Flag Desecration should always be legal

Thank you for your very thoughtful response! 1) Burden of proof: Sure... But you have yet to negate my resolution. 2) Definitions: I agree with all of them, we may proceed. 3) Notes: 1. I agree. 2. I agree. 3. Yes, I worded it that way on purpose. We may proceed. 4) Quote: I'm sorry if my "rant" was confusing. I feel that it does not intertwine both sides of the debate, but if you feel differently, that's fine. However, I must point out that that section was entirely unnecessary, as we are not arguing whether my opening statement was clear, but whether Flag burning should be legal in all circumstances. Please try to stay on topic. 5) First amendment: Unfortunately, some people feel that they can contradict the first amendment. However, as it is written, the first amendment is an absolute right. And, much like its neighbor below (The second amendment), it is widely misunderstood. What this section is essentially debating is whether it is permissible by the first amendment to desecrate a flag, and I attest that it is not. Your example about yelling "Fire" in a theater has to do with the law, but with the (albeit practically universal) theater policy. Hate speech is also not illegal. It is protected by the first amendment and has been reinforced by Gitlow v. New York, Yates v. United States, and Brandenburg v. Ohio. Since your entire argument there was a factual error, it seems that clearly, MY opponent's point does not hold water. 6) Morals: We live in the United States of America, where moral obligation does not influence our laws. Laws are for keeping people safe, not keeping people nice (Remember that point, I will come back to it later). I thought I made that clear in my opening statement, but apparently I did not. So there you go. I need to provide no such evidence. 7) Instances: 1. Is that the burning of the flag that is illegal, or is it the burning of the White House. Should the punishment be any different if they were burning wood? Absolutely not! 2. Sparks from a burning flag would never be that hot, but the point is still the same. Would it be any less illegal if he were burning wood? No. Once you find one legitimate instance where it would be legal, you win. Until then, you still have work to do. 8) My argument: As promised, I will now add in my second point, Morality v. Legality (Oppression). As i mentioned in section 6, laws in the United states are meant to keep people safe, not to keep people nice. Flag burning is absolutely an awful thing to do, but it doesn't hurt anybody. Even if it did, as in your instances, it doesn't matter if it's a flag anymore, therefore it is not the actual burning of the flag that is illegal. Let's say you find a loophole and make flag burning illegal. Then your Vice President (let's call him Dick, and you may pretend not to notice my obvious allusion) says, "Okay, if we can ban a gesture which symbolizes hatred of the government, then there's no stretch to ban them from saying anything against the government." Well, there goes the first amendment. Then Dick tells you that the penalties aren't harsh enough to work, so the new plan is that any political dissident is sent to northern Alaska and left for dead. So you see, you may start with something as simple as a flag, yet the domino effect turns our great country into a Stalinesque nightmare. Looking forward to your response!