jasona - Column for 4/5

Half-mast

I'm sure Lictor will undoubtedly rail against me in the forums, but I've got to bark out my disappointment at flying the American flag half mast for the death of the Pope.

Now I'm not saying the man shouldn't be mourned, I'm not going to say one way or another whether he was worthy of being mourned (except to point out that given the amount of people who have dropped whatever they are doing to book a flight to the Rome to mourn in person is pretty much a sure sign that some feel it's an important gesture). Regardless, this is a moot point.

The American flag should be flown at half mast for people who have served America in some great capacity.

Officially we're supposed to fly it at half mast for only the death of a President, a Vice President, Chief Justice or the Speaker of the House. We also fly it at half mast on Memorial Day, to honor those who died for our country.

Additionally, though, the President and state's Governors can, at whim, decide to fly the flag at half mast for any other reason they deem necessary. Recently some have decided to fly the flag at half mast for the victims of recent Tsunami disaster, and even more recently, for the death of the Pope. And this really chaffs my hide.

There should be mourning for these events, absolutely. I'm sad that we, as a society, don't have moments of pause in our lives when some tragedies happen. But the American Flag should be reserved for the death of American servants -- the men and women who died after working to further the cause of our nation. It should be clear cut issue of when a flag is flow half mast. I was surprised at my anger at people who claimed we shouldn't have been lowering the flag when Nixon died. Sure he was a shit heel. Sure he was a criminal (1). He still served at our call as a President. There should be no question that he gets the same respect as any other President. When the current shit heel, or his father, passes away, they should also get their due.

We've been given the First Amendment so that we can voice our disapproval of the people who run this country when their alive (and after they've died). Heck, it was the First Amendment that allowed Woodward and Bernstein to take down Nixon in the first place. It's also the First Amendment that allows you to mourn the death of leader of the largest religious body in the world. The First Amendment doesn't, however, give the President and the Governors the right to usurp a public symbol in order to push their own Religious views(2).

i,jasona

1) You know, I was going to at least look up some good things that Nixon did, to show that he did some serving of the country during his two terms. But everywhere I looked I saw he did pretty much two wrongs for every right thing he did. The only thing I could see that he established with crapping on was the EPA (although, truth be told, I didn't look that hard). Still, he didn't bring the country to a halt... well, actually he did with Watergate... still, I stand by my claim. He should have gotten a full 30 days from every American flag (on a public building) in the country.

2) I'm sure Lictor would simply ask "Why is this bad?" "Who does this hurt?" It hurts us, as a nation. I have no problem with people expressing thier grief, in private or in public. I have no problem with people in office expressing grief. But, to wave an over used quote around, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance(3)." Without constantly checking the Religious Right they would strive to make this country a theocracy. Of this I have no doubt, nor do many of the left. And this is why we on the left are constantly making sure that the intent of the Founding Fathers (as we interpret it) is followed, and that we keep Religion out of the government.

3) Actually, it's "Eternal Vigilance is the price of freedom" -- Wendell Phillips, sometime in the 19th century.

Columns by jasona