Whether I like the guy or not, that’s not the issue. Canadians have a right under the Charter of rights under our constitution. You could be the most vile person on earth but if you are a Canadian citizen you have certain rights.” Knowing this, it is easy for Canadians to demonize Khadr all these years because he is a Canadian citizen. A country should protect their citizens, as soon as they are in danger. It is wrong that it took Canada many years to actually take action for Khadrs rights and protection.
Books with artistic and cultural value are still challenged every day by those who want to control what others read. These people that put all their effort to censor books and free expression are unacceptable and unconditional. By censoring school books in libraries, our basic freedoms that are guaranteed in the First Amendment are violated. In other words, to be told what is were allowed to read and what is not is a direct defilement of the First Amendment, which 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”(Asato, 287). The quote clearly states that the congress will not take away our freedom of speech.
The Canadian Government should have not been allowed to force men to become soldiers against their will through the law of conscription. Conscription is against human rights, the government is using it as a tool to control its citizens and it was unfair to many people. Conscription is thus a human rights violation because in a free country, one should be free to choose to not die for their country. From the articles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, many claims that conscription violates the following articles. * Art.1: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
John Doe English 11 30 May 2014 Fighting for Writing Mark Twain's novel, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn criticism has two sides. One argument posits that this novel should definitely be taught in schools because it teaches the importance of integrity over racism while others argue that its use of raw offensive language and questionable content is vulgar, unnecessary and racist in nature. Twain wrote this book knowing the criticism that might come with it but stated that an in depth analysis as to the validity of the book is unimportant to the message it sends. Twain argues this by bluntly by positing in the beginning of the novel that, "Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted;... persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot." Twain is establishing from the get go that this novel should not be argued or criticized because it may be offensive to people but that it should be read as a novel that shows two men who find friendship despite racial boundaries.
This section proves that what is happening in schools all over the country is wrong, and it abuses the student’s rights. Every person in Canada is protected by the charter, which means that even if someone is not a Canadian citizen and even if they are subordinate to the person initiating the search, they have the right to remain secure. There is absolutely no reason that teachers and principals should have the right to conduct search and seizure as well as locker searches amongst their students, even if the student seems suspicious. For teachers to carry out these searches is against the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it violates the student’s privacy. This is
As previously discussed in class, we had come to the conclusion that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was a story about inhospitably, not homosexuality. The attempted act of the villagers toward the angels was not a representation of sexual desire, rather an act to shame the strangers. Leviticus 18:22 “you shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” is the law most quoted by anti-gay WORD, and at face value its meaning seems apparent. The film stresses the need for historic framework of the original authors and culture and reputable theologians describing said history and culture lend authority to the documentary. As a small community, ancient Israelites were concerned with the propagation of its people, and the best way for it to grow was to ‘go for and multiply.’ Importantly, the film demonstrates that acceptance within a Christian community is possible.
In addition, the States had socially influenced Canada greatly, in terms of culture. Canada did gain some political independence, hampered by the fact that Canada depended on the United States for much of its social and economic success. Canada’s prime minister, Mackenzie King, did not follow the regular rules set by Britain. Instead he refused to send Canadian troops with Britain to invade Turkey in 1922. (Cranny p.55) Normally, when Britain went to war, Canada would automatically be at war as well, but King took a big step in not following orders from the mother country.
I find this case to be contradicting because what is illegal in the copy right act somewhat violates your constitutional rights. (Eric Corley, 2000) Is it possible to strike an appropriate balance between the rights of both groups on this issue? I do not believe it is possible to balance out the rights of both groups without contradiction. You either can make a few copies or none according to the opposing side. I am completely against breaking the law but I myself have brought a CD for my father and burned it to my iPod so that I can also listen to it.
In the course of discovery, the School Board members who voted to remove the books acknowledged that they had not read many of the books and that they removed them because they exposed students to the "religion of witchcraft." The ultimate questions: Do students have a right to read? Does book censorship violate the First Amendment and at the expense of who? As the final verdict on April 22, 2003, the Supreme Court ordered the return of the books back to library shelves. Background Information The Court cited the Tinker case and ruled that there was no evidence that reasonably showed substantial disruption or material interference with school activities if students were allowed unfettered access to the books.
No books should ever be banned because for each book that is banned, there possibly could be one life lesson that will not be learned by the next generation. Censorship of books in schools and libraries is wrong for it limits what students can potentially learn. Books such as To Kill a Mocking Bird, Of Mice and Men, and others teach valuable life lessons, which is why they are considered classics. Books such as these are being banned for they have questionable material. In the same book introduction as the opening quote, Judy Blume wrote, “Those who were most active in trying to ban books cam from the ‘religious right’ but the impulse to censor spread like a contagious disease.