In a one paragraph answer do you think that the the United States Government should allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist? Should the history of the organization have any bearing on the government's actions? Does the KKK have a right to legal protection?
1st Amendment to the US Constitution
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition" the Government for a redress of grievances."
Preamble of Constitution: The purpose of the US Government's existence.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion should be allowed to exist in the United States because of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of people to peacefully assemble, and to petition.” According to the First Amendment, as long as the assembly of people is peaceful, and the meeting does not pose a threat to, “domestic tranquility” (Preamble of the Constitution), it must be allowed to exist. However, if an organization becomes violent and breaks the law, they should without a doubt be tried as criminals. Furthermore, only the individuals in the group who actually commit the crimes should be punished; the rest of the group, although they might agree with what the individual did, are innocent as long as they were not involved with the crime. The history of an organization, such as the Ku Klux Klan, should not infringe the right to legal protection of the organization’s current members. Members of the group should have total legal protection, unless they are guilty of committing any crime. Even though some organizations in the US have beliefs that are absolutely absurd to most citizens, they should be allowed exist despite any negative history; unless the organization as a whole can be proven guilty of crime.
ReplyDelete-Dylan O'Connor
The KKK has a right to exercise their beliefs as wrong as they may be. We cannot ban them because they are protected by the first amendment. If they were to be banned the Bill of Rights would have to be changed, and people would lose the ability to exercise their freedom of speech and right to hold assemblies in. Only when they harm someone or infringe upon their rights can they be locked up. Any gang or group can have negative beliefs but as long as they are peaceful the first amendment protects them. Only when members of the group incite violent crimes or participate in them can they be incarcerated. Racism is not illegal, it is just morally wrong. Their past cannot be used against them because there is no way to go back and changed it. It is immoral what the KKK stands for, but as long as they don’t harm other people or infringe on their rights, they are protected by the constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe United States Government should allow organizations that advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist because not allowing people to speak their opinions would be going against freedom of speech, freedom of expression, the 1st Amendment, and The Federalist #10. Both freedom of speech and expression are political rights that allow people to communicate their opinions, seek, receive, and communicate ideas. The 1st Amendment states, “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” this mean that congress cannot prohibit actions that people take to advocate for a certain thing. Lastly, The Federalist #10, written by James Madison agreed that restricting factions would restrict freedom, “There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.” By allowing factions to exist, Madison and the founding fathers believed that a single group would not be able to overtake the others. Groups should not be told that they can or cannot exist based on their history because that is not constitutional, rather the government should enforce certain aspects of the law, like murdering people or trespassing on land as illegal, and that is what should bear on an organization. So, although the KKK is by no means civil, they cannot be denied legal protection to endorse their ideas so long as they are taking the right legal actions and not committing crimes to do so.
ReplyDelete- Pape
Organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion should be able to exist in the United States according to the First Amendment which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition." Prohibiting such an idea would be deemed as unconstitutional, though many citizens of the United States may not agree with the views of some of these groups. The Amendments granting our freedom are the guidelines in which our country was built upon and, therefore, we must respect the cruel ideas of such groups even though it is difficult. However, if the "domestic tranquility" (Preamble of the Constitution) is threatened, these groups must be subject to investigation. When and if individuals are charged with a crime and or endanger the lives of others, "they should without a doubt be tried as criminals" as Dylan stated above. This only includes the individual if the crime was committed solo. If more than one person was involved then all should be tried until proven guilty. The history of organizations, such as the Ku Klux Klan, as a whole, should not have any bearing on the government's actions. The individuals a part of groups like the KKK that have committed past crimes should have a bearing on government's actions as any crime is not yet closed until the perpetrator has been proven guilty. Furthermore, the members of the KKK deserve the right to legal protection as long as they express their hard to believe ideas peacefully.
ReplyDeleteThe United State government should allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist because of our US constitution. The first amendment in the constitution states that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition" the Government for a redress of grievances." According to this, organizations who discriminate against particular races and religions have a right to express themselves and follow their beliefs. However, if these organizations violate the insurance of "Domestic Tranquility" among citizens, then they should not be allowed to exist in the United States because it would be disturbing the procedure of the Preamble of the Constitution to, "form a more perfect Union". The history of the organization should not have any bearings on the government's actions because it would be deemed as unconstitutional. Only the action of an individual, of an organization, that proves to be unconstitutional should have an affect on the government's actions. Although a member of the organization violates the rights a citizen, the whole organization should not therefore be punished. Organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan should have a right to legal protection because of the constitution. It exposes the horrible morals of citizens, but they have a right to, "prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech". For this reason, is why the KKK should have the right to legal protection, as long their actions prove to not corrupt the rights of other individuals.
ReplyDelete-Isiah Nunez
The United States Government should allow organizations that support the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist because of what the First Amendment of the Constitution entails. However, if any of these organizations pose a serious threat to the country, the government should then be permitted to interfere with the organization, and try to put a stop to it. The First Amendment allows citizens to practice the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and the freedom to assemble peaceably. This Amendment applies to every citizen in the United States, and therefore the termination of these assemblies would be unconstitutional. Like Dylan said, as long as the assembly is peaceful and poses no threats to "domestic tranquility", it must be allowed to exist. A perfect example of one of these organizations is the Ku Klux Klan. The KKK is a group that believes strongly in white supremacy. They are racist against blacks, and do not support immigration. Although they have been known to protest violently in the past, they should still be allowed to assemble in the present and future. It would be unconstitutional if they weren't. However, if anyone part of the KKK did something to threaten society, that person/people should certainly be tried in court. Even with those criminals being tried in court, the other innocent members of the KKK should be allowed to continue to assemble peacefully.
ReplyDelete-McErlean
The United States has no choice but to allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. This is a result of the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition.” This Amendment gives people the right to assemble and discuss whatever they choose, as long as they are not threatening the “tranquility” (Preamble of Constitution) of others. This Amendment gives the KKK a right to legal protection unless somebody is able to prove that individuals have disrupted the “tranquility” in a violent manner. If somebody is able to prove that members of the KKK have acted violently and violated the US Constitution, they then lose all legal protection. The history of an organization such as the KKK should not have any bearing on the government’s actions. This would be unfair treatment of any citizen, no matter how terrible their morals are.
