In the case,Texas v.Johnson,the texas court tried and convicted Mr.Johnson for violating the statute that prohibited the desecration of venerated objects e.g the American flag that could arouse anger in other individuals.Johnson appealed with the argument that the actions were a "symbolic speech" protected by the First Amendment.
Texas laws punishes actions such as flag burning that might arouse anger in other but it this case the outrage alone couldnot justify for supressing Johnson's freedom of speech.In this perspective,the Texas law discriminated upon view point in that though it punishes such actions,it still specifically exempt prosecution of actions with similar defination such as burning or burying of worn-out flag.
Therefore, flag burning in Texas v.Johnson constituted a symbolic speech and is protected by the Firts Amendment.
<span>He had two main arguments. the first was that the United States should be independent from England. He showed the advisability of separation and the problems that were inherent in a monarchy. His second argument was for the creation of a democratic republic. </span>
Better technology allows easier access to water supplies.
I had the same question
well it is declared that everyone has the rights to be enjoyed by all people, no matter who they are or where they live