Justice Ginsburg Eviscerates The Case Against Marriage Equality In Just Five Sentences (12)

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/04/29/3652468/justice-ginsburg-eviscerates-case-marriage-equality-just-five-sentences/ "Justice Ginsburg Eviscerates The Case Against Marriage Equality In Just Five Sentences" is an article by Ian Millhiser that was published yesterday, April 29th, 2015. As almost everyone in the United States is aware, on Tuesday three marriage equality cases were heard in the Supreme Court. During these hearings, Conservative justices made themselves heard. Arguments such as “for millennia, not a single society” supported marriage equality. So, just because they were never placed in a role deemed "socially acceptable," they were to be denied equal rights? (For the record, Ancient Greek armies often requested to have homosexual male couples in their armies. They believed that they would fight harder to impress each other.) Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a specific response to that. As she argued, the nature of marriage was, for many millennia, based on gender roles; a man being dominant, a woman being subservient. Because men held all the power, women were often unhappy, their rights ignored. The nature of homosexual couples challenges this setup, yes, but it is what makes them unique. Until very recently, women were not allowed by law to refuse their spouses sexual conduct, so, as Ginsburg says, the definition of marriage is changing all the time. This relates to our class because we are currently studying the judiciary. Our research of the Supreme Court and its justices allows us to better understand how the court system works. It's also important to note the often differing opinions of justices and how it effects lawmaking in the country. I completely agree with RBG. I believe that homosexual couples deserve the right to marry, just as any heterosexual couple can. These cases are going to change the U.S. for the better. We cannot call ourselves the land of the free when our laws keep people from committing their lives to the person they love, simply based on their gender. I hope that by June we are able to say that we, as a country, stand on the right side of history.

Senate Confirms Loretta Lynch as Attorney General After Long Delay (12)

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/politics/loretta-lynch-attorney-general-vote.html?_r=0 "Senate Confirms Loretta Lynch as Attorney General After Long Delay" is an article by Jennifer Steinhauer. It was published April 23rd, 2015. Loretta Lynch has been cleared by the Senate to begin her duties as Attorney General of the United States. She was first nominated in January, but the Senate has taken until today to confirm her position. This is the third longest Senate confirmation in the history of Attorney General nominations. Lynch is the first female African-American to have this job. Her confirmation passed in the Senate 56-43, 10 of the people voting "Aye" were Republicans. This relates to our class because at the moment, we are discussing the duties of the presidency and executive branch. We have discussed the ability of the Senate to nominate people to particular positions in the executive branch, some of which require Senate approval. I am happy that the Senate has decided to confirm Loretta Lynch as the Attorney General. It's a momentous day. I wish that the Senate had been a bit less influenced by Lynch's support of President Obama, but the fact of the matter is that she has made history today.

There’s A Reality About Hillary Clinton That Many Liberals Need To Face (11)

http://www.forwardprogressives.com/reality-hillary-clinton-liberals-need-face/ "There’s A Reality About Hillary Clinton That Many Liberals Need To Face" is an article by Allen Clifton, posted on March 18, 2015. This article is essentially a call to action for liberals and Democrats. The reality is, Hillary Clinton is not perfect. No one is saying that she's perfect. She's had her fair share of scandals and problems and no one is denying that. However, there is the fact that Elizabeth Warren is not running for president. Bernie Sanders isn't running for president. In this election, we really have to go for the lesser of two evils- someone who only shares 70% of your views, or someone who shares about 1% of them. There's no point in making a statement by voting Independent, because then there's the fact that they won't get elected. He talks about how trying to make a statement about our broken political system won't do anything; we've pretty much been a two party system since our country was first born. The main point is this: vote. Our president in 2016 is between Hillary Clinton or a republican. This is related to AP Gov because we have been studying the presidency and election process. What Clifton talks about in his article is true to everything we have learned, both about the presidency and the American political system. The fact of the matter is, if every American that is eligible to vote actually voted, Democrats would win every election. However, since the Democrat-supporting part of our constituency is not as consistent when it is time to vote, there's the potential for Republicans to win. The moral of the story is: vote, don't try to make a statement, and pick your battles wisely. I completely agree with Clifton. Although Hillary would not be my first choice (Elizabeth Warren would be), I know that I would vote for her if I could vote this election. The fact of the matter is, I don't want to live here if we're going to have both a Republican Congress and Republican President. We've made some extremely important steps forward in society that would not have happened had we not had Obama as a president. No one is perfect, but I honestly believe that he has done the best he could with what he was given. Election year is my least favorite part of the presidency.

North Carolina Religious Freedom-Bill on Hold (10)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/north-carolina-religious-freedom-bill-on-hold-1427908505 Recently, a bill was proposed in North Carolina that is very similar to the recently passed Indiana bill. However, NC House Speaker Tim Moore (R) has stated that the bill is on hold while sponsors evaluate its potential for unintended consequences. Moore has stated a desire to “balance” religious freedom and lack of discrimination, although he has also discussed that there are not any current pressing matters of discrimination under North Carolina’s current sanctions. This relates to our class because of our study of state government and civil rights and liberties. This bill definitely presents a danger to not only gay rights, but also ethnic rights. The fact that people would be able to refuse service to anyone deemed as in “violation” of their religion, it gives discrimination a little rock to hide under. Although Moore has said that they do not want to sanction discrimination, it would very hard to prevent under this possible legislation. I think that the delay of the bill is a good move. People really need to think about the implications this could have for our citizens. We welcome many different religions, ethnicities, sexualities, and levels of wealth into our state and our laws should protect all of us equally with no potential for discrimination.

