More handpicked essays just for you.
Civil rights for homosexuals in today's day
Modern Day gay Civil Rights
Civil rights for homosexuals in today's day
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Civil rights for homosexuals in today's day
Kim Davis is currently considered a hero of religious liberty to many Christians around the world but her “heroic acts” can very easily be identified as unlawful actions. Mrs. Kimberly Jean Bailey Davis was elected County Clerk for Rowan County, Kentucky, back in 2014. Luckily for her, the United States laws were not a problem when it came to her religious beliefs back when she was elected. However, on Friday, June 26th, 2015 the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples can marry nationwide, establishing a new civil right and finally giving gay rights advocates a well deserved victory. Recently Davis has chosen to expressed her religious beliefs at times where most would find inappropriate. She is a Christian with a particular set of views,
and the way and time she chooses to act on those views is hardly heroic. According to Davis, her persistent refusal to distribute marriage licenses to same-sex couples was due to her religious beliefs and values, but what she has seemed to overlook is the supposed separation of church and state. If she is going to have the ability to make lawful decisions it would make sense to assume that she would be able to follow the law and the orders of her superiors. After denying licenses to same-sex couples, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ordered that Davis be jailed for the refusal to follow judge's orders to distribute marriage licenses to all that can legally accept one. She remained in jail for five days until she was released by Bunning saying he was satisfied that her deputies fulfilled their obligations to give marriage licenses to same-sex couples in her absence.
In his article “Sacred Rite or Civil Right?” Howard Moody tackles the controversial issue of the definition of marriage and inclusion of same-sex marriage into that definition. The real issue that takes center stage is the not so clear separation between the church and the state. Moody, an ordained Baptist minister, shares his belief that it’s only a matter of time that civil law is once again redefined and homosexual marriage is recognized just as much as heterosexual marriage. The gay marriage debate he suggests isn’t focused on the relationship between such couples and is more about how to define such unions as a “marriage”. (353)
By using the story of Kim Davis the clerk that refused to issue marriage certificates to gay couples in Kentucky County, Rensin shows the brutal side of the disdainful liberals. He cites that the smug liberals enjoyed “mocking her appearance, openly celebrating the incarceration of an ideological opponent.” With phrases such as “hateful bigot,” “dumb hicks,” “rubes” are thrown in the article to highlight the condescending tones adopted by the liberals in the recent years against those that they deem conservative or less open to the liberal agenda (Rensin). He even incorporates George Bush’s encounter with the smug liberals that underestimated his Presidential ambitions and tenure as the President. With reference to the Daily Show’s rants, the article continues to show how the liberals have continued to make fun of the “dumb hicks” as “private entertainment of elites blowing off some steam”
Orwell’s rule and Gladstone’s bias both apply to Chris Pleasance’s report about the Kim Davis. Pleasance reports that a current social issue, which Kim Davis, a country clerk, uses religious liberty to defend for herself. Undoubtedly, Kim Davis becomes a national spotlight across the nation. In the article, Pleasance points out that “since
I wish someone would punish her and not just sweep it under the rug. Even though I do not personally agree with Nancy Davis, in the United States of America she has the freedom to believe in whatever she wants to believe in. She has not once been asked to believe that a marriage is not only between a man and a woman, all the citizens of Rowan County want Davis to stop interfering with what they believe. She is an elected state official governed by the Kentucky Constitution.
Tan includes a direct quote from her mother in paragraph six of the reading, and she does not shorten it for an important reason. Tan decides to keep the entire quote instead of paraphrasing to add an effect that a reader can only understand with the full quote. It shows that even though some people speak the language of English it is hard for others to understand based on the person’s full understanding and comprehension of the language. In Tan’s case she is used to the way her mother speaks and uses the language, but to others it is almost impossible to understand. If it were not for Tan summarizing what the quote meant before putting it in the text, few readers would have understood what the mother was trying to convey with her use of the language. Tan’s strategy in including this direct quotation is to show that language differs from person to person even if they all speak the same language. She is implying that the whole world could speak English; however, it would not be the same type of English because of how everyone learns and how others around
Angela Davis, a renowned political and civil rights activist, was invited in 2012 to Pitzer College to give the commencement speech to the graduating class. Her speech touched on important points in her life as well as many of the values she fought for and believe in. I have never heard her speak before watching this commencement address, and my initial thoughts when hearing her speech was that she was old. Her speech was slow and at first a little boring. However, as her commencement continued onward, she started to get more into rhythm and while she stayed relatively slow, the power behind her words as she spoke made me want to listen more to what she had to say. Angela Davis has had an interesting history as an activist and educator, and
Which is defined as a theory that reflex’s on traits and behaviors that are not guaranteed for a successful leadership. This is mainly due to the fact that some leaders lack the applicability of many situations. These leaders believe that effective results all depend on the correct correlation between the amount of control and style the leader has on a situation. Under the contingency theory the leader is task-oriented and relationship-oriented. This theory is related to the case of Kim Davis in many ways and has proven to have the potential to back fire on her leadership skills viewed by the public of the United States. With Davis, bringing her religious view into her work as a leader for the public sector, it creates a sense of power she thinks she has over the people. Kim Davis’s relationship with god and the belief of only heterosexual couples should be married, has shown that the contingency theory is something she follows when being a leader of the public
Her refusal causes confusion because of the technicality that it is interpreted as not following the law, but the law also shouldn’t cause her to act against her beliefs. Both the defendant and the plaintiff have rights that they feel are being stepped on. The similarities to the Brown v. Board of Education case is not only because it ended up going to the supreme court level, but because it is seen as a matter of equality even though it might be contrary to people’s religious beliefs.
