One of the most sacred symbols of America is our United States flag.

It represents our history, our freedoms, and the sacrifices made by countless men and women to protect this nation. Yet we are told that people are allowed to burn the American flag in protest — a symbol of disrespect not only toward the flag, but toward the country we stand for. To add to the offense, some then choose to fly the flags of other countries in defiance.

This is wrong.
While freedom of speech is a protected right in our nation — one of the very rights the flag represents — we must also recognize that with freedom comes responsibility and respect. Disrespecting our flag dishonors the principles that make this country great.

We should never take lightly the meaning of the American flag. It deserves honor, not contempt.

If people want to support countries whose governments would punish — even execute — them for doing what they freely do to the American flag, we have to ask: Why do we tolerate this kind of disrespect here?

Burning, stepping on, or spitting on the United States flag isn’t just an act of protest — it’s an attack on the very freedoms and sacrifices that make those protests possible. In many of the countries whose flags are proudly waved in these protests, such actions would lead to prison or worse.

There must be a line.
Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of our democracy, but when that freedom is used to defame the very nation that protects it, we should question whether we’ve lost sight of the balance between liberty and loyalty.

The American flag stands for all of us — for justice, for sacrifice, for freedom. It should never be treated with contempt by those who benefit from all it represents.


Proposed Constitutional Amendment: The Flag Protection Amendment

Section 1. The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States.

Section 2. Desecration shall include any intentional act of burning, defacing, defiling, trampling upon, spitting upon, or otherwise showing contempt toward the U.S. flag in a public setting.

Section 3. Congress shall have the authority to define penalties, including imprisonment, fines, or other appropriate sanctions, for violation of this amendment.

Section 4. This amendment shall not be construed to abridge the freedom of speech, but to protect a national symbol held sacred by the people of the United States.


Sample Federal Legislation: The Flag Honor and Loyalty Act

Section 1. Short Title
This Act shall be known as the Flag Honor and Loyalty Act of 2025.

Section 2. Prohibited Conduct
It shall be unlawful for any person, while in the United States or under U.S. jurisdiction, to willfully and publicly desecrate the flag of the United States.

Section 3. Definitions

  • “Desecrate” means to knowingly burn, trample, tear, spit on, or otherwise defile the U.S. flag in a way intended to express contempt or hatred.
  • “Public setting” includes protests, demonstrations, or any event where the act is meant to be seen or is recorded for distribution.

Section 4. Penalties
(a) Any person found guilty of flag desecration shall be sentenced to not less than 10 years and up to 50 years in federal prison.
(b) If the act of desecration is performed while waving, displaying, or promoting a foreign national flag, the individual may be subject to revocation of citizenship (if naturalized) and deportation to the nation whose flag was displayed, if they hold dual citizenship or legal standing in that country.

Section 5. Exceptions
This Act shall not apply to the proper and respectful retirement of worn or damaged flags by authorized organizations such as the American Legion or Boy Scouts of America.

Section 6. Enforcement
The U.S. Department of Justice shall have the authority to enforce this Act and prosecute violations in federal court.


Send this to President Trump, your House Rep, and your Congress Rep

Let’s make this happen


Feel free to reach out with any questions, feedback on articles, or anything else you’d like to discuss—I’m always happy to connect!


Copyright Notice © 2025 Cecil Wayne Thorn Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this work authored by Cecil Wayne Thorn, to distribute, display, and reproduce the work, in its entirety, including verbatim copies, provided that no fee is charged for the copies or distribution. This permission is granted for non-commercial distribution only.


USMC is looking at removing or changing their core values of Duty, Honor and Country

USMC logo

Removing “Duty, Honor, Country” from the ethos of the United States Marine Corps (USMC) is a decision that merits careful consideration and debate. However, it’s crucial to understand the rationale behind such a decision and evaluate its potential implications before forming a rebuttal.

  1. Contextual Understanding: Before rebutting, it’s important to understand the reasoning behind the removal of “Duty, Honor, Country.” Is it to modernize the ethos to better align with contemporary military operations and values? Is there evidence to suggest that these values are outdated or ineffective in the current geopolitical landscape? Understanding the context will inform the rebuttal.
  2. Core Values Preservation: “Duty, Honor, Country” are deeply ingrained in the traditions and history of the USMC. They encapsulate the core values that have guided Marines through generations. Removing them risks diluting the essence of what it means to be a Marine and could lead to a loss of identity and morale within the ranks.
  3. Moral Compass: Duty, Honor, Country serve as a moral compass for Marines, guiding their actions both on and off the battlefield. These values emphasize selflessness, integrity, and loyalty to the nation and its people. Removing them may create a void in ethical guidance, potentially leading to a decline in discipline and accountability among service members.
  4. Symbolic Importance: “Duty, Honor, Country” are not just words; they symbolize the sacrifices and commitments of Marines past and present. They inspire unity, resilience, and a sense of purpose among service members. Removing them could be perceived as a dismissal of these sacrifices and could erode the sense of pride and camaraderie within the Marine Corps community.
  5. Public Perception: The ethos of the USMC is not only significant internally but also shapes public perception and trust in the institution. “Duty, Honor, Country” resonate with civilians and reinforce confidence in the Marine Corps’ values and professionalism. Removing them may undermine public trust and lead to skepticism about the Marine Corps’ commitment to its foundational principles.

In conclusion, while changes to military ethos are not uncommon and can be necessary to adapt to evolving circumstances, the removal of “Duty, Honor, Country” from the USMC ethos should be approached with caution. Preserving these core values is essential for maintaining the integrity, identity, and effectiveness of the Marine Corps as a fighting force and a symbol of American strength and values.


Email Subscription

Loading