Abstract This paper argues that the death penalty should be abolished. The paper asserts that the death penalty is spurious, often based on socioeconomic or other factors irrelevant to the severity of the crime itself, and employed in a racist fashion.
From the Paper "The death penalty is an arbitrary institution that is employed for a series of reasons that are unrelated to the crimes committed by actual persons (assuming, of course, that those sentenced to the death penalty are even guilty of the crimes that they have committed). Indeed, the death penalty is employed differently depending upon the race, gender, and wealth of accused person. These criteria are unacceptable for use in determining outcomes that will result in imminent death for accused persons. The death penalty, since it is influenced by these factors is used arbitrarily and must be stopped."
Abstract This paper explains the social, economic, ethical and political concept, essence of justice, and all that it encompasses. The paper talks about the need for individuals to internalize and actualized justice in order for society to truly achieve it on all levels. Aristotle's definition and concept of justice are also discussed.
From the Paper "The understanding and practice of "justice" is central to the achievement of peace and happiness by the individual as well as society, as a whole. However, no amount of institutalization and administration of legal, political or civil systems, no matter how just or fair, can ever ensure the achievement of the same, without individual and collective commitment to the upholding of the concept of justice, in its fullest sense."
Abstract The paper describes aspects of the 2001 Patriot Act, including extensive surveillance powers to investigate the reading habits and Web surfing of citizens.
From the Paper "THE PATRIOT ACT AND CIVIL LIBERTIES
Barely six weeks after September 11, 2001, The Congress and the President may have done more damage to our civil liberties and freedom than the terrorists who crashed the planes into the Pentagon and World Trade to..."
Abstract Should physicians be allowed to assist in patient suicide? This paper discusses this issue and explains it in detail. The writer discusses its pros and cons and argues against making such assistance legal. The writer concludes that the negative consequences of the act far outweigh its purported benefits.
From the Paper "Euthanasia is, quite literally, a "life and death" issue. It is no surprise, therefore, that it evokes heated debate among doctors, lawyers, philosophers, academicians as well as the general public all over the world. Although, recent developments in modern medicine have given it a new dimension, euthanasia is by no means an exclusively modern-day concern. Even the ancient Greeks had pondered over the issue centuries ago, albeit without reaching a definite conclusion about its merits or otherwise. In more recent times, euthanasia has been the subject of discussion in various forums including the Supreme Court of the United States with similar inconclusive results."
Abstract This paper looks at some of the controversy surrounding health care directives. The paper explains what a health directive is, looks at the purpose of health directives, explores the problems and controversy associated with them, and suggests a possible solution to these problems. Appended to the paper are notations concerning laws on health care directives, quotes about advanced directives from medical professionals, and a statement on health care directives made by a bioethicist.
From the Paper "The past few decades have seen an increase in law suits revolving around the final medical wishes of those who fall ill. Media coverage has provided the nation with front row coverage when it comes to people in comas, vegetative states, and no hope of recovery. Family members are often pitted against each other and the hospitals as the patient lays waiting for a decision to be made. One of the things that has been increasing in popularity to prevent such problems is the use of advance directives. While advance directives are gaining in popularity and power their relative infancy creates an atmosphere for problems. Advance directives can lay to rest painful family decisions, as well as doctor decisions that may or may not agree with the family. They provide a blue print of the patient's wishes that everybody can follow."
Explores the controversy within the medical profession and the general public regarding the political ramifications of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.
Abstract This paper looks at the controversial topic of a patient's right to die and some of the moral and legal arguments that have been made regarding the topic. Examples of court cases and quotes from legal and medical professionals are cited to help illustrate the complexity and controversy of the right to die concept.
From the Paper "One of the largest concerns of modern society is the amount of control that is ethically possible within a social system that prides itself on democratic ideals of individuality. The rights and privileges of the individual are meant to be balanced with the judicial system's attempts at providing parameters of safety within the community. The political ramifications of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide (PAS) are very controversial, both within the medical community and the general public. The issue encompasses the patient's rights, the debate over pain and suffering and the religious prohibitions that bind many people."
Abstract This paper examines the Patriot Act and explains that its objectives include provisions for providing the U.S. with the instruments necessary to combat and prevent future acts of terrorism. The paper argues that the Act, however, is limited on many levels and does not necessarily achieve the objective of preventing terrorism; rather, it imposes limitations on civil liberties and causes unnecessary fears to be raised in the minds and hearts of the American people.
