THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, September 3, 1995 TAG: 9509010610
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J3 EDITION: FINAL
SERIES: DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP
Creating new conversations
LENGTH: Medium: 84 lines
Why stop at the flag? There are plenty of rights to trample
The proposal to amend the U. S. Constitution to prohibit the burning and desecration of the American flag is long overdue. However, I think it can be said that the goal of this worthy amendment does not go far enough.
Following the flag-burning amendment there should be an amendment to require every citizen of age to vote. NO EXCUSES! Further, we should do away with this crazy idea of a ``secret'' ballot. In that way every ``true'' American can more effectively monitor those who are voting in favor of what the majority feels is un-American. After all, the majority is always right. Right?
Perhaps the implementation of a commission comprised of recognized ``true'' Americans can be formed in order to investigate other unpatriotic activities.
In fact, the cumbersome system we now have in place to amend the Constitution can be trashed. We'll simply let the commission amend the Constitution as they uncover one unpatriotic and un-American activity after another. Soon, patriotism will be a breeze.
Hey! Why not have every citizen sign a patriotism and loyalty oath pledging never to dissent, deride or speak a disparaging word against this country, its government or its political leaders? Maybe that can be our commission's initial task. But why wait? Who wants to sign up first?
Come on people. . . . GET IN LINE!
Sam Morrow
Virginia Beach
The Supreme Court should stay out of it< To my mind, no one in the Pilot has gotten to the heart of the problem with the amendment. Even though the intent of the amendment is laudable, the actual effect would be to effectively write into the Constitution as legitimate all the pretended powers the Supreme Court has arrogated to itself over the past generation.
The answer is to attack the power of the judges to make laws in defiance of the people's elected representatives. In England and in most of Europe, judges cannot invalidate the laws of the legislators, and they cannot make up their own laws, like the judges did in the flag-burning case.
The approach being widely promoted in conservative circles is to amend the Constitution to strip the judges of the right to overturn laws, what is called ``judicial review'' in legalese. A few people are also talking about term limits for federal judges, including Pat Buchanon, but most conservatives believe it would be hard to get Congress to pass any kind of term limits amendment.
Timothy Minium
Norfolk
Veteran fought for the right to dissent
Dear Sir.
I am a veteran of the army of occupation of Japan. I served with the 7th infantry Division in the Korean conflict and spent 18 years on active duty with the United States Air Force. In addition to this, I served as Brigade Chaplain with the George Washington Division of the Virginia Defense Force. I am opposed to the idea of amending the Constitution of the United States in order to limit the freedom of the people to express themselves in any manner that does no direct personal harm to any other citizen. We should not limit freedom just because we find certain behavior distasteful.
Leo G. Ruffing
Portsmouth
Burning flag akin to burning Constitution
Editor:
I became a citizen of this great country September 2, 1992. This is my point of view about flag desecration and freedom of speech: The U.S. flag symbolizes the Republic. What is the one thing that is the `glue' that holds this Republic together and makes it what it is? The Constitution! So, in essence, if you burn the flag, you will also be desecrating the very document that gives you the right of free speech.
Analogy: Why would you burn your driver's license, that which gives the right to operate a motor vehicle?
Wanda W. Rossman
Edenton, N.C. by CNB