|
Now I don't really have any strong feelings on this the way I do on some other forms of limitation of free speech, but I guess I just don't really GET it. Burning the flag is a non-violent form of protest. By banning flag-burning, you're not changing the protester's opinions about our country in any way (or at least not any way for the positive). It doesn't accomplish anything -- except to maybe make the protester more angry, only now his way of burning off steam will take a different turn, perhaps one that is now uglier or more violent.
And I agree with valkyrie -- anybody with a little creativity can think of at least ten ways to decimate a flag that don't involve flames at all. Why is burning so much worse than any of the rest of them that we all need a law to protect ourselves from it?
|