American Government 13- 16

Front 1

Equal Protection Clause

Back 1

The constitutional restriction against state laws that discriminate, as stated in the 14th amendment

Front 2

Civil Rights Act of 1964

Back 2

Landmark legislation arising from the civil rights movement that made racial movement that made racial discrimination a federal crime in the workplace and in public accommodations, while giving the federal government greater power to strengthen voting rights and desegregate public schools.

Front 3

Voting rights act of 1965

Back 3

Landmark legislation arising from the civil rights movement that gave federal officials the power to oversee election practices in southern states where Jim Crow Laws disenfranchised African American voters

Front 4

Affirmative Action

Back 4

Federal policies requiring employers to address inequities in hiring and advancement if they appear to unfairly treated disadvantaged groups on the basis of race, religion. gender, national origin, sexual preference, physical disabilities, or Vietnam veteran status.

Front 5

comparable worth

Back 5

a manner of determination pay equity by equalizing pay between jobs held mostly by woman that demand comparable training and labor to jobs held mostly be men

Front 6

due process

Back 6

the protection of individual liberty from the arbitrary or capricious actions of government through a defined set of legal procedures designed to protect the rights of the accused

Front 7

right to privacy

Back 7

the protection against government interference in private matters, which is not specifically guaranteed by the Constitution but which has been established by the Court and used to legalize contraception and abortion

Front 8

Flag Burning

Back 8

Flag Protection Act of 1989
$2000 dollar fine and 1 yr of prison

Front 9

Reynold vs United States

Back 9

A case about the idea of polygamy or plural marriages that was practiced in Utah. Brought to the Supreme Court in 1878

Front 10

regulatory policies

Back 10

domestic policies designed to protect the public from harmful conditions that could result from unrestrained free- market competition or to ensure the benefits of a level playing filed for private competition

Front 11

distributive policies

Back 11

domestic policies primarily aimed at directing tax money to a range of public work items
-tend not to be controversial because benefits are widely shared

Front 12

redistributive policies

Back 12

domestic policies, like those promoting social welfare, that take resources from one group in the form of taxes and provide goods or services for another group, typically those in need.

Front 13

Comparable Worth (Arguments in Support)

Back 13

1.Its important, gender discrimination is illegal but it persist in pay differential
2. Market is not a solution. The alternative to pay equity laws is to permit the free market to establish wages, but the market fails woman, as evidence by wage inequities between men and woman and "glass ceiling" barriers to workplace enhancement.
3. It benefits women. No one questions that if gender pay disparities exist in the workforce and can be identified, pay equity laws would eliminate them
4. Its fair. Gender should not be a criterion determining what someone earns

Front 14

Comparable Worth (Arguments Against)

Back 14

1. It's not an issue. Proponents of pay equity use incorrect, inappropriate, or misleading statistics to argue that there's a large gender pay gap when in fact inequities between women and men are small
3. It hurts women. Mandating pay increases for women will simply make employers less likely hire women
4. Its arbitrary. Tyring to classify a multitude of different jobs in order to create comparability standards produces inexact and therefore unfair results.

Front 15

Capital Punishment (Arguments in Support)

Back 15

1. It deters crime. If people know they face execution, they are less likely to engange in violence.
2. It's justice. The death penalty is a punishment of last resort and used only in casese where the most horrendous crimes have been committed in these cases its is appropriate for guilty parties to pay with their lives
3. It's equitable. Any past inequities in the implementation of the death penalty have been sorted out, according to the Supreme Court in Gregg v. Georgia
4. Victims have rights. People on death row have committed the most gruesome crimes imaginable. The death penalty permits closure for the victims they left behind

Front 16

Capital Punishment (Arguments Against)

Back 16

1. It's not a deterrent to violent crime. There is no clear- cut evidence to demonstrate that people will think about the repercussions of committing a capital offense.
2. It's vengeance. Murdering someone who has committed even the most horrendous crime does not bring the victim back to life or set right the wrong that has been committed
3. It's equitable. There is far greater likelihood of being put to death if you're poor, nonwhite, or live in Texas.
4. Everyone has rights. The beauty of the American System of justice is that is protects the rights of people who have done unjustifiable things. For the state to put someone to death, regardless of the circumstances is the ultimate denial of individual rights.

