...The Founding Fathers were justified in rebelling against the British government due to the fact that they could not represent themselves properly and were being governed by individuals that were an ocean away from them. The taxes being imposed on them were outrageous and hitting the colonists hard. British soldiers stationed in the colonies intruded in their homes and private lives without them being able to say anything. There were many things they could have done instead of outright rebellion of course, but it remains that they did have justification in what they did. First of all the colonists could not represent themselves properly and were being governed by individuals that were an ocean away from them. The Parliament of the British Empire would create taxes and laws that affected the colonists greatly, yet the people it affected had no say in what would happen. This made life on the colonists more difficult because they had taxes and laws that not only they disagreed with, but could scarcely afford as well. What made the matter more humiliating to the colonists was that they're so called, representatives, were on the other side of the Atlantic ocean. They argued the points that the Parliament did not have a clue as to what these laws were doing because they...
Words: 759 - Pages: 4
...Sedition, rebellion, and uprisings: historically, the most volatile threats to establishment. Because a nation's Achilles’ heel lies within itself rather than in the hands of its adversaries, our founding fathers emphasized the significance of a consolidation of power between a government and its people. In order to accomplish this mission, America's forebear's assembled the constitution along with the Bill of Rights in order to not only protect the masses from despotism, but also to protect the government from insurrection. And yet, what becomes of a nation in the event that its leaders threaten the common good and safety of its people and fail to uphold certain inalienable rights? While American citizens rely on nothing more than principles established by a two-century-old document for protection, their governing body can employ brute force as its personal insurance at will. Faced with ultimatums that pit civic duty against political dissent, courageous figures throughout our nation's history have elected to speak...
Words: 698 - Pages: 3
...The Power of the Supreme Court Cannot be Justified in a Democracy (45) The US Supreme Court has a number of powers. These include the power to declare acts of Congress, the executive or state legislatures unconstitutional through the power of judicial review. The supreme court justices are also given the power to interpret the constitution when making decisions, again, through their power of judicial review. It is arguable that it is essential for the supreme court to have such powers in order to allow the American democracy to flourish. However, there is much evidence to suggest that the supreme court holds too much power for an unelected body, thus hindering democracy. The ambiguity of the constitution means that there is much room for interpretation. Since interpreting the constitution is the role of the supreme court, the supreme court is often seen as a quasi legislative body. This is because through its interpretations, particularly those made by loose contructionists, the supreme court acts as an additional legislature. It's decisions can have the same effect as passing legislation. For example, the Grutter vs Bollinger decision (2008) involved the courts laying down a time frame for which affirmative action can be deemed necessary. This effectively acted as a piece of legislation even though it did not pass through Congress. This can be seen as being problematic and potentially damaging for a Democracy. Justices are unelected, they therefore lack legitimacy and should...
Words: 913 - Pages: 4
...Electoral College gets danced around and avoided. That is because it is such a difficult concept to get a grasp on. Not many people exactly know how our election system works due to the cryptic language that it normally is defined with. It is safe to assume that the uneducated voter believes that whichever candidate wins the most votes nationwide is the winner, and that is sound logic. However in the case of the Electoral College, that sound logic doesn’t hold true; one of the commonly disputed deficiencies of the electoral system. Are these criticisms justified or are they merely just complaints? Another important question to ask is why this system was put into place by our Founding Fathers; there must be a logical explanation, right? In order to begin to understand the system that is currently in place, it is best to look at why it was seen as a necessary measure and some of the history surrounding it. Our Founding Fathers thought it was important that the States and the citizens residing in them should have a say in the appointment of our nation’s leader. The last thing they wanted was to have Congress deciding who would become president. They feared this for several reasons. The first is that Congress would have too much influence in politics, as well as being able to dictate the political agenda. Second, this would mean that members of Congress would have to guess how the people that they represent would want to cast their vote. Lastly, they wanted all citizens to...
Words: 2483 - Pages: 10
...against the welfare and safety of the public has always been a precarious balancing act. In the United States, gun control is one of these tumultuous issues that has both sides firmly entrenched in their positions. Those parties in favor of gun ownership and the freedom to use and keep arms, rely on the fact that the provision for such rights is enshrined in their constitution. In this climate of growing violence, rife with turmoil and crime, gun advocates feel more than ever that their position is justified. As citizens of the “Land of the Free” possessing a gun is a fundamental right, and may even be a necessity... Anti- gun lobbyists point to the same growing violence and gun related crimes in an effort... The Effects and Consequences of Gun Control “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The right for of all Americans to bear arms is a right even the Founding Fathers held to equal importance as the Constitution itself. Whether or not gun control laws work, the fact of the matter is that these kind of laws directly violate this right and therefore should not even be under consideration. Even if that issue is overlooked, gun control advocates state that in order to reduce firearm related violence, gun control laws must be implemented to remove the violence caused by firearms. Although this may seem reasonable, the consequences of such laws are ironically counterproductive;...
