When these actions of racial profiling takes away from your state of being free, power to do as you please, and in some cases your freedom from physical restraint; are in violations of your liberty making it immoral. In retrospect, what makes racial profiling immoral is the state that it leaves the victim in which is commonly a vulnerable one. This vulnerable state can consist of the feeling of being untrustworthy, an outcast, or stripped of his/her liberty. Everything about this goes against the way we should be treating each other morally regardless of our individual religious or personal
The major premise of his argument is that “the display of swastikas or Confederate flags clearly falls within the protection of the free speech clause of the First Amendment.” Thus, though he regrets that the students involved behaved in this fashion, Bok claims that censorship is dangerous and goes against the value of communication and American principles of democracy. He concludes his argument by suggesting that instead of enforcing codes, and thus violating the right to free speech, it would be better either to ignore such communications or to speak with those who perform insensitive acts. Rhetorical analysis Derek Bok organizes his argument by first describing the problem, then presenting both sides of approaches to resolving it, and finally explaining his personal stand on the issue. The rhetorical structure of such approach allows Bok present the argument fairly by conceding to the proponents of speech code enforcement that display of Confederate flags or swastikas is indeed insensitive and offensive. This pattern of organization also allows Bok to distinguish between the
Ethnocentrism can be detrimental to a society, because it can lead to false accusitions about a certain group of people, like the Muslims today. When people think of Muslims, the automatically think they are a terriost. All muslims aren’t terrorist and have a lot to offer this world, but we tend to label them as a terrorist because of the media and society. 3. Define emigration and immigration.
Just because someone is different, and going against "god's will," they can not have the same basic rights as everyone else. I believe the government is just trying to make the majority of the United States happy. I also believe they are letting their own religious beliefs get in the way. This needs to stop. We need to stop being so stubborn, and realize this injustice.
If the sex is not consented by both parties is then clearly it shouldn’t happen. It’s a violation of one’s person space and boundary. Depending on the severity of it, it can also be looked at the as violent act upon someone. When assaults of this nature are reported we are always trying figure out the reasoning behind it making excuses for the aggressor. There is a need for sovereignty and individual freedom that the assault takes away, and therefore that is the reason why a lot of cases go unreported.
There are words in some of the rulings that maintain the ”ex post facto” and “due process” provisions inherent in our United States Constitution are being violated including and stating “collateral damage”. The legal definition of collateral damage clearly indicates punishment. This is Punishment after the fact and strictly forbidden. In addition they have substituted the word civil proceeding as opposed to “criminal proceeding”. Most of us are not totally ignorant, as courts would like to believe.
Jihad is supposed to be an internal struggle however; people often confuse it with an external struggle in which they use violence for dominance. “Despite the fact that Jihad is not supposed to include aggressive warfare, this has occurred. Jihad means to counter such threats and assert the predominance of Islam.” Intercollegiate Review; Spring2002, Vol. 37 Issue 2, p24-32, 9p Just and Unjust War in the Terrorist Age. Many people consider Jihad to be a movement which causes a problem in the Muslim community because of the misinterpretation of the religious beliefs.
While others believe it is wrong and discriminatory. Racial profiling of a certain race and gender such as African American males, have an effect on society, and how society reacts to certain events. There have been events in American history that have led to riots or protests, which I believe is society’s way of fighting back. Racial profiling has been a long standing implemented tool used by law enforcement. However, it is important for law enforcement to follow guidelines and regulations such as civil rights.
Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity. All these points are valid, but they are forgetting about the rights of people and what they stand for. I would think people would want defendants to be punished fairly and not have an opening, where they could possible get their case dropped because of something illegal done on the prosecution or law enforcement
As United States citizens, we generally want to show that we believe in equality and don’t judge by race. However, there are still people in the United States that segregate, discriminate, and completely hate people who aren’t their own race. But, there are cases where racial profiling has been correct, and help apprehend a criminal. In any case, my opinion is that racial profiling is O.K to an extent. I believe that people should be treated equally so in that case, we shouldn’t be afraid to judge certain people like crime suspects because of color, and that we shouldn’t defend people because of color too.