ReplyDeleteThe United States Government should allow organizations that advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. The First Amendment protects organizations of this affiliation, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition.” If the United States Government took away an organizations right to peaceably assemble, that would be like taking away some ones freedom of speech without proper cause. Having said that, these organizations must peaceably assemble. When an organizations assembly leads to the infringement of people’s civil rights, then the Government should intervene. A group with a violent history, such as the KKK, should not have any bearing on the Government’s actions. Even the KKK should have the right to peaceably assemble like any other group. The Government should intervene with the KKK when they disturb others civil rights, and only then should they deal with the individual or individuals responsible. The rest of the group should be allowed to organize peaceably.
ReplyDeleteTipper Higgins
In our United States Constitution, the 1st Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition.” What our founding fathers were trying to imply is that any group that voice any cause or opinions has the right to do so. Some groups, though their beliefs may be repulsive such as the KKK, have all the same legal rights as a group who fight for a good cause, such as the N.A.A.C.P. Unless the KKK were to break any laws or to disturb “domestic tranquility”, they have the right to advocate their beliefs. If a member or the group as whole were to commit a crime, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Unless a KKK member was to be found guilty, they have all the same legal rights as a common citizen. If one was to take the KKK’s rights away, this would be unconstitutional and would go against the principles of what this great country was founded on.
ReplyDeleteThe United States Government should not allow any organizations that would appose the distribution of rights to different races and religions based on the information noted in the Constitution and its First Amendment. The Constitution’s main point is the equality of all men. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This amendment is giving people the right to their own religious views and freedom to speak or write as they please. The United States gives this right to all whites males, and due to the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment, giving African Americans, freed slaves, citizenship, it should apply to them as well. Organizations that due exist like the KKK that do effect the rights given to African Americans, are breaking the First Amendment because it is no longer a peaceful assembly, due to the danger they are putting other citizens of the United States in. Those who agree with their views are not necessarily guilty of a crime or of breaking the law, but those who act violently against African Americans are breaking a law and should be punished and tried in court for their crimes. The actions of this group and groups like the KKK should have affected the actions the Government took against them. The oppression by the KKK on African Americans should have triggered the United States Government to take more action on the enforcement of the Fourteenth Amendment. Although the KKK did do awful things to citizens, all groups or people have the right to legal protection, or a lawyer, but they were not immune to being charged with a crime. Until the whole group KKK is charged with a crime they are legally able to exist and are protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteAlli Toffolon
The Freedom of Speech and Expression is a cherished American right, enabling the people to advocate for whatever they feel righteous and just. However, anything beyond advocation, such as acts of violence or attempts to instill wrongful and discriminatory regulations should be condemned by the government. Simply voicing an opinion does not infringe on the rights of other citizens and being part of the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution allows for it, but if in any way discriminatory organizations attempt to violate the equal rights of certain religions or races, the government must prevent them from doing so. There can be no excuse or justification for any organization that does infringe upon the rights of others, no matter the history. America was founded under the notion of equality and hope to escape discriminatory persecution. Any group attempting to deny these basic rights to American citizens cannot be allowed to do so. If the KKK hadn't denied African Americans their right to Life, Liberty and Property, the organization could exist under the protection of the government. Being that the KKK committed countless unlawful acts, they should have no right to legal protection.
ReplyDeletediscriminatory organizations illegally attempt to violate the equal rights*
DeleteThe question of whether terrorist organizations such as the KKK should be allowed exist is one which is tearing me apart at the moment. I cannot decide whether or not to look at this from a morale standpoint, banning the organizations for what they stand for, or from a legal point of view and allow them due to their freedom of speech.
ReplyDeleteUltimately I can only take an example close to home. The I.R.A, like the KKK has become an organization focused on conflict with the Protestant religion and Protestants in the North of Ireland. At this moment in time the I.R.A is a legal organization, but it is an organization that must have no guns within the organization. For that reason I must agree that organizations such as the KKK, “who advocate the distribution of rights on the basis of religion and race”, should exist under the context of the law. They have a right to exist, whether I feel it is morally right or not.
I also feel it is important to note that, in my opinion, making the KKK illegal will have the same unintended affect that banning the I.R.A had, in that it gives those willing to fight a reason to be aggressive, as well as making those who were unwilling to fight, much stronger in their beliefs. Resulting in them fighting as well
DeleteThe Ku Klux Klan does not have a right to legal protection. Although the first amendment states that they have freedom of speech, the KKK abuses this amendment by going against the Constitution. The constitution states that they must "insure domestic tranquility" which is the opposite of the brutality of all the deaths they caused. They may think they have brought tranquility to their country but they have a weird way of showing it. They are hanging, shooting, setting to fire blacks and may even be destroying their homes along the way. Is destroying a person's home peaceful; is it even tranquil? The KKK may have a right to express their opinion of the blacks through the amendment but they cannot express their opinion in an angry, chaotic manner. They must express it tranquilly which is the opposite of what the KKK did. The first amendment may protect them but the constitution makes the legality of what they did void. The government cannot ignore the history of the organization due to the fact that although one amendment may legalize their act, the constitution may cancel that legalization. Therefore the Ku Klux Klan does not have the right to legal protection due to the unconstitutionality of the action done by this organization.
ReplyDeleteJenalyn Rembish
The United States Government does not have the ability to disallow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race or religion because the rights of these organizations are protected by the First Amendment of the U.S constitution. The First Amendment states- "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Due to the First Amendment it is within the rights of a group such as the KKK to express their beliefs no matter how morally wrong and hateful their beliefs are. However, providing "common defense" and insuring "domestic tranquility" for all citizens of the United States is part of the Governments vested constitutional duties as stated in the Preamble of the Constitution. So if the KKK or any other group violates another citizen's rights or uses violent means to express their opinions then the Government must ensure that they are tried and punished for their crimes. If the KKK does not violate any citizen's rights or commit any act of violence then they are entitled to the same rights as any other citizen, including the right to legal protection. The Government cannot let the history of the organization have any effect on their actions regarding that organization because it would be unconstitutional to do so, however it is completely legal for the Government to not let organization's past crimes be forgotten so that they will never again have a chance to be repeated.
