1880s park hotel 1940s theater united states questions

Questions

outline essay “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised” By Gwen Wilde All Americans are...

outline essay

“Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised”

By Gwen Wilde

All Americans are familiar with the Pledge of Allegiance, even if they cannot always recite it perfectly, but probably relatively few know that the original Pledge did not include the words “under God.” The original Pledge of Allegiance, published in the September 8, 1892, issue of the Youth’s Companion, ran thus:

I pledge allegiance to my flag, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. (Djupe 329)

In 1923, at the first National Flag Conference in Washington, DC, it was argued that immigrants might be confused by the words “my Flag,” and it was proposed that the words be changed to “the Flag of the United States.” The following year it was changed again, to “the Flag of the United States of America,” and this wording became the official—or, rather, unofficial—wording, unofficial because no wording had ever been nationally adopted (Djupe 329).

In 1942, the United States Congress included the Pledge in the United States Flag Code, thus for the first time officially sanctioning the Pledge. In 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved adding the words “under God.” Thus, since 1954 the Pledge reads:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one nation, under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. (Djupe 329)

In my view, the addition of the words “under God is inappropriate, and they are needlessly divisive—an odd addition indeed to a Nation that is said to be “indivisible.”

Very simply put, the Pledge in its latest form requires all Americans to say something that some Americans do not believe. I say “requires” because, although the courts have ruled that students may not be compelled to recite the Pledge, in effect peer pressure does compel all but the bravest to join in the recitation. When President Eisenhower authorized the change, he said,

In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America’s heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s most powerful resource in peace and war. (Sterner)

Exactly what did Eisenhower mean when he spoke of “the transcendence of faith in America’s heritage,” and when he spoke of “spiritual weapons”? I am not sure what “the transcendence of faith in America’s heritage” means. Of course many Americans have been and are deeply religious—no one doubts it—but the phrase certainly goes far beyond saying that many Americans have been devout. In any case, many Americans have not been devout, and many Americans have not believed in “spiritual weapons,” but they have nevertheless been patriotic Americans. Some of them have fought and died to keep America free.

In short, the words “under God” cannot be uttered in good faith by many Americans. True, something like 70 or even 80% of Americans say they are affiliated with some form of Christianity, and approximately another 3% say they are Jewish. I don’t have the figures for persons of other faiths, but in any case we can surely all agree that although a majority of Americans say they have a religious affiliation, nevertheless several million Americans do not believe in God.

If one remains silent while others are reciting the Pledge, or even if one remains silent only while others are speaking the words “under God,” one is open to the charge that one is unpatriotic, is “unwilling to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.” In the Pledge, patriotism is connected with religious belief, and it is this connection that makes it divisive and (to be blunt) un-American. Admittedly the belief is not very specific: one is not required to say that one believes in the divinity of Jesus, or in the power of Jehovah, but the fact remains, one is required to express belief in a divine power, and, if one doesn’t express this belief, one is—according to the Pledge—somehow not fully an American, maybe even un-American.

Please notice that I am not arguing that the Pledge is unconstitutional. I understand that the First Amendment to the Constitution says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” I am not arguing that the words “under God” in the Pledge add up to the “establishment of religion,” but they certainly do assert a religious doctrine. Like the words “In God we trust,” found on all American money, the words “under God” express an idea that many Americans do not hold, and there is no reason why these Americans—loyal people who may be called upon to defend the country with their lives—should be required to say that America is a nation “under God.”

It has been argued, even by members of the Supreme Court, that the words “under God” are not to be taken terribly seriously, not to be taken to say what they seem to say. For instance, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote,

To give the parent of such a child a sort of “heckler’s veto” over a patriotic ceremony willingly participated in by other students, simply because the Pledge of Allegiance contains the descriptive phrase “under God,” is an unwarranted extension of the establishment clause, an extension which would have the unfortunate effect of prohibiting a commendable patriotic observance. (qtd. in Mears)

Chief Justice Rehnquist here calls “under God” a descriptive phrase,” but descriptive of what? If a phrase is a “descriptive phrase,” it describes something, real or imagined. For many Americans, this phrase does not describe a reality. These Americans may perhaps be mistaken—if so, they may learn of their error at Judgment Day—but the fact is, millions of intelligent Americans do not believe in God.

