Or-probably better-one can use both as nouns, saying that someone is an individualist and a feminist. There is no reason to fear the word feminist. Equality must mean equality under the law, but it must also mean philosophical and social equality of men and women in daily life. The latter cannot be achieved by legislation. True liberation and individualism means that all virtues and characteristics are individual human virtues and characteristics, open to anyone who is inclined to pursue and develop them.
Amendment 1 shows equality because it allows people to be themselves and believe in whatever they want to believe in. Amendment #1 states, “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.It proved the point because it said that the freedom of speech,or of the press,or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.It
"Are the immense standards of political flexibility and of normal equity, typified in that Declaration of Independence, broadened to us" (Douglass1)? This inquiry is the most essential. In the Declaration of Independence it is expressed, "We hold these realities to act naturally obvious, that all men are made equivalent, that they are enriched by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the quest for Happiness"(Jefferson1). He is suggesting that these rights are not being reached out to African Americans. At the point when this nation was made it was intended to be where everybody could be free and have similar rights.
In my point of view having freewill is the source of rights. Because we only have the use and benefits of rights when we have freewill. Explaining this argument, there is no logic of giving rights to a creature or person which cannot grasp or having need to use those rights and giving rights to that living is pointless. Furthermore I disagree with Locke`s view that rights protect men from the force of others (1). Rights are ethical principles and moral values we have in our lives.
Because of session the nation fell apart. (Mrs. Wise) I would say the main cause of the civil war is slavery. North didn't like slavery and the south wanted it. They made the Missouri compromise but north thought slavery should be emitted from America so they were going to have to fight.
Ambivalence is the best description that can be given to the ideological positions that were held by Founding Fathers and Jefferson on the American slavery. On one position, it can be argued that founding fathers had more focus on creating the Union as opposed to engaging in property rights and by their vision of miscegenation and race wars. Conversely, founding fathers embraced revolutionary ideologies that would emancipation a possible occurrence. The question often asked is how their indecisiveness on slavery practically came to play. The answer herein is that whenever founding fathers were dogged with dangers of racial order, property rights, and the Union, the often did very little to subvert the situation.
They assume that equality among the people exist to the level where the individual will fulfil his responsibility keeping not just his motives in mind but that of society. There is also the assumption that individuals in a democracy will either be provided with or have already acquired the sense of politics and civic action through various levels of education. All these suppositions are what make the theories of democracy seems possible or even viable. Without them, the ideas would be lost on the public and democracy reduced to a rubber stamp that exists but cannot exert its rights. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan (‘97-‘06) states No nation is born a democracy.” By this he means, that nations need to build on their idea of what democracy should include and aspire to maintain that standard.
This leveled the playing field, by not putting one over another. Due to the impact it had on Britain, other documents were drawn that expressed similar rights. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it states, “...recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world,” (D). The base for democracy and peace is having equal rights and allowing for equal opportunities. This Declaration acknowledges that equal rights for all is the only way to accomplish anything, because it allows everyone
“Human rights are not a privilege granted by the few, they are a liberty entitled to all, and human rights, by definition, include the rights of all humans, those in the dawn of life, the dusk of life, or the shadows of life”. (Kay Granger, U.S. Representative) Out of all the ethical ideas in the world, the belief that all people have particular rights holds much significance. This is because there is recognition that where a right is shown to exist, it must be met, where possible. Governments across the globe are known to have an obligation to provide for, uphold and protect the rights of their citizens. Such rights which are accepted politically may receive the backing of law.
The principle of equality encompasses all areas of India’s governance and society. The Constitution is unequivocal that equality is a fundamental mandate by which both state and individual are bound. In one stroke of the pen it removes immoral and iniquitous practices such as untouchability and begar. Through positive discrimination, it makes clear that there is no place for discriminatory societal divisions or practices such as caste, the historic disadvantages of sections such as women, and the vulnerability of minorities and children. It decrees that “we the people” shall be equal in our freedoms, have equality of opportunity and shall, first and foremost, be equal before the law.