Front 17

Capital Punishment facts

Back 17

Jan 2003 Illinois Governor Ryan kills of 167 inmates.
1972 Furman v Georgia= All existing death penalty laws are unconstitutional
1976 Gregg v Georgia= capital punishment does not violate 8th ammendment

Front 18

School Prayer (Arguments in Support)

Back 18

1. Stop in Religious Tyranny. Without the liberty to wroship in schools we do not have true religious freedom in America.
2. Its what the Constitution intended. Having the right to pray in public schools. Different from state sanctioned religion which is what the 1st ammendments prevents
3. Its pro- family . Prayer wil reinforce traditional valsue and the lessons that so many parents try to teach at home, including tolerance for those who desire an outlet for religious expression at school by those who would otherwise stop them.
4. it's necessary to install values. Students learn values at school and the religious and spiritual values expressed by prayer are among the most important for individual society to uphold
5. Its voluntary
6. It's harmless. Permitting praying in school is entirely different from permitting government to decide what individuals can and cannot believe on how they should worship

Front 19

School Prayer (Argument Against)

Back 19

1. It's tyrannical. Sanctioned, organized prayer is a threat to the liberty of nonbelievers and those who believe differently than the majority.
2. It violates the intent of the constitution. The Court has repeatedly affirmed that having religious freedom protects us from prayer in public school.
3. It's intolerant. Those who wish to pray in school should do so without subjecting atheists, nonbelievers, and those of minority faiths to a profoundly disturbing experience.
4. It's coercive. Dissenters will ahve no protection from something they do not believe in.
5. It's dangerous. Any step that undermines the separation of church and state is a step in the direction of giving the government the power to sanction religion.

Front 20

Flag Burning ( Arguments in support)

Back 20

1. Nothing could be more American. The flag is a singular icon for America and is entitled to be accorded special protection as a revered symbol of our democracy.
2. It's honorable. People die for the American flag and what is represents.
3. It's popular. The will of the people is to protect the flag from destruction.
4. It won't violate the 1st amendment. Flag burning is an action not a form of speech.
5. Flag deserves special status. Deserves special protection because of its iconic value and deep attachment have toward it.

Front 21

Flag Burning (Arguments Against)

Back 21

1. Nothing could be more un-American. Imprisoning people for expressing political opposition is something we'd expect in the former Soviet Union, not here.
2. It's intolerant. If we are to be faithful to our core values, we cannot restrict flag burning, no matter how much we may dislike it
3. Democracy is not a popularity contest. The fact that most Americans find flag burning noxious and want to prohibit it is a strong reason for protecting it because having individual liberty means having the ability to express unpopular sentiments
4. It violates the 1st Amendment. The Court has consistently upheld political protest as a form of protected expression.
5. The 1st Amendment deserves special status. We dishonor the flag and all it stands for by unraveling the constitution.

Front 22

Obscenity on the internet (Arguments in support)

Back 22

1. The internet is not an invasive medium. To find something you might consider offensive, you have to look for it.
2. The minority should not censor the majority. A parochial interpretation of community standards creates a lowest common denominator yardstick for what others can say or post
3. Society must encourage artistic expression. Sometimes art is designed to offend, and the right to do so must be protected.
4. There is no constitutional morality protection. The 1st Ammendment does not permit one group to impose its ideas about morality on any other group or on the entire nation.

Front 23

Obscenity on the internet (Arguments Against)

Back 23

1. The internet makes everything available. You can stumble across offensive material by accident or through unclear or deceptive links.
2. It's not censorship. Not every place is as permissive as New York City. Individuals should have the right to be protected from material that would be considered offensive in their immediate community.
3. It's not art. It's filth. And it shouldn't be online where anyone can come across it.
4. There is legislative protection against distributing obscene materials. Even though the law does not prohibit Congress from restricting the interstate transmission of items it deems obscene or offensive.

Front 24

Physician- Assisted Suicide (Arguments in Support)

Back 24

1. It's compassionate. When suffering is unbearable, hte kind and moral thing to do is to give individuals with no hope for survival the opportunity to end their lives.
2. It's medically ethical. Doctors have an obligation to do everything to keep patients from suffering.
3. It's just. When treatment options have been exhausted and simply refusing care means a slow and painful death, it is right for patients to be able to choose suicide as their only viable option
4. It's personal matter. The timing and circumstances surrounding one's death should be a matter of private choice, not public policy.

Front 25

Physician- Assisted Suicide (Arguments Against)

Back 25

1. It's immoral. The sanctity of life is absolute, even when someone is in great pain.
2. It violates medical ethics. A doctor's foremost obligation is to save lives.
3. It's unjust. There is no way to guarantee that only patients in great pain will take advantage of assisted suicide, and it would be unjust if individuals who lack good medical care or who are a financial burden on their families were pushed toward suicided as a convenient option.

Front 26

establishment clause

Back 26

the language in the first amendment that serves as the basis for the constitutional separation of church and state

Front 27

free exercise clause

Back 27

the language in the 1st amendment that limits government interference private religious beliefs and practices.

Front 28

prior restraint

Back 28

censorship of the news by government officials before it is published or broadcast

Front 29

exclusionary rule

Back 29

to protect against unreasonable searches or seizures, the Supreme Court has established that evidence obtained illegally is not admissible in court