In March of 1895 Dred Scott and his owner, John Sanford moved to Illinois which was a free state at the time. Due to the fact that Dred Scott was a slave in a free state he believed that he should have been able to declare emancipation from his owner. Dred brought his case to court to try to gain the freedom he believed he deserved. It was also argued on the side of Dred Scott that the North West Ordinance proved that he should be a freed slave. On the side of Sanford, it was argued that yes, he may have been a slave in a free state but the fact of the matter was that he was still a slave and was purchased therefore he is property. In the end Chief Justice Roger B. Taney decided in favor of John Sanford on the basis that no pure blooded African person, or their descendants, would ever be citizens of the United States and there for could not successfully grant him freedom.
Monday, February 29, 2016
Dred Scott v. Sanford Court Case
In March of 1895 Dred Scott and his owner, John Sanford moved to Illinois which was a free state at the time. Due to the fact that Dred Scott was a slave in a free state he believed that he should have been able to declare emancipation from his owner. Dred brought his case to court to try to gain the freedom he believed he deserved. It was also argued on the side of Dred Scott that the North West Ordinance proved that he should be a freed slave. On the side of Sanford, it was argued that yes, he may have been a slave in a free state but the fact of the matter was that he was still a slave and was purchased therefore he is property. In the end Chief Justice Roger B. Taney decided in favor of John Sanford on the basis that no pure blooded African person, or their descendants, would ever be citizens of the United States and there for could not successfully grant him freedom.
Should the "Slender Man" Creator Be Held Accountable?
On Saturday March 31st, 2014 in
two girls stabbed a girl of the same age after luring her into the woods and
stabbing her a number of times; 19 to be exact. The victim manages to drag her
body out to a road sidewalk where a cyclist found her, called 911 and was
rushed to the hospital, dangerously close to death. Their motives claimed to be
to satisfy the fictional character, Slender Man who often lured his victims
into the woods who often targets children. When put on trial they said that
their motives were to impress the believed to be true, Slender Man by
committing an act for him to prove that they were worthy. During the case
trials it was brought up that the creator of Slender Man, Eric Knudsen should
be held accountable for the attack as he is the one who created the fictional character
in the first place.
The two girls charged as adults
for attempted murder
The answer was a hard no as
that directly violates his first amendment principles of free speech. In this
case there was no proof whatsoever that Knudsen intended for this type of
action to ever occur in real life. Another reason Knudsen could not be
convicted is because this is something out of the norm. The Huffington Post
states, "out of the many thousands and thousands of people who follow
Slender Man, we know of only two girls who allegedly committed a violent act.
In brief, it simply is not at all likely that any fan of Slender Man will
commit violence because of him." In conclusion, there is no possible way
Eric Knudsen could be held accountable for his creation as it was never his
intention for this horrible crime to be committed.
To read more about how the Slender
Man induced murder is not in violation of the creators first amendment rights,
click here
Thursday, February 25, 2016
"Ghetto Party' Backfires
Father von Arx sent out a letter to all students dressing the matter and stating that it is a sensitive subject to some students and that students should hold the utmost respect for their fellow students. He also stated how though this was an off campus party, the students are still held to the same code of conduct that on campus students are held to. Continuing, he said how this effected the their efforts to make the campus a more diverse, comfortable for all campus and how the students should have thought twice about their actions and the reaction it could have before going fourth with the event. The director of Urban Initiatives, Carolyn Vermont, claimed that it didn't come as a surprise that this had happened. The administrators at Fairfield University are taking this occurrence as a huge sign that they have much more work to do to get the campus to where it needs to be.
State v Mann
In the case of State vs Mann a woman named Elizabeth Jones
lent her slave, Lydia, to John Mann for a year who then abused her by shooting
her in the back when she tried to escape a prior beating. When brought to
court, a five-dollar fine was issued which Mann refused to pay for. When the
case finally reached the Supreme Court, State argued that this went against the
party’s religious beliefs as well as arguing not that slavery should be
abolished, as it was legal in North Carolina at the time, but that slaves are
human and should be treated as such. Mann on the other hand argued that the
slave was property therefore he had the right to do whatever he wanted with her
and that he should not have to pay the fine. In the final ruling, Supreme Judge
Thomas Ruffin stated that while personally he ruled in favor of Lydia he had to
remain impartial to the law and therefore ruled in favor of Mann from the
lawful standpoint, and the fine was overruled.
Cross at Ground Zero
If one were to go to New York City and visit the Ground Zero
memorial site they would see two beautiful memorial pools in place of where the
towers used to be adorned with the names of loved ones lost. If you were to
look further around the memorial you might run into a “statue” of sorts of a
figure that seems to be a cross. In recent past months this cross has been
causing quite the controversy especially from groups like the American Atheists
and the Freedom From Religion Foundation who believe that any display of a
religion in a public setting is in violation of the Constitution. This
controversy ended up being brought into court and was ruled multiple times not
to be in violation of the first amendment due to the fact that it is not stated that there has to be
separation of public life and religion.
Amongst all of the fighting it seems that people are
forgetting what the real meaning of the cross-shaped beam. The beam was pulled
from the rubbish of the actual site after the attack and stood as a sign of
hope for many people, not a way to cram a religion down people’s throats. It
represents history and stands as an actual artifact from the attack site and
can be seen as an educational aspect as well. I believe that people need to
take a step back and look at the bigger picture that the memorial in its entirety
represents, honoring those who lost their lives on September 11th
2001.
To read more about this seemingly controversial topic here.
Monday, February 8, 2016
The Chain of Events That Lead To A President's Resignation
The beginning of this year at the
University of Missouri was one that was unforgettable due to the array of
events that led up to the resignation of the University’s System President, Tim
Wolfe in November. The racial controversy actually began in 2010 when two white
students spread cotton balls out side of the University’s Black Culture Center.
Though they might have claimed that it was a harmless joke the University took
it as much more than that. Picking up in the beginning of this year Payton
Head, the President of the University’s Student Government cast his fed up
emotions on social media about the subject of discrimination in all forms,
after being verbally attacked with racial slurs by people in the back of a pick
up truck, claiming that he has been discriminated at the university more than
once and often did not feel safe or included.
Photo Credit |
The University officials
shorty after released a statement saying that these actions were not acceptable
but never seemed to take any action after that, leading to multiple student
protests like the “Racism Lives Here” rally. After further racist occurrences
between students the University Chancellor ordered for all students and faculty
to attend diversity and inclusion conferences which was acknowledged as a “step
in the right direction” but the chancellor did catch heat for not acknowledging
the work of the black students that worked extremely hard at the diversity
programs. During one of the student protests, that continued to take place,
President Wolfe’s car was surrounded with protesters which lead to him
accidentally nudge one of them with his car- sending the protesters anger go up
in flames with accusations such as the President laughing at the protesters and
smiling through out the protest. A student group Concerned Student 1950 issued
a list of demands including an apology and that president Wolfe step down from
his position. Contrary to what the group requested Wolfe did not step down and
other controversial attacks continued on campus. A month later, strikes continued,
including student wide hunger strikes and football players and coaches refusing
to play; which finally lead us to November 9th, the day Tim Wolfe
finally announced his resignation.
To read further about the events leading up to President
Wolfe’s resignation, read here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)