Since we learn that the aunt has a soft heart, I will say that 'this is an example of indirect characterization', because we learn of her characteristics in an indirect way, that is, we are not directly told that she has a soft heart, we can infer that information from this passage.
<h3>Some similarities between the speakers delivery and active listening are:</h3>
- Both the speakers delivery and active listening play a part in what is understood in the sentence that is being delivered through speech.
- Both speakers delivery and active listening are learning or have learned because of the speaker, (The speaker had to do research and stuff).
Good luck! Hope this helped! :D
<span>In the excerpt from "Dialogue Between Franklin and the Gout," </span>Madame Gout reasons with Franklin about the benefits of exercise by <span>C. making observations to compare the advantages of walking versus taking a carriage.</span> She details how walking works in helping accelerate one's blood flow and how it eventually does good to one's health.
Answer:
On the first day of school, Victor stood in line half an hour before he came to a
wobbly card table. He was handed a packet of papers and a computer card on which he listed his
one elective1
, French. He already spoke Spanish and English, but he thought some day he might
travel to France, where it was cool; not like Fresno, where summer days reached 110 degrees in
the shade. There were rivers in France, and huge churches, and fair-skinned people everywhere,
the way there were brown people all around Victor
Explanation:
Whatever we make of the substance of Judge Andrew Rutherford's ruling in the Cornish private hotel case, his citation of a striking and controversial opinion by Lord Justice Laws – delivered in another religious freedom case in 2010 – is worth pausing over. The owners of the Chymorvah hotel were found to have discriminated against a gay couple by refusing them a double-bedded room. They had appealed to their right to manifest their religious belief by running their hotel according to Christian moral standards. Given the drift of recent legal judgments in cases where equality rights are thought to clash with religious freedom rights, it is no surprise that the gay couple won their case.
But quite apart from the merits of the case, judges should be warned off any future reliance on the ill-considered opinions about law and religion ventured last year by Lord Justice Laws. Laws rightly asserted that no law can justify itself purely on the basis of the authority of any religion or belief system: "The precepts of any one religion – any belief system – cannot, by force of their religious origins, sound any louder in the general law than the precepts of any other."
A sound basis for this view is Locke's terse principle, in his Letter on Toleration, that "neither the right nor the art of ruling does necessarily carry with it the certain knowledge of other things; and least of all the true religion".
But Laws seemed to ground the principle instead on two problematic and potentially discriminatory claims. One is that the state can only justify a law on the grounds that it can be seen rationally and objectively to advance the general good (I paraphrase). The question is, seen by whom? What counts as rational, objective and publicly beneficial is not at all self-evident but deeply contested, determined in the cut and thrust of democratic debate and certainly not by the subjective views of individual judges. Religiously inspired political views – such as those driving the US civil rights movement of the 1960s or the Burmese Buddhists today – have as much right to enter that contest as any others. In this sense law can quite legitimately be influenced by religion.
Laws' other claim is that religious belief is, for all except the holder, "incommunicable by any kind of proof or evidence", and that the truth of it "lies only in the heart of the believer". But many non-Christians, for example, recognise that at least some of the claims of Christianity – historical ones, no doubt, or claims about universal moral values – are capable of successful communication to and critical assessment by others. Laws' assertion is also inconsistent with his own Anglican tradition, in which authority has never been seen as based on the subjective opinions of the individual but rather on the claims of "scripture, tradition and reason" acting in concert.