Notice, too, that Chief Justice Rehnquist goes on to say that reciting the Pledge is “a commendable patriotic observance.” Exactly. That is my point. It is a patriotic observance, and it should not be connected with religion. When we announce that we respect the flag—that we are loyal Americans—we should not also have to announce that we hold a particular religious belief, in this case a belief in monotheism, a belief that there is a God and that God rules.

One other argument defending the words “under God” is often heard: the words “In God We Trust” appear on our money. It is claimed that these words on American money are analagous to the words “under God” in the Pledge. But the situation really is very different. When we hand over some coins, or some paper money, we are concentrating on the business transaction, and we are not making any affirmation about God or our country. But when we recite the Pledge—even if we remain silent at the point when we are supposed to say “under God”—we are very conscious that we are supposed to make this affirmation, an affirmation that many Americans cannot in good faith make, even though they certainly can unthinkingly hand over (or accept) money with the words “In God We Trust.”

Because I believe that reciting the Pledge is to be taken seriously, with a full awareness of the words that is quite different from when we hand over some money, I cannot understand the recent comment of Supreme Court Justice Souter, who in a case said that the phrase “under God” is “so tepid, so diluted, so far from compulsory prayer, that it should, in effect, be beneath the constitutional radar” (qtd. in “Guide”). I don’t follow his reasoning that the phrase should be “beneath the constitutional radar,” but in any case I am willing to put aside the issue of constitutionality. I am willing to grant that this phrase does not in any significant sense signify the “establishment of religion” (prohibitied by the First Amendment) in the United States. I insist, nevertheless, that the phrase is neither “tepid” nor “diluted. It means what it says—it must and should mean what it says, to everyone who utters it—and, since millions of loyal Americans cannot say it, it should not be included in a statement in which Americans affirm their loyalty to our great country.

In short, the Pledge, which ought to unite all of us, is divisive; it includes a phrase that many patriotic Americans cannot bring themselves to utter. Yes, they can remain silent when others recite those two words, but, again, why should they have to remain silent? The Pledge of Allegiance should be something that everyone can say, say out loud, and say with pride. We hear much talk of returning to the ideas of the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers did not create the Pledge of Allegiance, but we do know that they never mentioned God in the Constitution. Indeed the only reference to religion, in the so-called establishment clause of the First Amendment, says, again, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Those who wish to exercise religion are indeed free to do so, but the place to do so is not in a pledge that is required of all school children and of all new citizens.

In: Economics

please a discussion answer WITH 5-6 SENTENCES ( PARAGRAPH) THE IDEA ABOUT VOTING IN TEXAS Texas...

please a discussion answer WITH 5-6 SENTENCES ( PARAGRAPH)

THE IDEA ABOUT VOTING IN TEXAS

Texas (and the United States) has come a long way in its history when viewing who has access to the voting booth. When Texas joined the United States in 1845, voting was largely limited to white males who owned property. It took over a century for the ballot box to become much more democratic and inclusive thanks to many changes at the state and federal level. Over this time a number of obstacles were put in place (some overcome) limiting who could vote. For example,

1848 The end of the Mexican-American War guaranteed Mexicans in Texas (also Arizona, California, New Mexico, & Nevada) US citizenship and recognition of Mexican land deeds ensuring the right to vote. However, voting was often denied due to language requirements and the failure to protect land deeds issued in Spanish.

1856 Property requirements were abolished for voting, but due to a number of other restrictions put in place to keep minority males from voting, only white men benefited from this change.

1866 Native Americans were given US citizenship, but not the right to vote until 1957.

1919 Texas ratified the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution allowing women to vote for the first time in Texas.

See your textbook for a number of specific ways voting was limited to individuals and groups to read in depth.

By 1965 with the passage of the national Voting Rights Act, most obstacles to voting will be abolished. With this new law, the federal government now had the power to step in when local and state elections showed evidence of discrimination. Because of continued discrimination, special provisions in the new federal law were extended in 1970, 1975, 1982, 1992 and in 2006.

However in Shelby County v. Holder (2013) the Supreme Court in a controversial 5-4 vote declared 2 key provisions of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. Within hours of the decision Texas officials pledged to enforce a photo ID law to vote that had not been cleared by the Justice department. A handful of other states followed.

