Flag Amendment

* I wonder, after reading your editorial of June 8, why The Times believes we are a greater nation if we tolerate flag burning. Taking pride in tolerating unpopular physical acts and justifying them as free speech does not make much sense. The highest service that a nation can provide its citizens is not the tolerance of the most evil. Flag burning and other forms of desecration go well beyond the boundaries of what the majority of our society regards as acceptable behavior. The people should be able to decide what behavior should be tolerated.

Our national tradition of tolerance is based on accommodating things that are of equal good, like differences in race, religion, national origin and differences in opinion. Must our society now embrace tolerance of physical acts that are repugnant? The First Amendment is not about offensive behavior. It is about more important things like freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and the right of the people to petition the government for redress of grievances. If there is a slippery slope, it began when the Supreme Court repealed more than 100 years of state flag protection laws and defended violent physical acts that defy community standards of personal conduct as free speech.

GEORGE SINOPOLI

California Chairman

Citizens Flag Alliance, Fresno