Is flag burning free speech?

SirPwn4lot said:

Flag burning should absolutely be legal. Not sure about the ruling, but that's my decision. No compromise.

Click to expand...

No.

Flag burning must be done in a controlled manner that does not present a threat to other persons or other property.

Other than that, the flag to be burned must either belong to the arsonist or have been donated to the arsonist for that purpose.

Can't have nuts running around burning someone else's flags, they have to buy their own. Oherwise it would have all the meaning of Jim Kerry thrownig someone else's medals over the White House fence.

cpgrad08 said:

There is a huge difference between retiring a flag and burning in protest. When we burn the Flag to retire it's done in a ceremony with the UT most respect to the Flag and to what it represent. When you burn the flag in protest it usually done to show one's disrespect/hatred to what it represent.

Click to expand...

Whole flags are never burned. The ceremony involves the structured dismemberment of the emblem and the reverent consignment to fire of the pieces.

But Mayor Snorkum will guess that you knew this already.

SheWolf said:

It's still destroying a flag with fire... the intent is different, but it's ironic, you have to admit. It's actually funny...

Click to expand...

No realy Irony and not funny.

Mayor Snorkum said:

Whole flags are never burned. The ceremony involves the structured dismemberment of the emblem and the reverent consignment to fire of the pieces.

But Mayor Snorkum will guess that you knew this already.

Click to expand...

Yes I did. =)

While I can't ever seeing myself doing it since the flag represents the ideals of the Constitution that I value, it's still protected under the freedom of speech.

The only reason most of us see burning the flag as treason or nonsensical though is because we live in a country where the relationship between the government/military and the people in relatively peaceful. If our government somehow became more of a dictatorship and our military used against us, then burning the flag might turn into an expression against the oppressive forces, particularly if they used it as a primary symbol of their actions.

This possibility, one that exists wherever there is a government and military, alone make its necessary in my eyes to keep such an action legal.

SheWolf said:

The supreme court says flag burning is protected speech under the first amendment.

Do you agree?

Texas v. Johnson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Unequivocally yes.

Wow, haha, I've spent approximately 2 hours a day since novemeber of '10 looking at Texas v. Johnson, and ways to use it to advocate free speech.

Mr. Johnson was exercising his protected right to symbolic, expressive speech (as the SC pointed out) because his speech, when taken in context, had a larger meaning. He wasn't just burning the flag just to burn it, he was doing it to protest Reagan's policies.

Furthermore, protestors around him chanted, and the entire event was at the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas (Johnson had some balls). The Supreme Court established the idea of "speech plus" which is synonymous with symbolic speech, and established that it's level of protection under the first amendment comes second only to "pure speech."

Specifically, the Texas statute prohibited desecration of the American Flag, and the compelling interest was the flag as a symbol of national unity. Regardless, the SC held that the compelling interest of protecting the flag for that purpose was insuccifiently compelling.

I suppose burning a flag might not necessarily be protected. For example, if it was done to represent a true threat (which was first mentioned in Watts v. U.S. and fully explained in Virginia v. Black) then it is not protected. Further, if it constitutes fighting words under Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, it may also not be protected.

Essentially, it depends on whether the statute the flag burning is being held liable under, whether the burning itself can be categorized as symbolic in nature, and if it is symbolic, whether the statute furthers a compelling state interest, and furthers that interest, "by the least restrictive means."

If the statute constitutionally prohibits the flag burning, then it is not "free speech" which is in any case, a rather ambiguous term.

It's just a flag.

Burn it, if you wish. Throw it in the garbage. Walk on it. Wear it. Makes no difference. The honor we show our flag comes from within the hearts of the individuals honoring it...not because it's sewn with a needle and thread. Actually, a pretty silly thing to waste much time thinking about. Don't want to honor it? Who cares?

The American flag is honored in my home. I don't care if my neighbor picks up dog **** with his. It reflects on him, not the flag he's usin'.

MaggieD said:

It's just a flag.

Burn it, if you wish. Throw it in the garbage. Walk on it. Wear it. Makes no difference. The honor we show our flag comes from within the hearts of the individuals honoring it...not because it's sewn with a needle and thread. Actually, a pretty silly thing to waste much time thinking about. Don't want to honor it? Who cares?