ReplyDeleteIn the history of the United States, the country has unfortunately faced groups with extremist and prejudice views toward humanity. From the Ku Klux Klan to Nazism, Neo-Natzism, Al-Qaeda, and groups in between. During the 19th and 20th Centuries, the KKK ruled as the leading force behind the drive for white supremacy. Although their beliefs contradict the grounds of liberty and independence which this country is based off of, they are still constitutionally protected by the law. In the minds of the KKK, they are forming what is in their eyes a more perfect Union, establishing justice, promoting general welfare. During the writing of the American Constitution, there were not defined meanings of how to carry out these acts. Like any other citizens they are not the denied the rights to vote, drink alcohol, drive, and carry out other such acts. The right to the Freedom of Speech should be one of those such acts that they are entitled to as legal American citizens. They do not deserve government protection for their violent and lethal actions in the past that they have carried out, but lingering in the past can only hurt the country. The members of the Ku Klux Klan are entitled to the rights that every other American citizen is entitled to.
ReplyDeleteThe United States government should allow the existence of organizations that endorse the distribution of rights based on race and religion because race and religious based groups are just as equal and deserve the same rights as any other association. This can be justified in the First Amendment that writes, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.” On the other hand, an organization that either breaks the First Amendment or another law should be brought to the court of law to decide whether the organization should cease to exist. Within the Preamble of the Constitution, a line states, “We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote general welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” This quote indicates the United States and its’ forefathers motives. Though if an organization infringes on one of these premises, it violates all of what or country stands for. Thus, an association that goes against or interferes with one of our ideals should be prosecuted. Although history is the only evidence we have for how groups act, it should have no connection on determining if the group should exist. This can be validated by change itself in other areas such as evolution. Organizations adapt just like animals do in their environments over time. The correlation with the old name and its bad foundation should have no relativity to its new morals. The KKK has the right of legal protection until they break a law or infringe on another citizens’ rights. While we might find some organizations ideas barbaric, they still have to be treated equal unless found guilty of a crime.
ReplyDelete--Sam Sabin
Strictly from a legal standpoint the government could allow an organization that advocates the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist within the United States due to the First Amendment. By not allowing these groups it would be contradicting the freedom to speech and freedom of expression, which is the first Amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”, meaning that congress does not have the power to prohibit organizations that believe in discrimination of a certain race or religion. Though if the “domestic tranquility”,(Preamble of the Constitution) these groups should most definitely be investigated and if a crime was committed they should be tried and the corrected punishment should be given. “So, although the KKK is by no means civil, they cannot be denied legal protection to endorse their ideas so long as they are taking the right legal actions and not committing crimes to do so.” (Pape, Jackie).
ReplyDeleteThe United States Government should allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. In the first amendment of the US. Constitution it states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition" the Government for a redress of grievances." Meaning each citizen is given the right to attend a place of religion of their own choice, or not to attend at all. Religion can be more than just the belief of a god. The definition of religion is 1) The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods, and 2) Details of belief as taught or discussed. The KKK taught and discussed their beliefs threw the other parts of the first amendment. The second part of the first amendment is the freedom of speech. Any citizen is allowed to say what they want. Whether they agree or disagree, believe, do not believe. We are given the freedom of speech as a birth right, and a right of citizenship because America is a fair place. Yes, what the citizen can be saying may be morally unethical, but it does not mean they are not allowed to say it. Another part of the first amendment the KKK used was freedom of the press. In class we were shown an article written completely in favor of the KKK. This part corresponds with the freedom of speech, just clarifying the freedom of printing any information .The next section of the First amendment is the right of the people peaceable to assemble and to petition. The KKK assembled and petitioned for what they believed in. However, the constitution was not written to make an outline for white supremacist males to become hate crime leaders. The Constitution was written to instill freedom and equality among the people, and to allow them to have a voice in the government. With this in mind, I believe that the history of this organization should have a bearing on the government’s actions. The government should modify the constitution so that hate organizations like the KKK cannot utilize the constitution for means much different than it was intended. Now for the question of: Does the KKK have a right to legal protection? Yes they do. They are citizens of the United States, and if they are following the constitution and the law then they should have no legal troubles. However, the KKK had their feet in the system of much of the south and manipulated their rights to suit themselves. They felt the constitution was written in favor of the white man and did not count for blacks. The KKK should have been charged for all homicides, genocide cases, misdemeanors etc. every law infraction they had broken they should have been punished for. If the Constitution had left less room for interpretation then a problem such as the KKK wouldn’t have gotten so out of hand. Although, this is all in our past and it is our duty to educate the future generations to keep and organization such as the KKK, Al Qaeda, Nazi’s, all organizations who feel they are superior to others from gaining power and momentum in the modern world.
ReplyDeleteKrissy G
Legally speaking, organizations such as the KKK are constitutional. The 1st Amendment to the US Constitution clearly protects the freedom of speech and religion. Therefore, the government is powerless against these racist movements. However, personally, I believe that organizations such as the KKK are breaking every moral values and rules that are the very pillars to the American pride, such as equality and justice. The founders of this country have fought against Great Britain to reclaim equality as an independent nation and not an inferior colony. Thus, I believe that it is today the government’s duty to stop organizations such as the KKK. Furthermore, one man’s freedom ends where another’s begin.“ The KKK’s exercise of freedom of speech is violating other men’s rights. Hence, according to the Preamble of the Constitution, the US Government must not allow their existence because they do not contribute to the nation’s tranquility. I believe that laws exist to protect the people, and when the law can no longer fulfill its role, it is the government’s duty to pass new laws to ensure the welfare of its people.
ReplyDeleteYes, I do think that the United States Government should allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion. No matter what an organization advocates, our government has a right to allow them their freedoms, as explained in the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and petition." (1) However, if that organization does start to violate laws and infringe people of their rights, they should be investigated and subject to respective consequences. Although, additionally, I do not believe that those previous actions should be the deciding factor on determining if that organization should further be aloud to advocate for their beliefs. I believe that the history of the organization shouldn't have any bearing on the government's actions. What if an organization changes their beliefs and practices, should they still be denied their rights just because of their history? The purpose of the Constitution is to display what rights Americans have, and part of the government's duty is to advocate for the people under the law, not to deny us of our rights simply because the government doesn't agree. I believe our government should be objective when deciding these matters. Therefore, according to the 1st Amendment of US Constitution, we have the right to assemble. In addition, though it may seem warped, the KKK believes their actions are justified to create their version of a better society. Since, as Colleen stated above: "there were not defined meanings of how to carry out these acts," (2) the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) is carrying out what they think is to "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ..." (3) according to the Preamble of the Constitution. Furthermore, I do believe the KKK has a right to legal protection. This is simply because everyone deserves the RIGHT to legal protection. Despite the KKK belief's and how immoral most believe they are, they are still citizens and still deserve the same rights. If the government starts opinionating an organization's beliefs and then starts deciding whether or not they deserve their innate rights based on those opinions, where does it stop? Our government could become corrupt and dictatorial if they put their opinions above the law instead of being objective. Simply, but not simplistically, it is the law and ideally, everyone should be equal under the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteSources:
(1) 1st Amendment of the US Constitution
(2) Colleen
(3) Preamble of the US Constitution: The Purpose of the Us Government's existence
- Nicky Friedman
Considering the the first Amendment of the US Constitution, the organizations such as the KKK should be allowed to exist by the government as denying that would be "prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech" (1st Amendment, US Constitution). Even though it is certainly true that these certain organizations are wrong in terms of the moral aspect, abruptly stopping them while disregarding the Constitution is also wrong on equal grounds as this action would be deemed as unconstitutional. These organizations should only be prosecuted when their members are found to be guilty of any criminal activities, violating the "domestic Tranquility","common defence" and "general Welfare".Furthermore, the history of the organizations should not be considered by the government when taking actions. History may shows how the groups had acted at a particular point of time but it doesn't say anything about how they act at present time, as shown through the change that KKK had gone through which involved the organization broken down after 4 different Klans, ending up as a scattered organization lacking in unity and downplaying their hate acts.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press"(US Constitution), therefore, the government should let organizations which advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion. For example, organization like NAACP who fights for the civil rights helps the government and the country in a positive way. Furthermore, the history of an organization should have some bearing on the government’s actions. For instance, if Al-Qaida suddenly says that they want peace in the world and will never fight do you think the government will just let the organization go? Because of the freedom of speech, the Ku Klux Klan was born, and it has a right to legal protection only if it follows the laws. However, due to the Preamble of constitution: “We the people of United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for common defense,”( Preamble of Constitution) thus it is clear that in the past years the KKK is threating people’s life, murdering people “illegally”( even if they say it was legal), and damaging the nation’s tranquility. Therefore personally I think the government has the right to stop KKK because this group of people is threating a greater group of people’s freedom and their freedom of speech and choice to live. If the majority is protected by the constitution, then the minority’s freedom should be removed in order for the common benefit of a nation.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press"(US Constitution), therefore, the government should let organizations which advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion. For example, organization like NAACP who fights for the civil rights helps the government and the country in a positive way. Furthermore, the history of an organization should have some bearing on the government’s actions. For instance, if Al-Qaida suddenly says that they want peace in the world and will never fight do you think the government will just let the organization go? Because of the freedom of speech, the Ku Klux Klan was born, and it has a right to legal protection only if it follows the laws. However, Justice Clarence Thomas characterized the Klan as a “terrorist organization, which, in its endeavor to intimidate, or even eliminate those it dislikes, uses the most brutal of methods.” (Extremism in America). The KKK people had been charged in murder, robbery, and so many other violations of laws. Furthermore in the Preamble of constitution: “We the people of United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for common defense.”( Preamble of Constitution) It is clear that in the past years the KKK is threating people’s lives, murdering people “illegally”(even if they say it was legal), and damaging the nation’s tranquility. Therefore personally I think the government has the right to stop KKK because it is threating a greater group of people’s freedom and their freedom and rights. If the government really wants freedom and equality to every citizen, KKK should be changed.
DeleteThe United States Government should allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. According to the 1st Amendment in the Constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition". Even though the KKK was not intended to form to create "Domestic Tranquility", "General Welfare", and "Common Defense", it had right to express its idea because every citizen or organization in the States has "freedom of speech". People are allowed to express their own ideas whether their ideas are wrong in terms of the moral aspect or not. However, this does not mean that such organizations are allowed to do whatever they want. If an organization is found to be guilty of criminal activities that violates the Preamble of the Constitution, then it should be prosecuted under strict punishments. In addition, only the individuals who actually commit the crimes and violate the Constitution should be prosecuted, not including the rest of the group. History of the organization should not have bearing the government's actions because even though an organization such as the KKK had negative history, the only thing that matters is how they act at present time. Unless the KKK is guilty of committing any crime, the KKK have a right to legal protection under the law.
ReplyDelete1. 1st Amendment to the US Constitution
2. Preamble of Constitution: The purpose of the US Government's existence
The United States Government should allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. According to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, the “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” (1st Amendment). In other words, the government has no right to deprive the rights and freedom of people from voicing an opinion. Thus, the government cannot prohibit or restrict organizations that advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion, because they are just having their own opinion, and by restricting these organizations, it would be depriving their freedom of speech. However, organizations which become aggressive in expressing their opinions such as the KKK should not have a right to legal protection. By violating laws, and depriving rights of others, the KKK did not bring anything like “Justice”, “domestic Tranquility” or “general Welfare” (Preamble of Constitution). They may have the freedom of speech or the freedom to assemble to express their opinions regarding religion and race, but that does not give them the freedom of depriving others’ rights. Organizations such as the KKK, clearly deprived others rights by practicing immoral actions. Unless the organizations which advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion remain legal and do not deprive other citizen’s rights, they have a right to legal protection. Furthermore, if the history of an organization is disgraced with illegal actions toward others, the Government has a right to interfere with the organization with action.
ReplyDeleteThe United States of America was created as a place of refuge- a sanctuary- for the
ReplyDeletediscriminated against and oppressed immigrants from England, during the 17th Century.
Then, once that sanctuary was finally established as a nation of their own, and based on
the principles of liberty and equality, these very immigrants turned around and did the
same exact thing that they ran from in England to immigrants of another race. They left
an extremely ethnocentric society behind in England, in which the wealthy and royal
Protestant Englishmen were superior to all others, just to come to the New World and
recreate their own version of the same type of ethnocentric society. The oppressed had
become the oppressors, and some of these extreme oppressors, known as “White
Supremacists”, came together in the post-civil war south to form the Ku Klux Klan: one
of the largest domestic Terrorist Organizations the United States had ever seen. They
made it their business to demonstrate their strong feelings of hatred and discrimination
against non-whites and were sure to make the lives of African-Americans a living hell -
that is, if they let them live long enough to complain about it. Since the 14th Amendment
ruled that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States...are citizens of the United States”, then that means that all American born people of African descent were
considered citizens. Furthermore, the Preamble of the Constitution, which outlines the
purpose of the U.S. Government’s existence, clearly states that the Government was
formed to “insure domestic tranquility...[and] promote the general welfare”. Therefore,
the K.K.K. had blatantly infringed upon the rights of legal U.S. citizens by violating
African-American people’s rights to ‘domestic tranquility’ and by taking attacks upon
their ‘general welfare’ as a race. Unconstitutional, and overall immoral organizations
such as this do not merit the legal protection of the United States, but rather the legal
prosecution by the U.S. Government. In a country formed under the moral precepts of
freedom and equality, it should be obvious to any competent ruling government that any
organization that advocates the distribution of rights based on race and religion, should
be immediately disbanded and forbidden to exist. History is bound to always repeat itself
in some form or another, therefore it is imperative that the Government use the history of
the K.K.K. to legislate against all current and future forms of aggressive, extremist
terrorist groups. In closing, I believe that it is self-evident that the K.K.K. is
unconstitutional, hypocritical, and immoral.
Groups such as the KKK discriminate against race and religion, and advocate for the distribution of rights based upon these characteristics. Although this is highly controversial, especially in a contemporary setting, these groups cannot be punished or penalized under the law until they infringe upon other people’s rights. The first amendment in the United States constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition". This gives KKK protection, along with similar groups until they put others in danger. This is a point of dispute, because at what point do the KKK infringe on other’s rights? There are 18 states that have laws that ban masks from being worn in public, except for religious and medical reasons, because the KKK’s use of masks was viewed as so intimidating, other people felt endangered. However, the Southern Poverty Law Center states, “In a series of cases, the Supreme Court has made it clear that citizens have the right to communicate and associate anonymously, without fear of harassment or reprisals by others who oppose their views”. The KKK fought against the anti-masking laws and U.S. District Judge Robert Miller said “the law violated the Klan's right to associate anonymously.” These decisions have varied from state to state, with varying rulings. In my opinion, the KKK has the right to assemble and voice their opinions, regardless of how undesirable and disgusting they may be, as long as they don’t infringe on other people’s rights (violence, threats, etc.). A more contemporary example would be the Westborough Baptist church’s persistent criticism, picketing and protests against gay rights. Although many people view this as outrageous, they are non-violent, and don’t infringe on other people’s rights, so therefore are allowed to continue. If the government bans one group, this could possible lead to more and more groups being banned that don’t agree with congress, the president or things along those lines. Therefore, I believe as long as they are peaceful, the KKK has the right to exist.
ReplyDeleteSource:
Unmasking the Klan | Southern Poverty Law Center
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/1999/summer/unmasking-the-klan
The United States government has no choice but to allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights through race and religion because of the first amendment to the US Constitution. The first amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition.” This amendment clearly states that the US government has no right and cannot interfere with groups who advocate certain rights of American citizens. If the US government tries to intervene with these groups such as the KKK, then they are taking away the citizen’s freedom of speech with no reason. However, it is also stated in the first amendment that these groups like the KKK must assemble peacefully without harming others. So, when the KKK began interfering with African-American’s rights, the US government should have entered and broke the KKK up because they were not assembling peacefully. Though this group’s history in America is very negative it should not have any bearing on the government’s actions, because again, that would be violating that groups personal rights.
ReplyDelete1st amendment to the US constitution
The Ku Klux Klan does not have a right to legal protection. Given the organization’s history of mass lynchings and violent raids, the KKK is dangerous, especially to their targeted group of blacks. So, they should not be given protection, since they are infringing upon the natural rights of blacks, since they are taking their lives. By killing black people, the KKK is not securing their "blessings of liberty". The beginning of the Ku Klux Klan was innocent enough; in 1865, six young men, veterans of the Confederate army, decided to take advantage of their right to assemble peacefully and their freedom of speech, as outlined in the First Amendment. They created the Ku Klux Klan as a way to express their pro-Confederacy opinions through secret and elaborate ceremonies. They would ride horseback through the night, eerie hooded figures, stirring terror in Blacks, although they did not harm them in any way. If the KKK had continued their organization like this, they would be perfectly eligible for governmental protection. They had also not been organized as a religious group, which exempts the KKK from the government's protection of a religious group. In fact, the Ku Klux Klan chose their name in parody of Greek fraternities with three letter names. However, the Klan's focus shifted from discussing the demise of the Black race to putting plans following this goal into action. The Klan's peak existed up until 1868, after local governments recognized the havoc the Klan was causing and suppressed their efforts at terrorizing Blacks. Local governments realized that by suppressing the KKK, they would restore order to the once-again shattered lives of black Americans and those against the KKK, thus in an effort to "provide for the common defense" and "promote the general welfare", since there were more people fearing the KKK than supporting it. By suppressing the Ku Klux Klan, the government was doing the most good for the majority of people - general welfare. Congress realized this, and in 1871, passed the Ku Klux Klan Act, that "authorized the use of federal troops in the Klan's suppression and for the trial of its members in federal court." Hence, the suppression of the KKK is the most Constitutional option for the government. More importantly, the suppression of the KKK is only ethical option for the government.
ReplyDeleteSource:
http://baic.house.gov/historical-data/civil-rights-acts-and-amendments.html
Singh
Even though organizations such as the KKK are allowed to exist in this country from a legal point of view, the KKK has proven to be unconstitutional in the past due to their tendency to harm those who disagree with their views. Today, this organization is protected by the law because it no longer physically harms anyone who disagrees with it. For organizations like this to be banned, the bill of rights of this country would have to be changed; but for now, we have to learn to live with this. From a moral point of view, I believe that organizations who interfere with people’s right to be ensured “domestic tranquility” should be made illegal, because “Your rights end where mine begin” (Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.) this means that if someone or something is interfering with other’s rights, then the law should protect him who’s rights are being violated.
