and technology and education have advanced immensely. With the change, the Constitution had to be modified and loosely interpreted, to better not only it, but the life of American citizens. Therefore, I believe that loose construction is better than strict construction, because it allowed early society to expand the power of the executive branch, which later improved society itself. Throughout his presidency, Abraham Lincoln, was criticized for actions that were deemed “unconstitutional.” Although,
Identifying Social Problems The definition of a social problem varies greatly depending on whether an objectivist approach or a constructionist approach is taken. This is because sociologists that adopt these unique perspectives will differ in how they view the nature of a social problem. The objectivist definition of a social problem is perhaps more common sense because it "suggests that the essence of social problems lies in objective social conditions and that some conditions are problems
the early 1800s America was still developing, trying to develop the government so it can learn to stand up on its own. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison played a key role in the country’s developing time, they created the idea of strict v. broad constructionism. Political parties were contradicting each other on the different point of views they had on the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson during his presidency sometimes made decisions that were based literally on the Constitution, whereas James
During the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison, Republicans, such as Jefferson were seen as strict constructionists of the Constitution while Federalists, like Madison, were generally looser with their interpretations of the Constitution's literal meaning. While the constructionist ideas were part of what separated the two parties from one another, Jefferson and Madison are both guilty of not adhering to these ideas on many occasions. Jefferson writes in a letter to Gideon Granger expressing
nations." (Document A). The Federalists of the United States were known as the loose constructionists, where if there is something which the constitution does not state, then it should be allowed to be done. The Jeffersonian Republicans were known as strict constructionists for their views towards the constitution that if there is anything that is not in the constitution, then it cannot be done. The Jeffersonian Republican party centered many of their political moves on the basis of creating a strong
attempted to stay true to Democratic-Republican fundamentals of strict constructionism, limited central power, and states’ rights that were put into place following the success of the Revolution. However, they eventually strayed from the original characterizations of their parties. In fact, during Jefferson and Madison’s presidencies, they often adopted or acted upon principles that were more aligned with Federalist ideals of broad constructionism, when the needs of the country demanded this, while remaining
Comparing Strict and Broad Constructionism It was 1800, when vice president Jefferson succeeded Adams in the role of president. Jefferson stressed republican virtues of independence and equality and his belief in a frugal government. With his inauguration, the transfer of power to the Republican from the Federalists intensified a political conflict between the two political parties. Even though Jefferson stated in his inaugural address that "we are all Republicans, we are all Federalists
Loose and Strict Constructionist of the Constitution The main similarity was that both factions recognized the Constitution as the guide that must be followed in running the new nation. The difference was on how they thought it guided us. Strict constructionists said that it was to be followed to the letter...if it wasn't in the Constitution you couldn't do it. They felt that it covered everything adequately and allowing a broad interpretation opened up too many possibilities. Loose construction
democratic nation. However as the democracy continued to grow, two opposing political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The Federalists saw it differently. They opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. The seemingly solid divide between Federalist and Republican
Vicariouis Liability and Article 21 I take this opportunity to express my gratitude and personal regards to Mrs. Stelina jolly for inspiring and guiding me during the course of this project work. I also owe my sincere thanks to the library staff, National Law University for the cooperation and facility extended from time to time during the progress of my project work. And last but not the least I must give my humblest gratitude to my parents and my friends for their support and encouragement
treating people as individuals, there are some regrettable circumstances in which grouping has legitimate purposes. The Supreme Court has recognized the necessity of grouping by subjecting "inherently suspect" classifications like race to a standard of "strict scrutiny," while letting classifications with a reasonable purpose pass with "intermediate scrutiny." Fundamentally, the Court asks whether there is a "rational basis" for a government policy that treats a particular group of people differently.
The English Law on Vicarious Liability An employer is responsible for damage caused by the torts of his employees acting in the course of employment. This is known as ‘vicarious liability’[1]. Essentially, vicarious liability is where the employer is generally substituted in terms of liability for the employee, the employee also has liability but the resources of the employer such as insurance makes them more financially attractive to the claimant. The mechanism of vicarious liability
There is a biological difference between boys and girls. There are also social constructions involved. Sex makes you female or male by your biological characteristics. Gender is generally learned from our society. It is behaviors and traits and based on appropriateness for our sex, according to our society. Socially constructed throughout our lives, gender is also a result of sociocultural influences. Gender socialization begins at birth. Some cultures have a third or fourth gender established. Samoa
The way in which the body is viewed is a complete social construction, dependent on the society, history and wider cultural attitude of a given group. Social constructionism can be defined as the ways in which society, culture and history builds up and dictates social norms. It shapes the way we think, behave and interact with our environment. The social construction of bodies is, therefore, the way in which society ascribes significance to different parts of the body and influences our understanding
diverse movement that values contributions of both individuals and communities, of scientific discovery and human rights advocacy, and of grassroots and public health movements” (Marlatt, Larimar, and Witkiewitz, 2012, p. 27). As opposed to being a strict set of policies, harm reduction has been frequently described as an “an attitude” (Marlatt, Larimar, and Witkiewitz, 2012, p. 8) founded on human rights, social justice principles and the desire to reduce health care
James Kelman's story, The Burn has been interpreted as a universal representation of the condition of the working class in an oppressive society. Also, critics have brought to light the stylistic accomplishment of Kelman's writing; his ability to use language to bring to bear a psychological and emotional state of being within a fraction of an individual’s life; but, there is another perspective that may have been an unintentional result of his genius as a writer. His unnamed character gives us an
and is constructed through our social interactions with other people. This essay will explicate the idea of socially constructed identities and consider the evidence for and against this view with examples of research studies from both social constructionism (Phoenix, 2007) and Social Identity Theory (SIT) (Turner and Brown, 1978). Here, the term ‘identity’ refers to the individual personality (behavioural and characteristic) of a person. It is what differentiates us from each other. The way we think
Social constructionism is how we, as a society construct the world between language and ourselves. Most things are not taken as being in existence until agreed by society. Social constructionism is not concerned about how things exist in any such materialistic form but how we construct the using words and how we apply meanings to certain things. For example, in the material world it is about objects, such as bricks and books and in the social and psychological world it is about how we apply meanings
Social constructionism originated as an attempt to come to terms with how reality is constructed, and knowledge is produced (Galbin, 2014). Its roots are connected to disciplines such as the ethnomethodology, sociology, anthropology, and psychology (Kham, 2013), and the works of Immanuel Kant, Berger and Luckman, Schutz, and Kunh, among others (ibid). In turn it acknowledges the influence of Mead, the originator of symbolic interactionism (Andrews, 2012). It may be defined as a perspective which
But this is departed from when creating strict liability offences. Strict liability offences require “proof that the defendant performed the prohibited conduct, but do not require proof that the defendant was blameworthy” . There are many interpretations of the term, one of the most accepted formal concept details strict liability offences as those ‘that contain at least one material element for which there is no corresponding mens rea requirement.’ Strict liability offences are not usually indictable