The American flag is honored in my home. I don't care if my neighbor picks up dog **** with his. It reflects on him, not the flag he's usin'.

Click to expand...

Exactly. People who burn flag are childish idiots, but nothing more and certainly nothing criminal or treasonous.

So long as you do it to your own property and you do it safely, it's none of anyone else's business what you do with a flag you own.

jamesrage said:

If you consider the literal definition of speech, then no its not free speech. Because speech is the expressing thoughts, feelings, or perceptions by the articulation of words. Burning anything is not the articulation of words. Burning stuff is no more speech than someone defecating on the sidewalk,someone walking around nude,someone urinating on the ground.
Speech | Define Speech at Dictionary.com

Click to expand...

A very liberal and a very conservative man agreeing 100% on something....!
Now that is something, and its not the only subject on which we agree.
Our flag must be protected, must never be desecrated.
Free speech, my foot !

All of our flags are made in China and are therefore disposable.

If you outlaw burning the flag, many more will be burned in protest than would have been if it had been kept legal. Protesters want to be arrested to make their point.

SheWolf said:

The supreme court says flag burning is protected speech under the first amendment.

Do you agree?

Texas v. Johnson - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Not only free speech, but property rights as well.

As opposed to flag burning as I am, I think it should be protected as 'free speech'.

Its constitutionally protected. however it cant be without consequence. if someone walks up and knocks a person on their ass (or douses the flag burner with gasoline) while they are burning the flag...well...dont put me on that jury. I would say the same thing about the whole Koran burning thing.

VanceMack said:

Its constitutionally protected. however it cant be without consequence. if someone walks up and knocks a person on their ass (or douses the flag burner with gasoline) while they are burning the flag...well...dont put me on that jury. I would say the same thing about the whole Koran burning thing.

Click to expand...

So you think that assault or outright murder is an appropriate response to someone exercising their Constitutionally-protected right to burn an object that they own? Seriously?

Imagine throwing somebody in jail for burning a flag... what would be the reasoning? something like: "You simply are not free to burn a symbol representing our freedoms." I mean, I'd love to meet a guy who burnt the flag in a boxing ring, sure. But am I that much of a hypocrite to think he ought to be punished by the law? never.

I'm actually surprised... I thought there would be many more right-wing protesters against flag burning.

Flag burning is not free speech, it is sedition. There is a fundamental difference between dissent and disloyalty, and I find it appalling that our courts cannot recognize this.

Viktyr Korimir said:

Flag burning is not free speech, it is sedition. There is a fundamental difference between dissent and disloyalty, and I find it appalling that our courts cannot recognize this.

Click to expand...

Sorry (not really), but you don't get to pick and choose the ways in which free speech is upheld. The First Amendment is pretty clear on that. If people want to show disloyalty, they can be my guest. They still have to pay taxes and support the country even if they hate it. Maybe they should just leave the U.S. if they don't like it. On the other hand, maybe if you don't like their rights to free speech, you should move to a country that supports charging crimes for sedition? I think Iran and China are pretty good choices for that one.

That's the thing about freedom. People aren't always going to do what you want them to do, or do things that you like. Those are the consequences of freedom.

I can't imagine a simpler way of harming one's own cause than burning the American flag in public.

Chappy said:

I can't imagine a simpler way of harming one's own cause than burning the American flag in public.

Click to expand...

There is one way to hurt one's own cause more than burning the American flag... and that would be the people making it burning the flag illegal. I'm not supporting flag burning obviously. But I think illegalizing it would be just as hypocritical as burning it.

Flag burning is an expression and expression is a form of speech - so I had to vote other for that nitpicky detail.

Cephus said:

So you think that assault or outright murder is an appropriate response to someone exercising their Constitutionally-protected right to burn an object that they own? Seriously?

Click to expand...

Would I say its the same thing? Nope. but then, I didnt equate the acts. What I said was I wouldnt be the person to put on a jury in the event someone committed such an act. I know a lot of people that fought under that flag, that lost everything, families, friends, body parts, and brothers for the right for some insignificant puke to 'express' themselves in such a manner. Should those people be inspired to respond to that expression of 'freedom of speech'...well...I'd understand. Sound too harsh? Oh well.

Flag burning isn't really free speech but what are you going to do? I mean it is the symbol of our great land and I think it's shameful when it is burned in protest.