This question is about the article "American flag stands for tolerance"
Answer and Explanation:
Allen shows that he believes that an individual can present better ways to show his discontent with the government instead of disrespecting the national flag by burning it, with that, we can see that he does not agree with the Supreme Court's decision to allow the burning of flags is a fair protest against the government, but quickly Allen claims that the Supreme Court is correct in allowing this, since even presenting a form of disrespect, the burning of flags is part of a peaceful protest, in addition to allowing freedom of expression in the country.
This shows that Allen's arguments are based on the country's ethical and legal standards and not on his own opinions, or on the sentimetalism he may feel for national symbols. He addresses the counterargument as a justification as to why he should not evaluate the Supreme Court's permission, but rather support it. This can be seen through the paragraph:
<em>"The American flag is a cherished symbol of our national aspirations [...] iven the widespread and deeply felt reverence for this symbol of what we perceive to be the best of our civilization, what is the harm in insisting upon a modicum of respect for it? [...] Any messages that burning the flag might convey easily can be communicated in other ways. </em>
<em>The Supreme Court was not wrong. Indeed, a decision contrary to the one reached would have been a definitive step away from our national aspirations. A commitment to the intertwined freedoms of conscience and expression is at the core of those aspirations. What most distinguishes our civilization from both its predecessors and its contemporary competitors is a belief in the sanctity of the human conscience. Each individual is to have the freedom to develop by his or her own lights, and not by the command of officialdom. That requires not just the right to be let alone, but also the right to communicate with, to learn from and test views in conversations."</em>
The correct answer is:
The skull of Yorik simbolizes Hamlet's obsession with death and decay in act 5.
In the Act 5 Hamlet visits the grave yard and foinds the skull of a man who worked for his father and who he knew as a child, it brings good memories of Hamlet`s childhood when all was well.
Hamlet remembers the dead in the graveyard. "Alas, poor Yorick," exclaimsHamlet, as he recalls that Yorick was "a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy," one who "hath borne [Hamlet] on his back a thousand times" (5.1.190-191; 191-192; 192-193).
He is likely to take measurements because setting up electrical wiring, installing power lines, and repairing equipment all consist in another job.
Answer:
Macbeth feels that all his deeds were done for the sake of Banquo's descendants to be kings.
Explanation:
In Act III, Scene I, of "The Tragedy of Macbeth" by William Shakespeare, Macbeth says that although he is the King because he has murdered King Duncan, he is not safe. The witches told him and Banquo that Banquo's descendants would become kings. Macbeth has called two murderers to kill Banquo and his son Fleance to prevent what the witches told would happen. He says these words because he realizes that all he has done is for Banquo's seeds to be kings.
