Based on What of This Goldfish Would You Wish?, Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion, and my own experiences, our reactions to situations define our relationships with others. In the the short story What, of This Goldfish, Would You Wish? by Etgar Keret, Yoni a young man with a thirst or making it big by creating a documentary knocking on doors, and asking people if they had three wishes from a magic goldfish what would they ask for. Along Yoni’s journey he comes across a man named Sergei in which he has altercations with that end in Yoni being killed by Sergei. “Before the mind of Sergei Goralick really understnads what it is that his body has done, he seems to have taken the burner off the stove and hit the boy in the head” (Line 104 Pg 6).
…show more content…
Johnson Majority Opinion, it covers the story of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. Angry protesters flooded the streets in order to protest President Ronald Reagan. Among them was Gregory Lee Johnson who was burning an American flag. The controversy happened in the courtroom as the U.S. Supreme Court has to make a decision and react on the situation of Johnson setting the American flag on fire. “To say that the government has an interest in encouraging proper treatment of the flag, however, is not to say that it may criminally punish a person for burning a flag as a means of political protest” (15). This shows that the relationship between Johnson and the U.S. Supreme Court can be defined as contentious due to the fact that Johnson burned an American flag at the Republican National Convention in …show more content…
Supreme Court. Here we see the U.S. Supreme Court’s relationship with Johnson when it says “[a]t the core of what the flag symbolizes, then, is tolerance. [m]ore than anything else, the flag stands for free expression of ideas, no matter how disgraceful” (20). This reaction by the U.S. Supreme Court can help us define what type of person Johnson is. Based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s reaction to the situation of Johnson burning the flag, we can conclude that the U.S. Supreme Court can also be defined as unbiased because the definition is "not biased or prejudiced; fair; impartial” The reason that the word unbiased defines this relationship perfectly is because the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling held true to the law even though they did not agree with it given the situation of Johnson burning the flag. The U.S. Supreme Court’s reaction was fair and impartial to the controversial situation of Johnson burning the flag and because of this the relationship can also be defined as unbiased. Again this continues to demonstrate that our reactions to situations define our relationships with
Johnson Majority Opinion, it covers the story of the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas. Angry protesters flooded the streets in order to protest President Ronald Reagan. Among them was Gregory Lee Johnson who was burning an American flag. The controversy happened in the courtroom as the U.S. Supreme Court has to make a decision and react on the situation of Johnson setting the American flag on fire. “To say that the government has an interest in encouraging proper treatment of the flag, however, is not to say that it may criminally punish a person for burning a flag as a means of political protest” (15). This shows that the relationship between Johnson and the U.S. Supreme Court can be defined as contentious due to the fact that Johnson burned an American flag at the Republican National Convention in …show more content…
Supreme Court. Here we see the U.S. Supreme Court’s relationship with Johnson when it says “[a]t the core of what the flag symbolizes, then, is tolerance. [m]ore than anything else, the flag stands for free expression of ideas, no matter how disgraceful” (20). This reaction by the U.S. Supreme Court can help us define what type of person Johnson is. Based on the U.S. Supreme Court’s reaction to the situation of Johnson burning the flag, we can conclude that the U.S. Supreme Court can also be defined as unbiased because the definition is "not biased or prejudiced; fair; impartial” The reason that the word unbiased defines this relationship perfectly is because the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling held true to the law even though they did not agree with it given the situation of Johnson burning the flag. The U.S. Supreme Court’s reaction was fair and impartial to the controversial situation of Johnson burning the flag and because of this the relationship can also be defined as unbiased. Again this continues to demonstrate that our reactions to situations define our relationships with