Pros And Cons In Defense Of Our America

1810 Words8 Pages
In Defense of Our America presents many examples that give sufficient evidence to prove that the U.S government has severely breached the U.S. Constitution. Our government has created a “war on terror” and has victimized its citizens with the most vehement emotions – fear. They have censored our freedom of protest, religion and choice, with hotbed issues such as abortion and terrorism. At a time when the government should be protecting its citizens the most, it has instead misused that trust and stripped individuals of their most basic civil liberties. With such subjective definitions of crime and a government in place that is willing to throw away the core values of America it’s no wonder we’ve gotten to where we are today. This system…show more content…
I’m not sure if the white male lawmakers of South Dakota would know, but having a child is incredibly emotional and having to give up something that is part of you could quite possibly hold as much trauma as the assault in the first place. Cecilia Fire Thunder makes a very good point, “I don’t think God wanted the future of the human race to be created in violence.” (pg 63) Opinions on abortion have its root in the values and morals of an individual. Pro life activists almost always align themselves with the conservative right, or vice versa, where values such as religion play a big role in just about everything. With a separation of church and state in affect the problem looks to be solved. Only being able to be defined as deviant behavior, to some, abortion unfortunately leaves a sour stigma with those parties involved. Abortion is such a hot issue because personhood, the most important thing to consider when taking an opinion on the issue is, again, completely subjective. By limiting one person from getting an abortion you are limiting that person’s right to choose. If someone doesn’t agree with abortion the solution is easy: Don’t get one! The argument that abortion is murder is a very mucky trail.…show more content…
This definition of people sounds eerily familiar to what the United States system of “justice” did to John Walker and Knaled El Masri. In a clear example of a faulty government John Walker’s story did provide a right to be suspicious especially at such a poignant time in American history, but once sufficient evidence, which is so easily gathered in the book, was provided the story should have been dropped. The government and media, who played a very important role in these cases, saw his case as an opportunity to let the American people know we are fighting against terrorism and will do anything we have to in order to stop it – including beating, torturing, and kidnapping innocent people. Here, the media had immediately tagged John Walker as a terrorist from the start. What if they had taken the more sympathetic version of the story? Because of the media frenzy involved, the story was sensationalized and the government fed it with Attorney Generals Ashcroft and Gonzales’ comments, and a trial date intentionally close to the first year anniversary of September 11th. John Walker’s story at a first glance is, of course, deeply skeptical especially having an indirect, and incorrect, correlation to Al Queda “Afghan civil war had a terrorism component,” and “the Taliban were seen as accessories to the World Trade Center attacks.” (pg 93) Emotions are high enough after September

More about Pros And Cons In Defense Of Our America

Open Document