ReplyDelete-Pedro Escobar
Eloise Morrow:
ReplyDeleteOrganizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion should be allowed to exist in the United States because of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press; or the right of people to peacefully assemble, and to petition.” According to the First Amendment, as long as the assembly of people is peaceful, and the meeting does not pose a threat to, “domestic tranquility” (Preamble of the Constitution), it must be allowed to exist. However, if an organization becomes violent and breaks the law, they should without a doubt be tried as criminals. Furthermore, only the individuals in the group who actually commit the crimes should be punished; the rest of the group, although they might agree with what the individual did, are innocent as long as they were not involved with the crime. The history of an organization, such as the Ku Klux Klan, should not infringe the right to legal protection of the organization’s current members. Members of the group should have total legal protection, unless they are guilty of committing any crime. Even though some organizations in the US have beliefs that are absolutely absurd to most citizens, they should be allowed exist despite any negative history; unless the organization as a whole can be proven guilty of crime.
Groups like the KKK should be able to exist because of the 1st amendment of the United states constitution. The first amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition" "no law respecting an establishment" is why the KKK is aloud to exist. In addition, "it is a right of the people of the United States to "peacefully assemble". This is why the KKK is aloud, legally, to assemble, as long as it's peaceful. The KKK does have the right to legal protection as long as "domestic tranquility" is kept.
ReplyDeleteWith that being said, another of the purpose of the United States Government is to promote general welfare and acts of racism are, in no way, beneficial towards general welfare.
Expressing opinions is legal thanks to our right to free speech and expressing these opinions in public, as long as it is peaceful, is legal. However disruptive towards general welfare I believe it is, expressing their thoughts should be legal.
Michael Schiffer
Sources:
US constitution, Preamble and First Amendment
Groups like the KKK, although morally wrong, should be allowed to exist in the United States. But, they should not be granted protection by the government. Members of the KKK stand against all laws for equality and black rights that Americans have ever established. While frowned upon by many, the KKK is still only using its rights as Americans- the right to the freedom of speech. The American Constitution states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religino, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition". The KKK is undoibtedly wrong on many moral levels. But, there is nothing we can do as every American is granted their own set of rights that entitle them to act on their own beliefs, however prejusice and hateful they may be. While in my opinion America would be a better place without organizations like the KKK, it would be taking away common rights if they were to be banned in America. It's a complicated situation and there will never be a time where everyone is happy with decisions made by the government regarding this dilemma. But, for the time being, America is a free country and people will use their rights as they please, whether we like it, and whether it is morally correct, or not.
ReplyDeleteEloise Morrow
ReplyDeleteOrganizations, as long as they do not abuse the constitution, should be allowed to legally exist, practice, and express their beliefs comfortably. As the first amendment plainly reads “congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition" the Government for a redress of grievances." This statement provides legality for any group or organization to freely express their views and thoughts in a public forum. The question is can this freedom, provided to the people by the U.S constitution, ever be abused. I believe that cases such as the Klu Klux Klan violate this amendment, accompanying their beliefs with violent and unconstitutional actions. Although every institution has the right to demonstrate and convey their beliefs, once it involves violating another’s natural rights, I think the group should cease to legally exist. When assessing an organization, their history does play a significant role in the process. If it has been obviously displayed that in it’s past this group has been proven guilty of committing actions disobeying the constitution, there is no reason to provide this organization with legal protection. Every person or group has and should always have the right to freely express their opinions on what ever the subject may be but if infringing upon the amendments becomes a practiced aspect of this association it should immediately be terminated.
Changing my earlier opinion, I feel that organisations, such as the KKK that "advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion", should not exist. I am of this opinion because the question does not ask if they should exist under the constitution of America. Simply whether the government should allow them to exist. As such I feel I can only look at this question from a moral standpoint, and under that ground, organisations such as the KKK should not be allowed to exist in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteIn my original answer I mentioned the case of the I.R.A being a legal organisation as an example of why the KKK should exist, however I also feel they should be banned also. Coming from a country that has at times reverted to censorship when the government has deemed it necessary, I have been brought up in the belief that sometimes freedom of speech can lead to problems. At this moment in time the KKK do not have an active role in society, but I feel that, from past experience of seeing problems in the North of Ireland, we are only another big recession away from the blame being placed on black people in the south and the KKK coming to prominence again. This has happened in Ireland on numerous occasions, most notable in the 1970s and the start of the Troubles in the North. Times of hardship brings out the worst in people. Therefore I am of the belief that, due to its history, the KKK should not be allowed to exist with its current set of beliefs.
The United States Government should not allow organizations that advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. Permitting this would be saying that the encouragement of segregation to exist in the United States is okay. The United States has worked to come together as one country since the end of the American Revolution in 1783 and is still working day by day to maintain its unity. Allowing organizations to support the idea that people should attain rights based on their race or religion would illustrate the exact opposite of what the United States is working towards. Yes, it is okay for people to have certain views about who should be given certain rights because the 1st Amendment of the U.S Constitution gives them freedom of speech, but forming organizations to demonstrate these views, whether violent or non-violent, is deemed unconstitutional. It would be encouraging the infringement of the rights and happiness of others. The Klu Klux Klan is an example of many racist organizations that worked to take away the rights of black people as they were seen to be an inferior race. Allowing organizations like this to exist is not fair to the people of whom they are trying to segregate, nor their rights given to them by the law. Even if an organization was made that was not necessarily violent to those in which they are discriminating against, their demonstrations would make it evident that the people they are shunning upon do not belong in the American society.
ReplyDeleteThe history of the organization should have some bearing on the government's actions because it proves that behavior in which the Klu Klux Klan presented is possible and the government should not turn a blind eye to that possibility. However, the organization is not the entire community. The government's actions should do what benefits ALL and not just a specific part of a community. It should also not, protect the protesting organization. If they are forming an opinionated organization, they should know what consequences and opposition they would be up against. The K.K.K was not a government-instituted organization; therefore they should not be legally protected as one. They chose to demonstrate their views on their own, so if they have to suffer consequences it should be on their own as well.
