Fall 2010 Critical Thinking Student Sample Work

Madison Bush

Reconstruction 1 In the Washington Times editorial “Save the Koran, burn the Constitution” the author argues that the stance and reasoning of Supreme Court Justice Breyer on the burning of the Koran not being protected by First Amendment rights are weak and ineffective. The editorial starts the argument with the debunking of Breyer’s analogy. Breyer says the threatening of the First Amendment can be likened to shouting “fire!” in a crowded movie theater. The editorial says that “fire” doesn’t incite anger among a select few, but only a need for safety felt by all. It then says that this analogy cannot be applied to this situation because the burning of the Koran does not present any “clear and present danger” that threatens everyone. The violence is “calculated and directed,” and not just chaotic. Breyer is making a poor argument by likening the two. The editorial then moves on to argue Breyer’s lack of faith in the First Amendment. He is considering changing the First Amendment based on the rash action of a small group of radicals; if it is offensive to a small violent non-American group, then it should be banned. The editorial argues that based on this stance, the best response of opponents of any action – whether religious or not – is to react violently to bring about change. The editorial closes by insinuating that Justice Breyer is not thinking carefully on the matter at hand.