Friday, November 24, 2006

Student Study Guide Page 75 # 7

1. Copy and paste and/or Post your essay/free response to this blog before Saturday.
2. Read someone else's essay/free response and comment on the content of it.

(# 7: State whether you personally believe that all types of political groups should receive the full protection of American laws. If so, why? If not, to which groups would you deny which rights?)


Jahir D said...

Equal Protection to All Political Groups
Personally, I believe that all political groups, regardless of their goals, should receive the same protection from the laws as everyone else. This includes the right to hold peaceful meetings and to speak their views (however misguided they may be). Without this guaranteed protection to all political groups, democracy as we know it might fall apart.
The freedoms given to all of us by the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution applies to all those living in the U.S. and its territories. Among those freedoms are the freedom of speech and the freedom of assembly. Because of these freedoms, the government should not apply the laws differently to groups which they feel are dangerous to the public good. It is true that some political groups strive to reduce the rights of others, such as the Ku Klux Klan’s attempt to halt desegregation in the 1950s and 1960s, but their attempts are generally futile. If the government were to start treating ‘negative’ groups differently, then who in the government would decide what constitutes as being ‘negative’? What begins as an honest attempt to deter dangerous political groups could morph into policies that restrict all political organization. This would start an infringement on public freedoms that could spiral out of control. Because of this possibility, every political group and person should not be “denied within [U.S.] jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws,” as stated in Amendment XIV to the U.S. Constitution.

BrandonK said...

Why is attaching something have to be so difficult?

Brandon G. Koster
Mr. Bretzmann
AP Government
26 November 2006
American Protection

I believe all groups should have protection under the laws of the United States. Under the Bill of Rights all groups have the right to say what they believe and the freedom to assemble. Simply because I do not believe in their values, does not mean the law has the right to stop them. As long as these political groups do not break the law, or cause violence against others, I believe they should have protection under American laws.
As time progresses, the American people are becoming slightly more tolerant of different political groups. I agree with these people. Regardless, of how you or your group was treated in the past, I believe that you should receive equal protection under American law now. The United States Constitution protects the American people, regardless of how they act or think. It is only fair that different people are treated equally.
There will always be intolerance toward people of different racial backgrounds, religious backgrounds, cultural backgrounds and political backgrounds. I believe it is a personal obligation as an American citizen to not judge anyone because of their beliefs. When liberties are questioned, and groups of citizens are singled out, the Supreme Court is the last bastion to rule on their abilities to survive. The Supreme Court is a supposedly neutral body that exists to protect the rights of different political groups.
In the end, it should not matter if you are Socialist, Atheist, Black, or a homosexual. Everyone has and should forever have rights under American law that protects them from other political groups taking their rights away. Beliefs are not universal, but our rights are.

KerryW said...

I do believe that all types of political groups should receive full protection of American laws even if their interests and goals are not acceptable to everyone. Every citizen in the United States has the freedom of speech and assembly under the Bill of Rights regardless of their beliefs. Therefore, unless they are violating the rights of other citizens, they can basically do whatever they want.

For example, the Neo-Nazis that exist today are very offensive to most people and have different goals and beliefs than other citizens. However, they are given the same rights under the Constitution as every other American. Although it doesn’t seem fair to allow Neo-Nazis to share their very “out there” beliefs towards Jews, we can’t deny this group their 1st amendment rights. One of the reasons the Constitution was worded the way it was was to protect the minority groups in our country because they are people too. Try to picture an America in which Christians were a minority and Muslims were a majority. The Christians, I’m sure, would want the same rights given to Muslims under our Constitution even though our traditions, beliefs, and interests are different. I would like someone to bestow upon me the same courtesy that had been bestowed upon them. Now, even though Neo-Nazis are the most well liked in America, they should be given the same rights as all other political groups are given.

MikeM said...

I agree with Brandon, that some groups should be restricted and denied the right to well, basically exist because what they stand for is nothing short of evil. However if you are going to take away the rights of some groups where are you going to draw the line, and who is going to decide which groups get to exist and which groups don’t? Should pro life groups be abolished because a few members went out of control and killed some innocent people? If the abortion ruling is turned and women are not allowed abortions should pro choice groups not be allowed to exist because what they stand for would be considered killing a human being? What about Christian groups that are protesting against various rights for homosexuals? My point is there will be a major gray area wherever you draw the line and this will cause many debates over what is right and wrong because what you think is right and wrong is your own opinion and may not someone else’s . To me this seems to me to be an all or nothing issue, either everyone gets their rights or no one does, and when you look at it that way a few extremist groups bunched up with many rational ones doesn’t look so bad.

BrandonK said...

I agree with Jahir's essay. Everything that he mentions agrees with my point of view. I feel he describes everything very well and straightforward. I also like how he explains about the extremism groups like the Ku Klux Klan still deserve equal protection under law. Jahir did a great job in my opinion.

Dain said...

I agree with Jahir

I applaude Jahir for his effective use of the Slippery Slope argument. He touched on what is 'negative' is subjective, though it might have been a point worth developing.

brandong said...

I agree with most of you that all political groups should be given equal protection under the law... until they abuse those rights that is. If any group disobeys a law they should be punished the same as any other group, I don't care if it's the Christian Children's Fund. Every one has the right to do, say, or protest what they will... peacefully.

brandong said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
brandong said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
RaStauss said...

i agree with jahir that all political groups should be protected. It is impossible for everyone to agree what is right and wrong, what may be right for one person may be completely against someone elses morals. Even if a group may seems wrong, they still have their right to voice their opinion because that is what democracy is all about...right?

justinbel said...

i also agree with jahir and all the others. i feel that everyone should be prtocted because one person can feel strongly for something and other people have the completely view point on the subject. that is why i feel everyone should be protect under the current laws with no exceptions.

Jahir D said...

Commenting on Brondon K.'s essay, the topic was clearly stated in the first few sentences, but in answering why you beleived that all political groups should be treated equally, you lacked support. For example, when you stated that "The United States Constitution protects the American people, regardless of how they act or think," you never explained how the Constitution protects people. Perhaps you could have mentioned the first ammendment freedoms or the 14th ammendment's equal protection clause after said sentence.

Jahir D said...

As a side comment, i never knew that by being the first post, i would get my essay referenced so many times in this particular blog... i dont know, just found it somewhat amusing. :)