From the Paper "Certain constraints evident in achieving the goals of the Act are presented by clientele opinion, the courts, agency staff, federal rules and even the culture within the U.S. Many argue that provisions in the Patriot Act are not compatible with the U.S. culture, which supports the idea that the government should be charged with "defending life, liberty, and property against both domestic and foreign predators" (Levy, 2003). Though in theory, the act was established to support these causes, many would argue that it in effect denies certain civil liberties and causes immigrants and non-citizens to carelessly be classified as foreign predators in many situations (Levy, 2003)."
Abstract The legalization of marijuana has been a topic of controversy for several years. Many proponents of the drug argue that marijuana should be legalized for both medical and recreational use. Others say that it should at least be decriminalized, meaning that the penalty for growing or possession of marijuana would be a simple fine, rather than jail time. This paper examines the controversial aspects of legalizing marijuana in an effort to present a strong argument in favor of legalizing the drug. The paper presents six valid reasons for legalizing the drug, as well as background statements to support these arguments.
From the Paper "The legalization of marijuana could help the U.S. economy by opening up new jobs. While the government would make a lot of money in taxes, sales and distribution costs, legalization would also cause the price of the drug to decrease, which means more people could afford it. According to estimations, if marijuana were legalized, and prices were cut in half, marijuana sales could gross anywhere from $50-$53 billion dollars (Rosenthal and Kubby, 2003). This money would no doubt stimulate the U.S. economy and create new jobs. These jobs would lower unemployment rates in the country, and open up more opportunities for employment in hemp and glassware industries."
Abstract America responded to the 9/11 attacks by strengthening powers of government and, in the process, eroding personal freedoms. This paper argues that it is time to understand that the war on terror isn't a short-term war, and if we are to live governed by the Constitution, which our founding fathers put into place to ensure freedom for everyone, it's time to roll back some of the more recent legislation and work towards more sustainable methods of preventing terrorism. The paper refers, in particular, to the USA Patriot Act and the laissez-faire policy of the Department of Homeland Security. The paper argues that if we continue to give up our personal freedom, we have, in fact, let the terrorists win.
From the Paper "Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act also gives the FBI virtually unlimited power to search bookstore and library records and see what people are reading. Before PATRIOT, the government needed probable cause and a warrant from a neutral judge in order to obtain such records; now they can see what a person is reading without that person even knowing about it. The Fourth Amendment's guarantee of ?[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search an seizures? (The Bill of Rights) doesn?t prevent this new power granted to our government agencies. Lawrence Lessig, Professor of Law at Stanford University, argues that under the Cohen Theorem, reading anonymously is "so intimately connected with speech and freedom of thought that the First Amendment should be understood to guarantee such a right" (154)."
Abstract Over the past two decades, parental use of physical punishment has become an increasingly controversial practice. The paper explains that the controversy has been further fueled by a growing body of evidence that suggests that physical punishment is associated with a number of negative developmental consequences for children, including higher levels of aggression, poorer mental health, lower levels of moral internalization, impaired parent-child relationships, and higher risk of abuse of the child. This paper provides an overview of the issues involved in spanking children as a means of punishment and instilling a sense of self-control, followed by a summary of the research in the conclusion.
From the Paper "The proper objectives of a system of punishment administered by the state have been the subject of debate among philosophers, educators, lawyers, and legislators for centuries. A variety of different theories or objectives of punishment have been proposed, some differing only in minor ways depending on the age of the child involved. The research into how toddlers develop self-control indicates that most children exhibit the ability to control their behavior after age one year (Dworetzky), which becomes more refined after age six years. In his novel, Waldon Two, B. F. Skinner described a utopian society which was built on psychological principles. One of these principles involved a method by which children were taught to delay immediate gratification in favor of long-term advantage. According to Skinner, children would be able to "generalize this ability to new situations" (Dworetzky, 1990, p. 119). The world of young children is not quite this utopian, however, and practically all parents and teachers experience situations in which children exhibit little or no self-control. However, by applying some alternatives techniques, parents, teachers and other caregivers can help provide appropriate role models for behavior and communicate appropriate models of behavior to children as young as one year old without the need to resort to corporal punishment."
