http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/19/opinion/granderson-duck-dynasty/
Although this is not an extremely recent article, or an extremely recent event, it was one that i followed fairly closely and after we were assigned to the topic of bill of rights for our blog, I remembered this story. I remembered how everybody had their own opinion about whether this story was unconstitutional or not, this article takes the side of it having nothing to do with the constitution.
The article speaks of how Phil Robertson of the hit show "Duck Dynasty" in an interview with GQ said some very controversial things pertaining to homosexuals and african americans. Although he was speaking from his religious views and what he had been taught, the television network decided to suspend him from the show. The activist groups came out up in arms either supporting the network or condemning it. Those condemning it were saying that it was unconstitutional that the network can try to censor what one of their actors says because of first amendment right of freedom of speech.
Like the article explained, the amendment was not meant to protect anything and everything a person says just because he has the freedom of speech, it is meant to merely keep the government from making laws that may infringe on this right. It is completely within the network's right to suspend a person or punish an employee for speaking out on a controversial issue that may 'damage' the network's repuatation. This is event is a great example of a way that although we all have the freedom of speech, we are not allowed to say anything we want, we still must abide to society's standards or risk persecution or punishment. This does not mean that we should be worried about giving our opinion especially in regards to faith, but like all who speak out we must understand the consequences of our actions and not try to hide behind the first amendment.
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
president and congress' battle royale
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/11/congress-gives-final-approval-to-keystone-xl-pipeline-bill-setting-up-veto/
In the article, "congress gives final approval to keystone xl pipeline bill, setting up veto showdown" it explains that the keystone xl pipeline bill has been passed by congress today. According to the article this is merely a formality because Of the fact that the president and his administration has repeatedly stated that They will immediately veto the bill if it is put on their desk.
Though the knowledge that congress would pass the bill and then Obama would veto it is Not new, the realization that it is more than just a simple decision on a pipeline. It is much more than that. It is the first showdown of what will most definitely become an incredible battle between congress and the president in the coming months. I can't wait to see how far the president goes to win this pissing match. Either the president will allow things to actually get done because now there is a majority in both houses or he will make sure absolutely nothing gets done.
In the article, "congress gives final approval to keystone xl pipeline bill, setting up veto showdown" it explains that the keystone xl pipeline bill has been passed by congress today. According to the article this is merely a formality because Of the fact that the president and his administration has repeatedly stated that They will immediately veto the bill if it is put on their desk.
Though the knowledge that congress would pass the bill and then Obama would veto it is Not new, the realization that it is more than just a simple decision on a pipeline. It is much more than that. It is the first showdown of what will most definitely become an incredible battle between congress and the president in the coming months. I can't wait to see how far the president goes to win this pissing match. Either the president will allow things to actually get done because now there is a majority in both houses or he will make sure absolutely nothing gets done.
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
vaccination nation
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6604708
Talks of vaccinations have become more prominent this past week. This is mostly due to the recent measles outbreak in the United States. The issue has been discussed by the top politicians in the country including governor Chris Christie, senator Rand Paul, and even the president. With all these talks, the Ohio State University recently put out finding of their analysis of the factors leading to a parents choice on whether to vaccinate their child or not. The results were very interesting to me. They found that based on a 2009 study, 43 percent of republicans and independents were willing to get vaccinated while 64 percent of democrats were willing. Though there was obviously a correlation between party affiliation and willingness, the thing that really interested me was that they also found that of those asked, 60 percent who had confidence in the government were willing while 32 percent who lacked faith were willing. I think that it should be legally required for parents to have their children get vaccinated, but all the statistics show that vaccinations only help people. Studies have shown that vaccinations alone save nearly 6 million lives each year. It definitely is something that people should have the ability to question, but the results really can't be denied.
Talks of vaccinations have become more prominent this past week. This is mostly due to the recent measles outbreak in the United States. The issue has been discussed by the top politicians in the country including governor Chris Christie, senator Rand Paul, and even the president. With all these talks, the Ohio State University recently put out finding of their analysis of the factors leading to a parents choice on whether to vaccinate their child or not. The results were very interesting to me. They found that based on a 2009 study, 43 percent of republicans and independents were willing to get vaccinated while 64 percent of democrats were willing. Though there was obviously a correlation between party affiliation and willingness, the thing that really interested me was that they also found that of those asked, 60 percent who had confidence in the government were willing while 32 percent who lacked faith were willing. I think that it should be legally required for parents to have their children get vaccinated, but all the statistics show that vaccinations only help people. Studies have shown that vaccinations alone save nearly 6 million lives each year. It definitely is something that people should have the ability to question, but the results really can't be denied.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)