topic:should heroes be defined as people who say what they think who say what they think when we do not have the courage?
Heroes should sometimes be defined as people who take the risk of saying what they believed as right while others dare not. Such definition is justified in the cases of John Adams and Tom Sawyer.
John Adams, later the second US president, was a hero when he defended two innocent redcoats in the court. In the Boston massacre of 1773, because of the attack by several mobs, two redcoats were forced to start fire and kill two mobs to protect themselves. Even though most people knew the innocence of the two redcoats, afraid of some fanatic Massachusetts colonists who hated the British ruling so much that they even tried several times to torture the royal governor, no attorney dared to defend the two redcoats, However, John Adams, really a brave and determined man, believing that the redcoats' behavior was justified, agreed to defend them with the word that:' I only side myself with the side of truth and justice.' and finally succeed proving the innocence of the two solders. It is his boldly saying his thought that established himself as a hero.
Similarly, we can define Henry Sinclair, a famous muckraker, as a hero. In the first decade of 20th century, terrified by the insanity of meatpacking industry, many reporters tried to report it to the public. After knowing their plan, several powerful meatpacking factories, such as CLAIR MEAT, threatened them that ' keep you mouth closed or go to hell'. However, not daunted by the threat as other reporters did, Sinclair published ' the jungle', which revealed how dirty the meatpacking process was. After reading his book, the public got indignant and urged the reform in the meatpacking industry, forcing President Roosevelt enforce the Meat Inspection Act to improve the sanity of the industry. In this case, no one would deny that frankly speaking Sinclair was a hero.
On many cases, people who speak what they thought are defined as heroes. In these cases,people who bravely give their thought can only be defined as heroes when they have justified purpose such as helping others. People who boldly insult othes can not be defined as heroes because they do not have justified purpose. In Adam's case, he tried to defend the innocent redcoats from unjustified penalty, and in Sinclair's case, Sinclair tried to make public aware of how their health was threatened. Thus, we can conclude that people who give their opinion for justified purpose should be defined as heroes.
A simple, more refined opening statement is necessary, for starters such as: "There are many actions and factors that define a hero. One such action is....
However, John Adams, being a brave and determined man and believing that the redcoats' behavior was justified, agreed to defend them with the statement that :' I only side myself with the side of truth and justice.'...After knowing their plan, several powerful meatpacking factories, such as CLAIR MEAT, threatened them by sayingthat ' keep you mouth closed or go to hell'... However, not daunted by the threat as other reporters did , Sinclair published ' the jungle', which revealed how dirty the meatpacking process was, as he was clearly more compelled to preserve justice than succumb to any threat or intimidation.
Good job
