| The following article was reprinted in The River Reporter on April 8, 1999. |
By Bert Feldman
The River Reporter
Reprinted Thursday, April 8, 1999
Voltaire
The Supreme Court of the United States, now consisting of a group of jurists whose majority was appointed by former President Reagan, has proven itself to be, like their sponsor, the south end of a herd of north-bound horses. Rather than representing views reflecting the diversity of opinions that make up the American people, they have become as lopsided as some claim was the Warren Court, so called.
Unfortunately, the loudest noises are being raised for the wrong reasons. One of the loudest complaints is being raised by various veterans' groups, three of which I belong to, on the court's decision to allow desecration of our national flag as a form of protest.
I fly the flag from a flagstaff in front of my house every clear day (do you remember those sunlit days we used to have?), I fought for it, and I yield to no one in my respect for our flag. but as much as I love and respect it and what it stands for, yet I can accept any person who may desecrate it to express his, or her, disapproval of certain policies or positions of our national government.
Read the quotation at the head of this column; it says it all. The decision to disagree with our government, or its leaders, is guaranteed by the Constitution of these United Sates, specifically in the First Amendment, and, however unpopular your opinion may be, you have the right to express it. The only limitation, as attributed to Mr. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, was that freedom of speech does not mean that you can shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre.
What is really cause for worry are some other decisions by the Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Desecration of the flag might arouse your anger and rightly so, but do you think that a retarded sixteen-year-old child should be subject to execution for a capital crime?
I am not talking about capital punishment itself (which I happen to favor), but the fact that, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, a sixteen-year-old person, who may be retarded or otherwise mentally handicapped, can be put to death. Again the Constitution declares, in the Eighth Amendment, that "cruel and unusual punishments" should not be inflicted. Certainly the execution of a 16-year-old retardate falls under that heading.
Another recent gem of insensitivity was the decision that while discrimination in hiring practices must not be allowed, if the successful applicant faces discrimination while on the job, that's allowable. In short, if a black person, a woman, a hispanic, or any other minority group member is abused, insulted, harassed, or otherwise made to feel unwanted by his fellow workers or employer because of his color, race, religion, or sex, that's okay. I understand that the various bigots, misogynists and others of that ilk are dancing with joy over that narrow-minded ruling.
Do worry about insults to our flag, but also care about those of your neighbors who are being denied the rights to which they are entitled, by reason of color, sex, religion or race. Martin Luther said: "It makes a difference whose ox is gored," but isn't it better to see that no one's ox gets gored?
Keep your eye on this present bunch on the bench; they will probably be with us for another 20 years of so. This is our Reagan legacy — bigotry, hate, discrimination, and sheer narrow-minded stupidity.
