Group items tagged

An explanation of what freedom of religion means. It also provides some history about religion.

Alatavista (Original) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, defines freedom of religion and belief as follows: Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes the freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance. (Article 18) (Paraphrased) In 1948 the United Nations General Assembly clearly stated in Article 108 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: that every person has the right to their freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This extends to a community as well as the individual and encompasses practice, teaching, worship, and observance.

This article goes into detail about Human Rights across the world and other nations struggles. This is a great website if anyone is doing a personal freedom issue that hits on a global scale. 

This article goes into detail about Human Rights across the world and other nations struggles. This is a great website if anyone is doing a personal freedom issue that hits on a global scale. 

no decision have been made however the Navajo Nation is considering to recognize same sex marriage.

This study details the Medically Assisted Procreation regulations in thirty-five nation-states, and explores the influence of national identity, social cultural and demographic differences on these regulations. Detailed data were gathered from ministries of health, offices of prime ministers, embassy staff, and others on regulations for each nation.

The parity of the state and federal law.

When it comes to any kind of insurances it looks like a shady business, that is more like a mobster playground then anything.

The revelations that Obama administration secretly collected phone records and accessed the internet activity of millions of Americans have raised new questions about the public's willingness to sacrifice civil liberties in the interests of national security. Since 9/11, Americans generally have valued protection from terrorism over civil liberties, yet they also have expressed concerns over government overreach and intrusions on their personal privacy.

This guy came up with four ways to end the Illegal immigration crisis. He suggests we build a wall, call out the national guard, deport those who cross the border illegally, and fight the welfare state.

This guy came up with four ways to end the Illegal immigration crisis. He suggests we build a wall, call out the national guard, deport those who cross the border illegally, and fight the welfare state.

There have been pushes to ban encrypted services online in order to try and prevent terrorists from secretly using such services to communicate. This article discusses three major points that we need to consider when discussing this issue; terrorists aren't using things like PS4's to communicate, despite what the rumors claim. When we apply back-doors to our encrypted services, we weaken them to attack. We need to think about this as Privacy vs security, not security vs security.

Earlier this year, Edward J. Snowden, a government contractor, leaked classified documents to the news media that revealed the existence of top-secret government surveillance programs. We now know that the National Security Agency gathers phone logs and Internet data from millions of Americans as part of its mission to keep the United States safe.

The Edward Snowden leak case, which exposed some of the practical elements of NSA surveillance operations unknown to many Americans, has also revealed just how divided the nation remains over whether the government should be permitted to intrude on privacy to safeguard national security.

The author believes we really don't gain from surveillance on a national level. But it does pay to keep an eye on those out of country.

This article outlines Freedom or Religion or Belief as established by the United Nations and its members. Discussed is the process and the outcomes of those discussion as well as the enforceability of the agreed upon principles.

The events in our society have led to more security to protect us. However, in the midst of protecting us, we have lost our rights and freedoms. Has the government gone too far?

This article talks about how police in Sacramento let minors consent to DNA testing without their parents permission. It also veers into NDAA briefly which is why I chose it.

This article is based off of another article published in USA Today that called NDAA and it's indefinite detention provision un-American. It comments on how this article is unconstitutional, but our country's leaders don't really care.

In this article, the author feel our constitutional rights are at risk with the new National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) passed by President Obama. She goes on to explain that the new act will let the government detain anyone who may be affiliated with terrorists, or the sources of terrorists without a trial, which is our Sixth Amendment.

An article, written by a woman who grew up in the 1950's, who is commenting on a "recent" survey reference values and morals. At the time, 74% of all Americans believed that nation was in moral decline and 64% felt media was to blame.

Congress just spends money like it's going out of style. When the goverment spends more money that it brings in, you know we have a problem. Then we start to play the blame game, republicans blame the democrats, and the democrats blame the republicans. Haven't we learned that blaming each other never solves anything? They need to take responsibility and budget better...pff. Or just raise all of our taxes to try to make up for it...now that doesn't seem fair for us hard working citizens, I don't think we recieved any of that spending money. Lets just fix the problem before our economic well-being is dug into a hole so deep we can't pull ourselves out.

How the European Union (EU) decides to move forward with their online privacy laws in regard to personal information, will greatly impact how the U.S. proceeds with theirs. The "economic partnership" between the two nations are so heavily intertwined, that legislations across seas will impact U.S. companies. The EU has implemented legislations protecting the rights of online customers. Meanwhile, in the U.S., companies have been reluctant to work with the government in providing U.S. online customers the same protection, because the majority of their profits stem from online advertising. These advertisements work so well because companies have been able to track consumer activities and in turn cater to them according to their habits. Implement government regulations that prevent big companies from doing that and their profits will plummet.