In the articles, “Texas vs. Johnson” and “American Flag Stands for Tolerance”, there appear to be two different point of views on how people should treat the U.S. flag. When Gregory Johnson was arrested for burning an American flag both William J. Brennan with the Supreme Court and Ronald J. Allen voiced their opinions on the case. They both agreed that a citizen’s rights from the Constitution allows Gregory Johnson to do whatever he pleases. However, his actions can’t be accepted. In “Texas vs. Johnson” William J. Brennan explains “The way to preserve the flag’s special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matters. It is to persuade them that they are wrong”(Brennan 16). The tone of his opinion is straight to the point. He doesn’t act confused on why the Court decided to allow the burning of the flag, instead he tells of how the people should know that they are wrong in supporting Johnson and the burning of the flag. In the court’s opinion, they are not convicting the act of burning the flag as something illegal because the First Amendment gives people the freedom of speech. This gives the people the freedom to say whatever they want. This helps the tone because he strongly states that a person’s rights should be taken into consideration. Conversely, in “American Flag Stands for Tolerance” the tone is very fierce and opinionated. “Let the controversy rage. After all, it is in robust debate that we are most true to ourselves” (Allen 18). By stating this he gives the comparison of a debate between people and how they show their expressions. This is similar to how Johnson expresses his thoughts by burning the American flag. Allen uses different events to share and help readers understand his opinion. Allen agrees with the court’s decision but strongly states that flag has importance and it should not be mistreated. Therefore creating the tone of the editorial opinionated.