To
nominate outstanding articles for this page, please send link to the article and
a brief note about why you submitted it.
Nothing will be published here until I obtain permission from the
author.
Of all the articles I read pertaining to this year’s celebration of Independence Day, this one seemed most appropriate to open this new page. I saw it on NewsMax and obtained permission to publish and archive it here from Dr. Stolinsky. I’m sure he would appreciate your feedback, as would I. Deb V.
Is
Our Flag Still There?
David C. Stolinsky
07/05/02
NewsMax.com - Francis Scott Key wrote the
National Anthem during the War of 1812. The British fleet was bombarding Fort
McHenry in Baltimore. Through the night, Scott was encouraged that continued
firing from the fort gave proof "that our flag was still there."
He couldn’t see the flag. But the evidence that those within the
fort were still fighting renewed Scott’s faith. And sure enough, the morning
sun showed that the tattered star-spangled banner was indeed still flying
proudly.
Our current situation is not quite so dramatic. We are not citizens
of a new and tiny nation being attacked by the world’s mightiest empire. Except
for our service personnel, we are not in physical danger – at least not at the
moment.
Still, our situation is similar. We are under attack, and on more
than one front. And we hope that our flag is truly still there. Is it?
After 9-11, flags appeared everywhere – cars, homes and stores.
Except on fire trucks, most of these flags are gone. This is to be expected.
Initial enthusiasm often diminishes with time.
But the significance may be deeper. Inquiries flooded armed forces
recruiting stations after 9-11. But actual enlistments did not increase.
Contrast this with the response to Pearl Harbor. The next morning
there were long lines at recruiting stations in all parts of the country. The
draft was already in effect and would soon intensify. Nevertheless, enlistments
surged. Underage kids with phony identification stood in line with older men,
many of whom had already served.
More people were killed on 9-11 than at Pearl Harbor. Most of those
killed on 9-11 were civilians, while most of the dead at Pearl Harbor were
service personnel. And 9-11 occurred in New York and Washington, not on what
was then perceived as a distant Pacific island. The horror of 9-11 was carried
on live TV, while news of Pearl Harbor came by radio and newspapers.
The impact of 9-11 should have been greater. The outrage should
have been stronger. So, where were the volunteers? We may be so afraid of
producing super-patriots that we are doing our best to produce no patriots at
all.
Our military is stretched thin, with deployments to roughly 100
overseas locations. Afghanistan was a success, but more remains to be done
there. We have barely enough personnel and equipment to get rid of Saddam
Hussein – at least we hope we do. And what if, for example, North Korea takes
the opportunity to attack its southern neighbor?
Will we re-institute the draft? That would almost surely spell
defeat for Republicans in the next election. But what is the alternative?
With due respect to Francis Scott Key, the most encouraging fact
was not that the flag was still flying from the fort, but that the flag was
still flying in the hearts of Americans. Perhaps Key took this for granted. But
we can no longer do so.
Comparing our traditions to those of the British is instructive.
The British respect their flag, but the symbol of the nation is the queen. If
she is present at a performance, the audience stands to sing "God Save the
Queen" and faces her, while she remains seated. But when our national
anthem is played, everyone including the president stands and faces the flag.
The British dip their flag in salute. To salute the queen or other
high officials, they touch their flag to the ground. We never dip our flag to
anyone, much less touch it to the ground. We chose not to have a monarch. Our
flag is the symbol of our nation and the focus of our loyalty.
That’s the key word – loyalty. To whom and to what are we loyal?
I am old enough to have been brought up as an American. In high
school, I had to memorize the first and fourth verses of "The
Star-Spangled Banner.” Of course, the fourth verse is now out completely – it
mentions God. And I had to memorize the Preamble to the Constitution and the
Gettysburg Address. But memorization is "old fashioned."
I studied American history and civics, not "social
studies." But that might make some students "uncomfortable." We
observed Washington’s and Lincoln’s birthdays, not "Presidents Day,"
and certainly not Cinco de Mayo and Mexican Independence Day.
On Flag Day we had a program about our flag. Our teachers wouldn’t
have dreamed of asking us to march with the flags of the nations our ancestors
came from, as was done recently in a local school.
