Name:
School:
Course:
Lecturer:
Date:
Constitution
The First Amendment of the constitution of the United States is concerned with religious freedom and the right of speech. It states:
“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 grievance” (American Constitution)
This amendment stresses several rights accorded to the country’s citizens. People have the right to worship freely, speak freely, assemble, and raise their grievances. The amendment is especially important to the media because it guarantees their freedom. The First Amendment has brought about some of the most controversial issues in the constitution. This is especially in concern with separation of religion and state, people’s right to speak freely and the media’s right to protect their sources of information.
Journalists and other reporters have often been hard pressed to reveal their sources of information. They have sometimes suffered, as they have had to fight legal battles so that they can protect their sources. The Shield Law is aimed at protecting journalists from revealing where they get confidential information. Cases concerning the rights of journalists to conceal their sources of information have not made the matter clear. The First Amendment clearly accords people the right of speech. It is however not clear to what extent the press is protected. Reporters are ordinary citizens and they are often required to testify in the courts when they witness criminal activities taking place. The issue is however different in civil proceedings.
In 2005, a New York Times reporter, Judith Miller, spent time in jail for refusing to reveal her source of information. When preparing for a newspaper article, Miller had noted the name of one of the CIA operatives, Valerie Plame, but she had written the second name as Flame. The controversy arose because it was not clear whether Miller got the name from an insider source in the government. The issue was especially sensitive since there were many critics at the time who were opposed to the war in Iraq. Miller revealed her source of information after she had spent time in jail. It was then that she informed the grand jury that she had obtained her information from I. Lewis Libby, who was the vice president’s chief of staff. Revealing sources of information is more of an ethical issue and it concerns an agreement between the reporter and their source. Most critics argue that although the First Amendment gives reporters the right to seek information, it does not protect them from revealing their sources.
In addition, there is much contention concerning the church and the state. The First Amendment is not only concerned with the church, mostly associated with the Christians, but it also includes other religions as well. Some of the cases involving religious freedom, or lack of it, and the state include the saying of prayers in schools and other public places, denoting symbols related to religion and the wordings in the pledge of allegiance among others. Roy Moore, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, was sued for displaying the Ten Commandments in his courthouse. The first lawsuit was filed in 1995 but it was dismissed due to technical reasons. The Ten Commandments are usually associated with the Jewish and the Christian religions. According to the First Amendment, the government is not supposed to endorse any religion. In November 2002, the Federal U.S. District Judge ruled that Justice Moore was in violation of the First Amendment. This was especially a sensitive issue since it related to matters of justice. Some people interpreted it to mean that the court would favor one religion over the rest and thus justice would not be upheld.
The Second Amendment to the constitution on the other hand states:
“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” (American Constitution).
This amendment gives individuals the legal basis to have firearms in their possession, as long as they have the right certification to do so. It not only includes the military and other armed forces, but it also includes the civilians. It is a controversial amendment for two reasons. First, it does not specify whether everybody has a right to own a firearm. Secondly, it does not specify which arms are acceptable. In the case District of Columbia v. Heller, it was a decision of the law that the Second Amendment provides individuals with this statute in order to give them a legal way to defend themselves in cases where it is necessary to use a firearm.
The District of Columbia has strict laws concerning the possession of firearms. The law only allows people to carry registered firearms and it does not allow the registration of handguns. Dick Heller was a police officer who had applied to register a handgun he intended to keep in his home. He was denied this chance and he sought legal redress. The Federal District Court dismissed the case but it was appealed in the D. C. Circuit. The Circuit ruled in Heller’s favor, arguing that the state’s law concerning firearms, especially the handgun rule, was in violation to the Second Amendment. The case was argued in March 2008 and it was decided in June the same year. The Second Amendment is especially controversial because of the issue of gun control. Some people are of the idea that the amendment was meant for the military and not other individuals. It is their assertion that individuals do not have the right and responsibility to bear arms, since not all people can know how to control or regulate their use. Some contend this, asserting that people have a legal right to protect themselves and their homes.
Although the first amendment guarantees the right of speech, freedom of the press and religious freedom, this does not mean that everything is allowed. People are free to say whatever they want to say, but everything has consequences. The constitution gives people the right to belong to whichever religion they choose. This has had both negative and positive consequences. Some religions advocate violence. In one case, followers of a certain religion committed suicide after a request from their leader. In the same manner, when individuals are allowed to bear arms, it can be one way of inciting and promoting violence. There is a danger that people will take the law into their own hands in the name of self-defense. A person who perceives that he or she is in danger will choose to use the available weapon instead of asking for help or informing the authorities. Gun violence is already a serious issue in the country, especially in places where there are many gangs and there is a high rate of crime.
It is necessary for the government to control how the guns are issued and how they are used. Although gun ownership is important in some aspects, it can be dangerous and comes with a lot of responsibility. Before an individual is issued with a gun, he or she should have received the necessary training required. The military and the law enforcers receive training before they are issued with the arms and it is only reasonable that the same case applies to individuals who are issued with guns. The person should be in a stable mental state and should not use the weapon out of anger. Some people do not know how to control their anger and they can quickly pull out a firearm as a way of resolving their problems. The government should take every precaution to ensure that it can trace all the arms issued and licensed to different people.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]