The push for photo ID laws for voting actually began in the late 20th century by Republican party members claiming voter fraud. Today 12 states have a form of photo id law on the books. Critics claim these laws are restrictive and prevent free access to the ballot.

In 2016, a federal court put a hold on the Texas photo ID law until future notice as the case over its use makes its way through the court system. (see link below for the current law and a statement how how it is modified due to this ruling)

In this discussion board, you will research the pros and cons of a photo id law in Texas and put forth a detailed and supported position on the issue by addressing the question below. Please note that much of this debate falls along partisan lines. Political language may interfere with your ability to think critically. Bias is not the problem, but failure to recognize it or failure to use factual evidence to support your position is.

To begin this assignment, you will want to read chapter 4 so you understand the process of voting and elections in Texas. From that point begin research the topic of photo ID for voting. You can use all sources related to Texas, other states and the nation as a whole. I've also given you a few sources below to help you get started.

Once you have written your response post (keep in mind you will not be able to read anyone's post on the board until you post yours) post your response post on the discussion board no later than THURSDAY night at 11:59PM. Once you have posted you can begin engaging in the discussion with your classmates through Saturday night when the unit closes. Reread the instructions for how to maximize your points in the syllabus.

Respond to this statement: Photo ID laws for voting serve a similar purpose as other historical roadblocks such as literacy tests and poll taxes to restrict certain groups from voting and are, therefore, unconstitutional.

Don't forget citations, links and other supporting evidence to include in your work on the board.

-https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/02/after-50-years-the-voting-rights-acts-biggest-threat-the-supreme-court/273257/

-https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/12-96

-https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/voter-fraud

-http://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/heritage-explains/voter-fraud

In: Psychology

Design your own experiment to demonstrate the probability of states using objects of your choice. Use...

Design your own experiment to demonstrate the probability of states using objects of your choice. Use Probability of States as a guide for experimental design.

In: Statistics and Probability

Create: A systems approach to the reduction of medication error on the hospital Here is an...

Create: A systems approach to the reduction of medication error on the hospital

Here is an example:

A systems approach to the reduction of medication error on the hospital ward Aims. To discuss a potentially powerful approach to safer medication administration on the hospital ward, based on principles of safety developed in other high-risk industries, and consistent with recent national reports on safety in health care released in the United Kingdom (UK) and United States of America (USA). To discuss why punitive approaches to safety on the hospital ward and in the nursing literature do not work. Background. Drug administration error on the hospital ward is an ever-present problem and its occurrence is too frequent. Administering medication is probably the highest-risk task a nurse can perform, and accidents can lead to devastating consequences for the patient and for the nurse’s career. Drug errors in nursing are often dealt with by unsystematic, punitive, and ineffective means, with little knowledge of the factors influencing error generation. Typically, individual nurses are simply blamed for their carelessness. By focusing on the individual, the complete set of contributing factors cannot be known. Instead, vain attempts will be made to change human behaviour – one of the most change-resistant aspects of any system. A punitive, person-centred approach therefore, severely hampers effective improvements in safety. By contrast, in other high-risk industries, such as aviation and nuclear power, the systems-centred approach to error reduction is routine. Conclusions. Accidents or errors are only the tip of the incident iceberg. Through effective, nonpunitive incident reporting, which includes reports of near-misses and system problems in addition to actual accidents, the systems-approach allows the complete set of contributing factors underlying an accident to be understood and addressed. Feedback to participants and targeted improvement in the workplace is also important to demonstrate that incident data are being used appropriately, and to maintain high levels of on-going reporting and enthusiasm for the scheme. Drug administration error is a serious problem, which warrants a well-reasoned approach to its improvement

In: Nursing

Mickey Mantle, Baseball Hall of Fame center fielder for the New York Yankees, received a liver...

Mickey Mantle, Baseball Hall of Fame center fielder for the New York Yankees, received a liver transplant in 1995 after a six-hour operation. It took only two days for the Baylor Medical Center’s transplant team to find an organ donor for the 63-year-old baseball hero when his own liver was failing due to cirrhosis and hepatitis. Mantle was a recovering alcoholic who also had a small cancerous growth that was not believed to be spreading or life-threatening.

