Free Essays on First Amendment

â€Å"You cheap ass hoe,† and â€Å"you *censored*ing ass hole,† are two of the many sayings you can hear on tabloid talk shows. All the profanity is usually beeped out, but should it be? We have freedom of speech rights, do we not? Technically, we do not have that right. So, producers are not going to let their guests use profanity, but when that is the case they should do a better job at censoring. The first amendment states, â€Å"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (U.S. Constitution.) Which means we do not have freedom of speech rights. It just means that Congress can not make any laws to prohibit speech as long as it does not hurt anyone else. However, producers can limit what their guests say. People on tabloid talk shows can use profanity as much as they want, but producers have every right to beep them out. People feel that profanity is bad for small children and is inappropriate. Producers will not ignore that because they want people to watch their show. If people will watch the show as long as profanity is beeped out, then they will beep it out because all they care about is ratings. People do not find profanity socially acceptable, so producers censor profanity or nudity. However, they do not do a good job censoring profanity. They miss the word by a second and you can hear the first part and only the other half is beeped out. If they want to censor things for the good of the people, they should also blur out their guest’s lips, but producers do not do this. They know that profanity will help keep their ratings up. It is entertaining to watch grown people cuss and fight on television. It is just inappropriate for impressionable minds. There are a lot of things that are sa... Free Essays on First Amendment Free Essays on First Amendment â€Å"You cheap ass hoe,† and â€Å"you *censored*ing ass hole,† are two of the many sayings you can hear on tabloid talk shows. All the profanity is usually beeped out, but should it be? We have freedom of speech rights, do we not? Technically, we do not have that right. So, producers are not going to let their guests use profanity, but when that is the case they should do a better job at censoring. The first amendment states, â€Å"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (U.S. Constitution.) Which means we do not have freedom of speech rights. It just means that Congress can not make any laws to prohibit speech as long as it does not hurt anyone else. However, producers can limit what their guests say. People on tabloid talk shows can use profanity as much as they want, but producers have every right to beep them out. People feel that profanity is bad for small children and is inappropriate. Producers will not ignore that because they want people to watch their show. If people will watch the show as long as profanity is beeped out, then they will beep it out because all they care about is ratings. People do not find profanity socially acceptable, so producers censor profanity or nudity. However, they do not do a good job censoring profanity. They miss the word by a second and you can hear the first part and only the other half is beeped out. If they want to censor things for the good of the people, they should also blur out their guest’s lips, but producers do not do this. They know that profanity will help keep their ratings up. It is entertaining to watch grown people cuss and fight on television. It is just inappropriate for impressionable minds. There are a lot of things that are sa...

Business economic Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Business economic - Coursework Example 6). Inflation causes a redistribution of income and wealth away from lenders to the benefits of borrowers. Inflation reduces the value of money so lender losses some value of his money once he is paid in the period of inflation. Keynesian economic theory usual relay on spending aggregate demand to define the economic market place of which is often influenced by public and private decisions. Classical economic theory is rooted in the concept of a laissez-faire also known free market, which requires little to know government interventions. Also allows individuals to act according to their self-interest regarding economic issues thus promoting unemployment 8). An externality exists in production of good or service when: the marginal social cost differs from the marginal private cost of production. For example, a chemical industry emits wastage as a by-product into nearby rivers and into the atmosphere. This creates negative externalities, which impose higher social costs on other firms and consumers. 9). In a market economy, the ideal solution to the problem of externalities would be to allow producers to produce the output level where both the marginal private benefits and the marginal. Externalities create divergence between the private and social cost of

The origins of the US Constitution Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

The origins of the US Constitution - Essay Example When delegates in nine of the then thirteen states ratified the document, it marked the creation of a union of sovereign states, and a federal government to administer that union. It took effect on March 4, 1789, replacing the weaker, non-centralized union that existed under the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution of the United States is one of the oldest constitutions still in use (the oldest being that of the Republic of San Marino, which dates backs to 1600), and the oldest federal constitution currently in use. In September 1786, commissioners from five states met in the Annapolis Convention to discuss adjustments to the Articles of Confederation that would improve commerce. They invited state representatives to convene in Philadelphia to discuss improvements to the federal government. After debate, the Confederation Congress endorsed the plan to revise the Articles of Confederation on February 21, 1787. Twelve states, Rhode Island being the only exception, accepted this invitation and sent delegates to convene in May 1787. The resolution calling the Convention specified its purpose was to propose amendments to the Articles, but the Convention decided to propose a rewritten Constitution. The Philadelphia Convention voted to keep deliberations secret and decided to draft a new fundamental government design which eventually stipulated that only 9 of the 13 states would have to ratify for the new government to go into effect (for the participating states). Congress, noting dissatisfaction wit h the Articles of Confederation government, unanimously agreed to submit the proposal to the states despite what some perceived as the exceeded terms of reference. On September 17, 1787, the Constitution was completed in Philadelphia, followed by a speech given by Benjamin Franklin. In it he talked about how he wasn't completely satisfied with it but that perfection would never fully be achieved. He accepted the document as it was and he wanted all those against the ratification of it to do the same. After fierce fights over ratification in many of the states, New Hampshire became that ninth state on June 21, 1788. Once the Congress of the Confederation received word of New Hampshire's ratification, it set a timetable for the start of operations under the Constitution, and, on March 4, 1789, the government under the Constitution began operations. Changes since 1787 The Bill of Rights comprises the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Those amendments were adopted between 1789 and 1791, and all relate to limiting the power of the federal government. First Amendment: addresses the rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, freedom of petition, and also freedom of religion, both in terms of prohibiting the Congressional establishment of religion and protecting the right to free exercise of religion. Second Amendment: declares the necessity for "a well regulated militia," and prohibits infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." Third Amendment: prohibits the government from using private homes as quarters for soldiers without the consent of the owners. The only existing case law regarding this amendment is a lower court decision in the case of Engblom v. Carey. Fourth Amendment: guards against searches, arrests, and seizures of property without a specific warrant or a "probable cause" to believe a crime has been committed. Some rights to privacy have been inferred from this amendment and others by the Supreme Court. Fifth Amendment: forbids trial for a major crime except after indictment by a grand jury; prohibits repeated trials for the same offense after an acquittal (except in certain very limited

