...Same-Sex Marriage: For Liberty and Justice for All? Carly Baxter The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is a U.S. law that defines marriage as the union between a man and a woman. Last year, President Obama's told the Justice Department to stop defending DOMA. There were worries that it violated the equal protection element of the Fifth Amendment (Montopoli). Later in 2011, the Obama administration confirmed that it would back a bill to get rid of DOMA (Nakamura). Same-sex marriage is now legal in seven states (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York) and also the District of Columbia. Maryland, Washington, and New Jersey will eventually allow same-sex couples to marry, but the bills haven’t taken effect yet. There are several other states that respect out-of-state marriages, and recognize domestic partnerships or civil unions (“States”). Denmark has accepted same-sex marriage for over twenty years and for several years now in Canada. No societies in these two countries have collapsed nor are divorce rates rising, which are common accusations (Eskridge). If Denmark has had a successful twenty years of same-sex marriage without the fall of their civilization, I doubt the societies in the United States will breakdown if same-sex couples get married. However, that doesn't stop the arguments from being made. So, the only thing someone has to do to cancel out a logical argument is to introduce fear. Nearly forty-six percent of people in the U.S....
Words: 2497 - Pages: 10
...© Michael Lacewing Ra wls a nd No zick on jus tic e RAWLS: JUSTICE AND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT John Rawls’ theory of distributive justice (A Theory of Justice) is based on the idea that society is a system of cooperation for mutual advantage between individuals. As such, it is marked by both conflicts between differing individual interests and an identity of shared interests. Principles of justice should ‘define the appropriate distribution of the benefits and burdens of social co-operation’. (p. 4) Justice is the most important political value and applies to the ‘basic institutions of society’ – the political constitution and the institutions that regulate the market, property, family, freedom, and so on – because it is intimately connected to what society is and what it is for. If society is a matter of cooperation between equals for mutual advantage, the conditions for this cooperation need to be defended and any inequalities in social positions must be justified. And so the principles of justice, Rawls thinks, must be ‘the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality as defining the fundamental terms of their association’ (p. 11). Justice, then, is fairness. What are the terms of the ‘social contract’? What principles of justice would we agree to in this situation? For our agreement to secure a fair, impartial procedure, we need to eliminate any possible bias towards, say...
Words: 2185 - Pages: 9
...A Theory of Justice, by John Rawls Tier III 415A Home Page A Theory of Justice, by John Rawls, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971. This outline of an extended book review is based in large part on notes composed by Darrell Huwe. I have attempted with limited success to understand Rawls' book - please do not regard this as being in any sense an authoritative summary of Rawls' thought. I personally find this book particularly difficult to penetrate, perhaps because my training is in the physical sciences rather than philosophy, and I generalize quite beyond the evidence when I suspect that others also find it less than accessible. I hope that this review is helpful. The Chronicle of Higher Education has published an article, "The Enduring Significance of John Rawls", by Martha Nussbaum. John Rawls died at age 81 on November 24, 2002. Dick Piccard General Conception All social primary goods - liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self-respect are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any or all of these goods is to the advantage of the least favored. Social Contract John Locke: Free people need to agree on some ground rules in order to live together in harmony. Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham: Act so as to maximize good (pleasure) in the aggregate. Later twist: minimize pain. From either perspective, your actions are judged good or bad depending on the consequences they have for you and...
Words: 1539 - Pages: 7
...Theory of Justice Analysis Conception and reality often clash when applied to everyday. In the most optimal society justice is served by punishing criminals so that law abiding citizens can live their lives in peace. The reality is that criminals receive punishments that are less than justice demands and the non-criminals are cheated. This short paper examines justice theories, the utilitarian view, modern justice view and the security based justice. It is important to consider individual justice, mob justice and societal justice as separate institutions. To better understand these institutions the next section explains justice theories. Justice Theories In this section two types of justice will be discussed: Rawl's Theory of Justice as Fairness and Libertarianism. Rawls focused on a hypothetical model in order to describe his form of justice. In this hypothetical model individuals are required to choose fundamental principles of basic institutions of a given society (Ilstu). The result choices made by the members of this society will be both fair and just. The two principles are as follows: Equal Liberty and Difference. "The Equal Liberty Principle states each person is to have the maximum civil liberties compatible with the same liberty for all (Ilstu)". These would be the principles of the United States Constitution; all American citizens are privileged to receive full civil liberties based on the laws of the land. "The Difference Principle states inequalities...
