Burlington High School
Burlington, Kansas
Teacher: Devra Parker
Looking Past the Hatred of America
Lyndsay Ryan
12th Grade
It is in every society, that one must adorn the true attributes in which we live by. From the moment the Framers set forth such a productive Constitution, America was truly born, and off of that, the good and bad liberties were shaken out of their bottle. Today, we wonder how our country operates with crooks and obscene happenings. Although, to me, I find that we look right through the vast opportunities that America allows us to have. Each and every person in this population of states should look towards the Statue of Liberty and see our role in balancing our individual liberties to the best of out nation’s good because, with the figure of liberty, we may have a visual to keep us going strong.
Day to day our nation’s people wake up and get prepared to go to their all American job. At the daily jobs they undergo, it seems only to be a figurative world of complaining and arguing. This, though, I cannot understand to the best of my ability. If one person or many persons have such devious thoughts towards our government, in which they believe is corrupt, then why can they not get up and take responsibility? Sitting back and watching a group of people shape this nation does not work out. It takes many hands; in fact, it should take help from each person in this country.
Furthermore, a common complaint from the more or less conservative side would be that the government helps far too much. An example is welfare and other supportive methods of payment. At the same time, they are complaining that the government isn’t giving enough money to make our gas prices go down. With this, it shows proof that liberty isn’t what our nation cares most about. It is, in fact, that the mass majority of people are selfish because they were taught that throughout the generations. It is your own individual responsibility to look past the downfalls of America and help make it an even better place. It should be apparent to everyone that in order to better some large body of people, one needs to give a little back to his/her community.
Going in depth on the ways to take responsibility, there is an outsized amount of opportunities each person has to better the United States as a whole. If there are worries about [our] country’s money situation, which is completely understandable, why not do some volunteering. It is in belief that giving time to a community not only [contribute to the] common good but also balances the acts of giving. Isn’t that what our beloved Founding Fathers wanted--a place of freedom and undoubtedly kindness? Perhaps…volunteering…will pass on from one American to the next.
Moving along, I believe that each person should not only help to make our world better but also feel the liberty. We are extremely lucky to experience liberty as a whole. It is such a blessing that we do not live in a third world country where from day to day we fear for our lives. It seems to me that people in those situations have better skills at presenting their responsibilities. Perhaps it is apparent that they show liberty because they have to protect themselves. Persons in this country should take time to realize the advantages that we have as United States citizens.…
I can think of a few typical examples of ways to have liberty in general. Natural disasters or terrorist acts are the most unfortunate ways to take a step up. Each year it seems that our country faces these heartbreaking…tragedies. September 11 and Hurricane Katrina are horrifying examples. There is no better time to [come] together than in times like these, even if it means not helping the actual site at all but emotionally supporting someone involved. I believe that the Founding Fathers would want this for our country.
More along the lines of disasters, our creators of this country probably felt that America should be the land free of disaster. America’s first people living in democracy came from England. Their homeland was a land of inequality and governmental disruption. We as people need to carry out the original peoples’ dream for our land.
Thus, our personal role in society for balancing liberty and the common good should actually be quite simple. If each person took the time to actually sit back and enjoy the surroundings, we wouldn’t feel such distress for America. It is time to come together and look past the downfalls of our government and the people involved in shaping our country. We are all one of a great nation and, with a little thought; we could show the liberty to be even better.
Answers to Questions Regarding the Required Reading
Q1-What do you think Justin Reiter meant by including the following in his essay?
“…if the people are not accustomed to the freedom they will be angered by the inequality.” Were you angered by some of the things Justin said in his essay? Did you agree or disagree?
A1-I believe that in depth, he meant that people are so used to the freedoms that we give them, that they are focusing on the unfairness of the government. My feelings toward this essay were neutral, and nothing angered me or pleased me to an extent. I feel that this young man had very good ideas, but came across to be very blunt.
Q2- Explain: “He felt that the common good could be served by each individual pursuing self-interest.” To whom did Chris Carney attribute these feelings?
A2-He was pointing this out to the audience as readers, but overall I think he was attributing the feelings towards angry Americans. He uses an example of his parents allowing him to stay out and trusting him. He uses a sarcastic attitude, in order to prove his point.
Q3- In the next to the last paragraph in her essay, Faith Doyle discuses Emperor Diocletian and his Edict of 301. Relate that to the essay topic.
A3-This is related to the topic because it deals straightforward with money. Money briefly rolls over into income in this essay. She talks about this Emperor to signify that money has been causing issues clear back when Rome was getting its start.
