Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on us amendments
Essay on us amendments
Essay on us amendments
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the United States, we have 10 Amendments that form our Bill of Rights. But in a different world, were humans were overthrown by animals, they have a different thought process of these. Some of our amendments may be the same as theirs. Some of our amendments could be way off from theirs. All together, some of our amendments could be totally ignored, or denied, by these animals and the society they run. One amendment that stuck with them from our original Bill of Rights was the 1st amendment, which states "Freedom of religion, speech, and press; rights of assembly and petition." We can tell because after they overthrow the farmer, they form a set of rules, most like amendments. They say " I merely repeat, remember always your duty of enmity towards Man and all his ways. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy. Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend. And remember also that fighting against Man, we must not come to resemble him. Even when you have conquered him, do not adopt his vices. No animal must ever live in a house, or sleep in a bed, or wear clothes, or drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco, or touch money, or engage in trade. All the habits are evil. And, above all, no animal must ever …show more content…
The reason they denied this was because when Major was telling his speech, he said that animals must not resemble man. The text states, "No animal must ever live in a house. or sleep in a bed, or wear clothes, or drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco, or touch money, or engage in trade." This surely means that no animal should be able to touch weapons, because that is also "a wicked way of the man." The 3rd Amendment didn't really apply to them, since the only battle they fought was "The Battle of the Cowshed", and the humans pretty much lost in a matter of minutes. One sheep was killed, though, making the animals angrier and scaring the humans away, winning the
The Tenth Amendment was ratified along with the rest of the Bill of Rights on December 17th, 1791, as well, unlike most other amendments, it gave rights not only to the people, but also to the state governments. The Tenth Amendment was passed in order to delegate powers to the state governments and the people that the national government does not have, this amendment states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”
...tempt to diffuse violence. To even state that mans use of animals is immoral, and to claim that we have no right over our lives and must sacrifice our welfare for the sake of beings that cannot even think or grasp the concept of morality is ridicules. We would be elevating amoral animals to a moral level that is higher than our own, thus granting animals rights is not only fictional but wrong. In the words of Mat Block “Cows or cats would eat us to if they had a chance. Do not mistake a cats respect for one that is dominate for love, they are killers plain and simple and if you do not believe me ask their friends the birds”
According to the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Though last in the Bill of Rights, it is one of the most powerful and ever changing in interpretation over the course of America’s history. Some historical events that altered its meaning include the Civil War, The Civil Right’s Movement, and even modern event’s like the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. In this paper I will discuss how the Tenth amendment has a large effect in both America’s history, but also how it is now portrayed America’s present.
When the Second Constitutional Convention wrote the Constitution in 1787, there was a controversy between the federalists and the anti-federalists surrounding whether or not to have a Bill of Rights. The anti-federalists claimed that a bill of rights was needed that listed the guaranteed rights that the government could never take away from a person i.e. “inalienable rights.” A Bill of Rights was eventually deemed necessary, and has worked for over 210 years. There are many reasons why the ten amendments are still valid to this day, and the best examples are the First Amendment, concerning the freedom of religion, the Fifth Amendment, and the Sixth Amendment.
What does freedom really mean? Many people today are aware that they have a right to freedom, but do not know what that really means. Religion, speech, press, assembly and petition are the five freedoms that the First Amendment specifically speaks about. Let’s take a look at the definition of each of the five freedoms, what the government says about our freedom, how it is acted out and portrayed in America, and a few case studies involving the different aspects of the First Amendment.
Indians understood animals to be powerful creatures possessing their own spiritual power and deserving of respect, but available as a food source. Therefore, Natives struggled to understand that animals could be property, but under the pressure of the English invasion attempted to integrate livestock into their lives. On the other hand, the English saw animals as property and as an indication of the supremacy of sophisticated agricultural culture. In part two, “Settling with Animals” Anderson examines the development of livestock agriculture in North America. The imported animals changed not only the land, but also “the hearts and minds, and behavior of the people who dealt with them”. (p.5) When the English arrived in America with their livestock the colonists became less focused on the animals and more focused on the cultivating of fields for crops for export and food purposes. The lack of labor and costs involved in the operation of farm lands led to the English being forced to allow their animals to roam freely in the woods. Ultimately, they lost control of the livestock and many of the herds became as feral as the animals the Indians typically
In conclusion, captive hunting ranches exist and seem to thrive especially in the state of Texas. From primitive times, people have hunted as a means of survival although this is no longer the situation. Instead, hunters as participants in captive hunting ranches hunt for the thrill and do not necessarily respect life of the hunted animal. These hunters seem to care more about the trophy prize in the form of the mounted animal head rather than about respecting the life of the animal and honoring its features. The concept of "fair chase" in these canned hunts simply does not exist. To many hunters and the public at large, canned hunts occurring on private land is an artificially expensive manner of achieving something in name only. It cheapens the concept and challenge of hunting and respecting life for all it is worth. As man has dominion over other creatures, it is sad that the battle is lost. The right for survival and achievement should be inherently good. There are a whole host of other problems which have been mentioned. Care must be taken to ensure captive hunting occurs for the right reasons. Man can be no better than the hunted unless he thinks...
