Assignment #12

"The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans—born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage—and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world." John F. Kennedy    JFK meant that the world has been come a very differnet place than what it once was. In nations hands they held the power of the atom. The atomic bomb which could wipe out all of humanity if not carefully handled.  He also states that Americans must never forget how far they have come. From being a small colony under rule by a tyrant to a super power with an army that helps other nations break free of the chains of tyranny. Since the inception of the United States it has been against tyranny and focused on the rights of all men. So he is using this as a way to say that the threat of communism must be met and stopped in order to preserve the rights not only for Americans but for all of mankind.

Assignment #11
"During those years of false prosperity and during the more recent years of exhausting depression, one business after another, one small corporations after another, their resources depleted, had failed or had fallen into the lap of a bigger competitor. A dangerous thing was happening. Half of the industrial corporate wealth of the country had come under the control of less than two hundred corporations. That is not all. These huge corporations in some cases did not even try to compete with each other. They themselves were tied together by interlocking directors, interlocking bankers, interlocking lawyers..."
 Franklin D. Roosevelt

 What Roosevelt is implying with this statement is that the great depression was caused by a lack of distribution. Only a handful of companies had wealth and these companies would not compete with each other. So prices would not flucuat, they would remain high causing greater returns for the company but fewer dollars to spend for the consumer. Competition in the market in his eyes could have possibly stoveoff the depression, but since companies were working together and competition was virtually non-existent, the depression was inevitable. Everyone was working together to maximize their own profits and to hell with everyone else. He uses the word interlocked, as if they were all chained or connected together and if one fell the rest would follow. Which is what happened, greed lead to slef interest, which lead shady deals, which lead to a collapse
.
Great Depression Artictle
 "Democracy has disappeared in several other great nations, not because the people of those nations disliked democracy, but because they had grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and government weakness through lack of leadership....Finally, in desperation, they chose to sacrifice liberty in the hope of getting something to eat. We in America know that our democratic institutions can be preserved and made to work. But in order to preserve them we need...to prove that the practical operation of democratic government is equal to the task of protecting the security of the people....The people of America are in agreement in defending their liberties at any cost, and the first line of the defense lies in the protection of economic security."
 Franklin D. Roosevelt

 This passage about the Great Depression highlights how foreign nations have abandoned the use of Democracy. He states that this was done out of fear because a country gets afraid when its people are going hungry, unemployment is at a high and money and resources are scarce. He believes that these countries are weak and lacked the necessary leadership to help uplift them and remain a democratic nation. He places people's libery above all and they should not be squandered no matter what the nation is facing. The security of the people is important, because in all actuality it is the people who make up the nation so you should be abandoned their rights in favor of a stronger healthier country. He feels the in America they people will not abandon their rights and liberties in place of a meal. He knows that they will try to make things work and they will also preserve the democratic state for aslong as they can.

Assignment #10
 "But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
Abraham Lincoln
November 19, 1863


This part of the Gettysburg Address pertains to the sacrifices being made in battle. Lincoln did not care if anyone remember what was said about the civil war and neither did he about the people who fought in it. He knew that their names would be lost in the pages of history just like what happens in every great war. What he wanted to be remember was their sacrificed, their unrelenting determination and their resolve. It was them, whon fought and died on the many battle fields who ensured that the United States remained a free country governed for the people, by the people and with the people's best interest at heart. He wanted their sacrifices to be etched into the pages of United States history for eternity since they were fighting to keep the land of the free, free forever.

Assignment #9
"Judicial decisions are of greater or less authority as precedents, according to circumstances. That this should be so, accords both with common sense, and the customary understanding of the legal profession."

What this statement means is that judgements to cases are very important. That is because what they do is set precedents in place, which allows future cases to be compared with prior cases and verdicts can be placed accordingly. It can also be said that they may prove precedents wrong and allow new laws to be written based upon the new discoveries found. In all, judgements are proven to hold a lot of clout in that what is determined in a case in the future.

