...Removing this would create a hole in the way people can live vicariously through imagination to committing immoral acts in their real lives. While outlets for our sexual adventures such as strip joints and the internet are easily accessible, I do not believe this to encourage an individual who does not already possess a desire to commit a sexual crime to act out these fantasies. The government ought not to impose undue prohibitions on the production of and participation in pornography I firmly believe that it is not the governments place to impose prohibitions on activities that do not constitute a harm to those who are participating or those who may encounter such activities. As it relates to pornography, the question becomes a matter of expression where an individual must be granted the authority to, whether through direct or indirect participation in the act of producing or consuming pornography, decide whether such acts are consistent with their own understandings of morality. Moreover, I firmly believe that if people do not want to view pornography then they have that choice. It is not like pornography, in many cases, is not thrown directly into the faces of those who oppose. An active attempt must be made in order to...
Words: 445 - Pages: 2
...VANESSA We all know what alcohol is: the stuff that people of all ages love and savor. The refreshing ice cold beer that empowers us after a long day at work and the Hennessy that we all go to the party for. But plot twist: in 1919, the infamous 18th Amendment stole our liquor. The manufacturing, selling, importing, and exporting of the so called “toxic” liquors was banned. SHAJNEEN This ban, known as prohibition, is a result of men over drinking and overspending, causing trouble for their wives. Prohibition does stop some husbands from going home drunk every day but the money they wasted on alcohol continues to be wasted. You would expect their new savings to be spent on clothes and babies, but instead, it is largely wasted in speakeasies,...
Words: 455 - Pages: 2
...Frentheway Professor Largey English 2010 2 February 2016 Marijuana’s prohibition We can’t live in a society that is free and drug-free. Seventy-seven years ago marijuana became illegal in the United States. There are two very distinct views looking at marijuana. One side is totally for it and sees it as an amazing plant that can heal countless medical problems, help with mental well-being, makes cells more active, and even more. But the other side is totally against it and sees it as the devil’s creation. Destroying lives. Making people dumb. Killing people. This side usually doesn’t have much knowledge about the drug, so they are ignorant to the facts. They rely on what the media tells them, what their old teachers and mentors told...
Words: 1412 - Pages: 6
...Global Politics: The feasibility of universal drug liberalization as an emerging phenomenon RWaterhouse Globalization & The War on Drugs: Assessing alternatives to criminalization The purpose of this paper is to address universal drug liberalization as a feasible alternative to the current drug control regime specifically in North America and potentially applicable elsewhere. With an in depth analysis of the historical regulation, implementation of law, and resulting consequences we will be able to see how nations are effected by complex drug politics and why there has been a global paradigm shift in looking spiritedly at the ideal of decriminalization. I argue in favor of liberalization by bringing to attention the violence associated with the commodification of illegal drugs, what the re-directed costs of control could mean for domestic investment into proactive drug awareness education, and finally recognizing Portugal’s success and weaknesses in the adoption of a compete legalization agenda. Following will be a discussion of concluding thoughts centered on the efficacy and feasibility of universal liberalization in today’s globalized world. Historical Context Libertarianism has almost always had position in political discourse but has been majorly popularized through public attention within the era of globalization. (article) Control of drug consumption has always been a contemporary ingredient in the political reform of Canada and the America’s and...
Words: 404 - Pages: 2
...major concern for a lot of people, some people believe that it can be changed by legalizing it and therefore taking away the drug cartels number one source of income. The U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy ... says that more than 60 percent of the profits reaped by Mexican drug lords are derived from the exportation and sale of cannabis to the American market (Armentano2). It is ridiculous to think that the United States can put out a statistic like this and ignore the fact that if they legalized the drug there would be less violence because there would be no point for Mexican drug cartels to try and smuggle the drug into the U.S. In the article “Blame Prohibition, Not Pot Smokers for Violence in Mexico”, published by AlterNet.org, Tony Newman tells us how the people who run the “Just Say No” campaign against drugs have a new scheme in which they plan to blame people who smoke pot for the violence in Mexico. They are hoping to stop younger people from smoking marijuana if they associate it with the murder of people by the drug cartels in Mexico. There are a few problems with these campaigns: They are inaccurate in some cases, and downright dishonest in others.Office of National Drug Control Policy It is disingenuous to connect the average American's marijuana consumption to the horrific violence of Mexico's drug war. The average pot smoker's growing and purchasing of marijuana has no relationship to the violence along the border that is the result of large-scale drug...
