Burning of the Flag It is 2018 and the debate whether flag burning should be legal or illegal. Although opinions vary, the current law is that it is actually a legal action. Even though the issue seems to have a simple answer, people have been arrested for burning the American flag in recent years. There are three points I want to address in this essay which are the history of the debate, why the action of burning the flag should stay legal, and any counter arguments I know people may have. This debate has been going on for decades and it wasn’t until 1984-89 until it was truly addressed.”Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag outside of the convention center where the 1984 Republican National Convention was being held in
…show more content…
“If you burn the flag trying to prove a point that has so many other ways to be voiced, shame on you. Shame on you for believing that destroying something that represents the strength of our nation will have a positive correlation with what you see as fit. Shame on you for being unable to respect the things that you have never seen, like the lives that have been and will be lost in war. You are not just burning a flag, you are burning our constitution and the memory of those who actually fought to make a difference in our world” (Castracani). There are more important issues than arguing over something that has been decided by the Supreme Court and something that is even protected by the Constitution. It is true that “Any messages that burning the flag might convey easily can be communicated in other ways” (Allen). However, the Constitution does not say anything against it. People may want to change the law because they believe that burning the flag should be a crime. Changing the law would be unconstitutional since freedom of speech is under amendment one and changing the Bill of Rights on its own is not possible. “In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon
“If you burn the flag trying to prove a point that has so many other ways to be voiced, shame on you. Shame on you for believing that destroying something that represents the strength of our nation will have a positive correlation with what you see as fit. Shame on you for being unable to respect the things that you have never seen, like the lives that have been and will be lost in war. You are not just burning a flag, you are burning our constitution and the memory of those who actually fought to make a difference in our world” (Castracani). There are more important issues than arguing over something that has been decided by the Supreme Court and something that is even protected by the Constitution. It is true that “Any messages that burning the flag might convey easily can be communicated in other ways” (Allen). However, the Constitution does not say anything against it. People may want to change the law because they believe that burning the flag should be a crime. Changing the law would be unconstitutional since freedom of speech is under amendment one and changing the Bill of Rights on its own is not possible. “In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon