Letter to the editor: Flag co-opted by hate-mongers | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Flag co-opted by hate-mongers

When I first heard about Nike removing its Betsy Ross flag shoes from the market, I was dismayed and thought that people where being too touchy-feely and too PC. Once I heard the context of the situation, I understood the objection.

I always saw that flag as a starting point for our new nation, and the amazing strength and wisdom of our Founding Fathers. It represented the ideals of freedom and diversity of our country. Then I came to understand that the 13-star flag had been co-opted by white supremacy groups and used along with the confederate flag to represent slavery and oppression. This is absolutely counter to what our early leaders wanted.

The shame here does not lay with the PC crowd, but with those who have stolen that flag and used it to represent evil, torture and death. I think the great men of 1776 would be sickened by the hate speech of today, by morons who don’t know the true history of what the Founders fought for.

They were not perfect and they knew it. They knew they had left things undone, but they had a vision of a great democracy where all men (and women) are created equal.

We need to take back the flag of decency, fairness and equality from hate- and fearmongers. That is the real problem here.

John Thomas

Evergreen, Colo.

The writer is a former Butler resident.


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.