Words: 559 - Pages: 3
...In accordance to a founding father, 1791, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”(DocC) so eliminating the spending cap would do that exactly. To truly rule whether this Supreme Court’s decision was constitutional is too look directly to the source itself. The court’s interpretation of the first amendment and their role in controlling politics , extending 88 pages long, majority highly incredulous of the governments’ attempts to get involved successfully, the minority agreed it was necessary for the government to endure the life of spending caps “to ensure a functioning democracy”(NYTimes). Correctively the government should recollect the structure of itself “being the opinion of the people”(DocB) and uphold in highest priority “to keep that...
Words: 538 - Pages: 3
...When the Civil War came to a close on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox Courthouse, it was obvious that making amends between the conflicting regions was going to be a difficult task. Reconstruction was a period plagued by conflict because there was no precedent or blueprints on how to deal with secession because the Founding Fathers never thought it would happen. There were several different ideas on how to go about Reconstruction, but they all conflicted with one another. I agree with these different plans by Lincoln, Johnson, and Congress to a certain extent, the Reconstruction policies were mediocre and could have been improved, Southern resistance was provoked but not justified, and lastly the most lasting impact of Reconstruction was the increase...
Words: 1423 - Pages: 6
...Poison in a 2017 was shown to kill over 51,000. While guns were at only 33,00. Yes. those are a lot of people dying but guns aren’t killing as much as they used to. "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." (Misquoting Yamamoto) This quote also shows why we need the second amendment since the Japanese were to afraid to attack our nation since we have the option to have a gun in our homes. That fear and hesitation let us win the war so why give up the ability to protect ourselves.Protecting ourselves is very important. No one ever knows when a burglar is going to be in your house or if you walked down the wrong street and now a gun is necessary. Though guns can protect they can also do more harm and damage then protect. But simply put we don’t know what is going to happen in the future so having a little protection will go a long way to keep out country...
Words: 1093 - Pages: 5
...Assess the significance of Federalism. The founding fathers had to make a compromise that would satisfy the 13 independent colonies, meanwhile providing a secure central base. This resulted in The United States government adopting federalism. Even though federalism isn’t mentioned in the constitution, the principles of federalism are mentioned in various articles. For example article 1 section 8 displays the power available to congress. It contains the ‘elastic clause’ that potentially gives the federal government so much power over the states. And the amendments provide a list of ‘can’t do’s’ for the states. For example states can’t enter into treaties with foreign powers. As the aspects of federalism is displayed in the codified constitution, signifies the importance for the US to collectively follow this system. However, Federalism is a method of government that also allows the states to maintain their sovereignty, without the fear of intervention of the central government, unless they violate or clash with the constitution. This is evident as each state has its own constitution and its own executive, legislature and judiciary all working within the limits set by the national constitution; executive; legislature and judiciary. An example of a state constitution that has relevant articles to its needs is Idaho. For instance in their constitutions article 16, section 1 the constitution talks of the need for the Idaho legislature to pass laws that protect livestock from disease...
Words: 2060 - Pages: 9
...I believe that the United States overseas intervention between 1870 to 1920 was justified. I believe it was necessary to maintain Democracy and freedom throughout the world, as well as protect the American people. As we all know, during this time period, there were two major wars, both were a serious threat to the United States and its people. The Spanish-American War began with the Spanish mercilessly crushing the Cuban people who were trying to start a revolution in 1895. Many U.S. newspapers graphically portrayed how the Spanish ruthlessly halted the Cuban revolution. This caused many citizens of the U.S. to sympathize with the Cubans and the demand for intervention rose. The demand for intervention would continue until the USS Maine exploded...
Words: 1117 - Pages: 5
...ETHICS ( MORAL PHILOSOPHY) Ethics , also called moral philosophy is the discipline concerned with what is morally good and bad , right and wrong. The term is applied to any system or theory of moral values and principles . It involves systematizing , defending and recommending concepts of right and wrong . Philosophers divide ethical theories into four different categories 1. Metaethics 2. Normative ethics 3. Agapeic ethics 4. Applied ethics 1. METAETHICS What does moral language mean ? Do moral facts exist ? How can we know whether moral judgments are true or false ? Metaethics is the branch of ethics that seeks to understand the nature of ethical properties , statements , attitudes and judgments . Two prominent issues of metaethics are : 1.1 Metaphysical Issues: Objectivism and Relativism Objectivism or other worldly views suggest that reality exists as an objective absolute – facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings , wishes , views or hopes. It holds that there is no fundamental contradiction between the free, abstract character of mental life and the physical body in which it resides . It holds it as undeniable that humans have free will, and opposes metaphysical determinism or fatalism. The metaphysical relativism is the claim that there are no absolutes in reality; epistemological is that there are no absolutes in knowledge; morality is the denial of moral absolutes; and religious is the clam that there is no true religion . Greek philosopher...
