American Flag And The Lottery

Benjamin Franklin once said, “ It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority”. “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson, features a superstitious town subjected to a brutal and needless yearly tradition. A lottery is held to choose a single townsperson, who then is surrounded by every man, woman and child and stoned to death publicly. They believe that this gruesome act will somehow ensure prosperity for the town and an abundant harvest. This story illustrates how hesitant people can be to reject outdated ideas and a cautionary tale of the dangers of cultural conformity. ”

"We, as human beings, must be willing to accept people who are different from ourselves." Life without diversity of color, race, religion, beliefs, etc., would be boring. Therefore as diversity expands, learning to reconcile with one another will only enlargened and strenthen today's society Intolerance and tolerance were shown throughout the stories, "The Lottery", "What, Of This Goldfish, Would you wish?", and "American Flag Stands for Tolerance". Each author expressed the many views of discrimination, acceptance, as well as they elaborated upon the common view of.

It’s almost the end of 2016 and we still experience discriminative trouble. We are all different but should accept others differences. After reading “What, of This Goldfish, Would You Wish?”, by Etgar Keret, “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion”, by William J. Brennan, and “American Flag Stands for Tolerance”, by Ronald J. Alle, I have found fluent differences in the people explored and the way the people accepted others. In “Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion” the people of Texas are having a hard time accepting the fact that Johnson had burned a flag. In “American Flag Stands for Tolerance” the writer states that burning the flag wasn’t illegal and should accept those who express what they believe, even if you don’t agree with them. In the story “What, of This

Unit 1 ties into the theme of tolerance and the acceptance of others, as Barbara Jordan said it, “We, as human beings, must be willing to accept people who are different from ourselves”. Whether it was the short story What of This Goldfish, Would You Wish? Or the newspaper editorial The American Flag Stands For Tolerance, the pieces dive into and explore the issues of acceptance among others.

It’s a small world and we all have our own characteristics and personalities. Barbara Jordan’s quote, “We as human beings, must be willing to accept people who are different from ourselves.” This quote is saying that we have to accept people for who they are no matter how different they might be from us. There are three literary pieces that help us illustrate Barbara Jordan’s quote. “What of This Goldfish Would You Wish?”, “Universal Declaration of Independence”, and “Texas V. Johnson,” These literary pieces show us how to accept people for who they are by communication, understanding rights, and tolerating each other.

The articles, Texas v. Johnson, and The American Flag Stands for Tolerance differ in tone as the context of the articles, and the authors’ purpose for writing each establishes the tone of each.

Johnson was decided on June 21st of 1989 by the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court ruled that Gregory Lee Johnson's liberties and rights were violated, and that the burning of the U.S. flag was a constitutionally protected form of speech under the First Amendment. The court decided that flag burning was symbolic speech, and protected under the First Amendment. The opinion of the Court came down as a controversial 5–4 decision, with the majority opinion delivered by William J. Brennan, Jr. and Justices Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy. Texas v. Johnson, was an important decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that revoked prohibitions on desecrating the American flag, enforced in 48 of the 50 states. Johnson’s actions, who were supported by the majority argued, that flag burning was explicitly symbolic speech, political in nature and could be expressed even if those disagreed with him, stated William Brennan. The majority also noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage is not justification for suppressing Johnson’s actions, or symbolic speech. The dissenting opinion, which was written by Justice Stevens, and included Justices Rehnquist, White, Stevens, and O’ Connor, was that the flag's unique status as a symbol of national unity outweighed "symbolic speech" concerns, and thus, the government could lawfully prohibit flag

The court said the government cannot "carve out a symbol of unity and prescribe a set of approved messages to be associated with that symbol . . .” The court also said that the flag burning did not cause or threaten to cause a breach of the peace. After this happened, Texas asked the Supreme Court to look at their situation and Johnson’s case.

