Flag Burning Unconstitutional essays

Flag Burning Unconstitutional essays Flag burning is absolutely not a valid form of political expression under the first amendment. Though the Supreme Court, in the case of Gregory Johnson, ruled that it was in fact constitutional to allow people to burn the flag, the evidence against this ruling is overwhelming. First, the first amendment does provide protection to demonstrators wishing to voice their political opinions vocally and symbolically, the amendment does not allow for the desecration of sacred objects such as flags, cemeteries, and public monuments. The Texas law in effect when Gregory Johnson burned an American flag in protest of the American political system clearly states that it is illegal to desecrate such objects. The law defined desecration as physical mistreatment of such objects in a way which the accused knows will offend one or more persons likely to observe or discover the act. When Gregory Johnson burned his flag he clearly intended to make a public display and offend onlookers. The se cond argument against flag burning is that there are many other ways for one to express dislike for the American democratic system than to burn on of its most sacred objects. The flag stands for much more than the fifty states, in the it represents battles fought for the United States by hundreds of thousands of veterans. The flag represents national unity. The third, and most important, argument is that flag burning is an act that could possibly cause a large amount of violence if done in a public place. The first amendment does not protest this type of speech. (Texas vs. Johnson worksheet) The Texas law created to protect sacred objects clearly states that it is illegal to desecrate anything that could case public dismay. In Gregory Johnsons trial several witnesses testified that they were deeply offended by Johnsons act. This argument alone makes flag burning illegal. Gregory Johnson should have been punish...