Tenth Amendment Our bill of rights all began when James Madison, the primary author of the constitution, proposed 20 amendments to the bill of rights and not the ten we know of today. Madison sent these twenty proposed rights through the House and the Senate and was left with twelve bills of rights. Madison himself took some of it out. These amendments were then sent to the states to be ratified. Virginia was the tenth state out of the fourteenth states to approve 10 out of 12 amendments.
The first amendment of the Bill of Rights gave them the freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and press. Every recognized citizen was allowed and entitled to their opinions in addition to Congress being restricted from creating any law regarding religion. The third and fourth amendments were written to secure a person’s privacy. A soldier, whether or not the country was in a time of war, had to ask for permission from the owner of any home to reside there. In legal cases, a person’s property and belongings was safe from violation unless a warrant is issued, with plausible reasons, to be allowed to do so. In accordance with the second amendment, a person had the natural right to bear arms. In other words, every recognized citizen should have the right to carry a weapon on their person or in their home. All in all, the context of the Constitution was meant to insure the security of all American citizens, again the ones who were considered citizens. Around the eighteenth century most people, most of them being rich white male landowners, would, and have, turned the other cheek to anything brought up from the Constitution that didn’t benefit them in any way. Admittedly their selfish desires to benefit themselves instead of the rest of the American population greatly helped in implanting the fortification of America’s rights. Yet when you think deeper about it, the reassurance of achieving your rights is
After reading “Do Animals Have Rights?” by Carl Cohen, the central argument of the article is that rights entail obligations. Cohen examines the syllogism that all trees are plants but does not follow the same that all plants are trees. Cohen explains the syllogism through the example of hosts in a restaurant. They have obligation to be cordial to their guests, but the guest has not the right to demand cordiality. Cohen explains using animals, for example his dog has no right to daily exercise and veterinary care, but he does have the obligation to provide those things for her. Cohen states that animals cannot be the bearers of rights because the concept of rights is essentially human; it is rooted in, and has force within, a human moral world. Humans must deal with rats-all too frequently in some parts of the world-and must be moral in their dealing with them; but a rat can no more be said to have rights than a table can be said to have ambition.
Have you ever wondered how the world would be if animals had a voice? Some have great intelligence already but imagine with the ability to speak they will evolve into a new species. Animals have many similarities with humans. For example they think, feel, and live exactly like people. The only difference that there maybe is speech. Animals can only do so much when they are trying to communicate. For example, they whimper, growl, or bark when they are in pain. Animals cannot tell a person if they are in pain or if they are unhappy. That is why humans have to be the voice for animals. While exploring these things, I agree with Tom Regan that animals should have rights.
There has been a long debate about how the citizens of the United States should interpret the constitution. The first amendment protects people's right to speak freely without punishment from the government. Society must distinguish between is speech versus "hate" speech. Hate speech has no place in the country because of the moral destruction it inflicts on the citizens. Additionally, people often use the internet as a way of conveying hate speech, which is a crime known as cyber bullying. The damage that hate speech inflicts on a person obstructs their path in gaining the pursuit of happiness, which is the cornerstones of the nation. The American people are given the right to observe freedom of speech, however, this does not grant freedom
Animals have no rights and their interests do not count equally with those of human beings.(pg. 147)
That’s because of something called poaching. Taking animals horns, tusks, antlers, skin, scales or whatever it may be without the animals consent is poaching. It’s illegal in most countries, but is still practiced anyway. The animals need their horns tusks and etc to live. If you take away a human’s hands and feet without consent it’s called cruel and unusual punishment, yet if you clip your bird's wings so that it may not fly it’s normal. Why is it okay to take away body parts of animals if we can’t do it to others? If animals had a bill of rights this wouldn’t happen. If the bill of rights made the fines and jail time so hefty that people would refrain from amputating animals, it could work. But currently since we have no bill of rights, animals are still being
These abilities allowed our forefathers to create the Constitution for the welfare of human beings then and future generations. And in recent years, human conscience has, also, established animal protection laws for their welfare. The only rights for humans from the Constitution of the United States that possibility apply and compare with animals would be: (1) personal security, not to be killed, injured or abused and (2) moving freely