...Chavez P5 Debates were going crazy throughout the United States about whether the new Constitution was an improvement or a disaster that will soon ruin the nation. Federalists were actually people who basically agreed with the Constitution and a strong government. The Federalists were basically way much wealthier and more educated Americans than the anti-federalist well most of them like John Adams, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. Anti-Federalists were actually people who agreed with a weaker government, but liked a stronger state legislature. Yet not all of them liked the Articles of Confederation, but none of them wanted the new Constitution to be ratified so in a way they wanted to make their own document basically. Poor classes in the West also supported the patriots like Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry in which they were actually very good at influencing people, like they were very charismatic.Anti-Federalists feared that a stronger national government would one day destroy the liberties Americans had won in the Revolution. They also worried that the new Constitution didn’t list any specific rights for the people in which that was maybe one of the main reasons why they went against the federalist. Many of the smaller states quickly approved the Constitution because it gave them more way power in the new legislative branch than they had under the Articles of Confederation in which was a great thing for...
Words: 832 - Pages: 4
...An outline is a “blueprint” or “plan” for your paper. It helps you to organize your thoughts and arguments. A good outline can make conducting research and then writing the paper very efficient. Your outline page must include your: * Paper Title * Thesis statement * Major points/arguments indicated by Roman numerals (i.e., I, II, III, IV, V, etc.) * Support for your major points, indicated by capital Arabic numerals (i.e., A, B, C, D, E, etc.) Roman numeral I should be your “Introduction”. In the introduction portion of your paper, you’ll want to tell your reader what your paper is about and then tell what your paper hopes to prove (your thesis). So an Introduction gives an overview of the topic and your thesis statement. The final Roman numeral should be your “Conclusion”. In the conclusion, you summarize what you have told your reader. Following are 3 sample outlines, from actual student papers. YOUR outline can be MORE detailed, or might be LESS detailed. Remember that a good outline makes writing easier and more efficient. Sample Outline #1 Title: Frederick Douglass Thesis: Frederick Douglass played a crucial role in securing the abolition of slavery and equality of African-American rights through his actions, ideas, and efforts as a lecturer, author/publisher, and politician. I. Introduction A. Thesis B. Roles/Arguments II. Douglass as Lecturer A. History as slave and acquisition of education 1) ...
Words: 1185 - Pages: 5
...Make out a case against the adoption of codified constitution for the UK A constitution is a system of rules which describes the structure and powers of the government, the relationship between different parts of government and the relationship between government and citizens. The UK has a un-codified constitution which means it is not written out in one single document. Unlike codified constitutions which are, such as the US constitution. There are many arguments against the idea of a codified constitution. One argument is that codified constitutions are considered inflexible, because higher law is more difficult to change than statute law. It’s easier to introduce an act of parliament than to amend a constitution. The UKs constitution is flexible as it is not entrenched. This is good because the constitution stays relevant and up to date. For codified constitutions it is difficult to change and adapt so this is a downside. A second argument against agreeing to a codified constitution is that parliamentary sovereignty would be effectively ended. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty states that parliament can make unmake or amend any law it wishes. With a codified constitution parliament would not be able to make, unmake or amend any law it wishes due to the existence of the constitution. This is because a codified constitution would act as higher law. Another point is that a new codified constitution in the UK is unnecessary. Codified constitutions may also not be...
Words: 297 - Pages: 2
...the introduction of a fully codified constitution’ Discuss Plan Arguments against * Ruins the doctrine of sovereignty-Parliament sovereignty is effectively beaten. * Judges have to police the constitution and effectively interpreted. – Threat of judicial tyranny. Codified constitutions cannot be interpreted by the public so the judges would have to interpret it which could bring out preferences and values of senior judges * Un-necessary- doesn’t Philly limit governments * Hard to change * Easily outdated * Legal documents created at one point of time rather than a document which has been endorsed by history and created over time Arguments for * Clear rules * One codified document * Limited government * Neutral interpretation * Protecting rights of individual liberty * Education value – highlight certain values and strengthen citizenship Introduction The argument of a codified constitution has been a debated subject for a long time within the UK political spectrum. The argument stands at present moment that if the UK should or should not implement a codified constitution. Both sides of the argument withstand staggering evidence both in favour and factors denouncing the idea being drawn at the same time. The fact of a codified constitution would invoke a greater judicial intervention within the UK – maybe even put the state under risk of judicial tyranny. On codified constitution we have at the moment, have a scattered...