The Klu Klux Klan was a group of white males that believed in the segregation and oppression of blacks. For many years blacks lived in constant fear of being attacked by a KKK member. Tensions would escalate when a deal was made between the democrats and republicans to accept Rutherford B. Hayes as president. The conditions of the deal were for all federal troops to be pulled out of the south, confederate David Keys be elected as postmaster, and the end of military reconstruction—allowing states their own rights. This deal allowed the KKK much more leniency with their actions since their were no troops to stop them. This group of radical racists murdered hundreds of blacks, and advocated the distribution of rights based of religion and race. So why were they allowed by the United States government to exist? Unfortunately there are laws that protect organization like this one to protest against the rights for African Americans. The first amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition.” This amendment allows the KKK to express their rights of freedom of speech and demonstrate in a non-violent manner. However, non-violent was not a character trait of the KKK, which is why they should not have the right to legal protection. Their actions included lynching, beating till death, and other forms harsh punishment, solely based on their opinion of the African American race. This in no way was an example of a “peaceable assembly”, and therefore should not be protected by the United States government.
ReplyDelete- Austin Brandt
Ku Klux Klan*
Delete-Austin Brandt
The United States was founded on freedom and therefore our country allows citizens to express themselves and any beliefs they have. The first amendment allows all citizens the freedom of speech, freedom of press, and freedom to assembly. This amendment states that it would be unlawful for the government to disallow a group to form or stay in existence based on beliefs on race or religion. The Constitution allows groups just like the KKK, or Klu Klux Klan, to exist as long as they are not infringing on the right of others. However, since the KKK was involved in the killing of innocent African Americans, they should not have been able to exist. African Americans were forced to live in fear because this group threatened their lives and rights through segregation and racism. They should not be able to have the protection from the government because they infringed on the rights of others. Overall, organizations that advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion are allowed to exist because the constitution allows it. Even if the history of a group was unlawful, and as long as they are not presently breaking the law or infringing on other people rights, they have the same rights as any other group. The preamble of the Constitution sums it up perfectly. The country wants to have “Justice” and insure domestic tranquility.” No group should disrupt this regardless of their beliefs or morals.
ReplyDelete-Jeff Thompson
The First Amendment of the Constitution states that no group should be prohibited. However, the First Amendment also states that, "the right of the people peaceably to assemble" should not be prohibited. Consequently, if the KKK is and has been discriminating other people, in other words acting violently toward others, then the government should have the right to stop the group from assembling. Moreover, by discriminating people, the KKK has violated the Preamble of the constitution, which is "The purpose of the US Government's existence." If the reason why the government exist is violated by a group, the government should have the right, but also the obligation to stop this group from forming. Zechariah Chafee, a judicial philosopher said, "Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man's nose begins." This quote fit perfectly the situation of the KKK in that they should have the freedom to exist unless they are taking away other people's freedom. Consequently, because the KKK is violating people's freedom, the government should be allowed to stop its activity. Moreover, The KKK's history should be used in order to prove that they have been a violent group acting against people' rights. The past of the KKK should help the government take a decision on wether the group has a right to exist or not.
ReplyDeleteFinally, the KKK being a violent group that violates the First Amendments and the Preambule of the Constitution and acts against people's right, it should not have the right to legal protection.
A person or a group is free to say or do whatever he wants only if whatever he wants to do or say doesn't interfere with someone else's freedom.
Sources:
"Zechariah Chafee." Wikiquote. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2013.
"WFG." WFG. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Jan. 2013.
Racist groups such as the Klu Klux Klan have a right to exist and be protected in the United States of America as long as the group and its individual’s actions remain constitutional. The United States must allow these groups to exist because of first amendment in the US Constitution. The first amendment states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition.” In other words, all groups including the Klu Klux Klan have the right to express their personal beliefs. The freedom of speech is protected by the first amendment because the founding fathers believed that if the freedom of speech didn’t exist then the government could oppress the people and new ideas and opinions would never be heard. Although, some beliefs are disgusting and repulsive, some beliefs are also very important. For example, if the freedom of speech was restricted in the United States, and there was some sort of corruption that could not be published then the people would never be protected, know the truth, or be able to make a change. The history of the Klu Klux Klan is nauseating, but it is not constitutional to punish its members if they have not committed any crimes. But, I do believe that it is necessary for the government to be particularly careful and aware of groups such as the Klu Klux Klan because they have a history of promoting violence. Not to say members should be punished for other people’s actions, just kept under close watch because they are a terrorist group that advocates actions that “disturb the peace” by taking away other people’s freedom. With that being said, members of the Klu Klux Klan do have a right to legal protection because freedom does not discriminate or have bias in America.
ReplyDeleteCooke
People and organizations should be able to voice their opinions in a non-violent manner. The first amendment of the US Constitution specifically states that citizens of the United States have the right to express their opinions and peacefully assemble. This amendment should protect the rights of all citizens of the United States even those whose opinions may not be morally correct. This includes organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan. Although I do not agree with the ideas of the members of the KKK I do believe that not allowing them to voice their opinions would be unconstitutional. If a person commits an act of violence against another person, be it because of their race or not, they should be punished. The problem with organizations like the KKK is that they are structured in a similar way as the mafia and other types of organized crime, where members provide alibies for their fellow members making it virtually impossible to convict one of the members of the crime. I believe that as long as the government is not corrupted by these organizations, murderers and violent racists will still be taken off the streets and targeted races will be protected. All in all, banning the right for these organizations to peacefully assemble would be unconstitutional as long as these assemblies remain peaceful.
ReplyDeleteDue to the first amendment and the founding ideas of this country, the United States government must allow organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to exist. Since the first amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ", but then goes on to say "or the right of the people peaceably to assemble". Therefor people do have the right to meet peacefully, even if the group is racist or against a certain religion. This type of organization practicing peaceful assembles does not pertain to the KKK, because the KKK was extremely violent towards innocent black people with extreme disregard to their rights. This infringement goes against the constitution in that the constitution states that “in Order to form a more perfect Union, [we must] establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves". Hence to insure this domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, and promote general welfare, the government must act to prevent such organizations as the KKK for the bettering of the country. Also the history of an organization should only affect the government’s actions if the organization has had violent tendencies or has been proven to illegally disrupt the wellbeing of others. Legally the KKK should have the right to protection, however once they become an organization that is no longer merely peacefully meeting, but rather violently acting out towards anyone, they lose this protection.
