State Of Texas Vs. Johnson (1989) Essays - Civil Disobedience

State Of Texas Vs. Johnson (1989) Essays - Civil Disobedience State of Texas vs. Johnson (1989) Justice Viveiros delivers the opinion of the court: Gregory Lee Johnson has been convicted of desecrating a flag in violation of Texas law; a conviction which questions ones guaranteed First Amendment, constitutional rights. Johnson's involvement in a political demonstration in Dallas, lead him to express his political concerns with the nations leaders and governmental policies. The State of Texas' conviction of Johnson was carried out due to Johnson's conduct, a physically expressive act, rather than a written or spoken one and based on two criteria: a responsibility to preserve the integrity of the flag representing the strength, pride and unity of our nation and whether Johnson's actions threatened societal order and peace. Both criteria, which serve as the basis for Gregory Lee Johnson's conviction, have been explored in depth, and this court concludes the following... Johnson's form of political expression did not cause societal disorder or disrupt the peace. There were no violent outbreaks, either verbal or physical, from members of Johnson's protest, or other citizens, who may view flag burning as a distasteful, ungrateful, slap in the face of our nation. However, the State of Texas has already acknowledged this fact. The State ruled that regardless of the lack of evidence that Johnson's actions have threatened societal order and public peace, on account there were no such occurrences, flag burning has the potential to do so. The State has concluded that flag burning could: first, stir up people's emotions enough, possibly resulting in intense public arguments, violent physical disputes, or riots, and second, serves as an invitation for others to take political protests to the next level, which could be dangerous. The States decision brings up two questions, is flag burning as a form of political protest an agreeable method of practicing ones First Amendment rights, or an attempt to persuade others to take the act beyond the rights of citizens to more serious and dangerously, harmful, acts of protest?, and does the State have the right to claim that Johnson's conduct had the potential or indented to cause a violent encounter with passionate opposition to flag burning, even if the act did not do so? Johnson is an individual, responsible for his own actions, not the actions of others. He has chosen to practice his First Amendment rights, by expressing his disapproval of government leadership and polices, by publicly burning and American flag. It is this courts decision that Johnson has not intended to encourage others to take more drastic approaches of protesting government. Johnson can not be accountable for wrongful impressions of his intentions. The State has allowed itself power not granted by the United States Constitution, by convicting Johnson for an act that potentially causes violent confrontations. Had publicly burning a flag caused a fight or rioting, this would be an entirely different case. However, the fact remains, the protest resulted in no such event. There is also no evidence that Johnson intended his protest to provoke societal disorder. Again, the State has not the right to base charges of Johnson's intentions with no evidence, only expressing concerns of the potential negative effects of Johnson's actions. The State's conviction is therefore unjust, based on its claim that Johnson has threatened societal order and peace. This does not disregard the conviction of Johnson entirely, the right of the State to preserve the integrity of the flag must still be discussed. Likewise, this courts ruling does not disregard the right of the State of Texas to promote and ensure order. History and common sense both show, order and peace necessary aspects of a stable, powerful nation and both must be ensured to protect American citizens. However, it has not been proven that Johnson's public desecration of the flag has infringed American peace or has promoted or intended to evoke societal disorder. The State's conviction of Johnson, based on a responsibility to preserve the integrity of the flag as a representation of national unity and pride, brings about several questions involving the meaning of America itself, and what our nation ezds for. The State concerns involve the message perceived by others, at the actions of Johnson. If a citizen can publicly destroy the symbol representing our nations pride

Calculate Osmotic Pressure Example Problem

Calculate Osmotic Pressure Example Problem This example problem demonstrates how to calculate the amount of solute to add to create a specific osmotic pressure in a solution. Osmotic Pressure Example Problem How much glucose (C6H12O6) per liter should be used for an intravenous solution to match the 7.65 atm at 37 degrees Celsius osmotic pressure of blood?Solution:Osmosis is the flow of a solvent into a solution through a semipermeable membrane. Osmotic pressure is the pressure that stops the process of osmosis. Osmotic pressure is a colligative property of a substance since it depends on the concentration of the solute and not its chemical nature.Osmotic pressure is expressed by the formula: ÃŽ   iMRT where ÃŽ   is the osmotic pressure in atm,  i van t Hoff factor of the solute,  M molar concentration in mol/L,  R universal gas constant 0.08206 L ·atm/mol ·K, and  T absolute temperature in Kelvin.Step 1:  Determine the van t Hoff factor.Since glucose does not dissociate into ions in solution, the van t Hoff factor 1.Step 2: Find the absolute temperature.T Degrees Celsius 273T 37 273T 310 KelvinStep 3:  Find the concentration of glucose.ÃŽ   iMRTM ÃŽ  /iRTM 7.65 atm/(1)(0.08206 L ·atm/mol ·K)(310)M 0.301 mol/LStep 4:  Find the amount of sucrose per liter.M mol/VolumeMol M ·VolumeMol 0.301 mol/L x 1 LMol 0.301 molFrom the periodic table:C 12 g/molH 1 g/molO 16 g/molMolar mass of glucose 6(12) 12(1) 6(16)Molar mass of glucose 72 12 96Molar mass of glucose 180 g/molMass of glucose 0.301 mol x 180 g/1 molMass of glucose 54.1 gramsAnswer:54.1 grams per liter of glucose should be used for an intravenous solution to match the 7.65 atm at 37 degrees Celsius osmotic pressure of blood. What Happens If You Get the Answer Wrong Osmotic pressure is critical when dealing with blood cells. If the solution is hypertonic to the cytoplasm of the red blood cells, the cells  will shrink through a process called crenation. If the solution is hypotonic with respect to the osmotic pressure of the cytoplasm, water will rush into the cells to try to reach equilibrium. This may cause the red blood cells to burst. In an isotonic solution, red and white blood cells maintain their normal structure and function. Its important to remember that there may be other solutes in the solution that affect osmotic pressure. If a solution is isotonic with respect to glucose but contains more or less of an ionic species (sodium ions, potassium ions, and so on), these species may migrate into or out of a cell to try to reach equilibrium.