| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "FEDERAL MARRIAGE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT": |
|
|
Federal Marriage Constitutional Amendment, 2004.
Argues against the Federal Marriage Amendment being added to the United States] Constitution.
1,170 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 8 sources, APA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper argues that the Federal Marriage Amendment should not be added to the United States Constitution. Some of the arguments include the ideas that the amendment rejects American traditions of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness allowed by our individual rights and that we would be obliterating the family rights that many same-sex couples and their families currently have.
From the Paper
"Another reason that the Federal Marriage Amendment should not be added is because we would be writing discrimination into the United States Constitution. The United States government has dealt with a lot of issues that seemed unheard of like racial integration and women?s rights, but as the times changed, so did society. In fact, in the past there were laws prohibiting people of different races from marrying, but that law was overturned 35 years ago (American Civil Liberties Union, 2004). Our society is growing and changing and with that comes acceptance. The issues of the past are a part of everyday life now. Who?s to say that gay marriage won?t be a thing of the past in a few years?"
| |
|
The Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment, 2002.
Discusses the motives behind adopting a constitutional amendment that requires a balanced budget and some of the problems associated with the amendment.
899 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the reasons behind Congress's proposal for a Constitutional amendment that would require a balanced budget and the groups that supported the proposal. The paper also looks at the groups that opposed the proposal and their arguments against it. The paper concludes with a counter proposal that is intended to address the concerns of those both for and against the proposed amendment.
From the Paper
"Deficit spending in the eighties, coupled with two Gulf Wars and a slowing economy, have escalated the borrowing and spending of this country for nearly two decades straight. As the federal deficit grows, those within government can not help but heed the warning signs. With no end in sight, many inside the beltway have proposed initiatives for capping federal spending. The most notable of these, and perhaps most drastic, is the adoption of a Constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget. Proponents believe a balanced budget is necessary for the continued prosperity of the nation. They also believe budget oversights can be avoided when the President and lawmakers are held accountable for where they direct money."
| |
|
Victims? Rights Constitutional Amendment, 2004.
A look at arguments for and against the victims? rights Constitutional amendment.
1,101 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the how Senate Judiciary Committee passed the victims? rights Constitutional amendment, which would give crime victims the right to be notified, present and heard at critical stages throughout their case. It examines how advocates for the amendment believe it encompasses four basic ideas: that all victims should be treated with the same dignity and given the same information as the accused criminal; how victims are notified when rapists or abusers are let out of jail or prison; how no one can profit from crime, and any monies should go to the victims and their families; and finally, how nationwide victims will be allowed to make victim impact statements before final sentencing. It also discusses how the amendment has encountered much opposition from nonprofit groups and prosecutors and judges who believe that granting victims the right to a speedy trial may put pressure on prosecution to try the case before it is ready.
From the Paper
"The amendment also denies defendants due process rights, due process rights protect the innocent from arrest and imprisonment. They do not exist to protect the guilty criminals from punishment. One basic due process right is the right to be afforded an impartial trial. However, when you have victims pleading to the jury to return a guilty verdict, you can easily see that someone innocent could easily be denied the due process of the law (aclu.org). The result of this miscarriage of justice is innocent people being wrongfully convicted for crimes they did not commit (Wallace)."
| |
|
Constitutional Amendment, 2005.
A look at two proposals for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution regarding the definition of marriage.
903 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 32.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper argues that the proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Federal Marriage Amendment, represents a repudiation of the rights and freedoms already granted to all citizens in the Constitution because its intended purpose is to deny gays and lesbians the right to a legal marriage. The paper contends that a better amendment regarding the institution of marriage would be the Amendment for Total Equality because it would guarantee to all citizens the legal rights and benefits of marriage and seeks to prevent and, ultimately, eliminate legal discrimination against homosexuals.
From the Paper
"The definition of civil marriage is currently defined by state law. According to the Federalist principles underlying the creation of the union, individual states have the right to define the legal parameters of marriage: "the state is free to set limits to the circumstances in which marriage may be permitted, and judicial interpretation thereof," ("Federal Marriage Amendment" 2004). The federal government cannot offer a blanket definition of marriage. However, a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States: H.J. Res 56, would place universal parameters on the definition of the social institution. Also called the Federal Marriage Amendment, the proposal reads: "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups," ("Federal Marriage Amendment" Section One, cited by Longley 2004). Support for H.J. Res 56 is relatively strong. Its proponents seek primarily to prevent gays and lesbians from being able to legally marry."
| |
|
Death Penalty Constitutional Amendment, 2004.
An examination of an alternative argument against the death penalty.
1,315 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores another argument against the death penalty: that capital punishment could not be fairly administered throughout the country. From state to state, variables such as race, class, and even gender continue to influence sentencing in capital cases. The inherent unfairness of this system is further seen in how states have different standards regarding what constitutes a capital offense. Given these differences, this paper proposes that a Constitutional amendment banning capital punishment is necessary on the grounds that the current administration of the death penalty is prone to conflicting interpretations by states, conflicting interpretations among jurors, and to the influence of extra-legal factors, such as gender, class, and race.
