To begin it is important to note, that flag burning is and has been since the beginning, protected by the U.S Constitution. The Constitution is best known for its protection of freedom of speech, religion, and peaceful protest. With that in mind, would it not be contradicting the Constitution
The ability for people to look at a situation from a different perspective is vital in today’s globalized society. Diversity is the most important, core attribute we each share that gives us the ability to assess new situations through our diverse backgrounds and upbringings. Unlike Patrick J. Buchanan’s argument in his essay titled “Deconstructing America,” diversity is a necessity in America’s culture as opposed to the burden it is described as. Conversely, Fredrickson 's essay titled “Models of American Ethnic Relations: A Historical Perspective,” illustrated a more precise version of American history that disproves Buchanan’s ethnocentric ideologies. Buchanan speaks of diversity on a narrow, one-way street. His imprecise interpretations
“What, of This Goldfish, Would You Wish?” (page 7 lines 131-132) “No,” Sergei says. He’s shaking his head from side to side. “I can’t,” he says. “I’ve been saving it. Saving it for something.” Right here we don’t quite
New York case, the Supreme Court decided that New York and any other state were not justified to charge someone for speaking negatively about the flag. In addition, in a precedent case in 1969, the Supreme Court of Brandenburg v. Ohio ruled that even though Brandenburg was a member of the Klu Klux Klan, he was able to present a speech at a rally. Granted, the first amendments forbids speech it is primarily spoken to encourage or commence any type of crime. In like manner, in Texas v. Johnson, though burning the flag was impressed as disrespectful to some people, no laws or amendments were corrupted. In 1943, a precedent court case Brown v. Board of Education allowed students to not salute the flag. Many people believe that if the argument is that desecration of the flag is ruining a national symbol, not saluting the flag is of the same disrespect. Precedent court cases have all stayed on the same line of judgement to say that it is constitutional for desecration of the flag to fall under symbolic
How important is it for a person to stand up for what he or she believes in? Barbara Johns had a lot of courage to plan a protest against segregation. Courage is the bravery to do something even if it frightens one. “Imagine This Was Your School”, a article by Teri Kanefield, contains all of the courage and bravery Barbara had to earn equality in schools. Kanefield gives evidence of the disrespect Barbara and the other students faced since they were black. Similarly, Irene Lathom illustrates how daring Barbara is in her poem “Barbara Johns Reaches For The Moon” ADD SOMETHING HERE.
The documentary Blackfish, directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite released in July 2013, explores the mistreatment of killer whales and the relationship between the killer whales and trainers as well as the significant problems of the sea-park industry, with a focus upon SeaWorld. Cowperthwaite positions the audience to feel sympathy towards the killer whales by making deliberate choices in sound, visual, language, and structure through the representation of trainers as unprofessional, and whales as mistreated, also experts as reliable information source.
When most people hear the words “Fourth of July” they think about fireworks, cookouts, and sparklers. During the 1850’s, the Fourth of July served as a reminder of the many horrors and injustices in the world. On July 4, 1852, Frederick Douglass-- a former American slave, abolitionist leader and adroit speaker-- spoke in Rochester, New York about the affectation of celebrating independence. In his speech, “The Hypocrisy of American Slavery”, he claims celebrating independence is unethical when slavery is widespread. To convince the reader of his claim, he uses rhetorical questions, emotional appeal, and antithesis in hopes of shedding light and sparking action on the wrongful situation.
Imagine that you discovered a fish that would allow you to receive three wishes, with the ability to wish for anything, what would you use it for? In the two stories, What, of This Goldfish, Would You Wish by Etgar Keret and The Fisherman and His Wife by Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, the two antagonist use their wishes in a selfish and greedy way. However greedy, both stories also have different meanings behind the greediness. In both text, the three wishes are used in the same manner, but for different outcomes.
In 1776, on July 4th, the 13 English colonies officially declared their freedom from England. However, as the years progressed, slavery became incorporated into everyday American life. In 1852, former slave Frederick Douglass gave a speech to celebrate America’s independence; however, instead of praising the country, he censured Americans for saying they were a “country of the free”. In the speech, Hypocrisy of American Slavery, Frederick Douglass declares that Americans should not be celebrating their freedom when there are slaves living in the country. To convince his audience that Americans are wrong celebrating freedom on the 4th of July when slavery exists in their country, he uses emotional appeal, ethical appeal, and rhetorical questions.
In the fictional short story ‘What of This Goldfish, Would you wish’, Sergei Goralick, a Russian hermit living in Jaffa, was fishing on one of his valued late night fishing trips, when he caught a magical goldfish that granted him three wishes. He uses his first two wishes in order to help his friends, but is hesitant to use his last. Sergei knows that when he uses his third wish, he has to let his goldfish, who is now his best friend, free. One day, a boy named Yonatan comes to Sergei's home, and asks him questions about what
In William Brennan’s view on the American Constitution he focused on human dignity to determine his interpretation. As he states in his essay, “But we are an aspiring people, a people with faith in progress. Our amended Constitution is the lodestar for our aspirations. Like every text worth reading, it is not crystalline.” (Brennan). Brennan believed that all important reading such as the Constitution require the reader to go much more in depth rather than to just scratch the surface of the text. He believed in viewing the Constitution with human dignity in mind. Human dignity is in a sense what the Constitution is composed of. The Founding Fathers did not wish for anything other than the respect of human dignity in this country.
This document is from the dissent of Mr. Justice Harlan in the Plessy v. Ferguson trial decided on May 18, 1896. His audience is the assenting Justices, and any citizen of the United States that reads the decision handed down by the court. Justice Harlan wrote his Dissent to the case to establish that the assenting judges were amiss in their decision to uphold the Louisiana Separate Car Act.
Texas v. Johnson (1989) was a Supreme court case deciding whether or not flag burning is supported by “symbolic speech” protected by the first amendment. Gregory Lee Johnson is caught burning the American flag in Dallas, Texas in 1989 to protest Ronald Reagan`s policies. When Johnson had burned the flag during the protest the state of Texas arrested him for desecrating a venerated object. Although Johnson did not hurt or threaten to hurt anyone witnesses and spectators claimed to be seriously offended by seeing Johnson burn the flag. Most of the people in the courtroom were sided with Gregory Johnson supporting the fact that flag burning is considered as symbolic speech which is protected by the first amendment. The case was wrapped up
When a person is falsely accused of a crime the most important element is courage. This is shown in The Crucibles by Arthur Miller and The Majestic by Frank Darabont. John proctor who was accused a witchcraft and Peter Apple who was accused of being a communist both find the bravery they need to stand up for themselves despite the consequence they might face. Eventually even though, the two protagonists face similar situations the outcome of their trials is different.
What are the specific issues raised in the book—legally and ethically? Think about the 1980s John Moore case: the appeal court decision and its reversal by the California Supreme Court.