Sample Essay on Counselor Education - Tips for Writing a Good Sample Essay

Sample Essay on Counselor Education - Tips for Writing a Good Sample EssayIf you have just decided to take up a degree in counseling, then the only thing you need to know about writing a sample essay on counselor education is that you have to get the best possible essay on counselor education. So, here are some helpful tips.Firstly, it is important that you choose a topic and an essay. You can do this by looking at your own interests and learning them. If you have an interest in health, then you should write about counseling courses in that subject. You may also want to include topics that can benefit you with your future job prospects. That way, you can maximize your essays.Next, you have to decide on the theme that you would like to cover in your essay. Remember that you have to keep your essay interesting enough to draw out any response from the reader. This can be done by providing contrasting views and arguments, while mentioning important points as well. So, this means that you should include information about both sides of a given issue.The next thing that you need to consider is the kind of writing style that you want to use in your sample essay. There are different ways of writing the essay. The most popular one is through the use of bulleted lists. If you want to use this option, you have to ensure that the list provides all the information needed to the reader. So, you have to ensure that the list includes everything that is required for the reader to understand the entire essay.In order to maximize the use of your samples, you have to make sure that they are organized properly so that you can use them as many times as you want in the entire course. You should use the samples for brainstorming sessions and also for problem solving so that you will have the basic idea on how to organize your essay. The last thing that you need to remember is to ensure that you practice writing sample essays. You can do this through reading and reviewing the sample ess ays that you have already written. By doing this, you will be able to become familiar with the format and look of the sample essays so that you can easily use them in your essays. Also, you will be able to get a feel on what format will work best for you.So, if you have not started yet, you need to get started now. Just make sure that you have selected the best possible sample essay for counselor education.

The Andromeda Strain Essay Research Paper Jason free essay sample

The Andromeda Strain Essay, Research Paper Jason Garoutte May 2, 1996 English # 8211 ; Bensel The Andromeda Strain The Andromeda Strain by Michael Crichton is a scientific discipline fiction book about the fictional # 8216 ; first crisis # 8217 ; in the biological field. The book starts out by indicating out that engineering is turning so quickly, there is bound to be crises, like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, and how the biological field of scientific discipline has neer had a major crisis. He besides points out that biological science is the youngest of all the Fieldss, and a crisis has been long delinquent. It begins with what is known as Project Scoop, a scientific mission to happen life in the utmost outer bounds of the ambiance. Many orbiters are put into orbit, and most are lost or come back with nil. Then, with the 7th orbiter, the get something. There is merely one job. The satellite lands in a really little town in nor-east Arizona called Piedmont. We will write a custom essay sample on The Andromeda Strain Essay Research Paper Jason or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Tracking crews are sent out to happen the orbiter and happen it, and caput into the town, but they find most of the dwellers of Piedmont lying dead, seizing their thorax, in the center of the chief street. When the get out of the vehicle to look into, they die excessively, while being monitored by wireless. The individual in charge is back at base, listening to them. When, after the two find all the dead organic structures in the town, everything goes soundless, he knows something has gone really incorrect, and calls in the job. The systems that have been set up to take over in the event that something that like this happened start to take over, and certain people are contacted. Old ages before, a group of life scientists proposed to the President that, in instance of a unknown biological agent acquiring out into the state, an belowground secret base should be set up to analyze the being, and perchance seek to happen a remedy. It would be five degrees, each consecutive degree more unfertile than the other, from degree 1 being non-sterile, to level 5 being every bit sterile as possible. The base besides would hold an automatic atomic device placed at the underside of it to prevent the spread of the being if it were to interrupt the seals of any of the degrees, and several Stationss to abort the explosion if it was non necessary. Now, the caput of this group of life scientists and the squad of physicians and other life scientists are called into action to turn this base into a disease control centre. After the squad has been assembled, two of the members are inserted into the town to happen the orbiter and any info on the manner this cryptic disease is killing people. They go through the town, observing that the blood had clotted solid in the arterias and venas of the victims, that decease is largely instantaneous, and that some victims live long plenty to kill themselves in eccentric ways. A kid is found with his oral cavity full of patterning gum, while an older adult male is found in full conflict frock with a gaping, bloodless hole through his caput. They find the orbiter in the town physicians office, with a brace of plyerss and a screwdriver that were used to open it. Then, an old adult male and a yearling are found that are still really much alive. They are put in the waiting chopper and leave straight for the base, and the town is set up for a thermonuclear explosion. In the base, they submit the orbiter T o many trials, seeking to happen any hints of what might be the perpetrator. When they find it, they see that its like nil they # 8217 ; ve of all time seen before. It was a crystal like construction, that used no proteins or aminic acids, merely truly basic elements: H, O, and N. It seemed to straight change over energy to affair, and was hurt by C dioxide. It killed by assailing the walls of little capillaries, which caused the widespread curdling. Most capillaries are found in the encephalon, so people that weren # 8217 ; t affected every bit fast as the others went insane because of the blood pooling in their caput. Meanwhile, the president had decided non to bomb the country of the first contact, Piedmont, because of reverberations it would hold with the pacts and such that were signed against atomic proving. This was a good thing, because the new life signifiers thrived on energy, and the two million degree blast of a H bomb would be the perfect environment for the animals. It was about this clip when the life signifiers mutated. Before, in a developing accident, a jet pilot flew over the restricted country of Piedmont. He and his plane crashed in the desert, and were taken to the base besides, for the pilot had reported really unusual things before he went down. He said that the gum elastic hosiery and other things had merely disintegrated before his eyes. The scientists in the base dismissed this as the insanity that affected some victims of the disease, but the being had really eaten the gum elastic. This led to another job. The seals in the base were made out of the same high tech polymer, and every bit shortly as the being reached the seals in one compartment, they ripped through the bottom degree of the base, prosecuting the self-destruct mechanism in the base. When the squad was foremost selected, the scientists wanted control of the atomic device. This was neer done, seting atomic arms in control of civilians. When the squad presented a survey done by a university, one on concluding capablenesss, the President agreed. The survey showed that, when faced with life and decease picks, scientific work forces made the best picks. Of that, individual work forces made the best picks. So the sawbones of the squad was chosen to be the # 8216 ; Odd Man # 8217 ; , the adult male with the key to close down the self-destruct sequence. Since the scientists knew that the disease was about instantaneous, and that cipher was deceasing, they had to close down the atomic bomb. Unfortunately, Dr. Hall, the sawbones, was trapped in a sealed off room where a shut down station for his key had non been installed, in a major design defect. It was decided that the cardinal nucleus, a cylinder with all the wires, plumbing, lifts, and pipes needed, was the lone manner out. Fortunately, the being by now had turned all seals in the base to a mud-like crust, so acquiring to the cardinal nucleus was easy. The thing was, though, that the nucleus was abounding with tranquillizer darts. It would take three good placed shootings to convey a adult male like Dr. Hall down. So he went, and as he was mounting, he got his three, and so some. Adequate to where he had to drag himself 50 pess to the nearest station and close it down. The being, now inert, drifted West, over Los Angeles. It was traveling toward more direct energy supplies, off from the C dioxide rich lower ambiance.

