Oftentimes in our country, there are discussions of protests. What makes a protest, how to protest, what is and isn't "right" based on the morals of our country. One thing that is always questioned is any protest involving the American flag.

On Monday, September 19th, history teacher Lee Francis was giving his students a lesson on First Amendment rights. According to this amendment, every single person in our country has free speech, including "free symbolic speech," an idea which was supported in the 1989 Supreme Court case, Texas v. Johnson; Johnson burned the flag to protest the Reagan administration during the Republican National Convention of 1984. This is an idea that Francis took and used in his own lesson. To show the legality of this form of protest, and to give his students an example of free speech, he attempted to burn and cut the flag; when that failed, he put it on the floor and stepped on it. Immediately, two students got up and left the classroom. Another came up and took the flag from him. And now, Francis is suspended from teaching, due to the outrage of parents in the community.

The whole concept of what's happening in this Fayetteville, North Carolina school is somewhat baffling when you really think about it. In teaching students about freedom of speech, including the right to symbolic speech, Francis gets punished for showing them an example of something that is considered to be an expression of free speech. That concept is so twisted and backwards that thinking about it enough gives you a headache. Francis was not showing his students anything that wasn't protected by his first amendment rights. Everything he was doing was legal and justifiable under these rights. There was no reason for him to be suspended and punished for what he was doing, which was the exact point he was trying to make.

One thing that people are citing as the reason why this lesson was wrong or inappropriate was the fact that Fayetteville has close ties to Fort Bragg, and many in the town have close ties to those in the military. This argument is faulty in two ways. One: does the military not exist to protect your right to protest? The military serves as our protection, the reason that America can be "the land of the free." They go overseas to protect us at home, to give American citizens the right to free speech and free press and everything else covered by our first amendment rights. Maybe burning or cutting the flag isn't exactly what they might have had in mind, but they still fight to protect our right to do it anyway. And the second issue: Francis himself has family in the military. This was not an anti-military protest. This was not any form of protest at all. This was a teacher trying to capture the attention of students who are visual learners, trying to provide a visual of what is protected under this amendment. And it got blown way out of proportion.

At the end of the day, not everyone is going to have the same views on this issue. Some are going to disagree with me fully, and I'd love to hear what those people have to say. Others are going to be in agreement, which is also incredibly affirming. But at the end of the day, you're allowed to agree and disagree with people because our country has free speech, and burning the flag is part of that essential American ideal.