Flag Burning Should Be Illegal

800 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Free speech in america essay

Is it right to burn one of the country's symbols, but should it be legal since it is part of the freedom of speech? Since the first day this country was free everyone looked at the flag as the reason why, but at the same time it isn’t the real reason. Our country is free because of the people who fought for it. Proving that burning the flag is disrespectful, but it gives people a way to express themselves. It should be legal because it gives people a way to communicate with the upper class, and if it is illegal they will protest and keep their same actions.
Flag burning is not right, but making it illegal takes away from the freedom of speech which turns it more into a religion than a symbol according to Mr. Levendosky. “In the following viewpoint, Levendosky argues that burning the American flag is a form of political …show more content…

“It isn't against the law to burn a cross or any other religious symbol—yet it would be against the law to burn a flag, if these flag amendment folks have their way” (Levendosky). If you are allowed to buy a cross and go home and burn it why should you be held to a law that is the same as that. Making a flag more than what it should be is what is making the argument such a big deal. “Chief Justice William Rehnquist, in a dissent fifteen years ago, when the Court refused to hold flag burning a crime, wrote that "the true nature of the state's interest in this case is not only one of preserving 'the physical integrity of the flag' but also one of preserving the flag as an important symbol of nationhood and unity. . . . It is the character not the cloth of the flag that the states seek to protect" (Garbus). This quote represents taking this case too far. This case should be held between a couple of people in the government, but they should have a vote that declares what's what. And if people don’t like what happens then you can keep it to

Show More
Related

  • We Need a Constitutional Amendment to Protect the American Flag

    487 Words  | 1 Pages

    Free speech and the First Amendment rights do not give people lisence to desecrate a symbol of pride and freedom. It is not all right to protect those who let it burn, lighting up the sky with their hatred. It definitely is not acceptable to insult the men and women who fight every day to protect this nation by burning the symbol of their labors. Therefore, it is crucial that the Supreme Court pass the amendment to the Constitution to protect the flag of the US.

    Read More

  • Texas Vs Johnson Case

    1237 Words  | 3 Pages

    After ruling the case in Johnson’s favor, it made it difficult to make a law banning the act of flag burning. Laws would be suggested and one would make it to the supreme court. The law would make flag burning a national offense punishable by law. Unfortunately the same majority decision as in the Texas v. Johnson case would arise as a five-to-four majority agreed once again that the law would abridge the right to freedom of speech. Seeing as the same judges presided over the case, the same defense was used to justify their ruling on the law. It was unconstitutional to abridge speech and by their ruling in Texas v. Johnson, the majority still viewed flag burning as a form of symbolic speech. Not only did the ruling in Texas v. Johnson hinder immediate lawmaking against flag burning, but it also divided a nation for a time. Johnson burned the flag, so he says, as an act against the Reagan administration. If this was so as he claimed that divided the nation, not only against him but against the supreme court. You have the protestors during the time who agreed with Johnson, the patriots against Johnson, and those left confused about what was right and wrong. No one side was right, yet no one side was wrong in their eyes. Johnson’s act was crude and even to those who agreed with his right to freedom of speech, they didn’t view his act as unpunishable. The case made the nation doubt itself and its

    Read More

  • Flag-Burning is No Crime

    1153 Words  | 3 Pages

    Stripes and stars forever, right? Well, what exactly does that mean? The American Flag can be seen almost anywhere. From the high-school, to the ball park, and even in our homes, the American flag stands as a symbol of all that is good and true in America. When one thinks of the flag, they usually think of the blood that was shed for this country. It was shed so that we could have liberties, such as, freedom of speech and expression, which fall under the first amendment rights of the Constitution. However, when you think of a burning flag, what comes to mind? One might say it shows disrespect and hatred to a country that has given so much. In the case of Texas v. Johnson, Gregory Lee Johnson was accused of desecrating a sacred object, but, his actions were protected by the First Amendment. Although his actions may have been offensive, he did not utter fighting words. By burning the flag, Johnson did not infringe upon another's natural human rights. He was simply expressing his outrage towards the government, which is within the jurisdiction of the First Amendment.

    Read More

  • The American Flag Pros And Cons

    580 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the First Amendment it says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Although some argued that the right to burn the American flag is fundamental to the First Amendment

    Read More

  • Texas v. Johnson Argumentative

    691 Words  | 2 Pages

    Much history came within the Texas v. Johnson case. It all started during the 1984 Republican National Convention, this is where Johnson participated in a political demonstration to protest what policies Regan was administrating (Brennan 1). A march was occurring throughout the city streets, which Johnson did take part in. Johnson burned an American flag while protesters chanted him on (Brennan 1). No person was specifically injured during this protest; although, many witnesses were severely offended (Brennan 1). Johnson was convicted of Desecration of a venerated object, which violated the Texas Statue. The state court of appeals affirmed Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and reversed the case stating it was a form of expressive conduct, so it was alright (Brennan 1). In a 5 to 4 decision the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that Johnson’s burning of the flag was protected under his First Amendment rights (Brennan 1). The court also found that although witnesses may have found it offensive, does not...

    Read More

  • 'Protecting Freedom Of Expression On The Campus' By Derek Bok

    1024 Words  | 3 Pages

    "Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to

    Read More

  • Why Flag Burning Should Be Banned

    674 Words  | 2 Pages

    Freedom of speech and expression is a right given to all Americans under the First Amendment of the Constitution. It is a difficult concept to embrace when individuals are faced with ideas they oppose. In this kind of situation, the protection guaranteed to American citizens becomes even more important. The First Amendment was designed not only to protect the freedom to express ideas and sentiments with which one agrees, but also the ideas and sentiments with which one disagrees. It is for precisely this reason that the government should maintain the right of individuals to express their dissatisfaction with the policies of the government through the act of flag burning and not amend the Constitution to make such an act illegal.