ReplyDeleteThe Ku Klux Klan is a white supremacist organization that originated in Pulaski, Tennessee in 1865 during a time of severe racism and African-American controversy. In the 1800s, they were full-blown terrorists, murdering thousands of innocent black people and wreaking havoc on American families. The Klan considers themselves a sector of Christianity, solely fighting for white supremacy, anti-immigration, and nationalism. Today, as the group has evolved along with governmental restrictions, they fight with words rather than actions, therefor making them untouchable by the law. The first amendment states, “freedom of expression consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, and the implied rights of association and belief,” meaning that the Ku Klux Klan has every right to advocate for their beliefs as long as they do not infringe upon other citizens’ rights. Although they technically have rights to practice their “religion,” I personally believe that the government should shut them down. Our country is known for acceptance of all races and religions, and this organization publicly discriminates towards almost every single one. If you are not Caucasian and Christian, the Klan discriminates against you, victimizes you, and basically wants you dead. Despite the fact that they may not come out and state that they want people dead, looking at their history of murder and terrorism will show you the monstrous side of them. America is a country that prides itself on opportunity and diversity and the organization takes away from that. In conclusion, no, I do not think the Ku Klux Klan should be permitted to exist in our country.
ReplyDeletesource:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment
The Ku Klux Klan, a group advocating for the distribution of rights based on race and religion, should not have a right to legal protection in the US. The history of this organization, which is feared by many, is that it was originally founded to resist the reconstruction-era politics put in place by the Radical Republicans. Essentially a terrorist organization , their methods of protesting included burning crosses, staging violent rallies, bombing of black schools, and many other violent acts. Legally, the KKK uses the first amendment, freedom of speech, to keep in existence. The first amendment states that no law can be made to prohibit the freedom of expression of any organization or group. However, regulations and restrictions of this amendment allow freedom of speech, religion, petition, and assembly unless any of these are disturbing the peace. The KKK disturbs not only the peace of mind of the people they discriminate against, but also has a history of physical harm to others. In the preamble of the US constitution, two of the first words are Justice and Tranquility. They clearly believe in white supremacy and have the desire to be rid of people who are not exactly the same as them, and this goes against everything America supposedly stands for. The KKK represents and stands for neither of these things, in fact, the opposite. Due not to their beliefs but to their violent history and possibly violent future, the KKK should have no protection under the US government whatsoever.
ReplyDelete-Patsalos-Fox
• Yes, the United States government should allow and authorize organizations who advocate the distribution of rights based on race and religion to create equality for the nation. It would be unconstitutional if the government regulated organizations unless their cause goes to an extreme. The First Amendment clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition.” Our government must allow freedom of speech and other citizens rights, but sometimes organizations go too far, such as the KKK. The KKK does not have a right to legal protection because they are singling out a race to an extreme with Black Codes and the violence they make. The government does not have a right to shut it down, but it does have the authority to regulate these groups when they disregard other peoples rights and break laws. This history of an organization does not have any bearing on the governments actions because despite its history, the government has a duty to run the nation for the better of the people, “in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote general welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” as stated in the Constitution. The 14th Amendement states that “All persons 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 state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens 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 its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”. This amendment was passed by the Radical Republicans to attempt to settle down the “Jim Crow Society” and the racism that still existed. The KKK and other racist organizations had the right to have legal protection until they broke numerous amounts of laws and made unspeakable actions that wounded this nation for years.
ReplyDeleteIn the United States we have many rights that we take for granted including the right to free speech, and the ability to protest the government. Citizens of the US do have the right to create groups that advocate rights based on race and religion because the 1st Amendment of the constitution gives us this right; as long as it doesn't infringe upon another persons rights. The first amendment limits the power of the government and gives power to the people. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition" the Government for a redress of grievances." If the group is not hurting any people or infringing upon their rights these groups are allowed. If any violent action or measures are taken by this group that infringe on the rights of others the government must step in. Via the Preamble of the constitution the government is given this power. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." If any organization disturbs the peace, the government is required to "insure domestic tranquility." I believe that the KKK should have no place in the United States. The government is technically not supposed to judge on past events from a group, but because the US government knows how violent and radical this group is its removal in necessary to maintain peace and order in our great country.
ReplyDelete-Fortenbaugh
The United States of America was created as a place of refuge- a sanctuary- for the
ReplyDeletediscriminated against and oppressed immigrants from England, during the 17th Century.
Then, once that sanctuary was finally established as a nation of their own, and based on
the principles of liberty and equality, these very immigrants turned around and did the
same exact thing that they ran from in England to immigrants of another race. They left
an extremely ethnocentric society behind in England, in which the wealthy and royal
Protestant Englishmen were superior to all others, just to come to the New World and
recreate their own version of the same type of ethnocentric society. The oppressed had
become the oppressors, and some of these extreme oppressors, known as “White Supremacists”, came together in the post-civil war south to form the Ku Klux Klan: one
of the largest domestic Terrorist Organizations the United States had ever seen. They
made it their business to demonstrate their strong feelings of hatred and discrimination
against non-whites and were sure to make the lives of African-Americans a living hell -
that is, if they let them live long enough to complain about it. Since the 14th Amendment
ruled that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States...are citizens of the United States”, then that means that all American born people of African descent were
considered citizens. Furthermore, the Preamble of the Constitution, which outlines the
purpose of the U.S. Government’s existence, clearly states that the Government was
formed to “insure domestic tranquility...[and] promote the general welfare”. Therefore,
the K.K.K. had blatantly infringed upon the rights of legal U.S. citizens by violating
African-American people’s rights to ‘domestic tranquility’ and by taking attacks upon
their ‘general welfare’ as a race. Unconstitutional, and overall immoral organizations
such as this do not merit the legal protection of the United States, but rather the legal
prosecution by the U.S. Government. In a country formed under the moral precepts of
freedom and equality, it should be obvious to any competent ruling government that any
organization that advocates the distribution of rights based on race and religion, should
be immediately disbanded and forbidden to exist. History is bound to always repeat itself
in some form or another, therefore it is imperative that the Government use the history of
the K.K.K. to legislate against all current and future forms of aggressive, extremist
terrorist groups. In closing, I believe that it is self-evident that the K.K.K. is
unconstitutional, hypocritical, and immoral.