1 Cristina Castaneda Professor Sharifian GOVT 2305 11 February 2018 Civil Rights versus Civil Liberties Civil rights and Civil liberties are well known for the type of impact they have had on our government. Civil liberties are specific rights, that are protected from the government. Civil rights are equal protection under the laws. The courts have ruled on civil rights as equal rights for all citizens no matter where you come from, or who you are. With civil liberties certain amendments grant citizens certain rights also referred to as the Bill of Rights.
Logos, the most important of all appeals, provides a logic to an argument by providing “reason an evidence to support claims” (Lunsford et al). The entire seventh and eighth paragraphs of The Ballot or the Bullet is an appeal to logic. X explains how the fight for civil rights holds no candle to the fight for human rights. Civil rights are unique to the US and cannot be fought for by anyone other than Americans, because outsiders have no say in how the US government works or what rights are bestowed (X 2). However, all humans my fight for and defend human rights.
Time and time again, he repeated freedom, justice and equality won’t be here as long as some people are still denied to one or more of those. However, for Dr. King, civil rights went further than that. He stated that all things are equal and important. As John Muir said, “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe” (110). Everyone has the right to clean water, soil and air.
OVT 2305-73005 Sherry Sharifian Feb 10th. 2018 Jun Seong Paik Civil Right and liberties Liberties and rights are the forces that all citizens can have, but they express a different meaning. Liberties from the dictionary meaning is an external constraint, a condition that cannot be tied to anything and can be done at will, and a right is a force given by law to enjoy certain life benefits. As such, liberties and rights can be felt in many ways in the dictionary meaning. 1 "It is a fair summary of constitutional history that the landmarks of our liberties have often been forged in cases involving not very nice people - Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter”(Civil Liberties and Civil Rights).
There have been many controversies around what people should do during the national anthem. We can still respect our country besides for standing. One of the most important principal in the united states is that we have freedom of speech unless there is a compelling reason to take it away. In fact the first amendment of the constitution states that in stipulations can not make rules that quote “abridge the freedom of speech.” This is implies that though we have been standing for the national anthem there is no rule or law saying that we can not do anything else during the national anthem and people are the only limitations from stopping people from doing what they want so whos to say we can only respect our country one way. We should be able to respect our country in many multiple ways and however we want to as long as it is some form of respect.
Even though women won their rights to vote in 1919, they still needed to fight for more equal rights. Due to the civil Rights movement the supreme court opened up gates to allow immigrants from Asia and South America to come and provided more rights to minorities Unfortunately people still have their rights over powered through authorities unknowingly by being frisked by police and security guards through Terry Stop. The Terry Stop violates the fourth amendment that states citizens have a right to privacy, a right to protect yourself from unfair treatment from authority therefore the Terry Stop violates our rights. The constitution should protect us from the Terry Stop which is already written in the fourth amendment prohibiting search and seizures unless a warrant is provided. In the case of Floyd v New York City when David Floyd an African American man was unfairly frisked and accused by the police for breaking and entering in to his own family building.
In the constitution,it’s about equality and all of our Amendments are about equality, but not everybody thinks that our Amendments have anything to do with equality. Our Amendments give everyone their rights.The substance is that everyone is shown with equality and fairness,but some of our people don’t think that were shown with kindness or equality. Everyone is shown with equality and gracefulness with all of the Amendments that we have like Amendment 4 it states that the government can’t go into our homes without a search warrant and they can’t go through our things. Amendment 4 is a good law because it gives our people our rights, Amendment 2 is a good law too,but if someone just killed someone else for their pleasure then it won’t be a good Amendment,but it still allows people to defend themselves.Presented in this paragraph was things about equality and how not everybody thinks that are Amendments show everyone their rights and equality. Amendment 1 shows equality because it allows people to be themselves and believe in whatever they want to believe in.
However, according to the United Nation Human Rights, “human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic, origin, color, religion, language, or any other status (What are human rights, 2015).” Everyone should have the same right and freedom to do whatever he or she wants without discrimination. The LGBT community does not have the same rights as straights; and are consistently denied the rights of matrimony just because of their
Right to freedom of speech, expression or association is basically one of the aspect of liberty while on the other hand the restrictions are the security of the state and these two, liberty and the restrictions are antagonistic in the pure form . As the foundations of law and government of the country, the constitution tries to strike a balance between liberty and restrictions but apparently it is not an easy job. The court’s attitude towards unpleasant, disturbing and outrageous ideas may not please everyone and not everyone will agree to it and also no one doubt that freedom of speech or expression views as one of the foundations of a democratic society . Even though not everyone will agree
Every moment that happens in our lives, every decision that we make, every path that we follow eventually boils down to us making the choice between having safety and having freedom. These two concepts are completely different yet in order for life to work properly you can’t have one without some of the other. They can never be totally equal and the greater one isn’t necessarily our choice all the time but if you were to only have one we would be living a completely different story. H.L. Mencken believed that human kind “doesn’t want to be free… [they] simply want to be safe.” However, in contemporary society (any society for that matter) that’s not true.