The Book of Ron Paul
1997 Ron Paul Chapter 60

We Should Not Sacrifice Freedom Of Expression With A Flag Amendment

10 June 1997

Home Page   Contents
Congressional Record   Cached

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Mr. Paul of Texas.

1997 Ron Paul 60:1
Mr. PAUL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.

1997 Ron Paul 60:2
Mr. Speaker pro tempore. Without objection.

1997 Ron Paul 60:3
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, in 2 days we are going to be debating an amendment to the Constitution dealing with the flag. The proposed flag amendment to the Constitution deals with more than just the issue of freedom of speech. It involves the right of free expression and the right to own property. These two are inseparable. A free society cannot have one without the other; and when one is compromised, so is the other.

1997 Ron Paul 60:4
When property rights are correctly honored, free expression is guaranteed through that right. The independence of a newspaper, radio station or a church guarantees the use of that property in any free expression desired. No one has the right to use any newspaper, radio or church to exert his or her own opinion as an example of free speech. Catholics have no right to say Mass in a Jewish temple. Certainly in our homes we are protected from others imposing their free speech on us. It’s the church property that guarantees freedom of religion. The networks or papers need not submit to demands to be heard by religious believers as an example of free speech. Use of the radio or newspaper by those with strong opinions or religious views is only done voluntarily with the permission of the owner.

1997 Ron Paul 60:5
Yes, it is very important who owns the flag and where it was desecrated. What if it is in a home or in a church for some weird reason? Do the police invade the premises? Who gets sent in? The BATF, the DEA, the FBI, the U.S. Army or the U.S. flag police? If it’s on government property or a government flag or someone else’s flag, that is an attack on property that can and should be prosecuted. By legislating against how someone else’s flag is being used, the right of free expression and property ownership is infringed just as if it were church property or a newspaper.

1997 Ron Paul 60:6
We work diligently to protect controversial expression in books, television and movies and even bizarre religious activities through the concept of private property ownership as long as violence is not used. Is this matter any different?

1997 Ron Paul 60:7
We live in an age where it’s becoming more common to attack free expression, and that is a danger we should not ignore. We find one political group attacking expression that violates the subjective rules of politically correctness while working to prohibit voluntary prayer. Now another wants to curtail expression through flag anti-desecration laws in the name of patriotism. But there is a better way to handle demonstrations and malcontents.

1997 Ron Paul 60:8
The danger here is that flag burners frequently express a disdain for big government. Curtailing any expression of criticism of the government is fraught with great danger. Will anyone who opposed big government someday be identified as a friend of the flag burners and treated like one since he is expressing an idea similar to the flag burners? Just because some people are not smart enough to express themselves in any other way than flag burning, it does not justify the careless attack on free expression. Once it’s routinely accepted expressing these ideas as dangerous to the status quo, all our freedoms are threatened.

1997 Ron Paul 60:9
We need to direct our patriotic zeal toward defending the Constitution and to the protection of liberty. Lack of this effort has led to the impending bankruptcy of the welfare-warfare state. Now, there is a problem worth directing our attention.

1997 Ron Paul 60:10
The flag police are no substitute for our policing our own activities and responsibilities here in the Congress. We are endlessly delivering more power in the name of political emergencies, budgetary crises and government efficiency to the Executive, a process not permitted under the Constitution. We permit socialists to attack property rights and the fundamentals of economic liberty as a right under our Constitution. But those who profess respect for private property should not be trapped into attacking flag property when it is used to express unpopular antigovernment views and even change the Bill of Rights to do so.

1997 Ron Paul 60:11
The socialists know what they are doing, but the anti-desecrators act out of confused emotions while responding to political pressures. We should not further sacrifice freedom of expression with a flag amendment. Especially when compared to the harm done with taxpayers’ funding of school programs and NEA desecration, it is negligible. True patriots can surely match the wits of the jerks who burn flags without undermining the First and the Fifth Amendments.

1997 Ron Paul 60:12
We can do better than rush to alter constitutionally protected free expression for a nonproblem. We could easily organize bigger and grander demonstrations to celebrate our constitutional liberties for which the flag is our symbol in answer to the flag burners.

1997 Ron Paul 60:13
I promise to appear any time, any place to celebrate our liberties and countermand the flag burners who work so hard to offend us. We do not need an amendment to the Constitution which for the first time in our history would undermine and curtail the protections of the First Amendment.

1997 Ron Paul 60:14
And I yield back the balance of my time.


1997 Ron Paul 60:11
Where Congressional Record says, first and fifth amendments, the words are capitalized here, First and Fifth Amendments. Cf. South and North Dakota.

1997 Ron Paul 60:13
Where Congressional Record says, first amendmanet it is capitalized here, First Amendment.

Previous   Next

Home Page ... Contents

This page was generated with Wednesday 03 November 2021 13:38:34 UTC