Olsen

“But organization often perish if they do nothing to further the interest of their members,and their factor must severely limit the number of organization that fail to serve their members”

     An organization can be defined as a body of people with a particular purpose, planning, arrangement and running of a business or institution.

The main purpose being, is to accomplish a certain goal or goals, while building a strong bond amongst one selves in order to maintain a certain criteria. Building a strong bond is essential, as it is noted that an organization is more powerful and able to achieve success when more people come together working towards similar interest. For examples, Unions as stated in the passage.

     Union are a group of worker that is formed to protect the rights of workers. Members of this group come together to achieve common goals such as protecting the integrity of its trade, improving safety standards, achieving higher pay and benefits such as health care and retirement, increasing the number of employees an employer assign to complete the work, and better working conditions.

   It is noted that members of unions collaborate and fight together for particular benefits. There are non stop negotiations until a satisfactory results are obtained.

However, some organization do tend to fall apart due to members being unorganized, some losing interest with the particular issue at hand, and some individuals seeking more power over others.

     I choose the first paragraph from the chapter 1 in Olsen, because these issues happens on a daily basis. Whether it be members of a club, unions or even a political party, there is always an individual or individuals that tend to disrupt the normal process of unity and peace by trying to get over on other due to their selfish reasons and greed.

                                           Roe v Wade

      The key deliberated article of the US Constitution is the fourteenth amendment which states:

“ All person born or naturalized in the united states, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No States shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizen of the United States, nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within it's jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.

      Abortion as we all know is a very controversial issue due to religious, cultural and political reasons. It has even been referred to as a “common law crime.” In 1973 abortion was prohibited in 30 States. However, it was legal in limited circumstances such as rape and incest, in 20 other States. That same year, the supreme court in Roe v Wade, deemed abortion as a fundamental rights under the US Constitution. The courts ruled 7-2 that a right to privacy under Due Process Clause of the 14^th amendment where, it's a woman's right as to whether or not she choose to bring fourth life into the world.

     Though a State cannot completely deny a woman the right to terminate a pregnancy, it has legitimate interest in protecting both the pregnant woman health and the potentiality of human life at various stages/trimester of pregnancy. In a first trimester abortion the decision to terminate the pregnancy, is based solely on the mother and physician. Second trimeter the State promotes their interest in the well being of the mother by regulating abortion procedure base on the mother's health. In the third trimester the State promote their interest on the potentiality of human life by regulating or even prohibiting abortion, except to save the life or health of the mother.

      As a woman, I believe bringing life into this world is considered a blessing. I personally don't agree in abortion unless the mother or child health is in danger. Whether it be first, second or third trimester it is still considered a life. With that being said, who am I to judge another woman who chooses not to be a mother. It's their body and their right to do as they please.  

     Furthermore, I am not going to be hypocritical and argue the point of contraceptive because as human being we all make mistakes.

Realistically speaking, everyone isn't cut from the same piece of cloth. Not every woman has that naturing motherly skills. Why should a woman be forced to have a baby that she is unwilling to care and provide for. Another child would be placed in a cold world and into a broken home, no parents, no family or love. 

Presidency

John F Kennedy Inaugural Speech.

John F Kennedy Inaugural Speech dated January 20^th , 1961, is considered one of the best presidential inaugural speeches in American history.

Some memorable quotes.

“ To those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best effort to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required not because the communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”

“ Let both sides unite to heed in all corners of the earth the command of Isaiah to “undo the heavy burdens … and let the oppressed go free.”

“All this will not be finished in the one hundred days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of the Administration, nor even perhaps in out lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.”

It's with enormous confidence that the 35^th President of the United States of America addressed the nation and the world making a bold step to change and make a difference in the lives of millions worldwide. President Kennedy called for peace, unity, equality and freedom. A new beginning, to make America greater. It was during this time that the country faced the rise in the KKK, Jim Crow, black power movement and other radical groups. His speech couldn't come at the most appropriate time.

Fifty two years later, history was made again as the first African American President, Barack Obama, stood exactly where former President John F Kennedy, and many other before him to addressed the nation.

President Obama stated, “We affirm the promise of our democracy. We recall what bind this nation together is not the color of our skin or the tenets of our faith or the origins of our names. What makes us exceptional... what makes us American... is our allegiance to an idea articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago. We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit to happiness.”