Abstract This paper discusses the value of a legal obligation as opposed to a moral one. The paper makes references to two documents, "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" by Henry David Thoreau and "Letter from Birmingham Jail" by Martin Luther King. Both Thoreau and King address the issue of moral obligation versus legal obligation, in which an individual experiences conflict with the government and society as s/he tries to follow his/her free will as a member of the society and the rules and laws imposed by the government at the same time.
From the Paper "In his discourse, Thoreau asserts, ?That government is best which governs least,? which means to say that the least government intervention in the society results to a better state of civil society. This is because he thinks that the government is susceptible to manipulation by people with vested interests, who consider the government as an institution that can be used to provide greater privileges to other people and not the society in general. Thoreau contends, ?But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it."
Discusses how the United States can protect itself from enemies within its own borders without harming the ideals of freedom on which the country's Constitution is based.
Abstract The tragedy of 9/11 is the most recent case in point of how a nation can take its freedom and liberty for granted, which ultimately allows others to tear down that which has taken over 200 years to build, protect, and defend. This paper shows that the Patriot Act of 2001 undoubtedly faces numerous legal challenges in the upcoming months and years. While the issue of protecting the nation cannot be forgotten in the aftermath of 9/11, neither can the lessons learned from the Alien and Sedition Acts, nor the tragic mistake of interning thousands of Japanese-Americans under no more than suspicion and bigotry. The paper explains that the challenge of defending a nation from outside aggressors is simple when compared to the problem of defending the nation from those who would attack it from within.
From the Paper "Under the Patriot Act, the FBI needs only to certify to a FISA judge that the action is based on investigating terrorism. There remains no need for evidence of a crime, or probable cause, only that the search is designed to protect against terrorism. Under the Act, the judge has no authority to reject this application. While the Department of Justice (DOJ) calls this "seeking a court order," in application it is much closer to a rubber stamp. In the pragmatic application of the Act, the target of a search needn't be a terror suspect himself, so long as the government's purpose is "an authorized investigation ... to protect against international terrorism." (Lithwick and Turner, 2003)"
Abstract The paper examines the controversy of the Patriot Act and answers many of the myths claiming that it infringes on people's civil liberties. The author discusses how this law has been a vital tool in helping to fight terrorism. It shows how, previously, governments agencies did not work together to share information and now, as a result, of the Patriot Act, agencies are exchanging information, which is key to preventing terrorist attacks. This paper, therefore, argues that, although certain sectors of the population may feel that the Patriot Act affects their civil rights, in general, the Act assists in protecting the country.
From the Paper "One of the most vocal critics of the Patriot Act is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Their biggest objection of the Act is to Section 215, which permits agents to seek business records by showing a judge that this information is required to help a terrorism investigation. Under Section 215 the FBI does not have to show probable cause of wrongdoing to obtain a warrant, as is required in other criminal cases. The ACLU contends that Section 215 is unconstitutional because it gives the FBI the ability to spy on and track everyday protest groups such as the National Rifle Association, Operation Rescue and Greenpeace, simply because they can be considered domestic terrorism groups."
Abstract This paper provides background information on the case against Martha Stewart and her involvement in the Imclone stock scandal. The paper looks at the arguments presented by the prosecution, the arguments presented by the defense, the verdict, and then offers some afterthoughts concerning the case.
From the Paper "Imclone is a biotech company that produces oncology pharmaceuticals. Imclone's most famous drug to date has been Erbitux, a compound that is used to fight certain types of cancers. On December 27th, 2001, Martha Stewart sold 3928 chares of Imclone. The problem the prosecution had with transaction was she sold the shares one day before the FDA announced it had rejected Imclone's application for approval of Erbitux. The days following this announcement sent Imclone's stock price way down. The fact is that even though Martha Stewart made a profit of $51,000 by selling her shares, she was never actually charged with insider trading."
Abstract In the past three decades, a veritable revolution has occurred in U.S. criminal law. It has taken place for the most part at the federal level where the number of crimes with which individuals can be charged has grown rapidly. Once there were only three named federal criminal acts: treason, piracy, and counterfeiting. Now there are thousands of federal laws and regulations, and the violation of any one of them, no matter how unintentional and harmless the transgression, can lead to years of imprisonment for the convicted person.
From the Paper "The large number of offenses, especially those criminalizing the vices, has led some people to question whether or not the criminal law is being overused to achieve moral purposes. This situation, called overcriminalization, occurs when behaviors are made illegal even though they do not cause great societal harm and are not regarded as criminal by a significant portion of society."
