Declaration of Independence:
1. After reading the Declaration of Independence, imagine one of the alleged abuses by King George as if it is happening today OR identify an actual or hypothetical violation of your natural rights. You should draw upon the text and lecture explanations of natural rights. You can approach this by using a hypothetical example and/or you can use creative license with current or historical policies (e.g., the Patriot Act’s wiretaps threaten citizens’ liberties by curbing their freedom of speech.). Your individual reflection should be approximately 100 words (6-10 sentences, in total).
First, from a current perspective, describe a policy (hypothetical or real) that violates natural rights.
Second, specify which natural right(s) is(are) violated, and how?
2. After reading John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty” excerpt, answer the following prompts with 1-3 sentences for each:
· Identify an idea, hobby, group, music, or artwork that might be shunned by today’s majority or perceived majority. Shunning includes a real or perceived social prohibition on mentioning the idea, hobby, and so on.
· Why is it shunned?
· How is it shunned?
· What does society lose by shunning it? Consider Mill’s arguments against shunning minority opinions.
In this assignment, please descrcibe and assess a current political argument in two paragraphs (8-12 sentences in total). Describe a political argument, the person making it, and cite the source. Specifically,
1. In the first paragraph, describe the argument in your own words, and then cite the source . Informal citation format is fine–just provide enough info to find the argument/discussion (e.g., these citations just illustrate the necessary citation info; you can find your own political arguments to analyze: [Ingraham Angle., “Mainstream media ignoring violence across America?” 8/27/20] or [“Democrats must battel social media disinformation attack with facts” by Steve Israel, The Hill, 8/26/20]) 2. In the 2nd paragraph, explain why you think the argument is strong or weak. Consider the author’s approach, language, authority, and/or intentions.