I’ve always opposed flag burning and denying a ‘right’ to burn the flag does not deny free speech. Require them to be more specific, specifically what are they protesting. Burning the flag could mean anything. Spell it out.
So free speech only covers speech with a clear message? Either it’s legal or not, we don’t need the government deciding which flag burnings are legal and which aren’t based on how “clear” the message is. IMHO flag burning and Islam should be like wearing a Nazi uniform; it’s legal, but nobody will want to have anything to do with you.
If the burning of the US Flag in a public place is a right protected by the courts, then one should be able to burn a Mexican Flag, Cuban Flag, Rainbow Flag or any other flag at the same public place. Or am I just mixed up about this “right”?
They are being specific.
They’re protesting “this system.”
Not “that” system.
“This” one.
The flag burners-—revcom.org-—aka the Revolutionary Communist Party-—have been burning the American flag and bawling thru a bullhorn about “this system” for over 40 years.
That’s their schtick, and they’re sticking to it.
It was one of the RCP’s leaders, Greg Johnson, who won the SCOTUS case-—see Texas v Johnson— that gave them the “right” to burn the flag.
Mr. Johnson and some of his comrades were high profile at the Rodney King riots, and more recently at Ferguson, Baltimore, NYC, Baton Rouge, etc.
The RCP idolizeS Mao and wantS to overthrow the US Constitution and replace it with a Maoist dictatorship. But of course Mr. Johnson declared his Constitutional First Amendment rights were violated when he was arrested for burning the US flag. Thus the SCOTUS case, which ended with the Court declaring flag burning to be protected speech.
Incidentally, Scalia voted with the majority.