First amendment rights continue to be taken away, as shown in a recent article. The U.S. Forest Service recently came up with the idea that anyone who takes a picture in America's national parks must pay a fine of $1,500. This is just absurd because professional photographers already have thousands of dollars worth of equipment, it would apply to camera crews for the news, and even people that can take pictures with their cell phones. Needless to say, the people did not react well to this, and the USFS continues to try to adjust their policy to make it possible. This goes against the first amendment because being able to photograph the natural things in the country should be freedom of expression, and putting a fine on that is just not right. Read more about it at This Link.

There was a debate today discussing the court case of State v. Mann, where a white man rented a slave and shot her. He was taken to court because the slave was someone else's property. This case was basically between two groups, one for and one against slavery. Both sides made good points discussing religious and economic factors. 

The side that was against slavery said how many slaves were shipped over from Africa unwillingly and how we are involved in race-based slavery, both of which are condemned by God. They also said that the slave was someone else's property, so he had no right to shoot her because he would bring her back to her owner not able to work as well. The most interesting argument was that because of the Three Fifths Compromise, a slave is three fifths of a person, and therefore has more rights than an animal. There are several laws against cruelty to animals, so therefore, there should be at least equal laws for slaves.

The side that was for slavery said that slaves are not full people and do not deserve the same rights, and that the Three Fifths Compromise was made for political reasons, not to state what rights a slave may have. They also stated that the Bible directly condones slavery, and it fulfills bible’s definition of the slave because they get housing, food, and friendship. The group also stated that slavery is necessary for economic success in the south. In respect to the case of State v. Mann, when Mann was given the slave, all rights involving the slave were transferred to him, so he had the right to shoot her because she was his property at the time. Another point that was made is that if a slave owner damages a slave, the harm is to the owner for not having someone to work, so there is no need for more punishment.

The side that was pro slavery seemed to have a better argument because they had more economic arguments and they were ready for the arguments the other group made and had counter-statements. The debate was very close, but the pro slavery group ended up winning for these reasons.

A recent article in the Wake Forest newspaper talked about an interesting way for the school to get rid of bias in the school. As stated in the article, Campus Reacts to Bias Report System, they are implementing an online system to report acts of bias anonymously in the school system. This is a way to make sure student's first amendment rights are not infringed upon. A student could say what happened and the school would take measures to fix the problem and make sure nothing like that never happens again. People are worried that students wouldn't take it seriously, but if they can start utilizing this system it would be a great way to stop discrimination and protect people's first amendment rights. More places should try to implement this system because it is a great way to get people to start thinking about their rights and how they can protect themselves and others. With this system everyone can get their thoughts out there without feeling like they can get in trouble, the only problem that could arise is if nothing was done about the biases that are being posted. However, if the system is used the way it is supposed to, it will be the next step to us getting rid of unfair biases that cause problems constantly in our society.

A Senate candidate in New York has begun to praise anti-gay laws in Uganda. As shown in this article, the candidate believes that gay marriage should not be accepted, and people should comply with the laws of Christianity as Uganda has.

This is an example of the countless number of times people's rights are taken away because they are a little different. This man believes our country should be like Uganda and do everything based on what Christianity believes in, but isn't that the exact opposite of the ideas our country was founded on? The United States may be a primarily Christian country, but it was founded on the idea that everyone has certain rights and we have laws in place that should protect people from being treated differently for looking or acting different from the norm. With his idea people are not free to do what they want, and gays would not be able to get married. The people of this country should be progressing to an area where people accept each other and do not discriminate based on what people look or act like. This is an example that there is still work to be done if we want to be the free country we say we are.