“Analyzing the Text” Michael Levin’s, “The Case for Torture” argues that there are various reasons for allowing torture in the United States of America. Michael Levin believes that torture is justified when victims are at risk, claiming that torture is not merely permissible but morally mandatory. The author makes hypothetical scenarios in which people’s lives are in danger and preventing future events from occurring. Then stating his position on torture when people’s lives are placed in danger. Levin’s target audience is Americans because his use of American symbolism such as “July 4,” and “unconstitutional.” In addition, the United States is not the only victim of terrorist attacks.
First of all, if the NSA were to pursue major invasions of privacy to American’s, they would be obstructing rights set forth by the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits non-reasonable search and seizure. If there is no probable cause for the government to search for evidence on an individual, then their legal rights should not be violated. I personally have nothing to hide, but being spied on would make me questions the true ethics of this country. On the other hand, I think that our government has the right to do everything in it’s power to ensure our safety, including spying on those in countries who have threatened our own.
Controversy with the Second Amendment As law abiding American citizens, we have the right to bear arms as stated by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. This Amendment was enacted to ensure that our founding fathers and their descendants had the means to protect themselves, their family and their property. Although this is a legal right, there is heated controversy as to whether it is an ethical right. Typically, the gun debate inflates shortly after a mass shooting like the recent incidents in Aurora and Newtown. The argument is usually the same: one side insists that if officials eradicated guns, thus abolishing the Second Amendment, gun violence will somehow go away.
The Eighth Amendment: protective or useless? In the United States government, the Constitution was formed to provide the basic structure of government. To appease the states and citizens who felt as though they were losing power and were scared of a strong national government in the wake of the stranglehold the British crown had held over the original colonies, the Bill of Rights was drawn up. The Eighth Amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual punishments inflicted” (Colbert 12). In theory, the Eighth Amendment provides protection to those who have been accused of a crime and those who have already been convicted.
If the sole reason for war was to capture Sadaam and his officials, this would then be unjust. At the time of the war, the war met another requirement of the doctrine; it had legitimate authority, George W. Bush. As long as a legit source declares the war, approval from the UN is unnecessary. Therefore there was an official declaration of war, showing
In fact, he would tell about how they should be realistic and understand human nature. Therefore, people would find him evil for saying such statements. Although, what could have affected Machiavelli to write such a controversial book? For this we have to look back in his life learning that he worked in politics for a long time, which affected him but how? Thus, we can bring the following question: How did Machiavelli’s political career influence the views he expresses in his book The Prince?
However, the opposing side was strongly worried that the United States government was going to have a loss of power. The opposing side had a goal to make the debate drug out as long as possible, by having long speeches about how the Bill angered them. Barry Goldwater stated that he believed that the United States government should not get involved in the employment area because there is “no constitutional basis for the exercise of federal regulatory.” Also stated in this selection Senator Sam Ervin says that it would ruin the relationships with the state and the federal government. Last but not least Senator John Stennis pointed out mainly that citizens should be able to their own businesses or property as that wished upon. (Source 6) Filibusters was another main event that took part in of the passing of the bill.
America is a free country and I agree with the opposing person that wouldn’t go because it forced on them. I believe you should have a choice in a decision that your life is at risk. At the same time I can see where sometimes it’s necessary to force people to serve because if everyone had the choice not to serve most people wouldn’t. I just think its wrong to force anything on someone especially when it has to with you possibly dying. People running away from not going to war can be a good or bad depending on whom the person is.
Gun control laws have become such a huge controversy in the United States due to the fact that citizens believe their Second Amendment right is being taken away from them. In my eyes, I believe that extended gun control measures should be taken to ensure that access to assault weapons should be limited to certain people. I believe one deserve a well rounded background check to see if any mental health issues are visible. I also believe you have the right to own a weapon and the government is not trying to take away your hunting rifles, personal permitted handguns, etc. They government is emphasizing more on the fully automatic weapons, explosives, armor and other things that only the military should have access to.
I could blame the defeat which would have been the result of my action on him and come out as Peacemaker…But I had a greater obligation than to think only of the years of my administration and of the next election. I had to think of the effect of my decision on the next generation and on the future of peace and freedom in America and in the world.” However, this idealistic standpoint was mere propaganda. In private, President Nixon would favour a more militant and aggressive approach. This contradictory position not only exposed Nixon’s vulnerability to public opinion, but also his disillusion and misunderstanding of the complexities of such a war. It is imperative to understand the factors which influenced President Nixon’s strategies and decision making during the Vietnam War.