Burning the Flag of the United States of America Should Be Legal.

=====Counterarguments===== "First, I did not equate the act of tossing a ring/breaking off a marriage with treason. " ----> Well then it was somewhat confusing since I misinterpreted what you meant, but no matter. 1. The Analogy of the Ring to Flag Burning Let's assume that burning the flag is as universal a message as is throwing one's ring off. Even if they both convey a universal message, this doesn't mean that flag burning should be illegal. To make it illegal, we have to first make sure that it is treason - which you have NOT proven. This analogy is impotent until you have proven that burning a flag is treason. 2. Meaning of burning a flag "Destroying the symbol in demonstration can only convey the message of the desire to destroy, or the want of destruction of, the entity in which that flag represents. " ----> Or it can symbolically call for a change of the entity, in this case the United States of America. 3. Genetic fallacy Your misinterpretation of the genetic fallacy is "what truly makes no sense and can be easily dismantled. " The genetic fallacy states that it is a fallacy of irrelevance where a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone's origin rather than its current meaning or context [1]. The original meaning of burning a flag does not necessarily mean it is the same today. Take the marriage ring for example - back then the meaning was MUCH different (slavery, male owning women, etc. ). When you bring up examples of historic examples of burning the flag, this doesn't mean anything for the symbolism of burning a flag today. My opponent's analogy to the ring fails, because the universal meaning for a ring means marriage. Burning the flag, nowadays, carries much more diverse meanings. People can burn flag for political, social, or maybe even religious reasons. This is usually a call for change - not universal support for waging war on America. 4. Definition of treason My opponent's attempt at equating burning a flag and treason is quite comical. He plays a large definition game, and in the end it seems as if he is correct. However, if you simply look at the result it's convoluted and erroneous. By "adhering to our Enemies", the Constitution means when one helps the enemy. When they go on "their side". If this isn't obvious enough, my opponent goes on to say that committing any act that is against the idea of "America" should be treason because it aligns with the enemy. But this is preposterous - agreeing with the enemies of America does NOT equal treason. To commit treason is to actually SUPPORT or HELP the enemy cause. To fulfill this prerequisite my opponent attempts to argue that we can "indirectly bolster the moral of our enemies" which would thus constitute helping them thus being treason. The fallacious quality of this argument is astounding. Just because people dissent from America does not mean they are aiding enemies. If this is true, then social progressives, people who want to change laws currently existing in America, and anyone who isn't a conservative for the most part can be considered an enemy. What if a host on TV said America sucks? Should he be tried for treason? Of course not. Again, my opponent's argument relies on the fact that burning a flag is universally meant to be advocating destruction of the entity it represents. Obviously, it does NOT. My opponent attempts to equate expressing oneself to violence by using the definition "vehement". How is making an expression vehement constitute a violent ACT? Me getting pissed off at someone isn't a violent action - unless I hit them in the face with my fist. 5. Interpretation of burning the flag True - people can misinterpret what people mean when they burn the flag. But then that's just their ignorance or lack of clarity for both sides then. Even if they totally misinterpret the flag burning, it means nothing for the legality of flag burning. The expression is still valid and should still be free under the freedom of expression. =====Conclusion===== Flag burning is protected under the freedom of expression and is not considered treason. This is because it is not a violent act, it does not call for others to wage war against America, and it does not explicitly state support for America's destruction because there is NO universal message for burning the flag (because there are people who legitimately burn it for political reasons, and not for anarchy of America). ---References--- 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org...