Words: 1221 - Pages: 5
...A Theory of Justice Rawls In 1985, John Rawls published his essay A Theory of Justice in which he defined social justice by applying social contract approach and introducing a hypothetical state – the Original Position with veil of ignorance. First of all, Rawls believed that the principles of justice should help society to govern its structure and protect the rights of everyone in the society. Then Rawls proposed the idea that justice can be called “fairness”. Since he claimed that the principles of justice should be decided in advance in order to regulate the society more efficiently, a group of chosen people must determine the set of principles of justice. Given the importance of such task, there is no doubt that the group of chosen people ought to have the knowledge in relative fields and the capacity to think rationally in order to make the best decisions, if not for anyone else, at least for themselves. In this case, we refer to the participant with rationality a rational agent. If we assumed that every party were a rational agent, we are, in fact, acknowledging that rational agent would determine the principles of justice with the purpose of maximizing benefits for him and for people with similar background based on the given status quo and specific traits of society he is currently living in. Hence, if we only choose people who are rational, we would face two problems including constant argument, which would fail to deliver any reasonable agreement when rational...
Words: 1288 - Pages: 6
...People have the right to secure their own safety. In order to avoid constant conflict with everyone we agree that cooperating together works in our favor and we ultimately benefit from our fair share in sacrificing liberties. Acting justly and mutually forfeiting our liberty and agreeing to cooperate in a society that secures ones right of self-preservation is rational. Justice protects us, causes less suffering, and allows us to benefit from time devoted to ourselves instead of committing injustices are all benefits of the principle of fair share. Glaucon’s notion that justice is a necessary evil is understandable in the since that it is better to live a life full of pleasure without remorse, however, justice is in fact the lesser of two evils,...
Words: 708 - Pages: 3
...A NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM?: OBERGEFELL V. HODGES Kenji Yoshino The decision in Obergefell v. Hodges1 achieved canonical status even as Justice Kennedy read the result from the bench. A bare majority held that the Fourteenth Amendment required every state to perform and to recognize marriages between individuals of the same sex.2 The majority opinion ended with these ringing words about the plaintiffs: “Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”3 While Obergefell’s most immediate effect was to legalize same-sex marriage across the land, its long-term impact could extend far beyond this context. To see this point, consider how much more narrowly the opinion could have been written. It could have invoked the equal protection and due process guarantees without specifying a formal level of review, and then observed that none of the state justifications survived even a deferential form of scrutiny. The Court had adopted this strategy in prior gay rights cases.4 Instead, the Court issued a sweeping statement that could be compared to Loving v. Virginia,5 the 1967 case that invalidated bans on in––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Chief Justice Earl Warren Professor of Constitutional Law, New York University School of Law. I gratefully acknowledge receiving financial support from...
Words: 15849 - Pages: 64
...Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, & Recent Theories of Rights: Rawls & Nozick. Natural Law Theory: Natural Law theory in ethics is not to be confused with the laws of nature as put forward by physicists or other natural scientists, but they are related and do overlap. In moral domains, we are not concerned to give a mathematical, experimentally based theory of ethics or justice, but we are concerned with the general order of nature and how human life is nestled in and depends on that order. For example, life (& its preservation) depends on observing the necessities and limitations of nature, how we are dependent on food, shelter, parents and a community and the satisfying of other natural needs for life to exist, continue and prosper. The most prominent philosophers & political thinkers in this line of thought include the following: ancient - Plato, Aristotle, & later Cicero & other Roman statesmen; medieval - St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas & other thinkers in the Judeo-Christian tradition; modern - John Locke, & of course Thomas Jefferson & the “founding fathers” of the American republic. According to almost all of these authors, the natural order ultimately depends upon a first ordering principle that established the relation between man and nature. That first principle is commonly referred to as God or Creator, as indicated, for example, in the opening of Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. One line of reasoning introduced by Plato is based on the law of the Division...