Words: 1530 - Pages: 7
...1785-1788 and the documents provided to answer the following question: What were the major arguments that surfaced in opposition to the new Constitution proposed in 1787? How did supporters of the Constitution counter those arguments? Previous attempts to change the Articles of Confederation had failed because the approval of every state was required. There was often one or more recalcitrant member of the union. For example, Rhode Island even refused to take part in the framing; opposition to a new constitution was certainly formidable. Consequently, the Convention discarded the provision of unanimous approval and adopted the notion that the new Constitution would pass with only the approval of nine states. The draft of the new constitution called for an ultimate executive leader. This was extremely controversial, as the nation had been founded to escape the practice of having a single leader. However, it was generally admitted that the Articles of Confederation were a failure because the people had too much voice. The national government could not impose or collect taxes, and they could not forcibly uphold the law to any state. The problem that needed to be overcome was whether the separate states would cast aside their provinciality and become a single body under the federal structure. Those supporting the ratification of the constitution called themselves Federalists, and those against it became known as Antifederalists. Federalists promoted the notion of a strong central...
Words: 985 - Pages: 4
...The Articles of Confederation had already been established in 1781, however, the debate over the necessity of a Constitution was underway. The Constitutional Convention, beginning in 1781 in Philadelphia included delegates from 12 of the 13 states. During the convention, the delegates discussed issues to be resolved in their proposed Constitution. Public debates outside of the convention also emerged where the common people debated over the Constitution as well. In the late 1780s, following the Constitutional Convention, two groups, the Federalists and Anti-federalists, debated over the necessity and potential dangers of the proposed Constitution....
Words: 1258 - Pages: 6
...uprisings characterize this period, which started with the framing of Articles in 1777 and ended with the final adoption of the United States constitution in 1787. STATES’ ARGUMENTS AGAINST A CENTRAL GOVERNMENT American leaders faced much opposition from the states after the American Revolution as a result of deciding to form a central government. The states feared that such a government would suppress them and would interfere with their internal affairs. Consequently, heated debates and uprisings characterize this period, which started with the framing of Articles in 1777 and ended with the final adoption of the United States constitution in 1787. The American Revolution holds a very prominent place in the history of this country, as it was the longest and the most painful war Americans ever encountered. It took many years and numerous conflicts to finally gain independence in 1776 from British domination, which had been subjugating its colonies with laws of an unwritten constitution. It must be understood that though Americans were fighting for the right of democracy and each state wanted self-government, later that same issue turned into a big problem. Soon after America became independent, the former British colonies decided to form their own governments. It was then that the real battle began. The task of forming separate constitutions for each state, along with the formation of governmental institutions, turned in to a huge task -- a task so gigantic that it forced some...
Words: 1120 - Pages: 5
...The delegates present wanted to reform the Articles of Confederation due to the weak central government that existed under it. Once coming together they wanted to create radical change, the Articles of Confederation turned into the Constitution where all the the changes they needed and wanted to make reside. One of the big topics discussed at the convention was the issue of slavery, and whether it should stay or go. The delegates and many of the nation’s founders wanted slavery to be abolished. They wanted to do so by “slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees (Koch 139),” so that the southern economies that were based mainly on slave labor did not have economic ruin. The south wanted slavery to continue, because everything the slaves did they counted on for money. Many people worried that if slavery were to be banned that the south would to try to secede away from the union. Mr. L. Martin of Maryland proposed “to allow a prohibition or tax on the importation of slaves (Madison...
Words: 1962 - Pages: 8
...In February 1787, Congress supported a resolution for revising the Articles of Confederation; in May, representatives from twelve states convened in Philadelphia. The original Constitution, ratified by the states, contained very few individual rights guarantees, as the framers were primarily focused on establishing the machinery for an effective federal government. As adopted, the Constitution included only a few specific rights guarantees: protection against states impairing the obligation of contracts, provisions that prohibit both the federal and state governments from enforcing ex post facto laws (laws that allow punishment for an action that was not criminal at the time it was undertaken) and provisions barring bills of attainder. The framers, and notably James Madison, its architect, believed that the Constitution protected liberty primarily through its division of powers that made it difficult for an oppressive majorities to form and capture power to be used against minorities. In the ratification debate, Anti-Federalists opposed to the Constitution, complained that the new system threatened liberties, and suggested that if the delegates had truly cared about protecting individual rights, they would have included provisions that accomplished that. With ratification in serious doubt, Federalists announced a willingness to take up the matter of a series of amendments, to be called the Bill of Rights, soon after ratification and the First Congress came into session...
Words: 853 - Pages: 4
...Articles of Confederation. After vigorous debate, the delegates realized the Articles were too weak to support economic prosperity nor provide for public safety. Thus, the delegates underwent a new task: the creation of a brand-new Constitution. A brand new Constitution presented the delegates with a new point of contention. The fifty-five men would have to create a new Constitutions strong enough the support a nation’s economic prosperity, public safety, and so forth without allocating the new government power that did not squint towards a monarchy. Realizing this challenge divided the convention into a plethora of different opinions. These competing opinions could largely be grouped into two factions; the federalist and the anti-federalist. An Overview: Federalist v. Anti-Federalist...
