American Flag Stand For Tolerance Summary

Government, the foundation of any civilization, defines both the life of its citizens as well as a tone of the country. Cicero, a roman politician and philosopher, wrote The Republic and The Laws shortly before the fall of the roman empire, which contained proposals to help fix the crumbling empire and outline justice within a democratic government. The Preamble to the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, unlike cicero's works, were written at the genesis of the United States. They, too, however, outline the basis for a just society, founded on written law, as opposed to its natural existence. Cicero’s The Republic and The Laws outlines many aspects of modern government, many of which the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution meet, and some of which they fall short of!

There are many differences in tone between Texas v. Johnson, and The American Flag Stands for Tolerance.

The first event had a court opinion about a man who burned the American Flag and decided that it was unconstitutional to criminally punish a man who committed an act by which he is protected by the First Amendment. (Page 19 lines 34-38) “A concomitant of the commitment to freedom of conscience in a sense its mirror image, is that no one has better access to truth than anyone else. Official dogma is not better (perhaps no worse) than the beliefs of private citizens.” In the following text it is spoken upon official dogma that can be no worse than what citizens believe in their own minds. The people have the freedom to follow their righteousness or their wrongness, each and every person has the open truth and no one knows more of the truth than another. The author has a very implicit opinion on the matter; he believes that everyone has the same rights as each other under the constitution no matter their

The Constitution—the foundation of the American government—has been quintessential for the lives of the American people for over 200 years. Without this document America today would not have basic human rights, such as those stated in the Bill of Rights, which includes freedom of speech and religion. To some, the Constitution was an embodiment of the American Revolution, yet others believe that it was a betrayal of the Revolution. I personally believe that the Constitution did betray the Revolution because it did not live up to the ideals of the Revolution, and the views of the Anti-Federalists most closely embodied the “Spirit of ‘76.”

In this essay “No one died in Tiananmen Square” by William Lutz, it is evident that the events displayed confirm the warnings that Orwell shared in Nineteen Eighty – Four. This essay resembled the novel by George Orwell in many different ways, both exploit the government to manipulate the mind of an individual over the actual reality and both governments overuse and abuse there powers. In “No one died in Tiananmen Square” the government uses violence to stop the peaceful protesters. This is similar to 1984 because the totalitarian government in Oceania uses violence if they do not obey the rules of Big Brother. A quote from 1984, from part 2 of chapter 10 displaying violence for commenting thought crime is “One of the men had smashed his fist into Julia’s solar

During the rule of Qin Shi Huangdi during the Qin dynasty, China’s government was based upon the philosophies of legalism. Legalists believed that all people were created amoral, and morality could only come from harsh punishments in society. As punishments, hundreds of thousands of peasants were forced into slave labor. Due to the extreme conditions, many slave laborers died from malnutrition and exhaustion. Today, China is still one of the most frequent instigators of human rights violations, which can be described as the deprivation of the most basic rights that all people are entitled to on birth. Those who are deemed “enemies of the state” can have their families tortured by the government without recourse, and activists can often be attacked

No matter how hard one tries, a person cannot debate a proven fact. Often times, the use of facts in literature can create a strong, compelling argument. In “Rough Justice: A Caning in Singapore Stirs Up a Fierce Debate about Crime and Punishment” by Alejandro Reyes, the author uses statistics, logic, and facts to build his argument supporting Singapore’s justice system that focuses on “a sense of personal responsibility” (Reyes 182). Unlike “Rough Justice,” the editorial, “Time to Assert American Values,” lacks logic but still attempts to convince readers of going against Singapore’s caning policy. After carefully analyzing the two texts, the reader realizes that the article “Rough Justice” is the most relevant and sufficient argument because of the author’s use rhetorical appeals and

Throughout the history of mankind, power has always been exercised on people as a way to suppress civil disobedience. Most of the time, resistance was and is still being produced as a backlash to the exercise of power. Foucault stated that: “Where there is power, there is resistance.” (1998:95) People have used different kinds of resistance to meet brutality such as acquiescence, physical violence and nonviolent resistance as stated by Martin Luther King in his article named “Three Ways of Meeting Oppression“. Our analysis will be mostly based on the justifications of M. L. King in using nonviolence rather than acquiescence or violence along with the examination of some failed cases of nonviolent resistance when the opponent was

Following the account of how man should seek “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” (The Declaration of Independence) the writer lets the people know that everyone has the right to overthrow a government if the human rights are unfair and unjust. And

embraces more than the fate of these United States. It presents to the whole family of man the question of whether a constitutional republic or democracy -- a government of the people, by the same people -- can or cannot maintain its territorial integrity against its own domestic foes. It presents the question whether the discontented individuals-- too few in numbers to control the administration, according to organic law, in anycase -- can always, upon the pretenses made in this case or on any other pretenses, or arbitrarily without any pretense, break up the government and thus practically put an end to free government upon the earth. It forces us to ask: “Is there, in all republics, this inherent and fatal weakness? Make a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own

In the article “Sleuthing Patriotic Slogans” by Gary Sloan, Sloan shares his thoughts with readers about seemingly problematic patriotic messages. Readers are presented with his point of view concerning “Patriotic Slogans” (Sloan 1). The myriad of slogans are seen just about everywhere and may not necessarily be taken at face value. That is to say, depending on how they are viewed by the individual, they can be problematic. Sloan’s primary point is though thought of as words that should bring people together on common ground, intended to bring forth a sense of agreement around the subject; the patriotic expressions can sometimes be conflicting and not necessarily be a positive thing. Thus, the article questions various patriotic expressions, parsing the words for what they mean.

Freedom of speech is a painting about a gentleman wears different cloth, he is not in a suit and tie like most of the audience. He stands up in his working man clothed and looks so noble that he’s really inspired by the figure a paper handing in the picture. And the citizens listen so attentively and respectfully(“Americaiwwii”). I can see the courage up the figure in the center to stand up and speak his mind,knowing that he’s in a safe respectful environment up his community.

The book, “America Swastika: Inside the white power movement’s hidden spaces of hate” by Pete Simi and Robert Futrell, was written 2010. I chose this book because I am interested in learning about why these racist groups have so much hate towards another race or group. Personally, I do not condone racism because it does not make sense to me as to how one person can hate another one without knowing them. I wanted to learn about how people who are in groups such as, the Ku Klux Klan, live in our country which is identified as a melting pot. White power movements are talked about in our history books and are explained as if they are in the past, but they aren’t. We still deal with racism and hate in our country as stories about acts of hate crime

The author's primary focus in this article is to illustrate and create awareness for the evolution of the First Amendment. The first amendment has been defined over the years as protecting Americans basic liberties, that being the freedom of religion, speech, press, petition, and assembly. The author introduces the factors that ultimately altered the definition of the amendment. The people’s misinterpretation of the amendment was the primarily the factor developing the evolution of the First Amendment.

The author continuously relies on a series of factual events that relate to what her particular arguments are. She attempts to prove to the reader that acting because of moral authority is what brings some of the biggest changes in society today. She states, “There are as many reasons to hope as to fear a new disappointment…” (pg.899) demonstrating to the reader than a protesters’ actions will not always result in a positive outcome. The style chosen by the author suits her purpose of giving the reader a clear view on what moral authority is and how it can impact the