Q4- Kelly Lanier says in her essay: “Even though everyone is born with the same rights here in America; sometimes a person can step on or take away the rights of another person.” Relate the example she gives and give us another one of your own.
A4-Lanier makes complete sense with her reasoning. She uses the example of Americans having the right to bear arms, which inalienably gives people the right to take away ones own life or someone else’s own life. My example of this would be illegal drugs. We have the right to buy all of the simple house products and chemicals used for making dangerous drugs. Eventually they are used in someone’s garage, making a very harsh setting for any one or more persons.
Q5- Explain what Joshua Spencer means when he says that “individual liberty is a fragile, yet powerful, asset.” How does he relate individual liberty to dictators? Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not? Be specific.
A5-I believe, personally, that Joshua Spencer is simply saying that freedom in America is something amazing, but when used wrong can be very dangerous. This relates to liberty to dictators in many ways. For example, he writes that with liberty through dictators, the masses are a threat. I do actually agree with him. His paper makes sense; since he can clearly write out the process of a dictatorship. I also very strongly agree with him saying how people should stop being so dependent upon each other.
Q6-Luck Hall asked “Will we maintain our freedom or destroy it to be safe?” How would you answer that question?
A6-In this day and age I would unfortunately say that we will destroy our freedom to be safe. With congress on such strict reforms, the agony of guidelines is bound to come into place. Although freedom being taken away will be misfortunate in some ways, it is clear that Americans would like the best protection available.
Q7- Some people, according to which student essayist in 1999, suggested that “the Constitution's framers might have 'put greater emphasis on the protection of the community over individual liberty', had they seen the world today.”? She doesn’t agree. Do You?
A7-Molly McClone, and yes I do agree with her statement. I do not know how you couldn’t agree with this, it was their main goal in life to establish justice, and insure domestic tranquility. It would be preposterous to think that the framers wouldn’t want every bit of protection possible for each and everyone of us.
Q8- “Just because a law may achieve desirable results, it should not take precedence over the Constitution.” Do you agree or disagree? Aaron Traffas, discusses the Ban on Smoking in Public Places and the Gun Free School Zones Act. How do you personally feel about these two issues?
A8-I do not agree
with this statement at all. When the Constitution was put in place, there
was not everything available, as there is today. For instance: technology,
which is mindedly an implied power. Today there has to be implied powers,
which go along with the constitution. People are not trying to overwrite
what the Framers set up for us. Congress is merely trying to protect us from
what could technically be a threat. I believe in both of these very much so.
There is no need to spread second hand smoke to everyday people. Also,
school should absolutely be gun free.
Q9- Annie St. Romain referred to a book in her essay where “the government regulated every possible aspect of human life from profession to family to emotions.” What was the name of that book? Have you read it?
A9-The Giver: a truly amazing book is the title of who she is referring to. I read the book in eighth grade and it was great at making me understand a completely different world.
Q10- “As nations grow in size and social complexity, governments claim greater powers to restrain individuals and groups. Those who criticize this development believe that it has gone so far as to threaten the existence of individual liberty. Others believe that only if government is granted such powers, can complex problems be solved.” This quote can be found in Jessie Veit’s essay. Which side of the issue do you support and why?
A10-My views are very neutral in this case, because it is very clear that each side has very great points. I can see that government needs to be strong, in order to control the out of hand characters of this nation. Also, I do not think it would be fair to make our government so strong, that every one who behaves properly has to be punished as well.
Q11- Give three examples where personal responsibility would replace the need for laws. Do not duplicate those found in Patrick Karcher’s essay.
A11-This question can be very drawn out. Of course if everyone in this society had a little bit of person responsibility and person respect, this world wouldn’t be so corrupt. If people had the common sense to use their weapons the proper way, then it is clear we would be away from school shootings. Next, there could be someone with a mental disability. If they were still capable of having a mental capacity, and they stopped taking medication, it would be there own fault for the danger they are causing for themselves and their surroundings. Also, if people could handle their money responsibly, then maybe we wouldn’t have to have so many laws on money.
Q12- It is obvious that Benji Lehman is idealistic. In his essay he claims when the founding fathers “wrote the constitution they put a great emphasis on each person having personal rights as well as individual liberties. The true strength of each and every community falls on the individual. Believing each man, woman, and child will, and can recognize the importance of good responsibility.… These were laws that gave each and everyone of us the opportunity and self-respect to do the right thing.” Benji believed that people would make choices that would serve and benefit their communities. Do you believe that? Please explain.
A12-This is only true to a certain extent. Not everyone is capable of making good decisions all of the time. Laws have never stopped everyone in the past from being bad, so why would certain laws make people do well? It seems like a preposterous idea to me.