Assignment #8
"The wife who inherits no property holds about the same legal position that does the slave on the southern plantation. She can own nothing, sell nothing. She has no right even to the wages she earns; her person, her time, her services are the property of another. She cannot testify, in many cases, against her husband. She can get no redress for wrongs in her own name in any court of justice. She can neither sue nor be sued. She is not held morally responsible for any crime committed in the presence of her husband, so completely is her very existence supposed by the law to be merged in that of another.”
 Elizabeth Cady Stanton

 What is meant by this quote is that women were virtually slaves. Since they did not have any rights such as to own land, sell anything or even work they were reduced to servants. They had to rely solely on men to provide everything for them. Which meant that they had to do what ever they were told to do. Women of this era had to obey men because they themselves were not people and their entire existence was merged with that of another.

 “It was a long, lean, gaunt, shivelled looking creature, stretched out on two chairs, and his legs resting on the prostrate bust of Washington; projecting from behind was a cat o’ nine tails knotted at the ends; around his person he wore a belt in which were stuck those truly American implements, a bowie knife, dirk, and revolving pistol; behind him was a whipping post, with a naked woman tied to it, and a strong- armed American citizen in the act of scourging her livid flesh with a cow skin. At his feet was another group;—a sale going on, of human cattle, and around the auctioneer’s table were gathered therespectability,…” Fredrick Douglas

 What Douglass does with this quote is he tries to show the brutality of slavery. He does this by showing the slavers as creatures who tormented and sold slaves as if they were cattle. What he also does is with this short quote is show the resolve of the slaves. He shows how they have grown accustom to these unbearable conditions and how they no longer resist. They gather around the table not forced but by choice because they know there is no hope in resistance. Their spirit has been destroyed.

Assignment #7
"The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army; and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgement of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens" 

 What this passage is stating is that the men who are serving the state are being used as tools. They are not desired for their brains, only for their body because their body can be shaped and molded into what ever weapon the state needs for that time. The author goes as far as to compare them to materials for building such as wood or stones this is because these materials are easily manipulated. So men who serve the state basically serve the same purpose. They are what ever they are needed to be for the time and the basically are the backbone of the state. They do these things not for any sort of glory or acknowledgement its actually the opposite. They are regarded as lesser men for being nothing but tools, dogs of the state.


Part I







Benjamin Lay, a Quaker strongly opposed slavery. He saw it as a crime unforgivable by god. This is because he believes that god created all men to be equal so if they are equal why are some men slaves while others are free. This can be related to what Thoreau believes because he believes in civil disobedience so he would support the claims of the Quaker and goes so far as to tell them to challenge the in-just system, in a nonviolent peaceful way.






Harriet Tubman could be considered a patriot by many. This is because she risked her life innumerable amounts of times and face immeasurable odds to help save her fellow slave. She escaped slavery and she could have thought of only her self and sought refuge somewhere safe but no. She thought of those who were still in bondage and she wanted to save as many people as she could. This takes Thoreau's idea and expands it because not only was she disobeying the government but she was basically stealing the property of slave owners and cutting them loose. She embodied civil disobedience and was a hero and the Moses of the slaves.

 Part II


John Brown was a man who held 21 men, 6 slaves and 15 white men on raid of a federal armory. he did this in order to lead an armed insurrection throughout the south in order to free slaves. Thoreau's idea's were blown greatly out of proportion here. He would not have been okay with leading an armed insurrection even though its end results could prove to be fruitful. He would have wanted a less violent aprroach, bloodshed should be a last option if one at all.