Kim Davis may have very strong beliefs in regards to gay marriage; nonetheless, they seem to be very problematic after studying Rene Descartes’s arguments from his meditations. This is problematic due the way she made her statement. Kim Davis stated, “According to the Holy Scriptures, “marriage” is the union of one man and one women; The Holy Scriptures are the word of God, We know that God is good because it is taught in the holy Scriptures, Gay marriage involves the union if one man and one man or one woman and one woman. Therefore, gay marriage is morally wrong because it violates God’s will. ”
Including scientific research done on the topic and taking the results of previously conducted studies in her article, Elizabeth Svoboda supports her claim that true happiness is love based on scent from her piece titled Scents and Sensibility. Svoboda quotes Rachel Herz, an author of The Scent of Desire, and Randy Thornhill, and evolutionary psychologist at the University of New Mexico to emphasize her stance. Svoboda quotes: “’I’ve always been into smell, but this was different; he really smelled good to me,’” from Herz as an example the claim supported in the environment. The quote: “’But the scent capability is there, and it’s not surprising to find smell capacity in the context on sexual behavior,’” (Thornhill) applies factual evidence
“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe”( Douglass). This famous quote epitomizes the philosophies of Frederick Douglass, in which he wanted everyone to be treated with dignity; if everyone was not treated with equality, no one person or property would be safe harm. His experience as a house slave, field slave and ship builder gave him the knowledge to develop into a persuasive speaker and abolitionist. In his narrative, he makes key arguments to white abolitionist and Christians on why slavery should be abolished. The key arguments that Frederick Douglass tries to vindicate are that slavery denies slaves of their identity, slavery is also detrimental for the slave owner, and slavery is ungodly.
I really do not get all of the appeal behind The Hunger Games. This is similar to The Twilight Saga, not that both franchises are the exact same, but they're both highly overrated franchises that are geared mostly towards teenagers. The only difference is that The Hunger Games tries to appeal to all demographics, but just ends up being REALLY obnoxious--- once you see the poster for this movie 1000 times. The one with Katniss on it. This is one of the most ANNOYING movie posters, if not THE most annoying movie poster I have ever seen. It's everywhere, even when the second movie is about to be released. Sorry, but The Hunger Games will not be as memorable as Star Wars or Lord of the Rings. It's just another
The 1920's was a time when cultural and social changes began to take place in the history of the United States. People began to grow in prosperity, change the rules when it came to morals and manners, and the cultural civil war of individual rights. This is the time when women are fighting for their rights to be equal in comparison to their white male counterparts. During this period women are realizing their impact on how society functions and the roles they play. This was the beginning of the true feminists’ mission. After “August 23, the day when the Tennessee legislature finally enacted the Federal suffrage amendment" (Eastman,
In the current climate of politics, it is clear who are the big names in the race for the presidency. Whether one is looking at either sides of the American political spectrum (Republicans or Democrats), the larger figures are Trump, Clinton, Cruz, and Sanders. In regards to social inequality, the candidate that is showing compassion is Bernie Sanders. Sanders has been on the campaign trail over the course over the last year trying to spread his message of equality and progress for the American people. He is a Senator from Vermont who has spent yeas doing work in his State and at the Federal level. Recently, certain media outlets have shed light to the fact that Sanders marched with Martin Luther King Jr in the 1950’s. Besides that, Sanders has shown time and time again that he is a current example of equality for our country. Mr. Sanders shows compassion on the following issues: discrimination, economic equality, and political corruptions. These issues are key when having the discussion of social inequality as it relates to the United States of America.
Throughout the recent history of America, gay marriage has always been an issue. With the different views and morals everyone has on the subject, it makes it hard for individual states to determine what side they should be on. In 1983 a Harvard Law School student, Evan Wolfson, wrote a thesis stating the rule of marriage equality. Justices concluded that gay couples were entitled to the legal benefits of civil marriage; and most crucially in the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts, whose favorable ruling, in a suit by lawyer Mary Bonauto and the Boston-based Gay and Lesbian Advocated and Defenders, led to the nation’s first bona fide same-sex marriages…” (“Gay Marriage turns 10 and Credit Should Be Spread around- The Boston Globe). On May 17, 2004 Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriages. In June of 2013, California legalized gay marriages, which helped their large LGBT (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered) community. (“History and Timeline of the Freedom…”). When this finally happened, it was seen as a great achievement by Karmala Harris, a California Attorney. “This is a profound day in our country, and its just the right thing: ‘Justice is finally being served’” (“Court Gives OK for California Gay Marriages”).