The famous phrase, "...give me liberty, or give me death," was articulated by the revolutionary thinker Patrick Henry and has since become a mantra for the people of the United States of America. However, many may never think about the myriad implications this phrase carries with it. In contemporary America many issues concerning censorship have arrived at the forefront of intellectual and social debate - one such issue is that of flag burning, and more specifically whether or not incarceration or fines should be imposed on those who commit the said act. Nonetheless, a contention exists that not only should fines and penalties not be imposed on flag burners but moreover, that the act should not be a culpable action; as flag burning is just another facet of civil rights demonstrations.

Flag burning is an extremely imperative issue in contemporary America; especially due to the war the country is now involved in, i.e. "The War on Terrorism." So, a question Americans should ask is whether or not demonstrations such as flag burning are acceptable - as many Americans already have. As far as a judicial standpoint is concerned, flag burning is emphatically illicit, "...all states have enacted

In the 1970's after the murders at Kent State, and the American incursion in Cambodia, a college student, named Harold Spence would come into battle with the Supreme Court over an act of alleged flag defamation. "...precisely because it is a national symbol, the government cannot limit its use only to those who agree with American policies. That appears to be the conclusion of a case in which the Supreme Court reversed the conviction of Harold Spence...who attached a peace symbol to an American flag and hung it upside down from the window of his apartment..." (Sexton, Brandt 185). In Spence's case one can easily ascertain that the act of taping a symbol to a flag is far different from razing a flag. However, the importance of the case is that it proves a valuable point; just because a symbol represents one aspect to some people, it represents others as well, and if any of the facets a symbol stands for are evil, tyrannical, misleading, et cetera then one has the right to point out these flaws. Due to the judicial systems' reliance on precedents as illustrated in the book The Living U.S. Constitution by Saul K. Padover one sees how law must bend towards the evolution of thought and sentiment, "The obligation to follow precedents begins with necessity, and a contrary necessity marks its outer limit. With [Justice] Cardozo, we recognize that no judicial system could do society's work if it eyed each issue afresh in every case that raised it" (Padover 63). Hence, flag burning laws ought bend with the collective minds of its' coevals, i.e. the American populous. If the nation is embroiled in foreign affairs, as it is currently, there will surely be those who disagree

Some common words found in the essay are:
Sexton Brandt, United States', United America, War Terrorism, Justice Cardozo, Vietnam Subsequently, Supreme Court, Saul Padover, Vietnam War, flag burning, Harold Spencewho, burning flag, demonstrations flag burning, demonstrations flag, sexton brandt, supreme court, purpose action, contemporary america, judicial system, flag burners, american flag,
Approximate Word count = 1129
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)