Words: 1068 - Pages: 5
...to keep them prohibited. According to LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, drug prohibition is the true cause of much of the social and personal damage that has historically been attributed to drug use. It is prohibition that makes these drugs so valuable – while giving criminals a monopoly over their supply ("Why Legalize Drugs? | LEAP").LEAP goes on to say that criminal gangs are driven by the huge profits from this monopoly, criminal gangs bribe and kill each other, law enforcers, and children and as such their trade is unregulated and they are, therefore, beyond our control ("Why Legalize Drugs? | LEAP"). It is LEAP’s belief that by eliminating prohibition of all drugs for adults and establishing appropriate regulation and standards for distribution and use, law enforcement could focus more on crimes of violence, such as rape, aggravated assault, child abuse and murder, making our communities much safer ("Why Legalize Drugs? | LEAP"). Another positive aspect of the legalization of drugs is financial gains. According to the International Business Times in a study for the Cato Institute, Jeffrey A. Miron, senior lecturer on economics at Harvard University and a senior fellow at Cato, and Katherine Waldock, professor of economics at New York University, estimate that legalizing drugs would save the government approximately $41.3 billion annually on expenditures related to the enforcement of prohibition (Ghosh, 2010). Of those savings, $25.7 billion would accrue to...
Words: 1233 - Pages: 5
...state legislatures. However, possession and use of marijuana is still viewed by many as comparable to consuming an alcoholic beverage. Regardless, it (marijuana) is still classified as a Schedule I Controlled Substance by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Introduction After prohibition of alcohol was rescinded by the Twenty First Amendment, years later the focus from the United States government shifted to prohibition of drugs. But there have always been varying ulterior motives. According to Baylor University Professor of Sociology, Dr. Diana Kendall, the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 was passed solely to criminalize marijuana by taxing it; this would dissuade migrant Mexican workers who smoked marijuana to seek employment elsewhere and not take jobs from U.S. citizens as the country struggled during the Great Depression (Kendall, 2010). Last year, voters in Colorado and Washington State approved legislation that supported the commercial growth, sale, possession and use of recreational marijuana. In response, United States Department of Justice, Deputy Attorney General James Cole, promulgated policy that established the posture for enforcing marijuana laws against people or organizations to that: Distribution of marijuana to minors; revenue from the sale of marijuana from going to criminal enterprises, gangs and cartels; the diversion of marijuana from states where it is legal under state law in some...
Words: 1535 - Pages: 7
...The so-called “War on Drugs,” as declared by the Nixon administration in the signing of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, marked the beginning of the current era of mandatory minimum sentencing, racism, privatized prisons, and a powerful constituency that profits as a result of the prohibition of drugs. Psychoactive substances have been apart of the human experience as long as humans have walked the earth. There is little hope that drug production will ever be curtailed, so long as there is a demand; a demand that has remained steady even though it has been forty years since the beginning of said war. As Judge James P. Gray from the Superior Court of Orange County has so plainly put it: “Where did this policy come from? Unfortunately I have conducted an inquiry into this and I have determined that drug prohibition laws came for reasons of racism, empire building, and ignorance.”(Booth) The War on Drugs is politically motivated as a means of profiting. One may ask them self how government can financially benefit from such policies. In fact, they benefit in a myriad of ways. The government spends an exorbitant amount of money in an attempt to combat drug production and drug usage. The U.S. government has spent over a trillion—that’s right a trillion—dollars in its attempt to eradicate the drug problem. With so much time, effort and money there should be something to show, right? Wrong. Today drugs are more prevalent, more potent and cheaper than...
Words: 1759 - Pages: 8
...respect to the notion of legal validity, making reference to the case of the “grudge informer”. Which position do you think is closer to the truth? Give reasons for your opinion. (2) Explain some of Dworkin’s main reasons for interpretivism. (Be sure to explain what “interpretivism” means here.) Do you think his theory is plausible? Give reasons for your opinion. (3) Explain and evaluate an argument for drug prohibition and an argument against drug prohibition. Discuss with reference to the case of R. v. Malmo-Levine and the case of R. v. Caine. Which argument do you think is more convincing? Give reasons for your opinion. (4) Explain some of the main reasons given by (some) feminists such as MacKinnon and Dworkin for making pornography illegal. Explain how their position differs from the simple “causal” argument. Do you think that their reasoning is correct? Give reasons for your opinion. (5) Explain and evaluate an argument for hate speech legislation and an argument against hate speech legislation. Discuss with reference to the Keegstra case. Which argument do you think is more convincing? Give reasons for your opinion. (6) The “sanctity of life” principle has often been central to debates about euthanasia. Explain at least two possible...
Words: 384 - Pages: 2
...Debate Paper: Gun Ownership versus Gun Prohibition Mark Mitchell XBCOM-275 April 27, 2014 Daniel Anderson Debate Paper: Gun Ownership versus Gun Prohibition Gun control (prohibition) is one of those matters on which practically every person has a view and those views are deeply maintained. Whether a person is pro-gun or anti-gun is based on each's opinion and are repeatedly established not on real details but rather on crude passions driven by extensively broadcasted distortions regarding the use and misuse of guns. Additionally, most people have the same opinion that gun-related injuries or death of unintended person should by no means tolerated, although there is a wide range of opinions on what the course of action to take in an attempt to obtain a proper solution. So in the interest of clarifying this subject of which is right and proper, whether it is the Private ownership of guns or the prohibitions of guns (or if the answer lies somewhere in the middle) is truly right for the country; enter the debate. As to reasons in support of pro-guns ownership for private citizens, comes from one of the founding fathers Thomas Jefferson (n.d.) who eloquently stated “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." He also said," No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” This belief was not his alone but that of all the founding fathers. This belief was so...
