Justice Brennan's Argumentative Analysis

Krakauer admits that Chris McCandless was a rash, but he insists he "wasn't a nutcase, he wasn’t a sociopath, he wasn’t an outcast. McCandless was something else-- although precisely what is hard to say. A pilgrim, perhaps" (85). Many thought McCandless was wise and he knew what he was dong, while others disagree, stating his poor decisions contributed to his own death. In my opinion, Chris was indeed wise- he was a young man who didn’t care about labels, brands, big things, or anything materialistic. Instead, he thrived on more important concepts of life like truth and freedom. He believed he would find his true self and relieved of society once he became one with the wild.

Marriage is a social institution that is practiced globally. Traditionally marriages are known to occur between one man and one woman. However, cultural values and time have reshaped and birthed new types of marriages. Polygamy is a type of marriage that is often practiced around the world specifically in Asia, Middle East, and Africa. Polyamorous marriages have been in existence for centuries. Polygamy is classified into two categories, polygyny, and polyandry. Polygyny is the most popular type of polygamy, in this type of polygamous marriage, a man is married to multiple women. On the other hand, polyandry which is the least familiar type of polygamy is where a woman is married to multiple husbands. The intolerance of Mormons in the United States has led to the outlawing of polyamorous marriages. The Morrill Anti Bigamy law of 1862 outlawed the practice of polygamy in the United States. Like many other laws, this law can be overturned. In fact, it should be reversed because illegalizing polygamy is unethical. Polygamy should be legalized because it is unconstitutional for it to be illegal, same-sex marriages and interracial marriages are legal, therefore so should polyamorous marriages. In addition, legalizing polygamy would prevent immigrant families who practice polygamy from being separated and it would also strengthen the feminist movement.

Most would equate their struggle and first for equality to gay marriage. This is mostly due to so much acceptance of those individuals that do not fit the mold of the typical monogamous man and women marriage. We are far from a city that is accepting of this union or are we? Recently families who practice polygamy have been in the public increasingly. Modern day television series such as the Sister Wives follows a family in a polygamous union who documents their day to day life and the struggle that we mentioned in the previous paragraph. This family lives their life in peace which reverts back to my stance on the issue in which the laws that currently exist around polygamy unions are good as they are. Reporter Amy Robek of the 20/20 news show reported on the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Ladder Day Saints Polygamy Compound in a documentary titled “Secrets of the Mormon Cult: Breaking Polygamy”. This documentary was filmed after the prosecution of the cult leader of the FLDS compound Warren Jeff’s. They got a rare inside look on what life is like within compounds, shedding light to outsiders the daily operations and schedules the sheltered people. What they discovered was these families are hold a lower standard of education, health care, and nutritional values. From

The purpose of this research is to rationalize an amendment to the Constitution of the United States forcing Supreme Court Justices into a medical review to determine if the Justices are physically and mentally able to continue to serve their tenure. The focus is to create a half way point between two opinions in the very controversial subject of the Supreme Court Justices tenure. As the Judicial Branch becomes more active, citizens have questioned the rationale of justices serving for life, while others maintain that there is no need for change. The middle ground purposed is the establishment of a medical review of the justices and the hard part is establishing when they are medically unfit to serve. Considering the Constitutional purpose

One Supreme Court member that stands out from the rest would have to be John Marshall. There is no doubt about this because he made the Supreme Court a co-equal branch of government. This means that it was an equal branch to the legislative and the executive. He became a Supreme Court Justice in 1801 and was appointed by John Adams. While holding his position he set three major goals that set precedents and made him the most significant Supreme Court Justice ever. Marshall strengthened the national government, weakened the state government, and strengthened the conditions for business and stabilized the economy. Before John Marshall was the Supreme Court Justice, there were attempts to balance the Court which had failed. His decisions

The main reason as to why the polygamist would be arrested is because although that person is practicing their religion under the free exercise clause, that person is committing a crime and is therefore punished. The free exercise clause within the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that the U.S. government is unable to interfere with a citizen's right to exercise their religion. However, as a citizen of the United States of America, that person has to abide by the laws of the country meaning that officials are able to arrest a person even if they are just practicing their religion.