Education and Safe Educational Environment Essay Example for Free

Education and Safe Educational Environment Essay Rights talk seeps into spheres of American society where a sense of personal responsibility and of civic obligation traditionally have been nourished. An intemperate rhetoric of personal liberty in this way corrodes the social foundations on which individual freedom and security ultimately rest. Because I agree with this quote, I firmly resolve the resolution that establishing a safe educational environment for grades K-12 justifies the infringement of civil liberties. I would like to offer the following definitions: Establish: to make firm or secure Safe Educational Environment: an environment conducive to learning where students are free from hurt, injury or loss Justifies: to demonstrate to be right, just, or valid Infringement: an encroachment, as of a right or privilege Civil Liberties: fundamental individual rights, such as freedom of speech and religion, protected by law against unwarranted governmental or other interference The value that the affirmative upholds is education. The value criterion I will use to uphold my value is safety. Safety is extremely important on any educational institute because it allows the students and faculty to learn and operate without any threat hanging over them. To explain my position, I offer the following contentions: Contention 1: Without the establishment of a safe learning environment, the ability to learn and to teach is severely hampered. Without a safe educational environment, the attainment of knowledge is difficult to achieve. As Michael Ferraraccio said, If schools cannot operate in a violence-free atmosphere, then education will suffer, a result which ultimately threatens the well being of everyone. An infringement of a students civil liberties is required to be able to maintain a safe and enjoyable learning atmosphere for both the students and the faculty. When a student does not feel secure in their learning area, they are often distracted and unable to focus. For example, a student cannot possibly concentrate if another classmate is spewing insults and cuss words at the teacher. However, if we allowed students the freedom of speech, this could be common place. Contention 2: Moral obligation to provide safe schools Donald Beci stated Because a state requires compulsory school attendance, it has a moral duty to maintain student discipline and to protect children from violence that occurs while they are attending the very schools to which the state has bound them to attend. A school is required to protect the children that it harbors, and thus some civil liberties must not be granted. Examples of these are the right to bear arms and the right to privacy, which could be construed to mean very dangerous things by students not mature enough to understand them. Also, privacy rights must not be granted in school, as it might endanger the safety of others. In fact, Donald Beci also says that, In situations where the school administration and students share joint control of lockers, desks, or other school property, the students would not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in such property; thus, in the abscence of privacy, Fourth Amendment requirements would be inapplicable. Thus schools must disregard some civil rights to uphold the value of safety which most of them abide by. The affirmative has proven that schools must disregard students civil rights in order to ensure a good and safe learning environment.

