We walk through the hallways at school and streets on the block everyday, constantly discriminating against the decisions of those around us. We view traits such as, what someone chose to wear today or how organized someone is and we hold them to it, without full understanding as to why a person may have done this. Within the excerpts: "What of This Goldfish Do You Wish" written by Etgar Keret (Page 3-8), "Texas v. Johnson Majority Opinion" written by William J. Brennan (Page 15-17), and "American Flag Stands for Tolerance" written by Ronald J. Allen (Page 18-20), all the authors project the same opinion on acceptance of those around us. Each author expresses that we must show acceptance to others because nobody sees the same side to every
…show more content…
Johnson" written by William J. Brennan (Page 15-17), we distinguish a document full of rational arguments that allow us to dissect his opinion on acceptance. In this except Brennan quoted Barnette, 319 U.S. at 640 with "...Under our constitution, compulsion as here employed is a permissible means for its achievement" (Lines 10-12). His reasoning for quoting this is to let you know his opinion that, we can't force people to have a feeling of national pride even though we may want them to. The only thing we can ethically do is try and persuade them that national pride is a good characteristic, or accept them for their logical, honest feeling on a certain subject like this. In his conclusion he states "The way to preserve the flag's special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matter. It is to persuade them that they are wrong" (lines 37-39). Brennan is trying to get across the point that we shouldn't victimize or punish other based on their hostile views towards the flag. He is communicating to the reader that the correct way to deal with such issues is to convince these people of the reasons that the flag is a honorable icon and needs to be preserved instead of "burned". Now, if we were to compare William J. Brennan's opinion on acceptance to Barbara Jordan's quote, we would end up with one common view between them. Brennan and Jordan both believe that we don’t have to agree with the decision of those that surround us, but we must accept them. The action on acceptance allows a person to welcome new ideas, an array of view on certain propositions, and fluent mindset when it comes to social issues around
Johnson" written by William J. Brennan (Page 15-17), we distinguish a document full of rational arguments that allow us to dissect his opinion on acceptance. In this except Brennan quoted Barnette, 319 U.S. at 640 with "...Under our constitution, compulsion as here employed is a permissible means for its achievement" (Lines 10-12). His reasoning for quoting this is to let you know his opinion that, we can't force people to have a feeling of national pride even though we may want them to. The only thing we can ethically do is try and persuade them that national pride is a good characteristic, or accept them for their logical, honest feeling on a certain subject like this. In his conclusion he states "The way to preserve the flag's special role is not to punish those who feel differently about these matter. It is to persuade them that they are wrong" (lines 37-39). Brennan is trying to get across the point that we shouldn't victimize or punish other based on their hostile views towards the flag. He is communicating to the reader that the correct way to deal with such issues is to convince these people of the reasons that the flag is a honorable icon and needs to be preserved instead of "burned". Now, if we were to compare William J. Brennan's opinion on acceptance to Barbara Jordan's quote, we would end up with one common view between them. Brennan and Jordan both believe that we don’t have to agree with the decision of those that surround us, but we must accept them. The action on acceptance allows a person to welcome new ideas, an array of view on certain propositions, and fluent mindset when it comes to social issues around