Assignment #6

". . . . . Great complaint has been made, that Congress [under the Articles] has been too liberal in their grants of salaries to individuals, and I think not without just cause. For if I am rightly informed, there have been men whose salaries have been fifteen hundred dollars per year, and some of them did not do business at any rate, that the sum they negotiated would amount to their yearly salary. And some men [are] now in office, at twenty five hundred dollars per year, who I think would have been glad to have set down at one hundred pounds a year before the war, and would have done as much or more business. The truth is, when you carry a man’s salary beyond what decency requires, he immediately becomes a man of consequence, and does little or no business at all. Let us cast our eyes around us, in the other departments-the judges of the superior court have but about one hundred pounds salary a year. The judges of the courts of common pleas, on an average, not more than sixty dollars per year. The ministers of the gospel-a very valuable set of men, who have done honor to themselves, and rendered great service to their country, in completing the revolution-have salaries but from sixty to an hundred pounds a year in general. The contrast is striking. I heartily wish that all ranks of men among us, ministers of the gospel as well as others, would turn their attention toward the Constitution they may be more concerned in the event than they at present think of"".

This particular piece of writing is trying to say that Congress has been giving way too much money out. The author feels that congress is paying some people way more than they are actually worth. This is because the author says that certain people who are getting an inflated salary annually are people who do no business at all and subsequently do not deserve it. While on the other hand there are those who's salary is small and contribute greatly to society. So this person thinks that the constitution in this aspect needs to fixed or light needs to be shed on it. I picked this article because I understand the authors concerns in regards to salaries. An issue like this could cause major problems because money is unfairly being paid to people who rightfully did not earn it. If They would have worked hard for the huge salary that would have been okay, but to pay someone less who is actually of value to society while you are paying a who is of less value is morally wrong.

Assignment #5
Madison
 The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man, and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation and practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to cooperate for their common good (pp. 92-93).

 Hamilton A Constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents (p. 121).

 What Madison was trying to say with this statement is that it is in human nature for people to divide themselves up into special groups. These groups are generally based upon similar interests or in his case by political beliefs. He feels that when this is done, when people divide themselves into special groups and form parties they will begin to follow and grow attached to a leader. He feels that hatred for other groups stems from this division and that groups will begin to dislike one another solely based upon the small differences they share.They would rather fight over petty things instead of making sacrifices for the greater good by just joining forces. I chose this statement because of the relevance it holds true to this day. We have two main political parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, who choose not to cooperate. Their dislike for one another goes so deep that they would rather reject something the opposition proposes, that will be beneficial for the country as a whole, just to spite and see the other fail and squirm. When in actuality they were elected to their respective seats to make sure that the American people are represented and have a voice, but by not compromising the people remain voiceless and are ultimately made to suffer.

 Hamilton's statement regarding the Constitution was saying that it is the basis of all law. That being said it is the job of the judges to place meaning to each part of it. It's their duty to know the Constitution and come up with a logical meaning for each part. They do this in order to prepare for cases that will test their knowledge of it. These cases may call upon their knowledge of it and from that they have to decide whether or not a crime was committed. This is done differently for each case because as like snowflakes no two cases are the same. I picked this statement because of how true it is. The Constitution is nothing more than just the ground work for law. It sets up the U.S legal system and it is the purpose of the judge to make sense of it. Since most amendments to it are rather old it is the place of the judge to decipher them and from their understanding of it place judgement in cases.

Assignment #4
Article IV
Section. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
 A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

  Well what this part of the constitution is trying to say is that any person or persons who are charged with a crime in one state must be dealt with by the laws of the state they commit the crime in. So if a person shoots and kills someone in New York, they must be charged in New York for that crime. If they flee the state they commited the crime in and try to seek shelter in another state, it is the responsiblity of the law enforcement of the state he now resides to obtain him and return him to the state in which he commited his crimes. So that he can be tried for the crimes he commited. This same law also applies to a person who holds a job that is state required or mandated. He can not flee that state and go to another in order to be free of the job. He must be brought back to the state which he is employed. This would be toward military jobs or anything of that nature. Also this part of the constitution states all United States citizens are entitled to the benefits that every state offers. So this means that all of the same laws apply to you no matter what state you go to.
 I picked this part of the constitution because I think that it is very important for people of the US to realize that just because the laws of each state may differ they still apply to you. As long as you are in a state whate ever laws of the state you are in apply to you. So if you are in a state that has abortion legal then you can get an abortion, but if you decide to move to a state that outlaws it and you try it you are breaking the law. Since you are a US citizen the laws of what ever state you are in apply to you, it is basically relative to what ever state you are. Also, I chose this because I like that it makes very clear that you can not run from your crimes. If you commit a crime in a state you will face justice. By running to another state nothing is gained because you will be sought after by the law enforcement of the new state you inhabit and brought back to the state you commited the crimes in. So its the laws way of saying do not think you can run from your crimes.

