The United States of America should not prohibit burning the American Flag
Debate Rounds (4)
The United States of America should not ban burning the American Flag in their country
I as Pro will argue for not banning the burning of the American Flag
Con, will argue it needs to be banned.
BOP is shared
United States of America
To prohibit (an action) or forbid the use of (something), especially by official decree
Setting on fire
Official Flag of the United States of America
Thank you for accepting Con.
I would just like to mention I do not support burning our flag. Its disrespectful and there are many more ways of protesting. But I still think we should have the freedom to do it. After all, that's what America was built on.
Why Flag Burning should not be banned
C1: Its unconstitutional
Flag burning is protected by the 1st Ammendment in the constitution. The 1st ammendment states that " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech" Since flag burning can be used as a form of free speech, it would be unconstitutional to ban it.
C2: It can be used as a form of protest
Flag burning can be a way of protesting against the government for some policies it has set. For example, many protesters were burning flags to protest U.S involvement in Vietnam. Whether or not it actually made a difference, it could have, and protesters should have the right to do it.
C3: Your morals cannot dictate what others should believe in
I understand why people are against it, and I agree. Its disrespectful, and is unnessary. But what your morals are cannot dictate what others want to do. If people want to burn the flag, they can, but they will be condemned by many. Banning this would only go against what our founding fathers believed in, Freedom and Liberty.
Over to you Con.
Contention 2 Rebuttal- Refer to contention 1 rebuttal.
Contention 3- Disturbing funerals is against the law, because it is against people's morals, and because death is a tragedy, and not a joke.This is especially true for the deaths of American soldiers, who, not to sound like a redneck but it is true, fought for our freedom.
Con, you technically already conceded a huge point. Flag Burning is covered in the constitution. In Texas v. Johnson, the judges already ruled that flag burning constitutes "symbolic speech". It doesn't specify specific circumstances where it is illegal, therefore we must assume it is for all cases.(2)
You commit a huge fallacy. Simply saying Nudity is allowed in certain circumstances isn't a good argument. Nudity is illegal due to public indecency laws. There are no such law for flag burning, therefore it is incorrect to make such comparison. You make another comparisons to disturbing funerals. Before I fully refute this, I would like to you give me a source which states that.
C2: Again, flag burning should have the same laws apply to it as public nudity does. (ex. flag burning would be illegal except in the form of a protest.
This probably the shortest rebutall I have ever written on this site.
C1: Your arguments are based on appeal to emotion. If you are going to say it should be illegal besides protest, you should explain why. Just because Nudity is banned, doesn't mean its a good reason to ban Flag Burning. I have already established that is uncontitutional, which means it goes against the 1st ammendment. You haven't really explained why Flag Burning should be given an exception in certain cases.
My arguments still stand.
I don't think Pro supports necrophilia, so his arguments, as a matter of fact, do NOT stand.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Varrack 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued that banning flag burning is a violation of free speech and that the right to do so is granted in the Constitution. Con replies by saying that flag burning should be illegal in some cases, but never provides a single argument as to why. Con statss that nudity is illegal, But never provides a link between nudity and flag burning in terms of policy. Pro points out the right to free speech as given in the law of the land, and Con dismisses it without a rebuttal. Con concludes his argument with the line: "You don't have to explain why it should be illegal". This is a refusal to argue, which Con clearly did, and thus loses the arguments point.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.