With the coming retirement of Representative AL Ott, we need to make sure we find the right person to fill his shoes. To me there is one candidate that really stands out. After meeting with him and doing my research, it is apparent that Atty Ron Tusler is the perfect candidate for the position. He is a proven leader and has done a lot for the Republican Party. He is a job creator and has a passion for helping people. He is doing this for all the right reasons and I believe he would be a fantastic Assemblyman. Join me in supporting Ron Tusler for Wisconsin's 3rd Assembly

The cultural foundations deeply ingrained in the American experience provide little relief towards an amicable concept of “Rooted Cosmopolitanism.” Southern California is an outlier, geographically dethatched with an aura of modernity. Rapidly advancing modernization and an influx of religious diversity emerged in tandem; the effect- Christianity molded to secular exigencies shaping a pluralistic state. However, Southern California reflects a religious model independently formed, largely out of reach from the grip of ripened American values and democratic traditions prevailing in the eastern part of the country. The distasteful reality, in which Roof did not address, is what would happen if Southern California bred the emergence of a religious practice similar to that of polygamy in Utah? Society and the Courts have fiercely preserved traditional American values, and would without doubt precipitously intervene. Perhaps, religious pluralism flourished so well in Southern California because, as Roof cited,

The state of Utah also relies heavily on Utah Const. art. III, § 1, in Utah’s Constitution stating “First: -- Perfect toleration of religious sentiment is guaranteed. No inhabitant of this State shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship; but polygamous or plural marriages are forever prohibited”, and Utah’s anti-polygamy statute, Utah Code Ann. § 76-7-101(1)(2)(3) stating “(1) A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits with another person, (2) Bigamy is a felony of the third degree, and (3) It shall be a defense to bigamy that the accused reasonably believed he and the

The source was created by the John Marshall, in 1803. What I know about the author, John Marshall, is that he was a great American Politician. John Marshall was born on September 24, 1755, and deceased on July 6, 1835. Also, he was the 4th Chief Justice of the U.S. from 1801 to the time he died in 1835. His opinions in court helped sustain the basis for the United States constitutional law. Furthermore, many say that he made the Supreme Court an equal branch of government alongside the legislative and executive branches. John Marshall’s point of view was that he wanted to gain the rights of the Supreme Court to determine the meaning of the United States Constitution in the case of “Marbury vs Madison”.

There is a large community in Bountiful, British Columbia, infamous for being the home of many Fundamentalist Church of Latter-day Saints (FLDS) which in turn garners interest in the constitutionality of the polygamy offenses. In 2011 the provincial government decided to get the opinion on the matter from the Supreme Court of British Columbia (BCSC) on the constitutionality of s. 293, now referred to as the Polygamy Reference (Wray, Reimer, & Cameron, 2015). The purpose of this paper is to critically assess the inherent harms of polygamy. Specifically, we will look at the harms against women, children, men, and society at large in relation to Polygamy. Polygamy violates s.15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

The practice of polygamy is said to be an essential part of Mormonism, promising resurrection after death or becoming closer to God, and although it has been argued to cause harm by many researchers, the prohibition of the practice could potentially go against the Charter’s promise of freedom of religion. Polygamy is prohibited under S. 293 of the Criminal Code, and the Government of British Columbia came to the Court in order to decide if the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects the right to practice polygamy for religious purposes. The objective of the prohibition of polygamy is to protect women, children, men and society from the harms associated with it.

Although the law states polygamy is illegal in all 50 states. (Carlisle 2017) The debate remains should the law be changed and is bigamy and polygamy the same thing? The answer is unclear since the bigamy and polygamy have two different meaning. Bigamy is when you are married legally to one person and then go and marry another person. Polygamy is when you are married to one person legally, however, cohabitate with multi-partners. Bigamy and adultery laws have a clause of co-habitation which polygamist fall under making it illegal. Nevertheless, most states won’t prosecute on cohabitation alone. The political debate is whether or not the law should be changed to reflect underage polygamy and not apply to adults

On November 14, 2014, “Kansas Becomes 33rd state to legalize Gay marriage”. Will this be normal for future years to come? Although Hawaii was the first to legalize gay marriage, Vermont took the first step to introduce and create “a parallel system of civil unions for same-sex couples that went beyond existing ‘domestic partnership’ and ‘reciprocal beneficiaries.’". In contrary of over half of the states legalizing this law as of 2014 and the President of the United States support same-sex marriage, but the acceptance of same-sex union however, remains a controversial topic.

On the other side of the spectrum, liberal critics have even argued for the complete elimination of marriage in favor of civil unions for all and for the expansion of marriage to include polygamy. Thaler and Sunsteins argued, “the only legal status states would confer on couples would be a civil union, which would be a domestic partnership agreement between two people.” These two scholars want marriage to be a private matter, so they want to get the State complete out of the marriage business in favor of letting religious or private organizations distribute the distinction of marriage. Moreover, Andrew March of Yale University objected to the standard complaints against polygamy and asserted that the State should additionally recognize plural marriages, using the same arguments as proponents of same sex marriages. In order to show why the expansion of marriage to include same sex couples while restricting marriage to monogamy is in the best interest of society, it is imperative to address the conjugal view and show how this view of marriage is erroneous and how the government cannot endorse recognition of plural marriage as it adversely effects civil society. Next, I will show why the expansion of marriage to same sex couples is the best