The Possibility of Justice for All Essay

The Republic by Plato examines many aspects of the human condition. In this piece of writing Plato reveals the sentiments of Socrates as they define how humans function and interact with one another. He even more closely Socrates looks at morality and the values individuals hold most important. One value looked at by Socrates and his colleagues is the principle of justice. Multiple definitions of justice are given and Socrates analyzes the merit of each. As the group defines justice they show how self-interest shapes the progression of their arguments and contributes to the definition of justice.

Equality is something we humans crave for when we are in a time of hardship. When we are being discriminated against, we feel the utmost pain and the need for freedom. Discrimination has lingered since the beginning of time, and ending it is impracticable. A French novelist, Honore de Balzac proclaims, “Equality may perhaps be a right, but no power on earth can ever turn it into a fact.” Here, Balzac is acknowledging that an individual is born a free man and is just as equal as any other man. But, an individual will never be fully equal as they desire. Some parts of society will try to act superior to a certain quality of someone’s life, like their race, religion, culture, etc. This statement proves to be valid in Khaled Hosseini’s novel,

The issue of gays in the military has been controversial in the United States for many decades. Over these decades there have been many different proposals as to what approach to take in order to handle the situation of homosexuals in the military. However, in 1992 when Bill Clinton was running for President of the United States, he made a promise to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military if he was elected (Washington Post). Bill Clinton followed through with his promise, and in December 1993 he instituted “a defense directive that military applicants should not to be asked about their sexual orientation” (Washington Post). This is now known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was the result

Justin Cook is a student at Stanton College Preparatory who is currently in the eleventh grade. Cook is enrolled in an AP Psychology and takes a great interest in connecting the work he does in the class to the work in his other current classes. In this essay, Cook presents his argument on why homosexuals should be permitted to serve in the American Armed Forces primarily from a psychological standpoint. Cook is an active advocate for human rights and the equality of homosexuals. He is also an active supporter of The Trevor Project which is the only American non-profit organization that runs a 24/7 suicide and crisis prevention helpline for gay and questioning youth.

Every day, there are American citizens who risk their lives for the sake of their country's safety. Men and women who believe that justice, peace, and equality should be served. However, within their beliefs, some choose to exclude transgender individuals who have the same rights and freedoms. The American society considers the world to be progressively changing and growing, however, seem to forget that in order for the military to survive the 21st century, diversity is crucial. Although the medical costs may raise the overall healthcare median per year, transgender individuals should have the right to serve in the U.S. armed forces because any human being who meets the physical qualifications and has a willing attitude should have the right to serve.

Lately, there has been an outbreak of people of the LGBT community coming out in the military. Historically the United States has had a policy of discharging gays in the military. There has been an act called the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”, it is basically saying that as long as somebody does not ask about your gender preferences, you do not have to tell. Even though the ban has been lifted, many militaries still say they cannot accept anyone from the LGBT inside. They do not care about how well you can perform or your strengths and that mindset is going to come back and hit them in the long run. Militaries that are judging these kids are taking them away from somewhere they feel safe and a place where they can finally belong. Members of the LGBT community find refuge in the military. It was one of the only places where they can prove their worth, where people aren’t focusing on their sexuality. They shouldn’t be judged based on their sexual preferences. Instead, they should be judged on their personality, performance, and their ability to get the job done precisely and correctly.

Equality is pushed upon each citizen. But with this equality, comes aforementioned characteristics: submission, hopelessness, detachedness, conformity, and isolation. Superiority is punished. As written in chapter I, "It is not good to be different from our brothers, but it is evil to be superior to them" (21). In this way, uniqueness is repressed when it should be

Another problem with the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is that, if discovered, homosexuals will be discharged from the military. The discharge of a homosexual from the military, based on his personal life, is a violation of equal rights. Every human is different, but none should be judged separately based upon who they are. “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal, that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; that if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else” (Obama 1). This statement shows that the nation does know about equal rights and is pushing for equal rights; therefore, “don’t ask, don’t tell” needs to be repealed for the integrity of our nation.

Through the study this term of the central text, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, and related texts, films Rabbit Proof Fence by Phillip Noyce and In the Name of the Father by Jim Sheridan, my understanding of the concept of justice, or what constitutes justice, has altered considerably. We all think we know what justice is, or what it should be. In Australian colloquial terms, it is the principle of a “fair go” for everyone. In a perfect world, everyone is treated fairly. No-one is subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, sex or disability. But the reality is that the world we inhabit is far from perfect, human beings are by their very natures

The term justice is used in some of America's most treasured and valued documents, from the Pledge of Allegiance, to the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. Everyone wants to be treated justly whether it's in the courtroom or the local bar. Most people would feel confident giving a definition for justice, but would it be a definition we could universally agree to? Given that justice is a very common term, and something we all want, it's important to have a precise definition. For hundreds of years philosophers have argued, debated, and fought over this topic. Justice can clearly be defined as the intention to conform to truth and fairness. This is true justice.

Is there structural inequality in the criminal justice system? When we watch the news or read our newspapers, we can see that most of the criminals portrayed are of African American or Hispanic descent. Being a fan of true crime novels, they even depict more Black male criminals than White males. Are African American males committing more crimes than White males? What factors are involved for Blacks to be more involved in crime? How do African American stereotypes play a role with possible racial profiling from the policing force? Are Blacks treated fairly in the criminal justice system? After much research, I hope to answer these questions and determine if African Americans

In 1999, more than 1,000 men and women were discharged from military service due to their sexuality. That number has actually decreased compared to recent years. (Suro NP) Homosexuals were purged from federal employment in 1950, with Bill Clinton updating that policy in 1993 by adding the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue” policy. (Deicher 176) This policy doesn’t work and needs to either be updated again or the ban against homosexuals lifted. Gays should be allowed to fight for the military for employment reasons, the right to fight for one’s country, and because they are no different from anyone else. The fact of the matter is that not even experts can argue in favor of keeping the

The concept of access to justice embodies the formal conception on one side, and substantive conception on the other. The formal conception of access to justice is considered to indicate abilities of people to have access to courts of law and other tribunals in a reasonable and effective manner coupled with the opportunity to receive legal services from qualified professionals. Access to justice in this way embraces the concept of the equality before the law which is the foundation of human rights protection, and protects the poor and the vulnerable from deprivation and violation of their rights. The substantive conception of access to justice, on the other hand, refers to people's ability to attain a substantive legal outcome. The substantive

American prisons have a disparity of minority inmate population, and one of the reasons this is so is because of the manner the judicial system operates. The investigator chose this topic because there are many African Americans and Hispanics that have been incarcerated for crimes they committed, as well as for crimes they didn’t commit, and because of their cultural background they were given severer sentencing. After performing the research the investigator found that many factors played a big part in the incarceration of minorities that included, ethnicity and gender. Although there is a high crime rate in minority areas, there are more

Communitarian critics of Rawls have argued that his A Theory of Justice provides an inadequate account of individuals in the original position. Michael Sandel, in Liberalism and the Limits of Justice argues that Rawls' conception of the person divorces any constitutive attachments that persons might have to their ends. Hence, Sandel asserts that Rawls privileges the standpoint of self-interested individuals at the expense of communal interests. I do not find Sandel's specific criticisms to be an accurate critique of what Rawls is doing in A Theory of Justice. However, this does not mean the more general thrust of the communitarian analysis of Rawls' conception of the person must be abandoned. By picking up the pieces