President Kennedy and Obama inaugural speeches spoke volume. Two powerful men seeking the interest of the people and the nation they pledge to serve, not just the rich or the poor, not just the color of the skin or gender, but for every civilian in this country.

Moving forward to 2016, our current election year. One could only imagine what the elected president inaugural speech would state,by simply looking at the current campaigning tactic and the behavior of the presidential candidates. I would say the country is moving backwards instead of forwards principals and values has been lost.

America's Most Gerrymandered Congressional Districts

“ The compactness of a district - a measure of how irregular its shape is, as determined by the ratio of the area of the district to the area of a circle with the same perimeter-- can serve as a useful proxy for how gerrymandered the district is. Districts that follow a generally regular shape tends to be compact, while those that have a lot of squiggles and offshoots and tentacle-looking protuberances tend to score poorly on this measure"

Gerrymandering is the intentional manipulation of an electoral boundary with the intent to obtain political advantage for a particular party or group. From my understanding the process of extending boundaries could be very complex. There is no guarantee that this process would secure the number of seats that are required for a particular party to be successful. Additionally, it can also give opponents a major advantage which can sometimes be sometimes detrimental to the party (and even cause the opposing to party to win.

An example of ineffective gerrymandering is in the 2012 election, where the Democrats won 5 out of the 18 seats (fewer than one third), due to the redrawing of the states congressional districts; yet were still successful in winning the elections.

In a State of the Union speech, President Barack Obama called for lawmakers and the public to take a step “to change the system to reflect our better selves for a better politics.” He requested that we put an end to partisan gerrymandering.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/13/this-is-actually-what-america-would-look-like-without-gerrymandering/

Here are some questions that I have asked myself and I think we all should ask ourselves as well.

• If electoral boundaries can be manipulated, what else can be or would be manipulation?
• Who does Gerrymandering benefit?

Realistically speaking, gerrymandering is technically a form of cheating. Taking this into consideration, the election is not in fact fair, rather it is a gamble. Additionally, this process is intended to weaken the political powers of minority voters who play an essential part of elections. 

While this process can go either way for both parties, I would like to say that I am more of a realist and believe that the law of attraction takes it natural course and that honesty and fairness will be the way.

The voice of the people and their needs should be heard and that is what really matters.

Citizenship and Social Class

TH. MARSHALL.

“There is no universal principal that determines what those rights and duties shall be, but societies in which citizenship is a developing institution create an image of an ideal citizenship against which achievement can be measured and towards which aspiration can be directed.”

I choose this line because honestly, what does citizenship mean?

Its is said that citizenship is defined as the state of being vested with privileges, rights and duties. But what privileges or rights do we as citizens of America have? Legally, as a citizens, we all share the same rights as defined in the Constitution.

We all have the right to vote, the right to free expression and the right to worship according to one beliefs. We also have the right to a fair trial by a jury without bias, the right to freedom, the right to bear arms, the right to be protected by the government from cruel and unusual punishment, and to be protected from unreasonable searches or seizure of ones property or properties.  However, in my opinion, these are simply guidelines and are not necessarily "rights".  The reality is that everyone has limited rights and sometimes one may only have "a right" depending on one's social and financial status. With this in mind, there may be some individuals, called citizens, who have no rights at all. 

Everyday many of there aforementioned "rights of individuals" are violated. There are many illegal arrests and searches of individuals who aren't aware of their rights. Innocent people have been falsely convicted of crimes which they didn't commit. Conversely, there are individuals who have the financial or social status to make all their illegal activities disappear.

Being a citizen and having rights doesn't guarantee fairness or justice. The only rights as a citizen that are acknowledged are basic rights, for instance, being recognized as a an American citizen;  which only entitles one to certain amenities of the constitution.

Recognition of citizenship mainly comes into existence during the election year because of the emphasis of getting votes.  Green card holders aren't recognized and undocumented individuals living in the country  are only discussed when there a benefits to politicians from such discussion. Citizenship in my opinion is just a title which provides you with the comfort and security to obtain certain benefits, mainly from the federal government. For instance medicaid/ medicare, loans, scholarships and Social Security benefits.

“What to the Slaves Is The Fourth Of July.”

“What to the Slaves Is The Fourth Of July.”

Frederick Douglass

July 5, 1852

“Fellow citizens, pardon me, allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here to-day? What have I or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us? And am I, therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national alter, and to confess the benefits and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us?”

