Freedom House: Civil Liberties And Political Rights In Morocco

In the past, freedom was not being persecuted for having different opinions and it was a new start, where everyone is equal. Freedom wasn’t in most parts of the world; in fact Freedom House showed the statistic of the freedom of the press from 1987 and 2014 and in 1987 fifty-seven percent of the worlds freedom of the press wasn’t free and in 2014 only thirty-two percent of the press wasn’t free. This show that people are learning the importance of freedom

Freedom is defined as the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement. It is the power to determine action without restraint and the exemption from external control, interference, and regulation. Americans, these days, commonly regard their society as the freest and the best in the world. Their understanding of freedom has been shaped and based upon the founding fathers’ belief that all people are equal and that the role of the government is to protect each person’s basic “inalienable” rights. The United States Constitution’s Bill of Rights assures individual rights including freedom of speech, press, and religion. America has changed dramatically from the country our founding fathers discovered. Some could even argue that

One might ask the importance of civil liberties after so many years. The answer is that we are all touched by these liberties every day. Even though civil liberties were embedded into the Bill of Rights in the late 1800’s, we today, as Americans, still have the right to be protected against any abusive power used by the government (Bianco & Canon, 2015, p. 106). Although Americans are protected fully today, it took over a century for all civil liberties to be implemented. With several civil liberties in place, which is most important? Which liberty protects us as Americans, most significantly? I believe all of our civil liberties are equally as beneficial and lead to the safety of every citizen in the United

There is humanly no possible way to merely or easily define what “freedom” truthfully is, as every distinct person and each social order has opposing restrictions for what this belief is. Bureaucrats and social researchers, for example, have vastly diverse philosophies of what institutes freedom. This primeval belief has been ingrained into mankind since the beginning of time. Century after century mankind has fought in numerous wars for this concept of “Freedom”.

The nation of Canada has strived to be recognized as a long-standing picture of equal democratic rights and freedoms for all. Although mistakes and occasional aberrations do occur, we must always endeavour to be a nation that promotes equality and shuns discrimination, even if it means changing our laws in the process. Equality for all is a constitutionally entrenched law and we as citizens, lawmakers, and judges must uphold the constitution and ensure our nation evolves to demonstrate, in practice, the intent of words outlined in the constitution. In Vriend v. Alberta, the appellant Delwin Vriend was working as a laboratory coordinator in Alberta when he was terminated after revealing his sexual orientation (Vriend v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493 2). It was well known that Vriend received positive reviews on his work and throughout the course of his employment he enjoyed the benefits of his hard work (Vriend v. Alberta 11). However, this all changed when Vriend shared with his employers that he was homosexual. Due to the fact Vriend refused to comply with the request to leave his position because his homosexuality offended the views of his employer, he was unceremoniously terminated solely on these grounds (Vriend v. Alberta 2). Vriend was understandably upset with this decision and moved to file a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission (Vriend v. Alberta 2). Vriend was informed due to the fact sexual orientation was not included as a prohibited grounds for

Raed Jarrar’s case had to do more with civil liberties, one big reason being his race having a big role in the situation. I truly believe that if a young white male was wearing a similar shirt he wouldn’t even have been looked upon. His civil liberties where thrown away when he was asked to flip his shirt inside out, and or buy a new shirt. Mr. Jarrar did not break any laws nor was he told the laws that he supposedly committed. The color of skin as well as the words in Arabic made him a target in the airport.

The norm of society has affected the way people’s rights were distributed throughout the course of America’s history. During America's darker times, people were all diversely treated. If you were unlucky enough to be born as a black child, then your life would have been laid out for you. You were a slave. If you were lucky to be born as a white male, then you were at the top of the food chain. Woman, even if white, were not perceived as equals to men.

In the following document I have read and researched two different points asked in the assignment. The first is a summarization and my take on Zakaria’s article, along with answered questions from the assignment. The second is a research portion, provided by the listed sources, about the civil rights movement. I thoroughly enjoyed reading the Zakaria article and it was an eye-opener looking into the civil rights movement.

Free societies all around the world are hanging from a thin thread, Law and order. A society, let alone a free one, can simply not function unless there is a set foundation for it to run on. When the people of such societies rise up and speak out, it tends to cause civil disorder and rioting for example Rosa Parks and the Civil rights movement. The cause in which they were fighting for was a one that was worth fighting but it came at the price of hundreds of African Americans getting beating by Police and Brutal anti-Black sentiment from the White majority. Free societies function on law and order however is it worth speaking up and jeopardizing it or better to just keep quiet and let the society run its course.

What does freedom mean to you? For me, it means that you can do what you want to do. But I know that America says that it is the land of the free, but it really isn’t. My E.L.E. class watches CNN Student News, (Which by the way is now going to be CNN 10) and when we watch CNN Student News, it sometimes says some things where freedom goes too far. A lot of people take things too far just because they have the power.

Freedom has a many different forms, meanings and applications. Although the concept is universal, the practices in different countries can vary greatly. Freedoms definition at its philosophical level is “the power to exercise choice and make decisions without constraint from within or without; autonomy; self-determination. Compare necessity” (Dictionary.com, 2017). With a broad application of this, Australia can be defined as a free country, however, in comparison; Iran can be seen to have restricted freedom.

First, what is freedom? It's an ambiguous term that can hold many different meanings to different people. Where a person comes from, their socio-economic status, their race, age, gender and other factors play a role in defining what freedom is. It's used in many different senses, for example: is freedom being able to do as you like

Freedom has a large range of meaning. The encyclopedia Britannica defines freedom as “the quality or state of being free, and the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action” (Britannica). In the American society there is a lot of emphasis on freedom, and the right to be free, but one must question to what extent we are truly “free”.

When Africans were taken from their motherland they lost their families, their sense of connection to traditions, their freedom, stability and their human rights. Through the Middle Passage they learned to rely on the others around them. Through this common bond they grew close and put aside differences their tribes may once have had. Due to the fact the captured people were young in age, healthy, vibrant and able to procreate; their future owners would use all of these features against them. Moreover, they made the enslaved peoples have relations, they would put them together strictly to procreate. If they could not or chose not to help the owners by giving birth to future slaves they were punished by extreme means. The enslaved used this as a form of resistance. They could control procreation to a certain extent. As they travelled across the ocean relationships were developed, they learned to communicate and sing songs as ways to encourage each other and remain hopeful even when things seemed dim. Little did the captured peoples realize those songs would help future generations of slaves by giving them the same hope that the current peoples were experiencing. It was through the songs that the African American slaves changed the lyrics to reflect how they felt about their owners and striving for freedom which they so desperately wanted. They used singing as means to spread messages, encourage one another and develop enough courage to revolt or runaway. As time went on, the

To begin, Shakespeare’s use of ethos displays that both princes are unworthy of marrying Portia. Sharing a common flaw, one reason why the Prince of Morocco and the Prince of Arragon are inappropriate choices for Portia’s husband is that both reveal pretentiousness during their contemplations on which casket to choose. For example, the Prince of Morocco assumes his worthiness to marry Portia due to his noble birth and achievements (2.7.24-35). Though having admirable achievements is a notable quality, the prince still completely disregards Portia’s personal needs and qualities. Proud, Morocco’s hyperboles in act II, scene 1 further cement the idea that the prince is imperious when referencing his accomplishments. Aside from the Prince of Morocco,