This project examines how Georgia draws the line between religious freedom and child abuse. In Georgia, certain religious parents are granted spiritual exemptions for conduct that would otherwise be prohibited due to its potential harm to children, while other parents must alter their religious practices to conform to the law. An examination of Georgia law governing conduct that is both religiously-motivated and poses a risk of physical harm to children illustrates that Georgia’s spiritual exemptions have contributed to producing legally-defined religious orthodoxy, inconsistent regulation of religious conduct, and less stringent state protection from harm for the children of some religious parents.

This study deals with the Supreme Court decision in the case of Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). The study analyzes the arguments presented in the decision by both the majority and the dissenting justices according to the Toulmin model. This study begins with a review of viewpoints on the First Amendment, and how they will be applied to the question addressed in the thesis. The history of the obscenity controversy is detailed to explain the viewpoints that the Supreme Court has taken dealing with this problem. This study concluded that the arguments presented by the majority were not supported by ample evidence. The arguments presented by Justice Douglas in the dissent were more justified. This study concludes that more study needs to be conducted in the area of obscenity; and that the material should not be suppressed.

No description available.

No description available.

Freedom and safety are two ideals that American citizens value greatly; however, the balance between privacy and security determines whether or not both can be achieved in a reasonable manner. Security and privacy are not mutually exclusive; however, they tend to exhibit an inverse correlation with regards to maintaining individual liberties. Security and privacy are highly beneficial, but when one is given too much weight, the other most often suffers. When the United States citizens are given too much privacy through regulations, the citizens risk their well-being by not allowing the government the ability to prevent dangerous activities being done by criminals. Citizens are unable to defend themselves against foreign and domestic threats of terrorism that affect large amounts of people such as bombings in public settings; however, the federal government can help to prevent such attacks in public settings through surveillance of public areas and monitoring of internet and intracellular communications. When the United States federal government is given too much discretion in security powers through legislation, citizens are at risk of losing their civil rights granted in the Bill of Rights and in Supreme Court cases. The United States of America has had a dangerous imbalance of power in favor of national security since the adoption of the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, and the imbalance has continued to the present even after the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act in 2015. This thesis will be a comparative analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 to the USA FREEDOM Act of 2015. This thesis will show what specific powers are granted through provisions of the acts, whether or not the provisions are unconstitutional, how the privacy and security of American citizens will change due to the provisions in the USA FREEDOM Act, and suggestions for how the United States federal government can continue to tilt the balance between security and liberty to ensure more protection for civil liberties and a decrease in national security powers. The suggestions will include three options for gaining the protection of civil liberties and the elimination of certain national security powers and the options are through Supreme Court cases on national security laws pertaining to individual cases or states, Congress passing concurring minor bills with the proposed plan to fully repeal granted national security powers without disturbing congressional alliances on other measures, and Congress passing a single act called the State Surveillance Repeal Act in order to fully repeal the USA PATRIOT Act provisions that would still be in effect after the passage of the USA FREEDOM Act.

No description available.

This study investigated the presence and content of school policies used by Virginia school divisions to address issues arising from educators' use of social media. The study also explored Virginia school divisions' policy implementation practices and resolutions for educators' social media use issues. Survey response analysis and policy review are combined to define: 1) Virginia school divisions' experiences with educators' inappropriate use of social media, 2) how Virginia school divisions are addressing educators' social media dilemmas and 3) the characteristics of school policies used to address social media issues in Virginia. The findings indicate that while 90% of respondents are concerned about the dilemmas created by educator social media use, 89% report having effective policies in place to address these issues. Responding Virginia school divisions are using Acceptable Use Policies (98%), Code of Conduct policies (54%) and Social Media policies (32%) to address educators' social media issues. The most common reported infractions are unprofessional comments. Most teachers sanctioned for online conduct are disciplined through reprimand (written and verbal) by school system administrators. / EDD / Social media has become a part of daily life for many people. People communicate about life events, daily happenings, and personal thoughts through various forms of social media (Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter). When educators share personal or work related news through social media there can be professional consequences. When social media sharing gains negative public attention school divisions act to protect the school community. This study surveyed all school division superintendents in the Commonwealth of Virginia to find the types of social media issues that have occurred with educators and how such matters are handled. Survey responses were received from every region in the Commonwealth. Nearly every responding division had experienced issues with teacher use of social media. Most social media incidents creating issues occurred when teachers made comments on social media that the school divisions found inappropriate or unprofessional. School divisions generally reacted to social media issues through written or verbal reprimands to educators. A large majority of divisions relied on Acceptable Computer Use Agreements between the school system and educators to regulate and manage issues that occurred. Most school divisions reported that their school policies (including Acceptable Computer Use Agreements) were effective in handling educator social media issues.

Through historical and content analyses of war coverage, this study qualitatively addresses emotional quality, use of sources, and implied use of technology to better understand the tension between Vietnam and Afghanistan war correspondents and their military counterparts. Early American democracy aspired to give total freedom to its people. But the American military, in its quest to uphold the ideas of democracy, has often challenged the freedom of press clause set forth by the United States Constitution. Since the Vietnam era, the relationship between the military and the media has been plagued by questions of censorship, assertions of falsehood, and threats to national security. But it is the technological advancements in both reporting and combat techniques that have caused a disappearance of the nostalgic war coverage that American correspondents once prospered from. The possibility of returning to journalists' vision of unrestricted press access is all but lost due to such advancements.

This thesis provides a comprehensive history of Supreme Court Free Exercise Clause jurisprudence from 1879 until the present day. It describes how a jurisdictional approach to free exercise dominated the Court’s rulings from its first Free Exercise Clause case in 1879 until Sherbert v. Verner in 1963, and how Sherbert introduced an accommodationist precedent which was ineffectively, incompletely, and inconsistently defined by the Court. This thesis shows how proponents of accommodationism furthered a false narrative overstating the scope and consistency of Sherbert’s precedent following the Court’s repudiation of accommodationism and return to full jurisdictionalism with Employment Division v. Smith (1990). It then shows how this narrative inspired a massive bipartisan coalition in favor of codifying accommodationism, and how this coalition succeeded in passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) in 1993. The RFRA coalition eventually fractured, as RFRA’s implications began to conflict with principles and objectives of liberal interest groups and the Democratic Party. This thesis posits that the fracture of the RFRA coalition can be traced back directly to confusions over Sherbert’s precedent.

The relationship between the state and religious communities in the USA Abstract The purpose of this thesis is to introduce the relevant aspects of the relationship between the state and religious communities in the United States of America. The focus of the thesis lies in the introduction of the development of interpretation of both religious clauses of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by the Supreme Court, especially in the 20th century. This thesis aims to show, how both religious clauses, even though they were created to serve the same purpose, are in some cases interpreted in a contradicting way. The thesis also elaborates on religious freedom in the sensitive environment of armed forces, as the soldiers depend totally on services provided to them by the government. In the final part, the thesis introduces certain exceptions from the generally applicable legal provisions for the churches and religious legal entities, as well as recent development from the perspective of admitting religious freedom to business corporations. Keywords: freedom of religion, Constitution of the United States, First Amendment, churches, Supreme Court, USA