I hope this answers your question..
The majority of the Court, according to Justice William Brennan, agreed with Johnson and held that flag burning constitutes a form of "symbolic speech" that is protected by the First Amendment. The majority noted that freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive, but society's outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech.
In particular, the majority noted that the Texas law discriminated upon viewpoint, i.e., although the law punished actions, such as flag burning, that might arouse anger in others, it specifically exempted from prosecution actions that were respectful of venerated objects, e.g., burning and burying a worn-out flag. The majority said that the government could not discriminate in this manner based solely upon viewpoint.
Answer:
I think it is D not sure tho
Explanation:
<span>By making it easier for the audience to follow what is happening in the play</span>
Answer:
no but i can get you started
Explanation:
technology isnt killing creativity, in fact, it helps us push the boundries of whats possible, 3d printing, virtual reality painting, animation, technology helps us push our creativity to the limits
Answer:
A CLAUSE WHICH DEPENDS ON OTHER CLAUSES.
Explanation:
HE WENT TO PARK<u> </u><u><em>BECAUSE HE WAS BORED.</em></u>
THE UNDERLINED WORDS ARE DEPENDENT CLAUSE.