Citizens United
Citizens United's stated mission is to restore the United States government
Thursday, August 6, 2015
American Rights
Freedom of Speech:
Are we free to say what we want and when we want it? I say YES! Our first Amendment guarantees it and our founding fathers fought to make sure we have it. So the next time you have something to say...say it because a lot of people died to make sure we the people today have that basic human right. Today we don't give it a second thought, but some people out there can't speak against or for their government. They can't form peaceful rallies because their government has taken basic human rights such as freedom of speech. People can't speak out against unfair and unjust regimes. We live in a country (U.S.) that many have tried to emulate because our system works. It's not perfect but it works so enjoy what others can't fathom saying, like John Boehner needs to take it easy on the tanning booth. See I can say that, but someone else in another country would probably loose their freedom for mocking a politician. Be responsible, safe and enjoy your American rights.
Are we free to say what we want and when we want it? I say YES! Our first Amendment guarantees it and our founding fathers fought to make sure we have it. So the next time you have something to say...say it because a lot of people died to make sure we the people today have that basic human right. Today we don't give it a second thought, but some people out there can't speak against or for their government. They can't form peaceful rallies because their government has taken basic human rights such as freedom of speech. People can't speak out against unfair and unjust regimes. We live in a country (U.S.) that many have tried to emulate because our system works. It's not perfect but it works so enjoy what others can't fathom saying, like John Boehner needs to take it easy on the tanning booth. See I can say that, but someone else in another country would probably loose their freedom for mocking a politician. Be responsible, safe and enjoy your American rights.
The rights you do not have
As American citizens, we have become very spoiled. We tend to take the rights for granted assuming that the rest of the world recognize the right of individual. Such thinking could not be further from the truth. In our spoiled bliss, Americans have assumed rights that are neither mentioned anywhere in our founding or could not be intelligently justified to even exist.
First, a quick background into the history of our own nation is in order. In the 18th century, a change in thinking known as "the Enlightenment" occurred. The concepts that came out of the Enlightenment were applied in the founding of the United States of America. In establishing the United States, the founding fathers determined that it was essential to lay out a Bill of Rights. The most common misconception today is that the Bill of Rights grants us our rights. Instead, it is a bill that protects what the founders knew to be unalienable rights that could not justifiably be denied any person.
In the modern era, there has arisen a new and disturbing trend of assuming rights that not only are not covered by the Bill of Rights, they simply do not make any sense when critical thought is applied. The following are some of the most common grievances which hold no weight.
The Right to be Heard:
This common complaint is usually voiced by someone with a fairly inflated ego, particularly celebrities and musicians. You have the right to voice your opinion, however nobody is obligated to listen. If a musician chooses to use a concert as a political sounding board rather than perform the music fans had anticipated, it should come as no surprise when fans walk out. If fans have spent money to hear music performed but instead are lectured on some political stance, they have every right to be upset. This is where the fans will use their freedom of speech to make it known that they are not pleased.
The Right to not be Offended:
In recent years, this one has reared its ugly head in pop culture and on college campuses. This "right" completely contradicts the Freedom of Speech. To truly be allowed the free expression of ideas, it is highly likely that someone may take offense. There is more to be gained by the thoughtful debate of ideas than there is through the suppression of those ideas. Rather than trying to shut down an opinion that contradicts our own, those opinions should be engaged in vigorous (albeit civil) debate in public. This allows citizens the opportunity to formulate their own opinions based on the views expressed in such public debate. Offensive and ignorant opinions may find small followings but the public, by and large will disregard such feeble thinking. One example would be that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. brought his views into public debate, which challenged the status quo. While originally opposed in some quarters, the overwhelming majority of the public found his views inspirational and enlightening which ultimately helped to alter the public's opinions on race. Imagine if, instead, Dr. King had been silenced because his opinion was offensive.
The Right to Have our Life Choices Accepted by Others:
This is difficult to argue as everyone does have the right to live their life as they see fit so long as it is within societal limits and does not infringe on another individuals rights. By societal limits, we can agree that abuse of women, children, or animals because of a religious or cultural practice is unacceptable. Nor does one have the right to engage in illegal activity based on personal or religious beliefs. Outside of these examples, we are free to live our lives as we see fit. However, if a person finds your lifestyle offensive or inconsistent with their own beliefs, they are under no obligation to show support from such practices. Nor should they face persecution for expressing their views just as they have no right to persecute you for living your life according to your own values.
