Our Principles Must Come Before Our Symbols

As a 23-year Navy and Vietnam veteran, as a former official in the Reagan-era Defense Department, as a former professor at the Navy War College and the Coast Guard Academy and as a second-generation American, I revere the flag and that “for which it stands.” As much as any citizen, I still get a lump in my throat when I see the flag raised or lowered. Nonetheless, I am unalterably opposed to the proposed constitutional amendment to ban flag desecration, which won approval in the House of Representatives last week. The Senate still can stop it.

During my years of military and civilian service during the Cold War, I believed I was working to uphold democracy against the expansion of Soviet communism. I did not believe then, nor do I believe now, that I was defending just a piece of geography, but a way of life. If this amendment becomes a part of our Constitution, this way of life will be diminished.

The amendment is bad public policy. The Bill of Rights has never been restricted by a constitutional amendment. This amendment would be the first in our history to cut back on the 1st Amendment’s guarantee of the freedom of expression so necessary to ensure the vigorous debate and dissent to prevent the abuse of power. The amendment also is phrased in such broad and vague language that it can have unintended consequences. These could include censorship of images of the flag in works of art, advertising or commerce. Moreover, the amendment would permit indictments and prosecutions not only of protesters but also of individuals who purchase these works of art or who use such advertisements. This could happen even though these consumers intend no disrespect.

In a 1995 poll, Americans rejected such an amendment 52% to 38% when they found that it would restrict 1st Amendment freedoms. The Supreme Court has twice ruled that destruction of the flag for political purposes, although highly offensive to almost all Americans, is undeniably a political expression. The court has held that it is a bedrock principle underlying the 1st Amendment that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive and disagreeable. Twice in this decade Congress has rejected this amendment.

In addition, the amendment is unnecessary to punish most incidents of flag burning or mutilations. Desecrating a flag belonging to the government or an individual is punishable under existing statutes.

Finally, flag burning is exceedingly rare in this country. Since the Supreme Court’s 1990 flag decision, there have been fewer than 35 burning incidents.

I understand why the amendment’s sponsors and so many Americans have such a strong reaction to the idea of flag desecration. But I believe they are wrong and ask the Senate to issue a statement for freedom by voting against it.