Assignment 9: Roe v. Wade: 1973

                  Roe v. Wade: 1973

"The Supreme Court agrees to hear the case filed by Norma McCorvey, known in court documents as Jane ROE, against Henry WADE, the district attorney of Dallas County from 1951 to 1987, who enforced a Texas law that prohibited abortion, except to save a woman's life. Norma McCorvey was a Texas resident who sought to obtain an abortion. McCorvey was pregnant when she became the lead plaintiff in the case. She later gave up the baby for adoption. The Texas law had been declared unconstitutional in an earlier federal district court case (United States v. Vuitch, 1971). Wade ignored the decision and both sides appealed.”

The District Attorney for Dallas County (1951-1987) made a law that prohibited women to undergo abortion unless it was to save their lives. This same law was considered unconstitutional in the case of United States v. Vuitch 1971, explaining it violated Due Process of the Fourteenth Amendment which guarantees a woman’s right to abortion. I chose this specific case because it pertained to an important debate in regards to women’s civil rights. For many years women were oppressed by society. We were denied of basic rights such as voting, rights to property, work in certain occupations (ex. law & medicine), and have an education as no college or university would allow women. This case is important to woman’s rights as it sent the message to the entire nation that women have the right to make decisions over their body without fear of prosecution. Woman deserve to have all the same rights as men, without exception. 

Assingment 8: Gerrymandering

                               

                                 GERRYMANDERING

Democrats won in nine of the 10 most-gerrymandered districts. But eight out of 10 of those districts were drawn by Republicans.

This speaks to the notion that the point of gerrymandering isn't to draw yourself a safe seat but to put your opponents in safe seats by cramming all of their supporters into a small number of districts. This lets you spread your own supporters over a larger number of districts. And the way to do this is to draw outlandishly-shaped districts that bring far-flung geographic areas together. North Carolina’s 12th district, which holds the title of the nation's most-gerrymandered, is a textbook example of this: It snakes from north of Greensboro, to Winston-Salem, and then all the way down to Charlotte, spanning most of the state in the process.

This passage explains the process of gerrymandering and provides examples of such. It explains that gerrymandering is a way to compact supporters into smaller numbers of districts so the opposing group leads. Electoral districts are responsible for re-drawing electoral districts depending on the fluctuation of their population. This is used to a particular party’s advantage and stop the larger party from growing. 

I chose this passage because it provides a better understanding of how the process of gerrymandering works. There’s a lot talk when the topic of politics comes up. One topic being how votes are manipulated to one party’s advantage, gerrynmandering is a clear example of how true this is. This process may be used to even out a minority group throughout the state but that may not necessarily be the agenda. It allows a certain party to use this method to block the opposing party and benefit their own.

Photo credit: http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2012/Pres/Maps/Nov15.html

Assignment 5: John C. Calhoun

                           John C. Calhoun


"To understand the mind of the Old South it is necessary to realize that emancipation meant not merely the replacement of slave labor by hired labor, but the loss of white supremacy, the overthrow of the caste system in brief, the end of civilization. Although Calhoun once condemned the slave trade as an "odious traffic," there is no evidence that he ever shared the Jeffersonian view of slavery, wide-spread in the South during his youth, that slavery was a necessary but temporary evil. During a conversation with John Quincy Adams in 1820 he revealed how implicitly he accepted the caste premises of slavery. Adams spoke of equality, of the dignity and worth of human life. Calhoun granted that Adams's beliefs were "just and noble," but added in a matter-of-fact way that in the South they were applied only to white men. Slavery, he said, was "the best guarantee to equality among the whites. It produced an unvarying level among them . . . did not even admit of in- equalities,by which one white man could domineer over another.""


This paragraph explains that the Old South believe that if the emancipated the slaves white supremacy would vanish. Calhoun agreed with Adams in that slavery was wrong. But while Adams believed it in equality and dignity of the human life, Calhoun believe that slavery was a necessary evil. The only equality Calhoun believed in was the equality amongst white man.

Reading this almost sounds like the same struggles Black people face today-a world where there is no equality although we may want to be led to believe it does exist. In the United States of today, Blacks are still fighting for their simple human rights. Equality amongst all men has not been established when a particular group is treated with respect, while Blacks are treated poorly. 

Assignment 4: "Revisiting the Constitution: Do We Really Need the Second Amendment?"

"Revisiting the Constitution: Do We Really Need the Second Amendment?"

Melynda Price is an associate professor at the University of Kentucky College of Law and blogs at Thoughts of an Ivory Tower Interloper.*

“…I am not sure this amendment envisioned the kind of gun toting that is permitted across this country in the last decade. The Second Amendment acknowledged the vulnerability of a nation in its infancy, but could not predict a world where some would move through life feeling more like targets than citizens.”

This quote refers to the Second Amendment: 

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

In her words, Melynda Price points out that when the Second Amendment was written, our Fore Fathers did not have in mind for everyone to carry a gun the way it is happening in the United States of today. She mentions the Constitution being written in a time the United States was still “..in its infancy” where the threats face were that of outsiders.