There is usually a waiting period of about 130 days for a liver transplant in the United States. A spokesperson for the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) located in Richmond, Virginia, stated that there had been no favoritism in this case. She based her statement on the results of an audit conducted after the transplant took place. However, veteran transplant professionals were surprised at how quickly the transplant liver became available. Doctors estimated that due to Mantle’s medical problems, he had only a 60 percent chance for a three-year survival. Ordinarily, liver transplant patients have about a 78 percent three-year survival rate. There are only about 4,000 livers available each year, with 40,000 people waiting for a transplant of this organ. According to the director of the Southwest Organ Bank, Mantle was moved ahead of the others on the list due to a deteriorating medical condition. The surgery was uneventful, and Mantle’s liver and kidneys began functioning almost immediately. His recovery from the surgery was fast.

As in the case of the liver transplant for Mickey Mantle, should the system make allowances for “real heroes”? Why or why not?

Some ethicists argue that patients with alcohol-related end-stage liver disease (ARESLD) should not be considered for a liver transplant due to the poor results and limited long-term survival. Others argue that since alcoholism is a disease, these patients should be considered for a transplant. What is your opinion, and why

In: Nursing

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of...

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of total advertising spending in 2016. The top five spenders of mobile ads are the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany. This number is expected to increase as the worldwide adoption of smartphones continue to grow. In 2015, there were about 2.6 billion smartphone users. This number is expected to top 6.1 billion globally by 2020.

Businesses are increasingly using mobile ads. Location data from mobile devices is the key element for a successful mobile ad campaign. Facebook and Google are two biggest players that generate the highest revenue from mobile ads. PlaceIQ, a technology form headquartered in New York city collects billions of data points from mobile devices and other sources and is able tract potential customers as they move from one retail location to another retail location – such as from one car dealership to another. PlaceIQ is also able to help businesses find out if the ads can translate to an actual visit by a customer. In addition to its huge data set for business, PlaceIQ also offers location data and analytics tools to businesses and allows them to do their own advertising.

Audi is using the Place IQ data to measure how many potential customers will visit its dealerships before and after they have seen ads. They also want to target potential customers who are visiting their competitors’ showrooms. Stacom Media Group is using PlaceIQ in order to find out how mobile location data can be helpful and eventually attract more customers to a business.

Questions:

a) By 2020 how many smartphones will be existing globally?

b) Who are the two leading companies that generate the biggest revenue from mobile ads?

c) How PlaceIQ impact businesses?

d) Why is Audi using the services offered by PlaceIQ?

e) Your overall observation and learning from the above case study.

In: Computer Science

Case 2 – Mobile Ads According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts...

Case 2 – Mobile Ads

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of total advertising spending in 2016. The top five spenders of mobile ads are the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany. This number is expected to increase as the worldwide adoption of smartphones continue to grow. In 2015, there were about 2.6 billion smartphone users. This number is expected to top 6.1 billion globally by 2020.

Businesses are increasingly using mobile ads. Location data from mobile devices is the key element for a successful mobile ad campaign. Facebook and Google are two biggest players that generate the highest revenue from mobile ads. PlaceIQ, a technology form headquartered in New York city collects billions of data points from mobile devices and other sources and is able tract potential customers as they move from one retail location to another retail location – such as from one car dealership to another. PlaceIQ is also able to help businesses find out if the ads can translate to an actual visit by a customer. In addition to its huge data set for business, PlaceIQ also offers location data and analytics tools to businesses and allows them to do their own advertising.

Audi is using the Place IQ data to measure how many potential customers will visit its dealerships before and after they have seen ads. They also want to target potential customers who are visiting their competitors’ showrooms. Stacom Media Group is using PlaceIQ in order to find out how mobile location data can be helpful and eventually attract more customers to a business.

Questions:

a) By 2020 how many smartphones will be existing globally?

b) Who are the two leading companies that generate the biggest revenue from mobile ads?

c) How PlaceIQ impact businesses?

d) Why is Audi using the services offered by PlaceIQ?

e) Your overall observation and learning from the above case study.

In: Computer Science

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of...

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of total advertising spending in 2016. The top five spenders of mobile ads are the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany. This number is expected to increase as the worldwide adoption of smartphones continue to grow. In 2015, there were about 2.6 billion smartphone users. This number is expected to top 6.1 billion globally by 2020.

