The Federal Government’s Role in the United States

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Definition
How Different Groups of People Define Freedom for Themselves
What Happens When People’s Definitions of Freedom Clash
Protection of Freedoms in America
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Democracy demands that individuals and states respect each other to ensure there is peaceful coexistence between them. America is considered to be the most democratic country in the world because of the smooth leadership transitions. Political campaigns in this country are characterized by mature debates based on issues that affect the lives of Americans. The election of Barrack Obama as the 44^th president of the United States of America symbolized a break away from racism and highlighted the need to offer individuals equal opportunities to develop America. The federal government has various responsibilities that ensure the lives of Americans are protected and their living standards improved. This paper examines the roles of the federal government in protecting Americans’ freedoms.

Definition

A federal government is a body in a state that has laws that govern the conduct of leaders, citizens, institutions and foreigners living in a country. America is a sovereign state and thus it has a federal government that ensures the rights and freedoms of Americans are protected against abuse from leaders, institutions, foreigners and citizens (Gruenewald 2011). This government has strong central powers that control the freedoms and rights of every person within its national boundaries.

Freedoms are the powers given to people by their states or natural provisions that enable them to act, speak or think the way they want without being restricted by others or institutions. The federal government of the United States must ensure all rights of its citizens are protected from abuse at all costs through the following ways.

How Different Groups of People Define Freedom for Themselves

People have different definitions depending on how they think about themselves. First, human right activities believe that freedom is an individual’s ability to express his or her opinion so that the person can live a comfortable life. For instance, people should be allowed to demonstrate and express their dissatisfaction in the way public affairs are managed. This group of people believes that workers have the right to demonstrate to demand better salaries and good working conditions.

The second group of people believes that freedom is the ability to be allowed to do what one wants without restrictions (Jacobs 2011). Youths believe that their parents should give them freedom to choose their careers, friends and leisure activities. They think that their rights are usually violated when parents demand that they must do what they are told and not what they think is right. For example, some youths believe that they should watch television or movies in the evenings because they have had a busy day. However, their parents think that this is not good because children are supposed to do their homework and assist in domestic chores.

Therefore, youths think that their freedoms are curtailed when they are not allowed to do what they want. The third group of people thinks that freedom is the ability to move away from oppressive social, cultural and political systems.

For instance, women believe that affirmative action will free them from male dominance in the society. They think that traditions and stereotypes have classified them as weak, incompetent and ignorant. Therefore, they are unable to serve in major positions in the society and thus their involvement in social, political and economic activities is minimized (Jacobs 2011). In addition, gays believe that they are supposed to be left to choose their friends and marriage partners; however, traditions and religious beliefs bar them from establishing same sex relationships.

What Happens When People’s Definitions of Freedom Clash

The differences shown in the definitions of freedom by different groups of people shows that human beings have various needs and they work hard to satisfy them to ensure they live comfortable lives. However, when the definitions of freedom clash some people will violate the rights of others. For instance, the workers’ revolutions witnessed in the 18^th century in America portrayed the conflict of interest between employees and employers. The absence of a vibrant judicial system to interpret the American constitution made most employers to win court cases against their workers during these strikes.

In addition, the clash in the definitions of these terms diverts the attention of people from fighting for their freedoms to competing to express their opinions. The weaker group or that with few members is usually disadvantaged. In addition, the popularity of members of these groups becomes a major factor in determining the urgency of their pleas (Gruenewald 2011). On the other hand, this clash is also important in ensuring that people come together and work as a team to fight for their rights. This makes their pleas to be matters of public interests and draws attention of their leaders and other important stakeholders.

Protection of Freedoms in America

First, America respects, loves and takes care of its citizens, according to its abilities and this means that it has a right to protect them regardless of where they are. This government believes that it has the best laws and measures to punish its citizens and that is why it is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court. America cannot allow its citizens to be tried in international or courts located in other countries.