I chose this quote because I agree that when the Constitution was written no-one could predict how the world would be 223 years later; where carrying a gun no longer meant to protect yourself, your land, or your family from imminent danger. In the United States of today, as we see daily, citizens are instead turning these weapons on each other, not necessarily to protect themselves but rather for petty reasons such as personal vendetta. This effect is a result of the lack of restrictions for obtaining a weapon and how to properly dispose of weapons no longer needed or wanted. Anyone who applies for a gun license should undergo rigorous training on the how to’s of being a responsible weapon ownership. Moreover, those who legally own weapons should be equally guilty as those who use their weapons to commit a crime; as it is the case of the *San Bernardino shooters where their neighbor, Enrique Marquez, has been charged for allegedly “making a false statement in connection with the acquisition of firearms” used in the murders. The Second Amendment should be reviewed and altered to reflect the United States we currently live in and allow for a more civilized right to carry and bare arms. 

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/07/08/another-stab-at-the-us-constitution/revisiting-the-constitution-do-we-really-need-the-second-amendment

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/17/us/san-bernardino-shooting/

Assignment 3: Constitution of the United States

                                                                                           Article l

                                                                                          Section X

                                                                                          Clause III

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.”

In this clause, the Constitution highlights the power denied to the States. Such limitations prohibits States from entering in any treaties with each other and other countries- this allowing the President of the United States to be solely responsible for managing all foreign affairs.  The States are not allowed to have their own armies or go into war with each other. Furthermore, they may not keep warships in times of peace and they may not engage in war unless it has been invaded or is in impending danger. This clause prohibits the United States from engaging in war unless its people are in danger also protecting foreign countries. I believe this clause was set forward by the Founding Fathers’ prediction of America's power. It protects states from each other and foreign countries from the power of the United States.

I chose this specific passage because as I read it my memory traveled back to September 11, 2001. During the early morning hours the public was not aware of the danger our country was facing. Even after the attacks there were moments of uncertainty and a lot of questions were in the air. The most important of them all..”Who would do this?.” Once the smoke cleared it was undeniably obvious that these attacks were executed by terrorists. I remember reading *many Americans were opposed to the war however it was a war we were forced into by terror groups who despise America and challenge its power. This clause allows America to declare war on its aggressors. Although the majority of Americans continue to oppose the war against Afghanistan, it is in the duties of the President to protect the country, as the constitution states, as it faces danger. America’s power spill entirely onto other countries and therefore should limited as this clause states. However, it is important to remember we must defend our country from the dangers of these terorrists who have expressed, time and time again, to have no mercy on our people.

 

*    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/30/63-percent-of-american-public-opposes-war-afghanistan_n_802765.html

Assignment 2: Trans-National America

Trans-National America

“We are all foreign-born or the descendants of foreign-born, and if distinctions are to be made between us, they should rightly be on some other ground than indigenousness. The early colonists came over with motives no less colonial than the later. They did not come to be assimilated in an American melting pot. They did not come to adopt the culture of the American Indian. They had not the smallest intention of 'giving themselves without reservation' to the new country. They came to get freedom to live as they wanted to. They came to escape from the stifling air and chaos of the old world; they came to make their fortune in a new land. They invented no new social framework. Rather they brought over bodily the old ways to which they had been accustomed.”

In this passage, Randolph S. Bourne explains that we are all foreign born or are progeny of foreign born- and there lies no difference between us whether we have lived in American all of our lives. He explains that early immigrants came with the same intentions as those after them- fortune and freedom; they came seeking what they could not find in their native country.

As an immigrant myself I find this passage to be important because a lot of people seem to ignore the reasons as to why people migrate to America. Many are unaware of the extreme challenges we face in our native countries: government corruption, unfair laws, violence, lack of basic resources such a light and clean water. In cases, we face such poverty that we stop going to school to help support the family. Consequently,  many are not able to find jobs that pay enough to cover bills and food. As a result of this struggle to survive in our country, we migrate to America- in search of a better future and better opportunities for us and our families. We do not come to America to disturb the peace of those who have lived here long before, nor to be ‘Americanized’. Our only desires is to provide for those we love, our family, and better educate ourselves in an effort to have a better future.  We all deserve the right to better opportunities, we are all entitled to have basic human rights.

Assignment 1: Americans Name its Government as its Number One Problem

Americans Name its Government as its Number One Problem

     “Americans continue to name the government as the most important U.S problem, a distinction it has had for the past four months. American’s mentions of the economy as the top problem dropped this month, leaving it tied with jobs for second place. Though issues such as terrorism, health care, race relations and immigration have emerged among the top problems of the government, the economy and the unemployment have been the dominant problems by Americans for more than a year.”

     The meaning of this short paragraph is quite clear; although concerned with terrorism, health care, race relations, the economy and unemployment, Americans consider the government to be the country’s biggest issue. It seems Americans are not happy with the way the government has been handling its affairs. This has been a recent change from previous months where the economy was considered to be the number one problem. The economy and unemployment are now occupying the second place. 

     The reason I chose this passage is because I completely agree with it, the government is America's biggest problem, as well as terrorism, race relations, economy and unemployment. The U.S. has been the target of numerous terrorist attacks before 9/11 and after. These attacks have caused many people to lose their lives; soldiers and civilians alike. It is a public threat the government has been dealing with for decades and in the past has proven somewhat successful in apprehending the individuals responsible for the attacks. However, it has become evident that each time the threat comes from a new group, the American government has difficulties in capturing or dismantling these groups. These wars on terrorism are costly to the country which in turn has had a negative effect on our economy. The problems Americans are most concerned about are part of ‘domino effect’, where one issue greatly impacts the other and the government’s response in dealing with these issues have not been very welcomed by the American people. 

Image original to usnews.com