Argumentative Essay: Refutation of “America Needs a Flag-Protection Amendment” In “America Needs a Flag-Protection Amendment” Senator Bob Dole attempts to persuade readers to adopt the idea that congress should instate flag protection throughout America. Dole begins by informing the audience of the flag’s adoption and ties to America’s founding fathers. The audience is then briefed of the decisions made by congress to legally allow desecration of the American flag. Upon leaning this information, Dole points out three misconceptions about the constitutional amendment and its advocates. One falsehood based upon personal beliefs is shared when refuting common beliefs held by political liberalists. In closing, Senator Dole shares a short story
…show more content…
While he uses a passionate argument, his debate lacks in several areas. For starters, Dole uses two fallacies within the first two paragraphs: hasty generalization and ad hominem. By stating “After 213 years, it is long past time to give our flag the kind of protection the Founding Fathers expected, and the kind of protection the American people are demanding” (Dole 254) Senator Dole is making two abstract conclusions. The first conclusion is that the founding fathers of America would have wanted a flag amendment instated, without any tangible proof. The second conclusion comes from general categorization that all of “the American people” (Dole 254) are demanding flag protection. Dole also uses a form of name calling by designating desecrators of the flag as “…kooks who get their kicks, burning, trampling or spitting on our flag”(Dole 254). Dole continues to point out misconceptions with very little probable data to support his claims. Once again Senator Dole makes a hasty generalization by saying “The American people know that the first amendment- an amendment which states that “Congress Shall Make No Law Abridging The Freedom of Speech”- was never intended to protect the act of flag burning” (Dole 254). There is no assurance that American people, as a whole, know this to be a fact. Senator Dole continues on to quote Mayor Ron Howard as an appeal to authority.
While he uses a passionate argument, his debate lacks in several areas. For starters, Dole uses two fallacies within the first two paragraphs: hasty generalization and ad hominem. By stating “After 213 years, it is long past time to give our flag the kind of protection the Founding Fathers expected, and the kind of protection the American people are demanding” (Dole 254) Senator Dole is making two abstract conclusions. The first conclusion is that the founding fathers of America would have wanted a flag amendment instated, without any tangible proof. The second conclusion comes from general categorization that all of “the American people” (Dole 254) are demanding flag protection. Dole also uses a form of name calling by designating desecrators of the flag as “…kooks who get their kicks, burning, trampling or spitting on our flag”(Dole 254). Dole continues to point out misconceptions with very little probable data to support his claims. Once again Senator Dole makes a hasty generalization by saying “The American people know that the first amendment- an amendment which states that “Congress Shall Make No Law Abridging The Freedom of Speech”- was never intended to protect the act of flag burning” (Dole 254). There is no assurance that American people, as a whole, know this to be a fact. Senator Dole continues on to quote Mayor Ron Howard as an appeal to authority.