The Right to Free Education, Health Care, Housing, Employment, etc...:
One the surface, it would seem that each of these are good ideas. Who would not agree that everyone deserves and education, health care, and a house? However, to make this argument is to ignore the fact that for someone to have a right to such things, someone else is required to provide them. For a government to provide you with something, it must take something from someone else. Ultimately, by insisting that these are rights is to insist that someone is obligated to provide these things to you regardless of compensation for time or material. What can be defended here is the opportunity to get the education which you desire, the health care you need, and a house of your own. It is essential that you do what is needed to receive these things. What gets lost in this debate is the effect that government has on education, health care, housing, and employment. Government subsidies often encourage waste while taxes and regulations drive costs up.
Ultimately, it must be remembered that your rights end where another persons rights begin. Our nation is founded on the concept of Negative Freedoms which limits what the powers the government has. To make the argument that the government must provide for you or keep another person from enjoying their freedoms, we are dismantling the essence of what a free nation is.
First, a quick background into the history of our own nation is in order. In the 18th century, a change in thinking known as "the Enlightenment" occurred. The concepts that came out of the Enlightenment were applied in the founding of the United States of America. In establishing the United States, the founding fathers determined that it was essential to lay out a Bill of Rights. The most common misconception today is that the Bill of Rights grants us our rights. Instead, it is a bill that protects what the founders knew to be unalienable rights that could not justifiably be denied any person.
In the modern era, there has arisen a new and disturbing trend of assuming rights that not only are not covered by the Bill of Rights, they simply do not make any sense when critical thought is applied. The following are some of the most common grievances which hold no weight.
The Right to be Heard:
This common complaint is usually voiced by someone with a fairly inflated ego, particularly celebrities and musicians. You have the right to voice your opinion, however nobody is obligated to listen. If a musician chooses to use a concert as a political sounding board rather than perform the music fans had anticipated, it should come as no surprise when fans walk out. If fans have spent money to hear music performed but instead are lectured on some political stance, they have every right to be upset. This is where the fans will use their freedom of speech to make it known that they are not pleased.
The Right to not be Offended:
In recent years, this one has reared its ugly head in pop culture and on college campuses. This "right" completely contradicts the Freedom of Speech. To truly be allowed the free expression of ideas, it is highly likely that someone may take offense. There is more to be gained by the thoughtful debate of ideas than there is through the suppression of those ideas. Rather than trying to shut down an opinion that contradicts our own, those opinions should be engaged in vigorous (albeit civil) debate in public. This allows citizens the opportunity to formulate their own opinions based on the views expressed in such public debate. Offensive and ignorant opinions may find small followings but the public, by and large will disregard such feeble thinking. One example would be that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. brought his views into public debate, which challenged the status quo. While originally opposed in some quarters, the overwhelming majority of the public found his views inspirational and enlightening which ultimately helped to alter the public's opinions on race. Imagine if, instead, Dr. King had been silenced because his opinion was offensive.
The Right to Have our Life Choices Accepted by Others:
This is difficult to argue as everyone does have the right to live their life as they see fit so long as it is within societal limits and does not infringe on another individuals rights. By societal limits, we can agree that abuse of women, children, or animals because of a religious or cultural practice is unacceptable. Nor does one have the right to engage in illegal activity based on personal or religious beliefs. Outside of these examples, we are free to live our lives as we see fit. However, if a person finds your lifestyle offensive or inconsistent with their own beliefs, they are under no obligation to show support from such practices. Nor should they face persecution for expressing their views just as they have no right to persecute you for living your life according to your own values.
The Right to Free Education, Health Care, Housing, Employment, etc...:
One the surface, it would seem that each of these are good ideas. Who would not agree that everyone deserves and education, health care, and a house? However, to make this argument is to ignore the fact that for someone to have a right to such things, someone else is required to provide them. For a government to provide you with something, it must take something from someone else. Ultimately, by insisting that these are rights is to insist that someone is obligated to provide these things to you regardless of compensation for time or material. What can be defended here is the opportunity to get the education which you desire, the health care you need, and a house of your own. It is essential that you do what is needed to receive these things. What gets lost in this debate is the effect that government has on education, health care, housing, and employment. Government subsidies often encourage waste while taxes and regulations drive costs up.
