Flag-Burning Amendment

* Re “House Panel OKs Proposal to Ban Flag-Burning,” May 26:

More than 200 years ago an ancestor of mine, a young widow whose husband had died at the start of the Revolutionary War, became part of our country’s history when she was commissioned to sew the first American flag. She was Betsy Ross, my great-great-great-great grandmother. For this reason my feelings concerning the proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit desecration of our flag are personal as well as patriotic.

Few people know that Betsy later remarried and also suffered the loss of her second husband in the Revolution. Eventually she was married a third time to John Claypole, who had been injured and imprisoned during the war but survived, and from whom I am descended.

At great price our family, along with many others, purchased the freedom that we take for granted today. With their pain, their blood and their lives they established a secure home for the liberty that is our heritage. But the Revolution was not fought for the sake of the piece of cloth that Betsy sewed. It was for our country, which the flag only symbolizes, and for our freedom that this sacrifice was made.

America cannot be harmed by the destruction of its symbols, but it can be damaged by abridging the freedom for which so many have died--even if this very freedom allows a sensation-seeker to burn a flag.

Those who seek to dishonor their country by trampling on symbols are only dishonoring themselves. Like a child throwing a tantrum, their goal is to draw media attention, and their actions should be fittingly dealt with. Let’s not make constitutional martyrs out of these people in the name of patriotism! Instead, give them the treatment they really deserve. Ignore them!

CARLA O’BRIEN

Torrance

* If Congress passes a constitutional amendment prohibiting flag-burning, then where do we draw the line on freedom of speech? If I were dissatisfied with this country, could I burn a flag bearing only 49 stars in protest? After all, it would not be the official ensign. I suppose that it could be argued that I had violated the “spirit” of the law, in which case it should be illegal to desecrate anything that resembles Old Glory, or perhaps even any American symbol. Why don’t we simply make dissent illegal? That would eliminate any gray areas. Why would anyone want to speak out against the freest country on Earth?

GREGORY A. BOYER

Oxnard

* The Republicans are trotting out their anti-flag-burning amendment of the Constitution again. They must have sensed the danger of a rational public discussion of the issues.

CLINT EVERETT

San Diego