Words: 3180 - Pages: 13
...different approach. There will always be organizations more concern about the financial interest of the shareholders than the consumer; however, there is now a growing interest among US companies to corporate social responsibility as a way to benefit both the community and the organization. This paper will briefly compare and contrast the various theories of economic Justice of Fairness, Distributive Justice, Utilitarianism, Capitalism and Morality, and Socialism; and reveal the one theory I believe to be the most practical; and the best theory of economic justice as it applies to the “fairness in hiring and promotions, and employees’ rights and duties.” Justice of Fairness includes components of the Principle of Liberty that every one deserve the right to basic liberties; and the Principle of Equality falls in line with the distributive justice for social and economic liberties to be arranged so that they are the greatest benefit of the least advantaged and fair equality of opportunity. Rawls’ point of view on the Justice as Fairness is to be fair and impartial in making decisions about fundamental principles of justice. In order to adopt this point of view is to insure impartiality of judgment, remove any knowledge of personal general...
Words: 1904 - Pages: 8
...Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, & Recent Theories of Rights: Rawls & Nozick. Natural Law Theory: Natural Law theory in ethics is not to be confused with the laws of nature as put forward by physicists or other natural scientists, but they are related and do overlap. In moral domains, we are not concerned to give a mathematical, experimentally based theory of ethics or justice, but we are concerned with the general order of nature and how human life is nestled in and depends on that order. For example, life (& its preservation) depends on observing the necessities and limitations of nature, how we are dependent on food, shelter, parents and a community and the satisfying of other natural needs for life to exist, continue and prosper. The most prominent philosophers & political thinkers in this line of thought include the following: ancient - Plato, Aristotle, & later Cicero & other Roman statesmen; medieval - St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas & other thinkers in the Judeo-Christian tradition; modern - John Locke, & of course Thomas Jefferson & the “founding fathers” of the American republic. According to almost all of these authors, the natural order ultimately depends upon a first ordering principle that established the relation between man and nature. That first principle is commonly referred to as God or Creator, as indicated, for example, in the opening of Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. One line of reasoning introduced by Plato is based on the law of the Division...
Words: 3177 - Pages: 13
...Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, & Recent Theories of Rights: Rawls & Nozick. Natural Law Theory: Natural Law theory in ethics is not to be confused with the laws of nature as put forward by physicists or other natural scientists, but they are related and do overlap. In moral domains, we are not concerned to give a mathematical, experimentally based theory of ethics or justice, but we are concerned with the general order of nature and how human life is nestled in and depends on that order. For example, life (& its preservation) depends on observing the necessities and limitations of nature, how we are dependent on food, shelter, parents and a community and the satisfying of other natural needs for life to exist, continue and prosper. The most prominent philosophers & political thinkers in this line of thought include the following: ancient - Plato, Aristotle, & later Cicero & other Roman statesmen; medieval - St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas & other thinkers in the Judeo-Christian tradition; modern - John Locke, & of course Thomas Jefferson & the “founding fathers” of the American republic. According to almost all of these authors, the natural order ultimately depends upon a first ordering principle that established the relation between man and nature. That first principle is commonly referred to as God or Creator, as indicated, for example, in the opening of Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. One line of reasoning introduced by Plato is based on the law of the Division...
