Same Sex Marriage

Source

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/s/same_sex_marriage/index.html?scp=1&sq=10th%20amendment&st=cse

From the Constitution

Tenth Amendment- The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Connecting to the Constitution

Is it unconstitutional to not let gays and lesbians be married. Well, it's up to the people. No where in the constitution does it specify weather they can be married or not. It's up to each individual state to come up with their own law fr or against that; then it's the people's job to accept it or not.

Personally, I don't see a problem with gay/lesbian marriage because they're people just like the rest of us. I feel as if they shouldn't be denied what should be their right. I also don't think it's right for them to have to stay in a specified place for them to be considered married. If they have a valid marriage license for one state then it should apply for all.

I Plead The Fifth

From the Constitution

Fifth Amendment- No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Connecting to the Constitution

The political cartoon shows that the attorney is trying to help his client by not making him talk as much as possible. This is the Fifth Amendment; it gives you the right not to speak. In order to make the case go on for an long as possible, the defendant won't speak, giving the attorney time to tell them what to say. The carton also shows that attorneys sometimes abuse the amendments.

The Fifth Amendment is a shield for the guilty. I feel as if one doesn't want to speak then they have something to hide. If you're innocent then you should be able to explain yourself and elaborate on the situation. Pleading the fifth is just giving time for someone to come up with a lie.

Full Body Scans

 

Source: "O’Hare to begin full-body scans Monday" March 2010

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-03-15/travel/ct-met-getting-around-0315-20100315_1_body-scan-full-body-tsa-officer

From the Constitution

Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Connecting to the Constitution

Are full body scans unconstitutional? The fourth amendment gives people the right to secure themselves from unreasonable searches. Are full body scans unreasonable searches or are they to ensure safety? Full body scans are devices that insure that no passengers have anything to harm anyone else. They are starting to be used in airports throught. One of the first ones were right he in Illinios.

Full body scans are used at O'Hare Airport. Some have no problem with it, while others think it is a hassle. Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with it. The scans are to ensure everyone's safety, and it's not like it hurts or harms the person being scanned in any way. The photo's are said to be earased upon exit of the machine, there is no way anyone could see it besides the machine operator.

It's Unconstitutional

Source:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/03/18/fighting_for_our_right_to_bear_arms/

From the Constitution

Second Amendment: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Connecting to the Constitution

When is it right for one to bare arms? Is it ok for a ex-felons, or mentally ill people to own guns and keep in their homes? No? Well Heller, a man living in Washington DC, agrees with you. He feels that he has the right to own a handgun. Heller says that his gun is for protection. And it's unconstitutional to ban them. The second amendment gives people the right to bear arms, and to take that away from him wouldn't be ok. He says that he doesn't use his gun at all, unless there's a need for him to.

Washington claims that a gun can be present in the house, but it must be disassembled. Having it is pointless then. There will be no sense of protection with a gun that is not put together. In case of sudden emergency, the gun is useless. If one isn't using their gun for bad, or if they don't have a record, then they should be able to keep the gun in their household.

Let Me Talk!

Source : "Shop, Walk, Work, and Protest" August 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/opinion/shop-walk-work-and-protest.html?ref=freedom_of_assembly

From the Constitution

First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Connecting to the Constitution

We're giving you the right, we're just sdjusting it a little. Is this right for a state to do? Well New York does it. The state of New York feels that as long as they give you the right, everything is ok. They don;t annitially menation thet you can only protest or speech in certain places or at certain times. Are they deny the poeple of New York city thier rights in the constitution?

Some think so. If one goes through the work to get the permit to say what they need to say than they should have the right to speak whererver their audience is. The set time or place may not suit them and what they're trying to enforce.

Other feel differently. Protestors may be disruptive to thir day or their work. They may feel that New York is just trying to keep the peace. If time and place is regulated then the protestors won't make an impact on someones everyday life.

Watch What You Say

Source: "Dr.Laura to End Her Radio Show" April 20, 2010

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/08/17/doctor.laura.ends.show/index.html?iref=allsearch

From the Constitution

First Amendment- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.



Connecting to the Constitution

People abuse their right to freedom of speech all the time. But can we justify when is the right and wrong time to say something? Celebrities must always watch what the say to the public all the time. They don't know how fans will react to their statements. They also don't know if they'll offend fans/ listeners. When you're a celebrity should you use the first amendment as loosely?

Dr. Laura used her right to the first amendment during her radio show. She did say some things that she regrets though. During her radio show, she was talking to an African- American listener, and she used the "n-word." She argues that she was trying to make a philosophical point; listeners disagree. Due to her poor use of the first amendment, she is now stopping her radio show. She says she's going to continue her legacy online.