People’s ability to speak out is protected by the constitution, as a way to give anyone the ability to voice their thoughts, opinions or criticism. Individuals are capable of finding a platform for themselves, or gathering similarly-minded people and advocating for change. Similarly, citizens can choose other methods of making their concerns heard, many of which can also constitute forms of speech. In particular, symbolic speech is one such form of conduct, using actions in order to demonstrate a social or political point. The position of symbolic speech within legislation is harshly debated, as the particular degree of meaning imbued into it can vary. In this discussion, flag burning remains among the most controversial types of symbolic action. Flags are generally considered to be a representation of a nation’s values, its pride and accomplishments. Therefore, the act of burning a flag is often seen as worthy of reprimand or punishable by law. Personally, I think flag burning should be protected by law. In many cases, the act of burning a flag can be seen as a call for radical change, a condemnation of the core principles of a nation. Much more than words or speeches, this action gives people the power and audience necessary to deliver a message. As a form of symbolic speech, I think that flag burning, must be fully acceptable. If other symbolic acts are allowed, such as flipping off police officers, then this act should be permitted too (Harr et al., 2016). In case of systematic injustice or inequality, it is important for individuals to question the very foundations of their countries, and critically viewing the implications of common national symbols.
References
Harr, J. S., Hess, K. M., Orthmann, C. H., & Kingsbury, J. (2017). Constitutional law and the criminal justice system. Cengage Learning.