Businesses are increasingly using mobile ads. Location data from mobile devices is the key element for a successful mobile ad campaign. Facebook and Google are two biggest players that generate the highest revenue from mobile ads. PlaceIQ, a technology form headquartered in New York city collects billions of data points from mobile devices and other sources and is able tract potential customers as they move from one retail location to another retail location – such as from one car dealership to another. PlaceIQ is also able to help businesses find out if the ads can translate to an actual visit by a customer. In addition to its huge data set for business, PlaceIQ also offers location data and analytics tools to businesses and allows them to do their own advertising.

Audi is using the Place IQ data to measure how many potential customers will visit its dealerships before and after they have seen ads. They also want to target potential customers who are visiting their competitors’ showrooms. Stacom Media Group is using PlaceIQ in order to find out how mobile location data can be helpful and eventually attract more customers to a business.

Questions:

a) By 2020 how many smartphones will be existing globally?

b) Who are the two leading companies that generate the biggest revenue from mobile ads?

c) How PlaceIQ impact businesses?

d) Why is Audi using the services offered by PlaceIQ?

e) Your overall observation and learning from the above case study.

In: Computer Science

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of...

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of total advertising spending in 2016. The top five spenders of mobile ads are the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany. This number is expected to increase as the worldwide adoption of smartphones continue to grow. In 2015, there were about 2.6 billion smartphone users. This number is expected to top 6.1 billion globally by 2020. Businesses are increasingly using mobile ads. Location data from mobile devices is the key element for a successful mobile ad campaign. Facebook and Google are two biggest players that generate the highest revenue from mobile ads. PlaceIQ, a technology form headquartered in New York city collects billions of data points from mobile devices and other sources and is able tract potential customers as they move from one retail location to another retail location – such as from one car dealership to another. PlaceIQ is also able to help businesses find out if the ads can translate to an actual visit by a customer. In addition to its huge data set for business, PlaceIQ also offers location data and analytics tools to businesses and allows them to do their own advertising. Audi is using the Place IQ data to measure how many potential customers will visit its dealerships before and after they have seen ads. They also want to target potential customers who are visiting their competitors’ showrooms. Stacom Media Group is using PlaceIQ in order to find out how mobile location data can be helpful and eventually attract more customers to a business. Questions: a) By 2020 how many smartphones will be existing globally? b) Who are the two leading companies that generate the biggest revenue from mobile ads? c) How PlaceIQ impact businesses? d) Why is Audi using the services offered by PlaceIQ? e) Your overall observation and learning from the above case study.

In: Computer Science

Case study – Mobile Ads According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts...

Case study – Mobile Ads

According to eMarketer, mobile ads will top 100 and it accounts for about 16.5 percent of total advertising spending in 2016. The top five spenders of mobile ads are the United States, China, the United Kingdom, Japan and Germany. This number is expected to increase as the worldwide adoption of smartphones continue to grow. In 2015, there were about 2.6 billion smartphone users. This number is expected to top 6.1 billion globally by 2020.

Businesses are increasingly using mobile ads. Location data from mobile devices is the key element for a successful mobile ad campaign. Facebook and Google are two biggest players that generate the highest revenue from mobile ads. PlaceIQ, a technology form headquartered in New York city collects billions of data points from mobile devices and other sources and is able tract potential customers as they move from one retail location to another retail location – such as from one car dealership to another. PlaceIQ is also able to help businesses find out if the ads can translate to an actual visit by a customer. In addition to its huge data set for business, PlaceIQ also offers location data and analytics tools to businesses and allows them to do their own advertising.

Audi is using the Place IQ data to measure how many potential customers will visit its dealerships before and after they have seen ads. They also want to target potential customers who are visiting their competitors’ showrooms. Stacom Media Group is using PlaceIQ in order to find out how mobile location data can be helpful and eventually attract more customers to a business.

Questions:

a) By 2020 how many smartphones will be existing globally?

b) Who are the two leading companies that generate the biggest revenue from mobile ads?

c) How PlaceIQ impact businesses?

d) Why is Audi using the services offered by PlaceIQ?

e) Your overall observation and learning from the above case study.

In: Computer Science