From the Paper
"Currently, 38 states have legalized capital punishment statutes. In most states, the reinstatements of the death penalty were a response to public outcry over the perceived increase of violent crimes. There are now more than 3,000 people on death row. However, the death penalty continues to raise many disturbing questions. Study after study, however, has shown no correlation between the availability of a death penalty and crime. A study by the Death Penalty Information Center shows that United States, which retains the death penalty, has a murder rate that is more than three times that of many of its European allies that have banned capital punishment (DPIC homepage)."
| |
|
Constitutional Amendment: The Right to Privacy, 2006.
A discussion regarding the history of the right of the individual to privacy.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 3 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how in 1947 Justice Frankfurter remarked that individuals were entitled to fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution. However Frankfurter concluded that he could not determine exactly what rights would be considered fundamental because there was no direction provided by the framers. The paper further discusses how 1965, Justice Stewart searched through the constitution for any indication that a right to privacy was evident. He found none. Stewart had intended to apply this right to a case that dealt with contraceptive laws that had been passed in Connecticut. However, failing in this mission, Stewart stated that the Bill of Rights offered guarantees to citizens and that within those guarantees there had to be a "zone of privacy" that was intended by the founders. Therefore, it would appear time to create an amendment allowing for the right to privacy for American citizens.
| |
|
Reseaching Constitutional Amendments, 2002.
This paper contains five annotated reviews of websites that can be used to research the United States Constitutional Amendments
1,580 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews five sites. It gives the appearance, content, how to navigate the site. For example, at one site the paper presents information about the 19th Amendment including states that ratified and the date. Another site gives information about ratification. Another site is selected because it contains many links to other sites related to Constitutional Amendments.
From the Paper
"This site is pleasing to the eye and yet remains functional for research purposes. It contains historical information, by way of a dropdown menu through which one can obtain profile, membership, and leadership information about a particular Congress. Legislative and historical information from the 91st (1969?1971) through the 107th (2001?2003) Congresses is provided. For example, the 106th Congress, which was 2000-2001) reports a total membership of 435 Members, four Delegates, and one Resident Commissioner."
| |
|
10 Constitutional Amendments, 2005.
A discussion on proposed constitutional amendments.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 35.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The following paper briefly adumbrates ten constitutional amendments this writer believes can safeguard individual rights in America. The paper looks at the constitutions of other lands to arrive at a better idea of what revisions will serve America best. The paper concludes that American problems need uniquely American solutions.
From the Paper
"Proposing amendments to the United States Bill of Rights is a favorite activity of many Americans. With that in mind, the following paper will offer up ten amendments, in order of significance, aimed at bolstering individual rights. To perform this rather ardurous task, it is necessary - among other things - to speak with various individuals who are of voting age and of sound mind to gain their input into what amendments will most advance the cause of liberty and the pursuit of individual happiness. The paper will also review the constitutions of at least a handful of other nations with an eye towards determining which aspects of them, if any, may be worthy of incorporation into the revised Bill of Rights. Finally, this paper will conclude with a table that delineates each of the ten amendments and offers a brief explanation of the meaning and intent of each amendment."
| |
|
Quinlan and Cruzan and Constitutional Amendments, 2004.
Looks at how the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution were used to argue legal cases regarding the right to die.
952 words (approx. 3.8 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 33.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the legal arguments presented by the families of Karen Ann Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan, two women in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery, in order to win the right to remove the women from life-support. The paper summarizes and explains the arguments, which were based on the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments, and looks at why these arguments might have been flawed.
From the Paper
"There is one problem with all three amendments, the First, Eighth and Fourteenth, as applied to the cases of Karen Ann Quinlan and Nancy Cruzan: When the Founding Fathers wrote those amendments, they assumed that their provisions would apply to people who could think and act for themselves. Extraordinary medical measures, in those days, consisted of applying leeches and hoping for the best. In short, the universe has changed drastically since those words were penned."
| |
|
Principles of the U.S. Constitution: The Fifth Amendment, 2002.
A comprehensive examination of the Fifth Amendment and its impact on criminal justice in the U.S.
5,011 words (approx. 20.0 pages), 12 sources, MLA, $ 126.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper introduces the Fifth Amendment, describes its primary components, and provides a review to identify their respective histories and interpretations. A Fifth Amendment case is selected and discussed as to its impact on contemporary American society. A summary of the research is provided in the conclusion.
From the Paper
"According to ?The Bill of Rights and the Judicial System,? the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution in 1791 to further strengthen the basic rights of American citizens. Some of the rights specifically protect the rights of citizens accused of committing crimes. The Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights requires that a person punished for a crime must be indicted by a grand jury. This amendment also forbids double jeopardy (trying a person more than once for the same crime) and forbids the court from forcing a person to testify against him or herself (called self-incrimination). As a result of the Fifth Amendment, the American judicial system is expected to assume the defendant is innocent until proven guilty. Further, the accused does not have to confess to a crime unless he or she chooses to do so."
| |
|
Gay Marriage Amendment, 2008.