Words: 2218 - Pages: 9
...Drugs. We are currently facing a large debate on the issue of drugs. That is whether drugs should remain illegal or be legalized within the United States. It has come to be a war; a war which is being fought against our own citizens and against other countries. It is a war which has taken many lives and will not cease in its toll. Both sides of the argument have strong points. In 1970, Gore Vidal wrote an essay supporting the legalization of all illegal drugs in the United States. I agree with Vidal, in legalizing drugs. They should be legalized and regulated by the government just as cigarettes are. In “Drugs,” Gore Vidal argues that all drugs should be legalized. The government should make all drugs available in markets and sell that at cost to the consumers. He states that the prohibition of these drugs is a violation of the constitutional right for the pursuit of happiness. He observes that legalizing drugs will take away its title of being a "forbidden fruit." People always want what they cannot have. Legalizing drugs enable people easier access to them, taking away the thrill of getting them. He argues that the prohibition of drugs, like that of alcohol in the 1920's, will be a failure. He believes that both the Bureau of Narcotics and Mafia are against legalizing drugs and selling them at cost because then there would be no profit for the Mafia to make anymore and the Bureau would diminish. He concludes by saying this situation will continue to get worse. ...
Words: 847 - Pages: 4
...The United States has been an example in following the United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) since 1984. Any use of torture was considered not only as an infringement of the human rights, but also an infringement to the same convention which United States was a signer. Nevertheless, the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist incursion changed the United States position against torture. Officials who were highly concerned about the security of the country voted for a start of a war against terrorism. During the same period any interrogation techniques, whether conventional or unconventional, were used on suspects to gain intelligence about any presumable imminent terrorist attack. The United States violated the UNCAT and began torturing its suspects. Many incidents reported by the media since 2002 revealed that prison guards were instructed to “prepare” prisoners for the interrogation suggesting the use of torture to intimidate them before the interrogation starts (“The Legal Prohibition”). These events caused a debate on the authorization of torture. The UNCAT signed by the United States defines torture as a dehumanizing interrogation...
Words: 2108 - Pages: 9
...Above we have looked at the two main radical environmentalist groups and have taken note of their ecotage and eco-terrorist like actions. So far the actions have been displayed as the wrong way to handle environmental issues. Using ecodefense as an argument for ecotage we can grasp or at least have an understanding for why these groups take part in these actions other that enforcing their ideologies of the environment. So let's take a look at what the ecodefense argument means. The ecodefense argument is a variant of the position that asserts that while it is usually wrong to damage or destroy another person’s private property, it is also usually permissible to defend oneself against undue harm or violation, and if such self-defense ever were...
Words: 558 - Pages: 3
...the RH Bill, are Philippine bills aiming to guarantee universal access to methods and information on contraception, fertility control, sexual education, and maternal care. The bills have become the center of a contentious national debate. There are presently two bills with the same goals: House Bill No. 4244 or An Act Providing for a Comprehensive Policy on Responsible Parenthood, Reproductive Health, and Population and Development, and For Other Purposes introduced by Albay 1st district Representative Edcel Lagman, and Senate Bill No. 2378 or An Act Providing For a National Policy on Reproductive Health and Population and Development introduced by Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago. THESIS OR CONVICTION: Yes, COUNTER ARGUMENT: No, because SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS 1. No, because Philip Nitschke, MD, Director and Founder of Exit International, commented in his June 5, 2009 interview with Kathryn Jean Lopez titled "Euthanasia Sets Sail" that appeared in the National Review Online: "Over time the Hippocratic Oath has been modified on a number of occasions as some of its tenets became less and less acceptable. References to women not studying medicine and doctors not breaking the skin have been deleted. The much-quoted reference to 'do no harm' is also in need of explanation. Does not doing harm mean that we should prolong a life that the patient sees as a painful burden? Surely, the 'harm' in this instance is done when we prolong the life, and 'doing no harm' means that we should...
Words: 1169 - Pages: 5
...The USBA secretly provided financial support for anti-suffrage campaigns at the state level…” as stated by an article on the alcohol and temperance movement (United States Brewers’ Association (USBA). Big alcohol corporations could not let women get in the way of them making money, so they tried to make sure they did not have a say by voting. Women had never been allowed in saloons or in bars and did not support them, and usually, only men would drink, so if women had the right to vote prohibition would have started earlier. The Seneca Falls convention where Elizabeth Cady Stanton gave her Declaration of Sentiments was mocked because it “generated widespread ridicule” and for its “hostility” (Declaration of Sentiments). The convention was ridiculed and received negative connotations by religious leaders and the press for not being a modest proposal like women should be. They believe that the way the women went about arguing for rights was viewed as absurd. That if women want to try to promote rights they should go about it more modestly. Many viewed the Declaration of Sentiments to be an “absurdity” of a proposal (Declaration of Sentiments). The anti-suffragist felt that Stanton was asking for too much, asking to be superior rather...
Words: 1627 - Pages: 7
