Argumentative Essay: Government Taking Away Our Rights

According to the First Amendment law from United States Constitution, a prior restraint is classified as a federal action which forbids speech or other mediums of communication and expression prior to publication. Under the First Amendment, American citizens and the press are granted the liberty of free speech. However, under certain terms the officials will sanction this blockage. For over 70 years, corporations and public figures have often wished they could stop media and broadcast stations from publishing sensitive information, their ability to censor or take action against them is very limited. The U.S Supreme Court considers this suppressive tactic as “the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights”. Scholars

The Bill of Rights is one of the most important things in the American government .The Bill of Rights has 10 Amendments. The fifth one however is one of the important one. The fifth Amendment deals with police procedures. Along with basic Constitutional limits, or in other words guidelines that Congress has to follow. The Fifth Amendment is a one of the most important Amendments because it gives people the rights to speech and privacy, the fifth doesn’t let people be charged with the same felony twice, and it gives citizens the right to a fair trial.

The most supportive argument why people are in an agreement with the government controlling what we eat is because of all the obese people in the country with medical problems. In fact obesity is one of the many problems

Everyone loves the idea of a government that truly cares about him or her. Especially a government that would go so far as to layout a healthy diet plan to insure the health of your children and to battle childhood obesity. It is great that the government is concerned about adolescent obesity and the nutrition students receive at school. However, the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) Food and Nutrition Guidelines provide more problems for schools and they need to be eradicated, as well as repealing the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.

The government is not responsible for the consequences of poor dietary choices made by individuals. The government is how ever needed to change the way we see health care. In America we have been taking on the burden of others issues unwillingly through the healthcare system. The article What You Eat Is Your Business by Radley Balko explains how premiums on healthcare due to “Your heart attack drives up the cost of [other’s]”. When others are paying for your personal health issues, it makes it easier to not “put down the cheese burger”. Other than motivation from the government we as individuals

The first amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech..." The Supreme Court determined that free speech does in fact have limits. For years the first amendment only applied to the federal government, that was later changed in 1925 in the 'Gitlow v. New York' court case. The Supreme Court said that this applied to other levels of government which included public schools. 44 years later in 'Tinker v. Des Moines' The Supreme Court ruled that if a student "materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others" that the First Amendment does not protect it. Then in 2007 in the 'Morse v. Frederick' case, the

Radley Balko, the once editor of the Huffington Post, argues in his essay “What You Eat Is Your Business,” that personal responsibility is necessary when it comes to the food you ingest and your health. Balko goes into detail about how the government should not have a hand in what consumers eat or where they eat by discussing initiatives the government has put in place. Anti-obesity initiatives such as the request for more food labels and the restriction of junk food in vending machines at schools are becoming more popular and causing the American population to not take responsibility for their own health choices. American’s well-being has become an issue of “public health” instead of being an individual concern.

During this year of 1794, we have come through many tribulations and have suffered to great extent for our freedom of Britain. This country has lost fathers and sons to bring us freedom and ensure our rights are kept. It brings me displeasure to write about grievances with our own government. However we must be aware of current and past issues and let it be known that this country and government will defend its people’s rights and preserve their freedom.

In an article written by Radley Balko titled “what you eat is your business” published on May 23, 2004, Balko informs us that giving the government control of the food industry is not the correct way to fight obesity. He points out that a few of the things that the government is doing already to try to control what students eat at school, and some ideas that congress are considering to help reduce obesity. Something that Balko mentioned related to putting focus on individual duties as a person, to take care of themselves by monitoring personal food intake, instead of everyone else’s unhealthy choices. He says that by giving government control of it, takes away the personal responsibility. Balko thinks that because the government is not allowing private healthcare to increase

In conclusion, all the stories you hear about police officers breaking the rules and crossing lines makes one concerned about our safety in this country. The power of the fourth amendment should be reconsidered and taken into more serious pretenses. When a person chooses to live in a certain area they expect that their safety is a main concern to the cops in the community. Many cops do not demonstrate their concern for the well being of citizens when they are doing things like discriminating or harassing someone to get what they want when it seems there is no danger at all at hand. It would make everyone comfortable if they knew that these police officers got what was coming to them for the mistreatment they are taking upon people. This also

Based on the information in the article, and what I know about the Patriot Act. I believe my rights have been imposed upon by the FBI, but I also believe they are trying to protect the Amercian citizens. The Patriot Act, which is an act of Congress, was signed into law by President George W. Bush this law was intended to halt terrorism and preserve life and liberty. This act was passed after the 9/11 incident. As with any bills or laws passed there are some glitches. Many Americans citizens and critics argue that the patriot act was passed before being introduced to the people. Most provisions of this act are considered invalid or unenforceable by its terms. Some optimist in major cities and communities are criticizing the patriot act as an

In the article, “What You Eat is Your Business,” senior writer and investigative reporter, Radley Balko, argues obesity is a personal and individual responsibility and should not be regulated through the government since that violates our freedoms and rights. Balko states the government’s regulations in preventing obesity, such as, removing junk food in school vending machines, more detailed food labels, and forcing the food industry to be more responsible in their behavior towards the health issues of consumers. Many politicians agree with banning of unhealthy snacks and sodas from school vending machines, in addition, calling for a fat tax on unhealthy, high calorie foods. According to Balko, this is the wrong way to fight obesity, he continues,

Within The Constitution lies the Bill of Rights. This document, as its name would suggest, gives U.S. citizens certain unalienable rights. One of these rights is the right to freedom of speech. This means that people have the right to speak their mind and nobody can tell them otherwise. But of course, with its ever increasing population, the United States is bound to birth a few blithering fools who take this right to the extreme. Fred Phelps is one of these such people. This man openly shames gays and soldiers, and at their funerals nonetheless. His reasoning goes something like this: “America supports gays, gays are bad, soldiers who fight for America, and therefore for gays, are bad.” This may be grossly simplified, but this is more or less

Imagine if the government controlled what everyone ate. The U.S. Government wants to be able to regulate people’s diets. This means that people will be limited and banned from certain foods that are unhealthy. Does the government want Americans to look a certain way or does the government actually care about health? How will the society react if the government gives into this new absurd regulation? I am challenging the governments regulation of peoples diets because people will be able to secretly obtain these limited foods, many people will be frustrated and Americans should be able to make well thought out decisions on what they will consume.

I think there are many Americans that are for this, however with the way the world is going the many opposed seem to be the anti-government prepper type people who have been stock piling weapons, food and ammunition for the last five to ten years. The military assets that law enforcement has a great value to offer the public, but we must present it to the public in the correct manner. It would be beneficial to the agency to have open house type events to showcase the items we have and present ways they will help the community. They anti-government people and media present it as way to take over America. This is a great topic and look forward to seeing to seeing what your research