Abstract This paper looks at the issue of same-sex marriage and proposes that it should be legalized. It examines the objections to legalizing gay marriage and contests these arguments. It gives the many reasons same-sex marriages should be legalized and itemises some of the benefits gays miss out on by not being allowed to marry.
From the Paper "The question of same-sex marriage is one that has been very much in the forefront of public discussion in recent years with states granting then withdrawing marriage licenses to gay couples, haggling over legislation as to whether to grant full marriage .."
Abstract This paper examines the loopholes that exist in current media laws regarding the publication of stolen information. The paper concludes that the loophole created by the current loosely written laws and ethical codes serves only as a safety net for unscrupulous journalists.
From the Paper "The ruling in Chiquita Brands International, Inc. v. Michael Gallagher clearly implies that, as long as a journalist does not personally steal information, the journalist is legally permitted to publish it. However, this implication creates a massive gray area of media law and ethics that serves as no more than a gargantuan loophole through which journalists are free to practice unethical, illegal, and unprofessional newsgathering techniques."
Abstract This paper analyzes the historical background of the Second Amendment of the US Constitution in order to uncover the true intention of its framers. The paper then presents the commonly advanced arguments by opponents and supporters of gun control laws.
Outline:
Historical Background of the Framing of the Second Amendment
Arguments in Favor of the Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms
Arguments for Gun Control and a Restrictive Application of 2nd Amendment
From the Paper "The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which declares: "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" is perhaps the most controversial and misunderstood parts of the country's Constitution. The confusing language of the Amendment makes it open to differing interpretations and gives rise to a number of question, including: (a) Whether "the right to keep and bear arms" is a fundamental right that "shall not be infringed" by the States as well as the federal government; and (b) whether the right to bear arms is an individual right of all people or a collective right applicable only to a "well regulated Militia?" Opponents of gun control laws argue that restrictions imposed on keeping guns, whether enforced through state laws or federal laws, are a direct infringement on the fundamental right to bear arms guaranteed in the Constitution. Supporters of gun control, on the other hand, firmly believe that "right to keep and bear arms" referred to in the 2nd Amendment only applied to the militias that had existed in the 18th and 19th centuries whose functions have now been taken over by the police force and the national guards; therefore, the amendment has no relevance to the existing conditions and has become an anachronism."
Tags: gun, control, self-defense, militias, Bill, of, Rights