This week’s case study, Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989), Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag in front of Dallas City Hall as a means of protest against the policies of the Reagan administration. He was arrested by Dallas police officers and he was charged with violating section 42.09(a)(3) of the Texas Penal Code, which prohibited the “desecration of a venerable object.” In this case, it was the contention of the arresting officers that burning the American flag was an act of desecration which was punishable by law. Section 42.09(a)(3) of the Texas Penal Code was enacted by the Texas State Legislature, at the time when this matter was brought to trial, the parties involved were the State of Texas and Mr. Gregory Lee Johnson. The case was heard by three lower courts before it reached the United States Supreme Court. List those three courts in order, beginning with the court that has the most authority and ending with the court that has the least

This brought on the Supreme Court striking down all laws banning flag desecration in 1989. Justice Brennan wrote “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable (civilliberty website, n.d) One cannot simply ban or outlaw a person’s right to exercise their ideas publically because it goes against the majority or popular belief. Taking away ones freedom of speech, you then take away the voice of a nation. You don’t have to always agree with the words, ideas or views someone expresses but you must give them the right to say it without repercussions. We recite the pledge of allegiance, not fully understanding what it means. The last section of the pledge states “with liberty and justice for all”. (UsFlag.org, n.d) Which means, the freedom to live, speak and to carry on without fear or injustice. No matter the race, gender or ethnicity George Washington said it best, “if the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”(Washington, n.d line 31 ) This nation was built upon principles that we are all free. Free to live and exercise our rights to speak freely and protest as citizens without fear. The Constitution also allows one to peacefully

On August 22, 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson was participating in a demonstration in Dallas, protesting the Rhegan administration and the Republican National Convention. Johnson was accused of burning the American flag, which offended onlookers as well as other patriots in the street(Goldstein 32). Johnson, who was convicted of violating a Texas law by burning a US Flag (because it is considered "desecration of a venerated object"), was later acquitted on all charges by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. They stated that because the ruling "was not consistent with the First Amendment that the State could not criminally sanction flag desecration in order to preserve the flag as a symbol of national unity" (B 1). However, on June 21, 1981 the Supreme Court and Justice Brennan defended Johnson and his actions by stating, "[a]fter publicly burning an American flag as a means of political protest, Gregory Lee Johnson was convicted of desecrating a flag

When the U.S. declared it is independence from the British the American flag became a symbol of freedom. Today's flag has fifty stars representing each state and thirteen stripes representing the 13 colonies, and it is an example of Americans’ values, hope and liberty. On August 22, 1984, Gregory Lee Johnson, a political activist, and other activist went on a march in Dallas Texas during the Republican National Convention. They went to protest the policies of the Reagan administration. When they arrived the Dallas City Hall Johnson doused an American flag with kerosene, and he set it on fire while the other people shouted, “American, the red, white, and blue, we spit on you was reported by Texas v. Johnson article.” There are several significant aspects in the case of Johnson v Texas including the Johnson’s conviction in the Dallas Country Criminal Court, Johnson’s appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Texas has not asserted an interest in support of Johnson 's conviction that is unrelated to the suppression of expression and would therefore permit application of the test set forth in the United State v. O 'Brien, 391 U.S. 367, where an important governmental interest in regulating nonspeech can justify incidental limitations on First Amendment Freedoms when speech and nonspeech elements are combined in the same course of conduct. "Expression may not be prohibited [p. 398] on the basis that an audience that takes serious offense to the expression may disturb the peace, since the Government cannot assume that every expression of a provocative idea will incite a riot, but must look to the actual circumstances surrounding the expression." Texas ' interest in preserving the flag as a symbol of nationhood and national unity is related to expression in this case, and thus falls outside the O 'Brien test. (Texas v. Johnson).

On August 22nd, 1984 Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested on the grounds of desecrating the American flag in downtown Dallas, Texas. His trial was held roughly three months later, where Johnson was then convicted of the crime, sentenced to one year in prison, and forced to pay a fine (Goldstein 37). After a series of appeal attempts, the decision of Johnson’s case was finally reviewed by the Texas Court of Appeals in 1988 and was then overturned. The court of appeals said that Johnson’s actions were protected by his 1st amendment right to freedom of speech. Texas then took that ruling to the Supreme Court where they ruled again in Johnson’s favor saying that Texas’ law against flag desecration was unconstitutional and violated first amendment rights.

This is shown the the three stories“American Flag Stands for Tolerance,”,“The Lottery” and, “The Wife’s Story,”. Groups interact poorly with each other, because the differences in what one group might think is right and the other thinks is wrong. In the story “American Flag Stands for Tolerance” it states, “In a controversial decision, the Supreme Court...held that a person has a right to express disagreement with governmental policies by burning the American flag”(Allen 18).