What the flag-burning amendment and hate-crime laws have in common

June 9, 2006

When the right criticizes [tag]hate-crime[/tag] proposals, the main argument seems to be opposition to punishing one’s thoughts. As the argument goes, judge the conduct, not the motivation for the conduct.

With this in mind, I’ve been wondering what these same people might say about the [tag]flag-burning[/tag] [tag]amendment[/tag] that’s supposed to come up for a vote in the Senate next week. Though I suspect proponents would deny it, the measure seems to be aimed, not at those who burn the [tag]American[/tag] [tag]flag[/tag], but at those who burn the American flag for the wrong reasons.

About a year ago, I was doing some research on flag “desecration” and found dozens of examples across the country of veterans’ groups, American Legion volunteers, and Boy Scouts holding public flag-burning ceremonies. In Hazelton, Pa., Tom Kostick, commander of AMVETS Post 253, helped collect thousands of flags for a mass burning and set up a mailbox in front of the VFW building where veterans can donate flags for the ceremony. “It’s the only proper way to it,” Kostick said. “We like to let people know the proper way to dispose of them.” Look at the men in this picture. They’re all [tag]burning[/tag] American flags.

Now, obviously, these aren’t the kinds of incidents Orrin Hatch and nearly the entire Senate GOP caucus are worried about. I suspect supporters of the amendment would argue that these public ceremonies are different because the people involved love the United States and were honoring the flag by burning it.

In other words, the argument is “good” people can burn the flag, but “bad” people should be prohibited from doing so, through a constitutional amendment if necessary. People who burn the flag out of reverence should be encouraged, but those who do so in protest should be prosecuted. It’s not how you act; it’s what you’re thinking while you act.

I don’t imagine Hatch or anyone else wants to punish patriotic Americans who burn the flag for all the right reasons, but I’m yet to figure out how the law is supposed to draw the distinction between the respectful and the insolent.

I agree with Jon Stewert “banning flag burning in the US will have the equivillent effect of banning american use of the metric system.”

There are a few places that would do it any way but no one would care.

  • All very interesting I suppose to people who have the god gene.

    But what about those of us who don’t supplicate, whine, and beg before an imaginary diety?

    For us, I suspect, the flag is just another piece of colored cloth.

    Quite frankly, I really don’t care how you burn it, when you burn it, why you burn it, or if you burn it.

    Why should I care?
    It is just colored piece of cloth or paper or hemp.
    Just another dead and dumb symbol…

    All of which makes me say:
    Grow up humanity… your stupidity is showing.

    One last thing:

    I’ve got a 1000 cash that says more flags would be burned AFTER such an amendment passes than before.

    So not only is it stupid… it is counterproductive to the very dummy who cherishes this as a cause.

  • “I’m yet to figure out how the law is supposed to draw the distinction between the respectful and the insolent.”

    Easy. “Dr. Frist, please watch this video and tell us, in your professional opinion, what the defendant was thinking when he burned the flag.”

  • To avoid confusion, burning is how a flag is to be disposed of “officially.” As a veteran, this seems to be knowledge I possess.

    “When a flag is so worn it is no longer fit to serve as a symbol of our country, it should be destroyed by burning in a dignified manner.” –

    http://www.usflag.org/flagetiquette.html

    And I agree burning makes a poignant statement of protest (if one is so inclined) and should remain protected as “free speech.”

    This doesn’t take away from your narrative that if “they” do it in protest (of whatever small mean thing they can think of) it would NOT be criticized.

  • When I was a Boy Scout (over a half century ago) we all knew better.

    United States Code Title 4 Chapter 1 — The Flag, §8. Respect for flag, §§k:
    The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning.

    You could look it up.

  • Incidentally, the same code (#5 above) has a very strong aversion toward wearing the flag.

    d. The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery.

    j. No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations.

    People used to scold us back when flags were worn by those opposed to the Vietnam War (“disrespectful hippies!”). Today it’s hard to find a fat, bloated “adult” Republican at a Memorial Day service who doesn’t wear some sort of tasteless display of the flag on their person.

  • Every time the issue of flag desecration comes up, I think of the picture from the campaign of George signing an autograph on a flag with a Sharpie. That picture needs to be thrown in the face of every rightie that complains about lack of respect for the flag.

  • This is somewhat off topic but I take every opportunity to disseminate my thoughts on the “thoughtcrime argument” regarding hate crime laws.

    The law regularly makes distinctions based on the intent of the perpetrators of a crime. Anti-terrorism laws are a case in point. They distinguish terrorism attacks from murder, manslaughter and destruction of property based on what the terrorists intended to achieve – usually frightening the populace to achieve political ends. Fagbashing is simply terrorism aimed at the gay population as opposed to people of a particular nationality or religion. (Not to exclude other groups that are often victimized, but opposition to hate crime laws doesn’t usually pop up until someone mentions protecting those filthy queers).

    In my opinion, predators who randomly attack a vulnerable group for sport need to be taken off the street and kept off the street, the same way terrorists should be.

    Now back to our program already in progress….

  • Easy, Just ask to see their voter registation cards.
    Republicans – OK.
    All Others – flag burning criminals.

  • The whole metaphor behind flag burning as a patriotic act of protest turns on the notion that when a flag has been stained or soiled beyond the reach of normal cleaning, you dispose of it by burning.

    The flag-burning protester is honoring the flag, not desecrating it.

    The fascist Right refuses to honor protest. Big surprise there. The Right hates this country and its liberal legacy. They hate egalitarianism. They hate that rich people have to pay taxes. They hate honesty and decency and the simple truth.

    The biggest advocate of a flag burning amendment was the slug, Duke Cunningham, and that tells you all you need to know about the social disease, which is the Republican Party.

  • I agree that there shouldn’t be a flag-burning ban and there shouldn’t be a category of crimes called hate-crimes. These all lead us toward the day when people will go on trial for “disrespecting the government” or “libeling a religion” like in China and, sadly, France. They’re all part and parcel of repressing dissent.

  • The flag burning amendment IS a hate crime. The Repubs want to pass it because it gives them punitive power against a group of people they hate.

    Someone should ask James Dobson which is a worse crime: burning a cross or burning a flag?

  • JC, very good. I applaud you.

    Greg H. You miss an important point. All the acts terrorists commit in your list are basically crimes already. They would make burning a flag becomes a crime based on intent. That’s a no-no (or at least, it ought to be)!

    I like to say, flag desecration is idolotry. The Republican’ts are attempting to raise a colorful piece of cloth to the status of an idol and are taking worship from the one true God.

    Shame on them!

    • Comments are closed.