In this paragraph, Mr Fredrick Douglass is expressing his utter frustration and humiliation to the people of America. He is speaking on behalf of Black Americans or people of color. Mr Douglass is baffled as to why people of color should part take in forth of July celebrations. He mentions that they are considering it as blessing. But what significance does this occasion have for individuals of color? When one hears the word independence, one thinks about freedom, liberty and forming of a new nation. However, how can individuals of color relate to such, when these basic rights and amenities weren't extended to them. Reality was that the shackles of slavery hadn't been removed. The Fourth of July in fact did not include the black race. It was just a reminder of all the suffering and heartaches of the past, present and the future for blacks because in fact...freedom came at a cost.

America was built on slavery...all the sweat and blood of innocent black men, women and children. How could this day be so glorious? Were they truly in-touch with life that they didn't recognize what the day signified and that it excluded them? Why wasn't it a day of recognition for all the millions of lives that were taken away? Had they forgotten the countless amount of hangings, lynching and other tortuous measures used against them? Why wasn't this, a day of prayer and forgiveness how can this be considered a blessing? It was all a political propaganda...there weren't any morals or ethical values it was all about America claiming Independence.

This article does in fact remind me about Civil Disobedience because, as mentioned before, Civil Disobedience relates to breaking the law and challenging authorities, but usually in a non-violent manner; as stated in your blog. I relate to both articles because there were laws/amendments which were put in place to bind people living in a community as well as to protect the general safety and rights of citizens. However, why is it that it seems to only pertain to one race? How was it possible back then, that only blacks were arrested and convicted for crimes without any evidence or correct judicial order and rights? Individuals of color were sold, lynched, assaulted and mistreated in the public eye, yet these oppressors were not charged for such heinous acts. Where were the government personnels who took an Oath to protect and serve? Why didn't they step in and put an end to these activities?

The government has failed the black race then and it continues somewhat to this day as well. Where is the equality and justice for all? “AMERICA IS SLAVERY”...the screams that fell on deaf ears; the sweat and tear drops that poured out daily; the chains that rattle simultaneously. Where does the 14^th Amendment of the Constitution fall in this world? Protection of the law, rights and privileges to all citizens? 

The Seventh Of March Speech.

March 7th, 1850

Source: Shoemaker.121-130

“I hear with distress and anguish the word “secession,” especially when it falls from the lips of those who are patriotic,and known to the country, and known all over the world, for their political services. Secession! Peaceable secession! Sir, your eyes and mine are never destined to see the miracle. The dismemberment of this vast country without convulsion! The breaking up of the fountains of the great deep without ruffing the surface!”

 Secession is defined as the process of withdrawing or separating from a nation or state and becoming independent. In the article “ The Seventh of March Speech,” Daniel Webster expressed his disappointment with members of the Senate of the United States concerning his support to the compromise with the  Fugitive Slaves Act of 1850. An act which required federal officials to recapture and return runaway slaves to their owners.

  Webster was a member in the senate and a main supporter of the Fugative Slave Act and he strongly believed that slavery couldn’t be “abolished” but that it was a matter of historical reality rather than moral principals. Webster firmly believed that captured slaves should be returned to their rightful owners as they were considered to be the owners’ property. Webster was also against the Abolition societies as he thought they were useless and that they caused tensions between the blacks and whites over the last twenty years and that nothing good or valuable came out of it. Webster argued that laws should be abided and that no one should get around the Constitution, or embarrass the free exercise of the rights secured by the Constitution as stated in the article.

    Webster speech is an outreach to the other members of senate insisting that a secession is unpatriotic and could never be peaceful when there are different views towards the Fugitive Slave Law. It would be the fall of the government and an embarrassment  to the United States of America. It would be considered a disruption of the normals aspects of life and that things wouldn't be the same.

    In my opinion Webster was mainly looking out for his interest. The livelihood of the slaves was not of importance to him because he didn't see beyond that fact that they were running away to get away from the unjust and inhuman treatment that they were receiving. Probably he himself was a slave master and was protecting his interest and seeking profits. It isn’t uncommon for individuals in certain areas of the government to work together and manipulate their power to get a desired and profitable outcome. What is also ironic to me is that the law seems to be considered for these individuals when it seems to be in their benefit. For instance, his claim sought to mobilize the nation to follow the law. He stated that there would be penalties and punishment for such actions for citizens who do not abide by the law. However, there seemed to be no equal consideration for the freedom, justice and liberty for all…that everyone should be equal.