This paper argues against an amendment to ban gay marriage in the United States.
1,358 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article, the writer discusses that Congress should not adopt a resolution calling for an amendment to the United States Constitution to ban same-sex marriages. The writer maintains that such an amendment is not necessary to address any real problem and would cause problems. Further, the writer argues that this is a political ploy. In addition, the writer maintains that such an amendment would jeopardize the separation of church and state. The writer concludes that the Federal Marriage Amendment is not needed practically, may cause unexpected problems, is a cynical political ploy, undercuts the judiciary, would jeopardize the separation of church and state and should not be adopted.
From the Paper
"Further, Chapman finds strong practical arguments for gay marriage. It will not increase unfettered sex. Sex, fettered or unfettered at one's preference, is easily and abundantly available. Given liberal divorce laws, many children already live outside the idealized mom-and-daddy family, and others are suffering because their parents do not divorce when they should. If children are better off when their parents marry, and adults generally build more stable relationships in which to raise children if they commit themselves to marriage, how are the children of gay couples better off if their parents barred from marrying? Proponents of the Federal Marriage Amendment leave these questions frustratingly unaddressed."
| |
|
Constitutionality of Same-Sex Marriage, 2008.
This paper discusses whether the denial of same sex-marriage is unconstitutional.
820 words (approx. 3.3 pages), 13 sources, APA, $ 29.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this article the writer examines the constitutionality of bans on same-sex marriage. The writer reports on the analytic framework at issue in a case litigating constitutionality of an issue of this nature, and reports on decisions in recent cases from courts in Vermont, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and California. The writer concludes that there have been differing interpretations on this issue, but the majority of courts have ruled that there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, so that the ban on same-sex marriage is not unconstitutional.
From the Paper
"On the other hand, if the right does not affect a fundamental right, and is based on a non-suspect classification, it will be upheld so long as it reflects a "rational classification." Fundamental rights include those in the bill of rights. Suspect class is generally limited to race."
"Thus: is the right to marry a same-sex partner fundamental? The Supreme Court, in Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), called marriage a fundamental right -- for a heterosexual couple.
"State courts to date have reached different conclusions. Massachusetts ruled marriage is a fundamental right, upholding same-sex marriage under the state constitution in Goodridge v. Department of Public Health (2003). (Grossman; Burge) In that case, a trial court ruled that the purpose of marriage was procreation."
| |
|
New Amendments to the Constitution ? A Debate, 2006.
A paper describing and analyzing three potential constitutional amendments.
3,572 words (approx. 14.3 pages), 13 sources, APA, $ 99.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper addresses three potential new amendments to the constitution. The first of the amendments discussed addresses school prayer. The second and third amendments discussed address term limits for both members of Congress and for the United States president. The final amendment proposed seeks to overturn Amendment 22 that limits a president to two terms of four years in office. It also proposes that a president be elected of one term of 9 years, with a provision that congress may remove the president and call for a new election after the president has served at least three years in office.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Amendment Number 28 Congressional Term Limits
Discussion
Amendment -33
Conclusion
From the Paper
"This amendment attempts to satisfy two very different groups of people who have conflicting ideas about school prayer. On one hand, it allows individuals and groups to conduct public prayer in a public school setting. On the other hand, it still protects the separation of church and State that is part of the first Constitutional Amendment in the Bill of Rights. (Bill of Rights) It appears that the majority of people want prayer returned to public school. A survey by the Pittsburgh Courier received a significantly large positive response to the question "Should prayer be returned to public schools.""
| |
|
Federal and State Power: The Constitution, 2006.
An analysis of the reasons that founding fathers of the United States included the Bill of Rights as the first set of amendments to the Constitution.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 5 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes the main concerns of the founders when the wrote the Constitution of the United States, explaining that the delegates wanted limits on the federal government's power over the states and the citizens of the nation. Because of their experience with the British crown and the absence of freedom that existed in England for the common man at the time, the framers wanted to ensure that at no time could the federal government reduce state or individual freedoms. The paper explains that this is why the Bill of Rights was included as the first set of amendments to the Constitution, as it directly ensured that certain freedoms were protected. These amendments also stipulated that the federal government had enumerated power, rather than absolute power; an action "intended to keep the central government weak and to the keep the political power close to the people".
| |
|
The Legalization of Gay Marriage in the United States The Legalization of Gay Marriage in the United States, 2006.
A discussion regarding the controversial issue of same sex marriage in the USA.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 0 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the long debated issue of gay marriage in the United States. This paper reports how proponents of the issue contend that same sex marriage is not about gay rights but about human rights. It further discusses how these individuals believe that gays in modern society have long been subjected to inequalities and a lack of support from the social order. The opponents of the gay marriage issue refer to a stereotypical framework for gays in general that suggests that gays are evil and dangerous to children.
|
|
|
