The American flag is not aesthetic?
I was pleased to read that the Sussex Square Homeowners’ Association had dropped their threat of a lawsuit against Van T. Barfoot.
His offense? Flying the American flag outside his home in suburban Richmond, Virginia.
The association claimed that Col. Barfoot’s American flag on a 21-foot flagpole was not “aesthetic.” Of course there was an immediate outcry from veterans’ groups and many others. Being a 90-year-old retired Army Colonel and World War II Medal of Honor winner certainly helped his cause.
Virginia’s Senator Jim Webb, a decorated Vietnam veteran and author, wrote to the association and asked them to “consider the exceptional nature of Col. Barfoot’s service when considering his pride and determination in honoring our flag.”
Consider nothing. Every American should have the right to fly the flag. Although the Sussex Square mob may feel the flag is not aesthetic, I take great pleasure in looking through my bay window everyday and seeing the American flag on the pole in front of my home.
I don’t believe that everyone should be required to fly the flag, but in turn I don’t believe that anyone has the right to deny Colonel Barfoot, me or any other person that honor.
I’ll bet that the Sussex Square mob would not have dropped their actions if the flag owner had not been a 90-year-old Medal of Honor winner who created so much bad press for them.
I’ll also bet the Sussex Square mob would not have demanded that a homeowner take down a Muslim flag.
Latest posts by Paul Davis (Posts)
- On crime & thrillers: Agents of Treachery — a collection of superb spy fiction - September 21, 2010
- On crime & thrillers: Frederick Forsyth offers a fact-based story of an all out war on the drug lords - September 7, 2010
- John le Carre’s spook world - September 5, 2010
- On crime & thrillers: Don Winslow’s Savages is a fast-paced, wild and funny crime story - August 24, 2010
- Spy writer vs. spy writer: John le Carre calls Ian Fleming’s iconic James Bond character a neo-fascist gangster - August 20, 2010
Print This Post
“I’ll also bet the Sussex Square mob would not have demanded that a homeowner take down a Muslim flag.”
Paul, I think you’d lose that bet. While it’s possible that some political correctness was at work here — someone not liking public displays of patriotism — it is more likely that this Homeowners Association is like so many others, with lots of rules and people eager to enforce them. If flags or flagpoles are not allowed, they would not allow any of them.
These cases come up every year or so and make national news, because people get upset when they are told someone can’t fly an American flag. It isn’t a question of whether the American flag is itself aesthetically pleasing. Some stuffy HA types don’t like any ostentatious displays — any flags or flagpoles, or animal statues in the front yard, or certain kinds of fencing or certain color siding. I’ve owned in an HA development. There are lots of rules. Whether you or I would like those rules is not the issue.
If you choose to live there, you sign a contract and agree to the policies. If you don’t want to follow those rules, you shouldn’t buy there. The Sussex HA has dropped the demand because of the bad publicity and the pressure. And it is easy to see their pursuit of the matter in the first place as petty, especially given Col. Barfoot’s service.
You write: “…I don’t believe that anyone has the right to deny Colonel Barfoot, me or any other person that honor.”
No one has the right to deny you that honor, because you have not signed a contract agreeing not to fly a flag. Barfoot, by owning in that HA, has agreed to be governed by the rules of the HA. Don’t you agree that property owners have the right to enter into such contracts? If people voluntarily join a Homeowners Association and agree to live under its rules and political structure, and if those rules include a ban on flagpoles or whatever, then I don’t see those people as having their rights violated when they can’t fly a flag, as stupid or unpatriotic some might say the rules against flags are.
Scott makes a good point. (One of the reasons I detest the suburbs.)
Moreover, by allowing Col. Barfoot to fly the American flag because bad publicity trumped their code, the HA may have just paved the way to allowing a Muslim homeowner to fly his flag.
For that matter, what does a “Muslim flag” look like? A religious banner or a flag of whatever country the homeowner might have come from? How about a Puerto Rican flag flown by a Puerto Rican homeowner?
I get a kick out of the way this played out for Col. Barfoot.
He was denied the freedom to put up a flag pole (not to fly the flag, mind you) based on the premise that it lowered home values, thus making it a decision for the HOA.
They made their decision. Then the media got ahold of it, and it ended up with the HOA’s actions being dismissed as “silly” by Robert Gibbs.
After looking at how much more the national outrage was damaging property values than the flag pole, they smartly decided to let him keep it.
Now, that’s the free market at work. Isn’t it beautiful? Problem solved, and it didn’t require an Act of Congress. How often do you see that happen these days?
Scott,
You have a point, but I doubt that the HA contract said no American flags and flagpoles.
The key word, I believe, is aesthetic.
The HA ruled that the flag and flagpole were not aesthic. But who are those petty dictators to say the American flag on a pole would devalue homes?
Yes, the old Colonel signed a contract, but he was willing to go to court over his flag, which is what one does in a contract dispute.
I stand by my bet that the HA would have been too politically correct to take action against a Muslim flag (Jericho, a Muslim flag might have the star and crescent, for example).
I wonder how they feel about a Greenpeace flag, or an Al Gore Nation flag (ha).
Then what would a Christian or a Jewish (not Israeli) flag look like? With all due respect, Paul, methinks you’re mixing apples and oranges by comparing a flag that symbolizes a religion with a flag that symbolizes a country.
The HA just opened the way to all its homeowners to hoist the flags of their homelands. Hoisting religious flags would be a whole ‘nother court fight.
Jericho,
To answer your question, this is what the Christian flag looks like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Flag
This flag has been in every Protestant church I’ve ever stepped foot in throughout my life. As a kid in Vacation Bible School, we said a pledge to it and sang “Onward Christian Soldiers” after we said the Pledge of Allegiance and sang “The Star Spangled Banner” to the American flag. And I promise, I wasn’t in a cult. – just a regular ol’ Southern Baptist.
I’m with Scott. Everyone has the right to fly whatever flags they so choose, unless, of course, they sign legal documents agreeing that they won’t.
I’d like to see a copy of the Homeowners’ bylaws, or whatever they call them, and find out whether they have been amended since Mr. Barfoot moved in, and whether that matters.
In the mean time, I’m with Scott and tspoll.
I read that the old Colonel had agreed to a smaller flagpole, which seems reasonable.
My issue, and that of many Americans, was the comment about the American flag not being “aesthetic,” not about the size of a flagpole.
I have a ten-foot flagpole outside my house, not a 24-foot pole.