Dump the flag amendment

Once again, the House of Representatives has passed a constitutional amendment to protect the American flag from desecration. This is an annual event almost as predictable as the swallows returning to Capistrano. So, too, is the Senate's annual ritual of not passing it.

This year, there is reason to think the Senate may be inching closer to passing it, and that's a concern.

Few things are as reprehensible as watching someone protest the government by burning the flag. Particularly at a time when the nation is involved in a military conflict, it is a stunning affront to brave men and women who are sacrificing their all for freedom.

But it would be wrong to rewrite the Constitution to equate a forced honoring of the flag with other freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. As upsetting as it is, flag burning is a form of expression every bit as much as flag waving. And a nation that attributes part of its greatness to its willingness to tolerate dissent and protest can't afford to stifle this type of speech.

Flag burning — an occurrence so rare most Americans would be hard-pressed to pinpoint the last time they saw it — would not disappear because of an amendment. Chances are, it would become more prevalent, out of some misguided attempt to stand on principle. That would harm public morale at an important point in history, and the pride many Americans feel in their ability to tolerate free speech would feel more hollow.

Besides, an amendment would raise a number of troubling questions that surely would be tested by the nation's detractors. Would it be illegal to desecrate something that was almost a flag? For instance, if protesters create something that looks like the flag but has less than 50 stars, could they be punished for burning it? And what about hanging the flag upside down or in other ways considered disrespectful? A lot of clothes these days, from hats to T-shirts to blue jeans, contain images of the flag. Would these, too, be covered under the amendment? Would they, themselves, be illegal?

Courts would be kept busy for decades answering these and other questions.

This is the sixth time the flag amendment has passed the House. Should it pass the Senate, where its sponsor is Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, it would be almost assured of ratification by the states. All 50 states already have resolutions calling for it to pass.

One of the Senate votes against it belongs to Utah Sen. Bob Bennett, who normally agrees with much that Hatch supports. He has said he is unwilling to overturn 200 years of tradition in regard to the First Amendment.

He's right. The Constitution is no place for feel-good amendments that do nothing but restrict freedoms.