The Blood is on Our Hands Essay -- Essays Papers

The Blood is on Our Hands The two main tribes that occupy the vast land of Rwanda, Africa are the Tutsi and Hutu tribes. According to David Rieff, author of Rwanda and Genocide in the Twentieth Century, Rwanda gained its independence from France a little over forty years ago and the territory has been involved in or been on the verge of a civil war between the two tribes ever since. During most of the colonial period the Tutsis had control because of the influence of the Banzugu, the white French man. The Banzugu only occupied about one percent of the population but they obtained most of the material wealth within Rwanda. The Banzugu separated the Hutus from the Tutsis socially based on there physical features. The Tutsis were thought to be the superior tribe because of their non-African appearance, pale skin and their aquiline noses. Since the beginning of their tribal existence the two tribes have lived next to one another, believed in the same religion and spoke the same language. After Rwanda gain ed its independence from France the Tutsis held the majority of the power and authority. The Tutsis only held the control for a short period of time before the Hutus took control. When the Hutus took control many Tutsis fled Rwanda in fear of their lives or stayed and were murdered (1-2). This was just a preview of the rage to come in April of 1994. About nine months before the massacre broke out the governments involved in the peacekeeping agreement signed what was called the Arusha Accords. This treaty was to be an international agreement to help control the constant battling between the Hutus and the Tutsis. On August 4, 1993 only five short days before the funding to the Rwandan government was revoked, Presi... ...f 1994 in Rwanda in the amount of time it would have taken you to read this paper over fifty-five innocent people would have been put to death! Works Cited Burkhalter, Holly J. â€Å"The Question of Genocide: The Clinton Administration and Rwanda.† World Policy Journal 11.4 (1994): 44-55. Byrne, Louise. â€Å"Doctors Battle to Contain Cholera in Rwandan Camps.† British Medical Journal 309 (1994): 289 Des Forges, Alison, et al. Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda. New York: International, 1999. Gourevitch, Philip. We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We Will be Killed with Our Families: Stories from Rwanda. New York: Farrar, 1998. Ignatieff, Michael. â€Å"The Next President’s Duty to Intervene.† New York Times 13 Feb. 2000, late ed., sec. 4: 17. Rieff, David. â€Å"Rwanda and Genocide in the Twentieth Century.† The New Republic 214 (1996): 27-37.

Ch. 23 Kite Runner

Chapter 23 †¢The narrative starts very fragmented and disjointed as Amir Flits in and out of consciousness. This is reflected presented by the continued use of short sentences and paragraphs, the broken narrative could also show Amir’s detachment from reality. †¢Within the chapter we are also presented with dreams as a form of narrative. A prominent dream is the dream of the bear and Baba, this could represent Amir finally conquering his guilt, the bear, and however the dream ends without Amir killing the bear which could show he is fully redeemed yet.This moment comes later when Amir runs the kite for Sohrab. The dream could also symbolise many other things Baba could be the bear as earlier in the novel Amir comments â€Å"I could never tell the difference†, the dream could represent how he has finally proved to Baba he is a man or the bear could have represented for Assef who is the real monster in the now. Earlier in the novel â€Å"When Baba died, Amir ca lled his cancer â€Å"the Bear he could not defeat. † This shows how the dream is symbolic on so many different things. The relationship between Sohrab and Amir Remains strained â€Å"I asked Sohrab if he wanted to play. I didn’t expect him to answer, let alone play†. They play â€Å"panjapar† in silence for hours and Amir relates many of Sohrab’s characteristics to Hassan such as his ability with a slingshot and his skill at card games. †¢The chapter is also a very emotional one for Amir he breaks down when Farid says â€Å"For you a thousand times over† this is closely linked to Amir’s memories of Hassan and this phrase is repeated throughout and Repetition is a device used throughout the novel, to create emphasis.It is first spoken by Hassan to Amir, at the beginning of the novel. From then on, the reader associates this quote with the relationship that Hassan and Amir have. Then at the ending in a letter Hassan has wrote to A mir. The fact that Hassan can still say this to Amir after all Amir has done to him, show that he followed through with his words, which makes this phrase very meaningful. This lexis used, such as. A thousand† is purposely used by the author to emphasize Hassan's unlimited loyalty to Hassan. †¢Rahim Khan’s letter provides some answers to the questions that Amir may have had about his and Baba’s behavior. The contrast of how Baba dealt with the guilt, by giving to charities etc; contrasts of how Amir dealt with his guilt. He then later dreams he is Assef’s twin maybe showing he still hasn’t reached peace with

PHI2604 income distribution Essay - 661 Words

Patricia Pupo Professor Matthew Sang PHI 2604 26 November 2014 Income Distribution This essay will discuss if current income distribution has a negative impact in the society because of the inequality that exists. What is income distribution? It is how a national income is split between different groups. Rights theory worries as the name says it, about people rights, and action is good if it respects the people’s rights. There are two kinds of rights, positive and negative. The first one relates to the right that people have to entitlements, is also known as Welfare (food, shelter, healthcare). The second one is negative rights, it is associated with the right that a person has not be subjected to an action from another group or person.†¦show more content†¦The inequality of income distribution does not fit well with rights theory since the goal of the second one is equality. All citizens should have same opportunity. People join a society because they need protection and help. Another philosophical theory is egoism that states that since people live from their minds which is independents therefore they should act in their own self-interest. There are two kinds physiological that says that people should do what they want and ethical suggest that they do things in self-interest. Egoist does not sacrifice himself for others and does not sacrifice others for himself since that is the basis of this theory we can resume that the inequality of income distribution goes well with this theory. No one is responsible for no one, because if they are, they would be living like parasite.† The average pay of a CEO in a major corporation was $11.9 million in 2000.† (Shaw,144) and a McDonalds employee is $18,890, if we were to compare those two salaries from a egoistic point of view they both deserve what they have accomplish because they work independently, it does not matter how unequal the distribution of the income is. Many associates income distribution with social inequality and see it as a bad thing, from the egotistical point of view is good, individuals get to thrive because they set their goals and derive their