Words: 1126 - Pages: 5
...Second Amendment: Still Valid after 200 years Jeremiah A. Dozier ITT Technical Institute The subject of this research paper is on a particular subject that has spurred an ongoing debate for many years, the Second Amendment. To this day many Americans have raised the question is the Second Amendment still valid after 200 years? The answer to that question is YES! When the founding fathers signed the Constitution in this document there are many Articles and the First ten are known as the bill rights and the first one is the right to free speech, most everyone is in agreement that is one of the most important rights as citizens. Now the Second Amendment which states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. In this paper it is the authors’ intension to show why this Amendment is important today and in the future. The Second Amendment has been a part of this country since the very beginning of our great nation. Fast forward to the present, they are now people saying the Second Amendment is no longer valid or needed. How can that be we not need this right or it no longer applies to the present day? One of the main reasons most people say we don’t need this fundamental right is because of the recent waves of shootings around this country. The only response is to put a ban on firearms or limit how many rounds a weapons magazine can hold. The Second Amendment is in place as...
Words: 2105 - Pages: 9
...John Nix Kevin Thomas Harrel His 105 Section 28 8 December 2009 The Formation of the Confederacy: An Inevitable Occurrence When looking at the history of the United States it is necessary to look at our past in two separate halves: the first half being everything before the Civil War and the second half being everything after the Civil War. With this being said, it can be reasonably argued that the Civil War is one of the most critical events to every happen in our country’s rich history. The devastating war took over half a million American lives in just a little over four years. This tragic event in history, up until Vietnam, claimed more American lives than any other war (Rubin 11). In hindsight it is clear that this war should have been avoided at all cost but during the late 1800’s the tension was so high and hostile that the war was inevitable. Sectionalism had increased so much during that period that even citizens thought of their country divided into two halves, being the North and the South. Each section considered themselves as right and proper while the other as ridiculous and wrong. These tensions kept building until the thought of secession became not a question of if but rather a question of when. According to Cole C. Kingseed, author of The American Civil War, the seeds of the Civil War can be planted as early as the Constitutional Convention of 1787. By the time of the convention five states had already abolished slavery, which made the southern states...
Words: 2217 - Pages: 9
...stop these plans in their tracks. Soon after submitting their petition the group was met with a lawsuit from the company responsible for construction, claiming charges of defamation. Every day Americans assume they are able to enjoy and exercise the inalienable rights that were protected by our founding fathers in the Bill of Rights. However, in recent years it has come to the attention of many that our right to petition, as protected in the first amendment of the Bill of Rights, may be at risk. The source of concern is a controversial one that forces us to weigh the importance of our right to enter a plea against another citizen, against our right to petition freely without fear of redress. Over the past couple decades Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation in government, also know as SLAPPs, have become a tool used by corporations (especially those in real-estate) to silence critics who petition against their actions. The goal of delay and distraction is accomplished by forcing defendants to bear the burden of litigation costs in order to defend themselves from the impending lawsuit. Twenty-Eight states have already passed anti-SLAPP statutes, however I believe it is necessary for the national government to pass a nationwide anti-SLAPP law in order to protect what is arguably one of its citizens most fundamentally important rights. In order to support this claim however, it is imperative for us to examine the history of how the right to petition has been used, and the...
Words: 3478 - Pages: 14
...LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY REFLECTION PAPER TWO: THE AMERICAN CHAPLAIN IN 1607-1865 A PAPER SUBMITTED TO PROFESSOR JAMES FISHER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CHPL 500 BY HARRY PITTS VILLA RICA, GEORGIA SEPTEMBER 7, 2013 Introduction The American Chaplain Association was a very formidable resource for military personnel during the defining period within America. Understanding the contribution of chaplaincy is a vital part of understanding American history, and how chaplains help servicemen and women in wartimes. It is important to note that some military chaplains in the early 1800’s were not part of the military organization, and these individuals were not commissioned. With all of the bureaucracy that took place during this era, it made it somewhat difficult for chaplains to professionalize their positions. Chaplaincy service has been a part of world history, and the contributions that have been made by clergy in times of transition and militaristic occurrences cannot be considered irrelevant or unimportant. The historical foundation of chaplaincy within the United States has stood the course of time. American chaplaincy has matured significantly, and the age of Chaplaincy is as old as some European colonial explorations. The example of American Colonial Chaplaincy that was conceived in the womb of the United States was birthed by caring for earlier settlers and military organizations colonists...
Words: 1798 - Pages: 8
