion. Sure, you buy a flag, and it becomes your possession. But that flag's meaning and symbolism is not altered in the
purchase. It still is a symbol of our country and it should be treated as such. I guess in a way, even though you buy a flag, it is still the one thing that can be called common property. That flag belongs to anyone who will salute and pledge to it. It belongs to us all, and treating with disrespect, treats us all with disrespect.

A good argument, but that is also like saying the Bible (the actual book) is common property. It's just a book in my opinion; of real importance is what is written in the book (a whole other issue entirely for a later post). Symbols are just that, symbols, and if they are given too much 'sacred status' they become idols, a thing forbidden by [one of the Commandments] and altogether a bad idea anyways.

There are plenty of good arguments out there, especially on the forum discussion I linked to, and I want you all to make your own decission in the matter since that is the American way. But I still believe the American Public is badly missinformed about most things and thus inherently unqualified to make the decisions they make. Be an informed person, study all sides of an issue at least, before picking sides. I find that picking a (singular) side is or should be nearly impossible on any one matter. There are too many other sides. This brings up another subject, that I will write about later. My point is this flag burning issue goes way beyond just looking at 'flag protocol', we must also discuss all the 'unalienable rights' and Bill of Rights type stuff that applies to every such dicision being made in regards to our liberty. As it is I am tired and I will leave the issue here for now.

I really ought to just write a book.