Words: 3180 - Pages: 13
...Michael Walker Park University Abstract The criminal justice system is greatly shaped by the civil rights safeguarded under the Bill of Rights. The court jurisprudence with regard to national security and civil liberties largely revolves around the provisions of the Bill of Rights (Baker, 2003). This paper discusses Chief Justices Earl Warren and William Rehnquist’s significant decisions and the effects they had on the balance between social order maintenance and individual liberties. Warren versus Rehnquist Courts Earl Warren held the position of Chief Justice between 1953 and 1969. He led a liberal majority, who utilized the judicial authority to consternate their conservative opponents. The Warren Court promoted the federal power, judicial power, civil liberties, and civil rights in a dramatic fashion. The Rehnquist Court, on the other hand, took a conservative approach in criminal justice (Pollak, 1979). The most significant case that the Warren Court decided with regard to civil liberties was Brown v Board of Education of Copeka, Kansas (1954). The court unanimously ruled that there is no place for the doctrine of separate but equal doctrine in the sphere of public education. The Warren Court demonstrated its value for liberalism and activism. The view of the Warren Court was that states are a hindrance in the enhancement of a just nation. In the sphere of criminal procedure and law enforcement, Chief Justice Earl Warren’s Court was associated with four chief cases:...
Words: 2153 - Pages: 9
...Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror U.S. Presidents have been known to assert their presidential prerogative in times of crisis. Their decisions, sometimes haste and irrational, were rarely challenged by the Supreme Court because of extenuating circumstances. Over the years, our nation’s leaders made the tough decisions that raised eyebrows in the Supreme Court and caused confusion among the American public. The latest battle that has our nation in an uproar is terrorism. Since the attack on September 11, 2001, the American government has exercised its powers to detain suspected terrorist or illegal combatants for the sake of national security. Such actions violate the right of habeas corpus which grants detainees due process in court. Is it a question of what is right according to the executive powers of war or the right of habeas corpus? The need to explore the right of habeas corpus is an understatement; during the war on terror, it was simply an afterthought. Habeas Corpus has evolved over the course of history but still holds the same core principles. Unlike the evolution of man, habeas corpus has been subjective to interpretation and uncertainty of its true meaning. The Habeas Corpus Act 1679 was passed during the reign of King Charles II by what became known as the Habeas Corpus Parliament to define and strengthen the ancient prerogative writ of habeas corpus, a procedural device to force the courts to examine the lawfulness of a prisoner's detention...
Words: 1392 - Pages: 6
...government ran systems exist of social support. Such systems are Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. These systems seem to be widely accepted in other countries than in America. Individualism and justice has been included in the United States foundation of welfare. Citizens feel a level of appropriateness allowing the government to spend tax monies to help an unfortunate person who has exhausted all of his or her energy, strength, and abilities to help himself. Americans further feel the efforts to help are satisfactory if an unreasonable amount of money is not used. Bioethics is a prevelent and sensitive topic of debate in health care. A single mother with children who is particially dependent upon welfare takes it upon herself to pay privately for a single treatment of Invitro Fertilization (IVF). This mother is implanted with several embryos and chooses not to reduce the number of fetuses and successfully delivers multiple premature babies. We must take into account the cost of delivery, care in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), and future cost to the Welfare system for all of this mother’s children. Reviewing this issue from a health care professional’s point of view, the four basic principles of ethics, beneficence, autonomy, nonmaleficence, and social justice, are part of this issue. The Four Basic Principals Autonomy Medicine Net (2011), defines autonomy as the right of a patient to make decisions about the care received without influence from a...
Words: 1181 - Pages: 5
...When Kramnick is speaking about Liberalism, he speaks much about Locke’s Libertarianism. Meaning they believed in everyone having equal rights without jeopardizing liberties. Kramnick states that there was a divide amongst the colony. As stated in the Federalist number 10, land was as the center of this divide; it broke people up into creditor and debtors. The Federalist also states manufacturing and money interests played a role in this divide (Kramnick 6). Locke was against this divide, he quotes “justice gives every Man a Title to the product of his honest Industry” (Kramnick 6). Locke Madison and the Federalist believed in a liberal society where everyone should be treated fairly, and be respective of their “private rights” and “property rights” (Kramnick 6). Kramnick refers to CIvic humanism as the government should provide a place for this equality. The government should represent equal rights. As Hamilton states, “The idea of an actual...
Words: 1114 - Pages: 5