Words: 1285 - Pages: 6
...down and have one source, new laws cannot go against these laws. The codified system allows for the country to adapt to the changing world, it also means that after a crisis laws can be changed very easily and quickly. Additionally, the codified system stops tyranny of the judiciary. On the other hand, an uncodified system means that the people's rights are protected and it limits power, it also makes sure that laws cannot be changed whenever they want. One argument for the UK remaining uncodified is because it allows the country to adapt to a changing world. In places such as America they are very much stuck in constitutional times, for example the constitutions says that everyone has the right to bear arms, this would have been relevant back when the constitution was made and they had just gained their independence. Today having a gun is not necessary in everyday life but the are unable to change the law as it is in the constitution. In the UK it is much easier to change the law as there is not a written constitution, for example in 1996 there was the Dunblane shooting, it did not take long for the government to change the gun laws so this would not happen again and they could keep the people safe. This shows how an uncodified system can really benefit a country. I believe that uncodified is better as it allows laws to be changed so we can keep up with the rest of the world and it also makes sure that everyone can be kept safe. Another argument for the UK to remain uncodified...
Words: 967 - Pages: 4
...Analysis and/or Literature Review 8 Literature Review 7 Discussion of Findings 14 Recommendations/Solutions 15 Conclusion 17 Bibliography 18 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This research paper will provide a critical analysis on the legal and social challenges raised by the legalization of same sex unions/marriages in the Caribbean, specifically Barbados. Several social issues as well as legal constraints and considerations were identified during the research. The paper presents arguments for both the retention of criminalization as well as arguments for the de-criminalization of homosexuality, the first step towards legalizing same sex unions/marriages. The findings, as presented provide the reader with alternative views and arguments; the conservative moral religious argument is presented as well as the more liberal human rights motivated arguments. This will provide the reader with more information supported by sound argument, allowing them to formulate their own opinions on the issues identified. Based upon the research and the discussion of the findings, the author suggests several alternatives to deal with this divisive issue. BACKGROUND FACTS Across the globe there is growing pressure by homosexual couples to get their relationships officially recognized by governments. This would...
Words: 3655 - Pages: 15
...During the ratification process of the United States Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published a series of anonymous articles in the New York Times. Published under the name Publius, "The Federalist Papers," as they were called, advocated for the ratification of the new Constitution by New York State. Each of the papers, therefore, outlines the benefits of one united nation, as well as the interests of, and supported by, the proposed government. Written by Madison, Federalist Paper No. 10, generally considered one of the most important articles, concerns itself with the problems of and plausible solutions for the formation of factions. Through multiple assertions concerning the dangers of factions and the benefits of a republic, Madison formed one of the major arguments in favor of the United States Constitution. Federalist No. 10, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection," expanded on dangers of factions outlined by Hamilton in Federalist No. 9. Defined by Madison as, "A number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community" (Madison), factions are comparable to the modern day interest or lobby groups. That is to say, Madison defined factions as groups of people with...
Words: 1377 - Pages: 6
...Levinson begins his argument of proving the constitution is flawed by addressing what he believes is problematic about the electoral college. According to Levinson, the electoral system is outdated in our new millennium. The evidence he uses to support the argument against the electoral system is that it prevents the popular vote from prevailing and gives advantage to less populated states. This occurs since each state is guaranteed at least three electoral votes and these votes determine the presidency of our country. A specific, argument-supporting example by Levinson explains that three rural states such as the Dakotas and Wyoming attain more electoral votes compared to New Mexico, which has a similar population. This example provides solid evidence that the constitution has overlooked the popular vote. Besides the electoral college, Levinson believes a number of other constitutional flaws exist. The most unreliable feature of the constitution according to Levinson is the power of the House of Representatives on a one-state, one-vote basis to decide a stalemate between the electoral college. This would ultimately...
Words: 829 - Pages: 4
...* Controversy- etymology (word origin) From Latin: “against” (contra) and “versus” (verse) Contra = against or in comparison with Implies difference of opinion or contrast Verse = line of writing Implies opinions expressed in some type of public arena Controversy- definition A prolonged public dispute or debate. Disputation concerning a matter of opinion. “Prolonged” - matters are unsettled over time, lasting “Public” – not private, concerning people as a whole “Dispute / debate” – challenge, taking exception to “Opinion” – personal belief or judgment Synonyms of controversy- disagreement, difference ALSO- contention, strife, argument, dissonance, lack of harmony, heated conflict Controversy- Denotation v. connotation Denotation = meaning The most direct, exact, specific meaning of a work or expression Literal meaning- meaning without interpretation, embellishment, or exaggeration A dictionary definition. Subjective and “cold” Connotation = suggestion Emotional coloration Suggested or implied meaning in addition to what is explicit, objected, denoted Impression that goes beyond a defined meaning Emotional association with a word, phrase, idea Subjective and emotively “loaded” September 17 Democracy- people, common people. People’s rule. Types of democracy Direct- when all members of a community (polity, group) gather together and individuals cast a vote or make decisions=each person is given a chance to influence the policymaking process Representative-...
Words: 2003 - Pages: 9