Ultimately, it must be remembered that your rights end where another persons rights begin. Our nation is founded on the concept of Negative Freedoms which limits what the powers the government has. To make the argument that the government must provide for you or keep another person from enjoying their freedoms, we are dismantling the essence of what a free nation is.
Teenage Pregnancy
Teenage pregnancy is an unplanned pregnancy in females under the age of 20 mostly that's when the pregnancy in teenagers ends. Teen pregnancy in the united states has increased rapidly since 2013. Statistics shows that there were 26.5 births for every 1000 adolescents female from the ages of 15- to 19. My question is what causes these unplanned pregnancies in teens? Is it that they are not educated enough on the problems they will be facing if they get pregnant at a young age and also can it be prevented?
I think every parent or an adult should educate the young ones on how teenage pregnancy can affect their lives. We can not follow each and every child to make sure she is not sleeping around but we can at least advice them to use contraceptives and have one partner, because aside teenage pregnancy there are other sexually transmitted diseases that can ruin their lives. . The picture above depicts a lot about unplanned pregnancy she is 15 and pregnant, will she be able to take care of this child at this age?
http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/teen-pregnancy/trends.html
In 2009 the FDA approved over the counter contraceptives sale of plan B one step for all women of child bearing age. the secretary disagreed with this decision that children under the age of 17 still need a prescription before they can get these drugs. I disagree with that because most teenagers do not want to tell their parents they are having sex, and for them to go to the doctor they will need their parents consent before they get these drugs. Do you think a teenager will want to go through this whole process. I think it should be available for everyone at least 13 and above only if you have the money for it.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/emergency-contraception-state-laws.aspx
Dangers of a Professional Political Class
Corruption! Talk to the average American citizen and it is likely that they will express extreme disfavor in how the nation is being governed. The government is out of touch, and American citizens know it. America's low opinion of our representatives is shown in the approval ratings of Congress and the President taken by Real Clear Politics. The most disturbing is there polling that shows the majority of Americans believe the country is heading in the wrong direction. Yet, when we look at the names of our elected representation and how long they have occupied their positions, we find that the government that President Lincoln spoke of has slipped into history. The government "of the people, by the people, for the people" has been replaced by a professional political class. Holding office is no longer an obligation to serve the people but a career, complete with benefits.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institute writes that the answer to this problem is Term Limits for Congress. By forcing members of Congress to return to the economy and job market that they have affected, it is more likely that they will represent the best interests of the people. This would also mitigate the effects of money in Washington D. C. by cutting into the cycle of favoritism and contracts in exchange for re-election campaign funds. Term Limits provides the most effective solution to corruption in Congress.
Further removing themselves from the people, Congress has seen fit to exempt themselves from the very laws they have put in place for the rest of us. One obvious example of this is the Affordable Care Act, which provides members of Congress and their staffers different set of rules from those that the public must abide by. Originally exempted from the law, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R, Iowa) was able to get a provision included which forced Congress and their staffers to enroll under modified rules. There are many other examples (such as insider trading) that, when brought to the attention of American citizens would create outrage.
And yet the members of Congress who remain firmly entrenched in their position can not be expected to surrender their comfortable positions atop Capitol Hill. This is why Article V of the Constitution allows for the states to act. A new movement to hold a Convention of the States in order to pass several amendments to the Constitution. This includes an amendment that would put Term Limits in place for Congress. Controversy surrounds this movement but as Mark Levin, a leading advocate of the movement to hold such a convention, the federal government will not fix itself.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institute writes that the answer to this problem is Term Limits for Congress. By forcing members of Congress to return to the economy and job market that they have affected, it is more likely that they will represent the best interests of the people. This would also mitigate the effects of money in Washington D. C. by cutting into the cycle of favoritism and contracts in exchange for re-election campaign funds. Term Limits provides the most effective solution to corruption in Congress.
Further removing themselves from the people, Congress has seen fit to exempt themselves from the very laws they have put in place for the rest of us. One obvious example of this is the Affordable Care Act, which provides members of Congress and their staffers different set of rules from those that the public must abide by. Originally exempted from the law, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R, Iowa) was able to get a provision included which forced Congress and their staffers to enroll under modified rules. There are many other examples (such as insider trading) that, when brought to the attention of American citizens would create outrage.