Yes, I was luckier than today’s kids.
I took ROTC in high school and college. Many schools have kicked
this program out. Many find uniforms objectionable, not to mention drilling
with rifles, even deactivated ones. As a result, the services have been deprived
of a major source of civilian-educated officers. And boys have been deprived of
a major source of positive male role models, which they desperately need.
From grade school on, we said the Pledge of Allegiance to start the
day. The Pledge has been eliminated in many schools. And now a court has banned
it for containing the words "under God" and thereby brought on itself
a storm of criticism.
Most critics stressed the second word. But the first word is the
key. Liberals cannot tolerate the state being "under" anything. To
them, the state is supreme. Unlike medieval kings, who were thought to rule
with God’s permission, the liberal’s notion of government usurps God’s role
entirely. It becomes the final arbiter of right and wrong.
What is legal replaces what is right. We see the evidence all
around us.
The extreme example is Hitler, who proclaimed himself the
"Supreme Lawgiver." We are still far from this extreme, but it is
where the road we are on is leading. In the end, there can be only one Supreme
Lawgiver – God or the state.
To put it another way, there can be only one god – God or the
state. It is no coincidence that the most tyrannical regimes of recent times,
Nazism and Communism, were atheistic. And it was an atheist who filed the suit
that resulted in banning the Pledge of Allegiance containing "under
God."
Certainly religious extremism can be dangerous – consider 9-11. But
the answer is not to go to the opposite extreme, which is also dangerous.
Incompetent doctors are dangerous, too, but in response we do not abolish
medicine. We do our best to train good doctors. We try to steer a middle
course.
Ben Franklin proposed "Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to
God" as our national motto. With God banished, a major justification for
opposing tyrants is removed. This may be the underlying reason that liberals
banished God from public life.
The Bill of Rights gave us no rights – it listed God-given rights.
But if God isn’t the source of our rights, the state must be. And what the state
gives, it can take away.
If the Bill of Rights were repealed, would we still have rights?
The Founders, who were religious to varying degrees, would say yes. Liberals
would say no. Which point of view seems more hospitable to liberty? Which seems
safer?
Again I ask to whom – or to Whom – and to what will we be loyal?
As kids grow, their circles of interest grow. First they are
interested only in themselves, then their families, then their friends, then
their nation, and finally the world.
Loyalty grows in the same way. We can’t "love all
humanity" in any meaningful way without first being loyal to our family
and our nation. Otherwise there is no reason not to love al-Qaeda as much (or
as little) as America. In fact, many love only themselves and are loyal to
nothing except their own selfish interests.
We claim to "understand" the point of view of the
terrorists. In fact, we merely find excuses for our own cowardice and for our
inability distinguish civilians from combatants, terrorists from soldiers, or
aggression from self-defense.
If the defenders of Fort McHenry had been brought up like that,
they likely would have run when the British fleet appeared.
If the Marines on Iwo Jima had been that faint-hearted and
ambivalent, they wouldn’t have bothered to raise the flag. Of course, they
wouldn’t have been Marines in the first place, and most of Asia would have
remained under a brutal and racist tyranny.
And if those underage kids and older men hadn’t signed up, Europe
probably would still be under Nazi domination. Those Europeans who incessantly
criticize American "militarism" might remember to whom they owe the
right to criticize anything.
The original Independence Day celebrated our declaring ourselves
independent of Europe and all it stood for. We were announcing in a loud voice
that America was a new idea, not merely a revision of old European ideas.
We were declaring that we did not want to be a slightly updated
version of the class system, ethnic and religious bigotry, intellectual
snobbery, and infantile reliance on the state to make all important decisions
for us. No, we wanted something new.
We wanted a nation of individuals who were responsible for
themselves and their families, who consented to be governed by laws that
respected their God-given rights, and who were willing to fight to achieve
these goals.
As another July 4 is upon us, we need to recall what we wanted to
be independent of, and why we wanted to be independent in the first place.
Is our flag still there? Don’t look at flagpoles or car antennas.
Look in your heart. Then answer the question.
Dr. Stolinsky is retired after 25 years of teaching in medical
school. He writes from Los Angeles on political and social issues. He may be
contacted at dcstolinsky@prodigy.net.