Connecticut Becomes First State To Boycott Indiana Over LGBT Discrimination Law (9)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/30/connecticut-indiana-boycott-lgbt_n_6969684.html Connecticut Governor Dan Malloy (D) has signed an executive order outlawing Connecticut state funded travel to the state of Indiana as a result of the religious freedom bill recently signed into law by Indiana governor Mike Pence (R). Connecticut is the first state to boycott Indiana, although the cities of San Francisco and Seattle have both instated a ban. The reason for the boycott is because this recent religious freedom bill gives all people to turn away anyone from their establishment, essentially do anything they see fit as long as they are capable of citing “religious liberty.” Indiana has received a huge backlash from the passing of this bill. Angie’s List, an Indianapolis based organization, has declined to execute a $40 million campus expansion project, and the CEO of Salesforce, a $4 billion software corporation, announced plans to "dramatically reduce our investment" in the state because of the law. This relates to our class because of our recent study of civil rights and civil liberties. This bill has the potential to produce extreme inequality. The most likely people to be turned away from businesses are LGBTQA and Muslim Americans. It is likely that this law will be declared unconstitutional. I completely agree with Connecticut’s actions. Religious institutions already receive enough exemptions and residents of Indiana should be ashamed of themselves if they feel the need to turn anyone away from their business. This is the United States, and discrimination should not be available or excusable, regardless of the form it takes.

Florida Teacher Suspended For Calling Teen Student A ‘Raghead Taliban’ (8)

http://www.liberalamerica.org/2015/03/19/florida-teacher-suspended-for-calling-teen-student-a-raghead-taliban/ "Florida Teacher Suspended For Calling Teen Student A ‘Raghead Taliban" is an article by Andrew Bradford, published on March 19, 2015. Recently, Weston, Florida teacher Maria Valdes received a five day suspension for tasteless anti-Muslim comments directed towards a Muslim student, Deyab-Houssein Wardani. Comments including “Here comes the raghead Taliban” and “Okay the Taliban, what is the answer?” have been reported not only by Warden, but also fellow students. The student's family has released statements particularly regarding the treatment he received because he was Muslim, rather than a different religion or race (such as making anti-Semitic comments to a Jewish student or racist comments to an African American student.). The school has released statements that their policies do not tolerate Valdes' behavior and embrace diversity. The family is currently deciding whether or not they will seek further legal action against Valdes. This relates to our class because we have recently begun a unit on Civil Liberties and Rights. This regards equal treatment of religion, and the school system (and as a result, the government's) role in ensuring that children of all different backgrounds are treated equally. The freedom of religion is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. I think that Valdes' actions were inexcusable. She is very lucky to have only received a five day suspension- she deserves much longer. This conduct is completely inappropriate, not only for a teacher to her student, but any person. All children should feel safe while at school and they should not feel threatened or belittled for who they are by a person that assumes as much responsibility as a teacher.

More Than 300 Republicans Call on Supreme Court to Recognize Gay Marriage Nationally (7)

http://time.com/3734626/gay-marriage-supreme-court-republicans/ The article "More Than 300 Republicans Call on Supreme Court to Recognize Gay Marriage Nationally" is an article by Zeke J. Miller, published March 5, 2015. Recently, Republicans have taken a huge step forward to amass a brief to the Supreme Court in support of legalizing gay marriage. The brief is specifically targeted at four cases that are about to return to the Supreme Court, and could eventually aid in the nationwide legalization of same-sex marriage. Among the signatories are 23 current and former Republicans members of the House of Representatives and Senate and seven current and former Governors. Sens. Susan Collins and Mark Kirk have signed onto the brief, as has Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker and former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. Other notables include former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal and billionaire GOP mega-donor David Koch. As of the day that this article was published, the brief had amassed 303 signatures. Fortunately (for the Republicans), it is unlikely that Conservative voters will be too angered by Republican support of same-sex marriage. This relates to our class because at the moment, we are studying the Constitution and its applications within the government. This brief to the courts shows the Constitutional responsibilities given to the Judicial branch of the state and federal governments. Of course, the Supreme Court essentially states the law of the land in regard to same-sex marriage and other such cases, including abortion, so if they were to rule that the currently upheld marriage bans in various states were unconstitutional, there would be little that could be done to change the ruling. Although I agree with Republicans and Conservatives on very few things, this is one development I definitely support. Same-sex marriage is one of the only topics on which I agree with (some of) my Republican friends. For many Republicans, I believe this support is not so much support for homosexuals, but the belief that no one should have a say in whether or not you can get married. I know people on both sides of that; support based on the people vs. support because no one should be able to tell you who you can and can't marry. As far as how I feel about this: go Republicans!