The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. PAUL) is recognized
for 5 minutes.
1999 Ron Paul 63:1 Mr. PAUL.
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow
we have on our schedule the debate and
the vote on a constitutional amendment,
the amendment that would make
the desecration of the flag illegal.
Many who support this amendment
imply that those of us who oppose it
for some reason might be unpatriotic.
That, of course, is not true.
1999 Ron Paul 63:2 I would like to call attention to my
fellow colleagues just exactly what I
see us doing by amending the Constitution.
1999 Ron Paul 63:3 The very first thing that Communist
China did after it took over Hong Kong
was to pass legislation to make sure
that it was illegal to desecrate the Chinese
flag. Now let me say that one time
again. As soon as Red China took over
Hong Kong, that was the very first
thing they did. One of the first pieces
of legislation was to make sure that
the people of Hong Kong knew it was
illegal to do anything to desecrate the
Chinese flag.
1999 Ron Paul 63:4 Now another interesting thing about
the Chinese and their flag is that we
monitor human rights in China. As a
matter of fact, the State Department is
required to come before the House and
the Senate and report to us about the
violations of human rights in China.
The purpose is to find out whether or
not they qualify for full trade with us,
and the argument comes up every year.
Some say, well, they violate civil
rights and human rights all the time;
therefore, we should not be trading
with Red China, which is an argument
that can be presented.
1999 Ron Paul 63:5 But in this report that came out in
April to summarize last year, our government
lists as a violation of human
rights that we are holding them accountable
for that we want to use
against them so that we do not trade
with them is the fact that two individuals
last year were arrested because
they desecrated the Communist Chinese
flag.
1999 Ron Paul 63:6 I think that is pretty important. We
should think about that. First, the Chinese
Government makes it illegal to
desecrate a flag in Hong Kong, and
then they arrest somebody and they
convict them, and they want to hold it
against them and say we do not want
to give them Most Favored Nation status
because they are violating somebody’s
human rights.
1999 Ron Paul 63:7 Mr. Speaker, my point is obviously
that why do we want to emulate them?
There are other countries around the
world that have similar laws: Iraq,
Cuba, Haiti, Sudan; they all have laws
against desecration of the flag. But in
this country we have not had this. We
have never put it in the Constitution.
This debate would dumbfound our
Founders to think that we were contemplating
such an amendment to the
Constitution.
1999 Ron Paul 63:8 We have existed now for 212 years
since the passage of our Constitution,
and we have not had laws like this, but
all of a sudden we feel compelled. What
is the compulsion? Do we see on the
nightly news Americans defying our
flag and defying our principles of liberty?
I cannot recall the last time I
saw on television an American citizen
burning an American flag or desecrating
our flag. So all of a sudden now
we decide it is a crisis of such magnitude
that we have to amend the Constitution;
at the same time, challenging
the principles of freedom of expression.
1999 Ron Paul 63:9 There is one State in this country
that has a law which they have the
right to, a law against desecration of
the flag. And the flag police went to a
house to find out what was going on because
they were flying their flag upside
down. What is going to happen when we
try to define “desecrate”? Desecrate is
usually something held for religious
symbol. Have we decided to take the
flag and make it a holy symbol? But
will a towel that is in the shape and
the color of a flag that somebody is
lying on at the beach, is that going to
be a reason to call the FBI and call the
flag police in to arrest someone for this
desecration? Because we do not define
the desecration, we just say we will
write the laws to police this type of activity.
1999 Ron Paul 63:10 Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks we have
had many Members in this Congress
cite the Constitution. As a matter of
fact, the Constitution is cited all the
time. Sometimes I see it inconsistently
cited, because when it pleases one to
cite the Constitution, they do; and
when it does not, they forget about it.
But just recently we have heard the
citing of the Constitution quite frequently.
In the impeachment hearings:
We have to uphold the Constitution, we
have to live by our traditions and our
ideals. Just last week we were citing
the Constitution endlessly over the
second amendment which I strongly
support, and which I said the same
thing. We must uphold the Constitution
to defend the second amendment.
But all of a sudden here we have decided
to change the Constitution that
we are in some way going to restrict
the freedom of expression.
1999 Ron Paul 63:11 We say, well, this is bad expression.
This is ugly people. These are people
that are saying unpopular things, and
they are being obnoxious. But, Mr.
Speaker, the first amendment and the
freedom of expression was never put
there for easygoing, nice, conventional,
noncontroversial speech. There is no
purpose to protect that. Nobody cares.
The purpose of freedom of expression is
to protect controversy, and if somebody
is upset and annoyed, the best
thing we can do with people like that is
to ignore them. If we pass a constitutional
amendment and people are so
anti-American that they want to display
their anti-Americanism, they will
love it. They will get more attention
because we will be sending in the Federal
flag police to do something about it.
1999 Ron Paul 63:12 Some will argue the Constitution
does not protect freedom of expression;
it protects freedom of speech, and this
is not speech, this is ugly expression.
But the Constitution does, does protect
freedom of expression. That is what
speech is. What about religion? To express
one’s religious beliefs. What
about one’s property, the right to go in
and express what one believes? That is
what freedom is all about is the freedom
of expression and belief. I do not
see how this country can become greater
by having an amendment written
that is in some ways going to curtail
the freedom of Americans to express
themselves. We have not had it for 212
years, and here we are going to change it.
1999 Ron Paul 63:13 It is expected that this will be passed
overwhelmingly, and in the Senate possibly
as well, and then throughout the country, but I do not see this as a positive
step. We here in the Congress should think seriously before we pass this amendment.
Note:
1999 Ron Paul 63:10
the second amendment probably should be capitalized in both instances in this verse: the Second Amendment.
1999 Ron Paul 63:11
the first amendment probably should be capitalized: the First Amendment.
