Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Un-Protecting the Flag
This is one issue that may put me at odds with my conservative readership. I am against Flag Burning Amendment. Let me outline why...
I am passionately patriotic and understand the sacrifice of our military (and their families) for the freedoms I enjoy. My love has been birthed in a study of history, nurtured in blessings I enjoy, and matured in an understanding of the sacrifice of our grandparents.
I have a love affair with the United States of America and find it upsetting that someone would so strongly and emotionally oppose a national policy that the best expression of their emotion would be in the burning of our most sacred national image.
My affection is the result of relationship; were someone to force me to love it or act like I love it, I would immediately reject it and all that it stands for. A rule without relationship produces rebellion.
Parents who have too many rules for their children and don’t take the time to foster a relationship create of void in relationship that manifests itself in the rebellion of the child. It’s not a perfect metaphor, but maybe you can understand my thought. If the nation chooses to make rule for acceptable forms of expression, I believe we would widen the void between the parties.
Before anyone else mentions it…The flaw in this argument is this: What if my form of dissent is to walk around naked all day (or some other irresponsible manifestation of self-expression)? Shouldn’t a community have the right to establish acceptable forms of dissent within itself? That’s a good point too.
The answer is ultimately yes. Which bring us to the current vote. If it were me voting, I would say that walking around naked is unacceptable but, because of the reasons above, flag burning would be acceptable.
Personally, however, if someone resorts to flag burning, they have just demonstrated to me that the weight of their argument is too weak to stand on its own merits. Haven't they?
RIGHTFAITH: Where everything favors the stewardship of patrimony. All content is believed to be correct but may be amended based upon new information. The content of this page may be republished with proper citation without the expressed consent of the author. This site is not, in any manner whatsoever, associated with the religious philosophism from the Indian penninsula. All comments or emails to the author become the property of the author and may be published or deleted without notice or reason provided. Copyrighted 2005.
I am passionately patriotic and understand the sacrifice of our military (and their families) for the freedoms I enjoy. My love has been birthed in a study of history, nurtured in blessings I enjoy, and matured in an understanding of the sacrifice of our grandparents.
I have a love affair with the United States of America and find it upsetting that someone would so strongly and emotionally oppose a national policy that the best expression of their emotion would be in the burning of our most sacred national image.
My affection is the result of relationship; were someone to force me to love it or act like I love it, I would immediately reject it and all that it stands for. A rule without relationship produces rebellion.
Parents who have too many rules for their children and don’t take the time to foster a relationship create of void in relationship that manifests itself in the rebellion of the child. It’s not a perfect metaphor, but maybe you can understand my thought. If the nation chooses to make rule for acceptable forms of expression, I believe we would widen the void between the parties.
Before anyone else mentions it…The flaw in this argument is this: What if my form of dissent is to walk around naked all day (or some other irresponsible manifestation of self-expression)? Shouldn’t a community have the right to establish acceptable forms of dissent within itself? That’s a good point too.
The answer is ultimately yes. Which bring us to the current vote. If it were me voting, I would say that walking around naked is unacceptable but, because of the reasons above, flag burning would be acceptable.
Personally, however, if someone resorts to flag burning, they have just demonstrated to me that the weight of their argument is too weak to stand on its own merits. Haven't they?
