Comparisons to Holocaust Life’s experiences teach us that unless we can learn from our mistakes, that history will repeat its self! Were the genocides against the Native Americans a stepping stone to the Nazi Holocaust? Historical facts can lead one to believe that it most likely was. From the beginning of both the Holocaust and the Native American genocide there were many stereotypes. Stereotypes are a form of classification based on inaccurate information or assumptions.
There is a moral difference between Shelton’s killing of his attackers and that of his other victims. Darby and Ames caused personal harm to Shelton and thus gave him the moral right to try and prevent any other future pain that could be caused by these men, but the other victims were combatants in the war that Shelton waged against the “system”. When looking at Darby and Ames, Shelton takes a more utilitarian approach when dealing with their killings. The government “system” is supposed to punish those who are wrong. But in the trial of Darby and Ames, only Ames was punished severely while Darby was allowed to go free.
The Spread Of Genocide Racism has conflicted many countries with catastrophic tragedies. Overtime, genocide became the given title for racial, religious, and ethnic destruction. After the Jewish Holocaust of World War II, many countries pledged to a new world without genocide; however, many recent conflicts in different countries show us that the pledge against genocide has failed. The consequences of inaction and indifference has decimated a large population of ethnic groups like the Jewish population during the Holocaust; moreover, the value of acting out against oppression and tyranny can prevent violence and evince human morality. The consequences of inaction has decimated ethnic minorities, but how did these consequences affect ethnic groups?
Thinking about it more, I realized that hate-crimes legislation doesn't aim to punish the actual crime, but rather the motive (or thoughts) behind it. That's smacks of being more than a little Orwellian to me, besides being something that's very difficult to prove. If someone is continually spouting hateful speech, there's a pretty good chance you can figure out that their motive for a crime might be related to that hate. But what about someone who doesn't give any
To further enforce this law would only be a waste of effort and “more dangerous” to those who are actually doing the enforcing. I think the second premiss is completely credible; “society” will not stop the use of marijuana if there are new laws passed stating the use of marijuana is prohibited. Therefore the conclusion that states “severe laws against marijuana are more dangerous to society than the activity which they are designed to prevent” is plausible due to the fact of reality that on a regular basis people don’t obey these laws. Getting in trouble with the law is more dangerous to society than just taking marijuana as an activity. For this particular argument it would have to be “Circular Reasoning”, it’s a fallacy that in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true.
Hate Crimes By Tashena Estelle Com 172 Hate crimes are defined as the violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of who they are. Hate crimes are also defined by federal law as criminal acts motived by an assailant prejudice against victim’s religion, race, ethnicity, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. The word is full of hate. The problem of hate does not seem to be subsiding either, by a long shot. To think after all the years to past, things would have gotten better!
Labeling a particular crime as special or different does not deter criminals from their true intention. If we place a "special" label on certain types of murder, rape or vandalism we are not preventing the hate that is the motive for such crimes. This is not the true goal of society. Helen Dodge makes a compelling argument to shun the members of such hateful communities in her article "Special Crimes Need Special Laws", when she says that the public should band together against such forces (Dodge 140). However, even she had to admit that these special laws won't deter the criminals who practice these violent acts.
Lincoln Douglas Debate Case Outline Negative “Killing innocent civilians is a horrific, hideous act that no religion can approve.” It is because I agree with Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy that I feel compelled to negate today’s resolution, Resolved: Targeted killing is a morally permissible foreign policy tool. For clarification of today’s round, I offer the following definitions : First, I would like to define foreign policy. Foreign policy is defined by dictionary.com as a policy pursued by a nation in its dealings with other nations, designed to achieve national objectives. Targeted killing is defined as the premeditated killing of an individual by a state organization or institution outside a judicial procedure or a battlefield. The highest value in today's debate is that of utilitarianism.
Illegal votes minimize citizen’s rights in the Constitution and it undermines our democracy that was established and preached by the founding fathers; therefore a solution for this loophole should be quickly tied and these actions no longer tolerable or allowed under the 14th amendment. As citizens of the US, we have a right stated in the 1st amendment to be able to express our opinions; our values and beliefs should be directly represented through the voting process. Although future elections are predicted to be heavily influenced by this growing minority population, politicians are beginning to apprehend the negative brunt illegal immigration has bestowed upon our country as this could be a small factor in the current struggling economy. Congressman Tom Tancredo has vast prospective ideas on how to reform our immigration system. By working across the aisle a feasible and successful solution to the straining liability and encumbrances may be obtained to make our country incorrupt and hospitable to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness to the citizens of the United State of
In every part of the United States there are crimes being committed out of hate towards certain individuals or groups, but these crimes can be put to a halt with more strict laws against crime, public awareness, and world peace. First of all, the people must come to realize that crime motivated by bias or hate is much different than other crime (Lieberman 81). If more strict laws are put