    Read More

  • The Disgrace of Flag Burning

    815 Words  | 2 Pages

    For those who want to light Old Glory on fire, stomp all over it, or spit on it to make some sort of "statement," I say let them do it.  But under one condition: they MUST get permission from three sponsors.  First, you need permission of a war veteran.  Perhaps a Marine who fought at Iwo Jima?  The American flag was raised over Mount Surabachi upon the bodies of thousands of dead buddies.  Each night spent on Iwo meant half of everyone you knew would be dead tomorrow, a coin flip away from a bloody end upon a patch of sand your mother couldn't find on a map.

    Read More

  • Is Flag Burning Protected by the First Amendment?

    2205 Words  | 5 Pages

    Can an individual be prosecuted for openly burning the American flag in a political protest? Gregory Johnson did this in a political protest outside Dallas City Hall. He was then tried and convicted of desecrating a venerated object under a Texas law (Penal Code 42.09), which states that "a person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly desecrates a state or national flag" (317). The question of whether this Texas law is in violation of the First Amendment, which "holds that Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech" (316), was brought before the United States Supreme Court in Texas v. Johnson (1989). A divided court ruled 5 to 4 that the Texas law was in violation of the First Amendment. Using the same Constitution, precedents, and legal standards, the Supreme Court justices came to two drastically different positions regarding the constitutionality of prohibiting flag burning. To see how such a division is possible, we are going to compare and contrast both the arguments and the methods of argumentation used by both the majority opinion (written by Associate Justice Brennan) and the dissenting opinion (written by Chief Justice Rehnquist), which critiques the majority opinion.

    Read More

  • Snyder V Phelps Summary

    613 Words  | 2 Pages

    Looking back to a similar case, Virginia v. Black(2003), “Barry Black burned a cross at a rally for the KKK near a highway in a field on private property belonging to a person who was sympathetic to the views of the klan.” The Supreme Court concluded that it was in Black’s rights to burn a cross as a political statement as long as he was not trying to threaten any specific person. Both cases involve being accused of trespassing on private property. However, if there is no intention to harm, you are protected by the 1st.

    Read More

  • National Anthem Kneeling

    595 Words  | 2 Pages

    Kneeling During the National Anthem You have probably seen the debate across the news covering the controversial protest of kneeling during the National Anthem. This protest has stirred up conversation throughout the nation. Is kneeling during the anthem an appropriate way to protest? Supporters think that the celebrities are smart by using their fame to bring attention to America’s problems, but others think that football games are not the appropriate place to focus on politics.

    Read More

  • Persuasive Essay On The Confederate Flag

    730 Words  | 2 Pages

    Therefore, the flag presents a symbol of southern pride and heritage. With that being said, all Americans should be allowed to live in a country where they feel safe and free from hatred. If a historical symbol fuels hatred, violence, and fear, then the display of such a symbol would only misinterpret the meaning of the land of the free. Although there are many pros and cons to the Confederate flag, it is only just to ban the flag.

    Read More

  • Flag Burning: The Debate Continues

    2577 Words  | 6 Pages

    The burning of an American flag is not necessarily anti-American or unpatriotic. Sometimes, the greatness and majesty of the flag is better portrayed in the powerful political and societal statement of destroying it. This act can convey the feeling of the American people that their government is not the body it should be or that it is not doing the will of the people. This is probably one of the most emotional actions they can take to get the government's attention. Some of these protestors may even love the flag as much as those who are for banning flag burning, but the burners want to emphasize the seriousness of their complaint. The act of burning a flag may be the people's way of telling the government that it is co...

    Read More

  • Free Speech or Flag Protection? There Can’t Be Both.

    1380 Words  | 3 Pages

    The first and only time I had ever heard of someone burning the flag when I came across an article on Regory Lee Johnson. In 1984, he showed up at the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas and burned an American flag in order to show his knowledge of the policies of Reagan administration. At the time, he was convicted of flag desecration, but the Supreme Court overturned that decision by ruling that burning a flag was “expressive conduct within protection of the first Amendment” (Pledging allegiance). The issue of flag desecration is one that been around for a while. There are two sides to the debate: one being that the flag should be protected by law, and one being that it should not because it restricts free speech. There have been times when Congress has tried to pass laws protecting the flag, but Supreme Court as struck those laws down by deeming them as “violating the constitutional guarantee of free speech, and hence unconstitutional” (Wall, 1995). However, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling of the laws being unconstitutional, there are many advocates that are still trying to pass flag protection laws by amending the Constitution to allow it. This cannot be done. The constitution should not be amended to protect the flag because it would be a violation to our first amendment: our right to free speech.

    Read More

  • Flag Burning

    1062 Words  | 3 Pages

    Flag Burning can be and usually is a very controversial issue. Many people are offended by the thought of destroying this country's symbol of liberty and freedom. During a political protest during the 1984 Republican Convention, Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested for burning an American flag. Years later in 1989, Johnson got the decision overturned by the United States Supreme Court. In the same year, the state of Texas passed the Flag Protection Act, which prohibited any form of desecration against the American flag. This act provoked many people to protest and burn flags anyway. Two protestors, Shawn Eichman and Mark Haggerty were charged with violating the law and arrested. Both Eichman and Haggerty appealed the decision because the law was inconsistent with the first amendment to the Constitution. The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances is protected by the first amendment of the Constitution. Burning American flags and other such actions are not treasonous and should no be treated as so, as long as these actions are done to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Read More

More about Flag Burning Should Be Illegal

Open Document