Monday, January 02, 2012

Lawmaker wants to outlaw national anthem parodies

Seems reasonable but sad that it's needed.
An Indiana state lawmaker has introduced a bill that would set specific “performance standards” for singing the national anthem. State Sen. Vaneta Becker’s legislation would affect all renditions of “The Star-Spangled Banner” performed at any event sponsored by public schools or state universities

Performers would have to sign a contract agreeing to follow certain lyrical and melodic guidelines, and would be fined $25 if they failed to meet the appropriate standards.

According to the Star, Becker‘s bill doesn’t lay out what is considered “acceptable” — instead, those guidelines would be determined by the state’s Department of Education

Becker, a Republican, told the newspaper she would expect the guidelines to require the anthem be sung with the usual lyrics to the traditional melody: “The way that we normally have it sung or heard throughout most of our state and our country.”

She said she wrote the bill after a constituent complained about a school program in which the anthem was parodied in a way the constituent thought was disrespectful. Becker told the Star said she herself has heard parody versions of the national anthem on TV.

She insisted she only wants to punish those who make intentional changes — not people who can’t carry a tune.

Other states already have laws on the books dealing with “The Star-Spangled Banner”: In Massachusetts, it’s illegal to play the anthem as dance music, an exit march or part of a medley, punishable by a $100 fine. In Michigan, a similar law can earn violators a misdemeanor.

Source

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is the second time I have had to copy this off the front page of THIS site to make my point...

"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."

Anonymous said...

Jimi Hendrix is rolling in his grave...as are many Hendrix fans

Anonymous said...

There is and has never been such a thing as hate speech. There is only speech that you agree with and speech you do not agree with.
If you are committed to the principles of the First Amendment neither is a crime. If you are not, then the latter is a crime.
As for performance of the anthem - there is no question is constitutes speech - and particularly political speech - and as such is clearly protected by the Amendment.
That said, it does bug me a bit when some people think that singing the anthem is an excuse for them to use every note in their register.