And yet the members of Congress who remain firmly entrenched in their position can not be expected to surrender their comfortable positions atop Capitol Hill. This is why Article V of the Constitution allows for the states to act. A new movement to hold a Convention of the States in order to pass several amendments to the Constitution. This includes an amendment that would put Term Limits in place for Congress. Controversy surrounds this movement but as Mark Levin, a leading advocate of the movement to hold such a convention, the federal government will not fix itself.
Bullying Laws
This is a matter that I hold close to my heart. My freshman
year of high school, I was bullied for most of the school year. The bullying
got so bad that I would skip school, take different routes to class and be
late, skip lunch period, and hid anyway I possible could. Every day I would
think to myself, why is she bullying me, why is she picking with me every
chance she gets? In high school, you hear people talking about what’s going on
and who it involves. In high school, everybody id trying to fit in with each
other and nobody wants to stand up and speak up to say STOP! Finally, somebody
did speak up and the same girl who was the bullier friend is the same girl who
spoke up and told the bully to stop. Surprisingly, we are now best friends.
Bullying is using strength or force to intimidate somebody.
Bullying can lead to many different outcomes; but the strongest one is suicide.
After being bullied, I went through a dark path. I never considered suicide,
but I wasn’t eaten at home, I didn’t feel like myself, and I couldn’t speak up for
myself anyone. Unfortunately, there are no bullying laws in the state of
Virginia. Bullying should be considered a crime. Bullying is not a game and is serious.
In some cases, bullying can be considered discriminatory harassment which is
under federal civil rights.
According to Stop
Bullying.gov, bullying hazing or teasing needs to be reported by schools in any
way shape or form. My question is bullying should be taking serious, yes, so
why aren’t there any laws about it? Why aren’t there any ways to stop this from
happening?
My mom is my best
friend. I come to my mom with everything. I tell her when I had a great day in
school and when somebody at work really pissed my off. In my personal
experience, when I was bullied at felt lower than low. I felt like nobody could
understand where I was coming from. I felt like nobody knew how to help.
Today, I am brave and I speak up for what’s right and what’s
wrong. I don’t let anybody pick with me or intimidate me to make me feel
inferior to them. I give advice to some of my younger friends going through
high school and letting them know to not let anybody mess with you on all
terms. My advice to young girls and boys is to tell a teacher, a friend, a
classmate, your parents. My advice is to tell somebody and to not let the bully
consume your life.
Legalizing Marijuana
**** My Hyperlink wasn’t working….. http://www.governing.com/gov-data/state-marijuana-laws-map-medical-recreational.html
Legalizing
of Marijuana is good for some but bad for others. In my opinion, legalizing of Marijuana should
be used for medicinal purposes only.
Why does
marijuana need to be legalized? What does legalization of marijuana help? Or does
legalization of marijuana show more harm than hurt?
The
government has begun the process and marijuana is not legal is 23 states, including the District of
Columbia. Marijuana is used not only for
medicinal use; but for recreational use as well. The states that marijuana is
legal for recreational use are Washington, Oregon, Colorado, and Alaska. The
states that marijuana is legal for medicinal use are California, Nevada,
Arizona, New Mexico, Montana, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Maryland,
Delaware, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and
Maine. Also, Alaska, is the only state where marijuana is legally used for
medicinal and recreational uses. This is almost half of the states. Legalizing
of Marijuana has spread like an epidemic.
Colorado, is
one of the main states were marijuana is frequently used. Colorado is a major state
that implement recreational usages since 2001. In Colorado, it is legal for
recreational usage. In Colorado there are shops with different flavors of
marijuana for people to buy. Should marijuana be legalized for recreational and
medicinal uses in all 50 states? In Colorado, there have been an increase in
DUI, from about 25 to 40 %. In schools, there has been in increase in
drug-related arrests by 32%. These arrests have resulted in suspensions and
expulsions. From 2011 to 2013, there were numerous results from drug related incidents.
In 2012, about 27 % of college students
admitted to smoking marijuana. Also, in 2013, 57% of emergency room visits were
from marijuana.
According to drugabuse.org, in 2009, 376,467
people were involved in marijuana visits to the emergency room. It also states
that most of the emergency room visits were of females than of males. The age
of marijuana use is between 18 to 20.
In my
opinion, I believe marijuana should not be legalizing. What does legalizing
marijuana help. It does more help than harm. I believe that it should be used
for medicinal purposes only.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)