This means that Americans enjoy the freedom of not being prosecuted while they are in other countries. They must be extradited to America to be prosecuted from there. This is an important aspect of protecting the freedoms of Americans and ensures that they have a right to do what they want when they are in any location in the world provided they do not break their laws. Therefore, their freedom of movement and expression are more than those of people from other countries.

This government opposes the adoption of ratifications of international treaties that are perceived to weaken on infringe on the freedoms and sovereignty of this country. This means that if an American is accused of committing an act that is criminal in another country, but not criminalized in America the individual will not be prosecuted because there will be no legal basis to do so.

The Declaration of Independence protects the freedom to live and asserts that even unborn children have a right to life and this cannot be infringed by their parents or the state (Ayers 1992). The Fourteenth Amendment of the American constitution highlights the need to protect the life of all individuals, including unborn children and sanctifies their lives. The federal government ensures it does not support, sponsor or approve projects that will promote abortion because this will infringe on the rights of unborn children and make their parents or state to have control over their lives. In addition, this state does not subsidize health care programs that cover abortion and euthanasia (Garcia 2014).

The state believes that people have inalienable rights to life and thus nobody should dictate when they should be killed. The fundamental principles that respect life explain that every person has a right to life, regardless of their physical or mental disabilities, diseases or economic status. Therefore, people should die natural deaths and no medical or other interventions should be used to shorten the lives of Americans (Jacobs 2011). The Born Alive Infant Protection Act should be strengthened to ensure the freedom of people to life is respected. This will reduce cases of criminal abortion and ensure innocent infants are not killed.

Thirdly, individual property rights and freedoms to own property are protected by the Fifth Amendment: Protecting Private Property that explains that individual’s property cannot be taken for public use. This means that private property belongs to individuals and thus they have the power to decide whether to offer it for public use or not. The regulation stipulates that the state must compensate private property owners if their assets are taken for public use (Jacobs 2011).

Environmental and other regulations are not supposed to take private property, even if they have compelling public interest and use. The federal state should strengthen the existing private property ownership regulations to ensure people differentiate between public, community and private land and other natural resources like forests and water bodies.

The right to privacy gives Americans the freedom to enjoy their free time and get together with their family members. In addition, it protects their homes, businesses and farms from unauthorized entry. People are supposed to be secure in their houses and feel comfortable so that they can enjoy being Americans (Ayers 1992). This provision means that unreasonable searches and seizures are prohibited.

In addition, there is the need to make amendments to this section to ensure there is no unnecessary aerial surveillance on people’s homes because this violates their rights to privacy. It makes them uncomfortable and affects their concentration on what they are doing when there are endless planes flying over their homes in the name of surveillance. There is the need for this country to focus on ensuring that an individual’s freedom and national security are not traded for each other because none will be achieved. Therefore, there is the need for the federal government to ensure there is a clear boundary between individuals’ freedoms and measures to provide reasonable security to Americans.

Moreover, individuals have the right to move to any place they want provided they do not intrude into private property. However, the need to have self defense mechanisms compels people to carry small arms. This assures them that their security is guaranteed and nobody can hinder them from doing what they want. The Second Amendment gives people the right to carry small arms for self defense when they are attacked (Garcia 2014). However, there is a serious challenge associated with this freedom and this can be linked to recent cases of shootings that saw several people killed and others seriously injured in different incidences.

Conclusion

The freedoms of individuals must be protected by the federal government through its institutions. However, individuals have a significant control over what their government should do to ensure their rights and freedoms are respected. People have a responsibility of ensuring they promote respect for their freedoms and rights by respecting those of others. Some clauses and acts that do not promote respect for human freedom and rights should be amended or deleted so that Americans can enjoy their lives.

References

Ayers, E. (1992). The Promise of the New South: Life after Reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gruenewald, M. M. (2011). Looking Like the Enemy. Troutdale: Newsage Press.

Garcia, M. T. (2014). The Chicano Movement: Perspectives from the Twenty-First Century (New Directions in American History). London: Rutledge.

Jacobs, H. (2011). Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl (Essays). London: JPM Ediciones.

Click Here To Order Now!