Assignment #2
 "In truth it is inequality that is the illusion. The extreme disproportion between men, that we seem to see in life, is a thing of changing lights and lengthening shadows. A twilight full of fancies and distortions....It is the experience of men that always returns to the equality of men; it is the average that ultimately justifies the average man. It is when men have seen and suffered much and come at the end of their elaborate experiments, that they see men under an equal light of death and daily laughter; and none the less mysterious for being many..."
 What Chesterton is trying to say is that the idea of that inequality exists is false. He says this because as the times change so do the people living with in them. People adapt to what is going on around them, he uses changing lights and lengthening shadows to express that concept. So because the environment in which people live in change and their nature changes as well what was once deemed right and wrong has now also changed. Chesterton then goes on to say that "It is when men have seen and suffered much and come at the end of their elaborate experiments, that they see men under an equal light of death and daily laughter..." and what he means by this is that people need to go through the same struggles. They need to sweat and bleed together before they will be able to call someone a comrade. Most people are friends with people or just connect better with people who have been and seen the same things as them. Once a person has gone through the deeps of hell they will only fully respect a person who has traversed it as well.
I choose this quote because I agree with what Chesteron is trying to say but at the same time I disagree. I agree that people consider anyone who has gone through or even walked the same path as an equal. Most people do not respect someone who in their eyes has not experienced enough. For example a new guy at work will not be respected as much by the veterans because he is new. They will consider themselves superior to him and thus they will not associate with him. This will change when he is around them longer and shows his worth. When work becomes hectic and the new guy and the old veterans are all suffering and working tirelessly, in the eyes of the veterans that new guy has earned his position. When people go through the same things, share the same experiences, and suffer together they can truly consider their fellow man an equal. What I disagree with is that he considers inequality a illusion. That is false because if that were true why do poor people who acquire wealth, by any method, look down upon those who are that level they were once on. Inequality is real and shared experiences is just one pillar that supports that bridge.

Assignment #1 "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. 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. Tightly concentrated on a hostile frontier, they were conservative beyond belief. Their pioneer daring was reserved for the objective conquest of material resources. In their folkways, in their social and political institutions, they were, like every colonial people, slavishly imitative of the mother-country. So that, in spite of the "Revolution," our whole legal and political system remained more English than the English, petrified and unchanging, while in England law developed to meet the needs of the changing times." What I can take from this quote is that the author is trying to say that the first settlers of the United States came to this land in order to seek freedom. They wanted freedom from the lands they previously had inhabited because the laws and customs were to them unjust. They wanted to be in a place where they did not have to conform and where they could be themselves. So they set sail for the America's, but when they got here and began to settle and spread in this new land they began to change. Not in the sense of their customs but in what they would tolerate. The new settlers had become the very same persecuters they had once escaped from. The settlers would begin to set up laws and a legal system that would mirror those of the english. They would become extremely xeonphobic which is ironic since they themselves were immigrants to this land. Even their revolution could be considered a sham because even though they had fought to free themselves from the tyranny of the british they too would become tyrannts seeking to swallow up as much of this land as they possibly could. Though there were already people native to this land and who had layed claim to these lands they would be forced to move as the setters gobbled up as much of the country as they possibly could. Even though they were free from the british they would not adopt and change to the times as the british would. They would remain the same using out dated laws and a flawed legal system to govern the land.