buy custom Captivating Nursing Essay Examples on Patient Care Delivery

buy custom Captivating Nursing Essay Examples on Patient Care Delivery Nursing Essay Example on Patient Care Delivery Models Introduction In the recent past, the United States of America has been focusing on the health care delivery system restructuring in order to facilitate the provision of high-quality and affordable health care services to people. The continued restructuring of the health care delivery system has led to the creation of new jobs for nurses, and more nursing jobs are expected to be created in the future. According to Sullivan-Marx (2010), most of these nursing jobs are expected to be available in the community. On the other hand, nursing jobs in acute care hospitals are likely to decline considerably. In my view, the continued restructuring of the U.S. health care delivery system is likely to impact significantly the practice of nursing. The practice of nursing is likely to shift its focus from acute care hospitals to community-based health organizations. The reason for this is the development and implementation of new health care delivery models such as the continuum of care, Accountable Care Organi zations (ACOs), medical homes and nurse-managed health clinics.

The Advantage of Pragmatism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

The Advantage of Pragmatism - Essay Example Thanks this paper   we shall see the theories’ relevancy on Centrica’s progress and how creative thinking in adapting new set of ideas as well as proper utilization of resources and advance technology can greatly contribute to progress. One kind of resource that will be emphasized would be Human resources and that how could this be an asset or a hindrance, on the other side, to company’s goals. We shall be dealing on factors like stress control, support and performance as a key of business improvement and success. Human resource is one of the most essential element of a business or company in the long run including today, whilst the expansion and enhancement of technology. This could be hardly eradicated in business, although they are already experiencing recession, still a company needs a human workforce for it to work (regardless of its size). One main reason for this is because human have the capability to think unlike of machines. We have interesting mental capabilities that only us could analyze and implement solutions and answer to predicaments and that machineries are just by-product of our creative thinking being a secondary source of our solution.

Compare between two companies Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Compare between two companies - Essay Example This is also evident in HRM where the two words are mostly used in the same context. However, the two words have different precisions in that training stands as both a segment of as well as a pre-condition for training. Training entails the changing of behaviors of non-managers and this may be through such efforts as vocational education among others (Noe, 2002). Conversely, development would be involves building managers whether individually or as a group for future needs. Development does not focus upon immediate needs but rather future demands. Building employees at an individual level entails such actions as mentoring them as well as conducting a self-analysis of each employee personally. Contrary, developing workers as groups would includes letting them engage in outdoor trainings meant to increase their competence. Therefore, whereas training focuses on imparting employees with skills to tackle their current tasks, development focuses upon future engagements. Training arises ou t of various needs that a company may point out. For example, training may be to ascertain that employees match with the procedures stipulated for the said company, or it may for aligning the employees with the ethics of a particular company (Pride et al, 2010). Training process includes such measures as identifying organizations as well as the HRM’s strategies to make sure that the two do not conflict. The other step includes identifying the need or areas that call for training. What follows is the training and an evaluation to check the efficiency of the process. Various methods may be suited for either training or development. For example On –the-job-, this happens when an inexperienced person learns under the supervision of a worker already acquainted with skills. Classroom – whereby, trainees get into classroom situations to learn skills. Role-playing- This happens when a trainee works in another person’s job or placement to understand it best (Pride et al, 2010). Simulations- This occurs when employees have to take training away from their job areas to get away from the baffles associated with work and engage seriously in training. Training entails various accrued benefits and one of them would be ensuring that employees match with the organization’s goals. It also brings about improved skills to enable people tackle their jobs effectively and there is lowered labor turn over (Aguinis & Kraiger 2009). In addition, trained employees display heightened morale while going about their jobs. Disadvantages associated with training include the fact that it may render a financial burden upon an organization in that it at times calls for lots of capital. Background of the two companies Coca cola Coca Cola Company traces its roots in 1886 at the heart of USA. The company stands in recent times as a leading manufacturer in soft drinks globally. It also boasts of being the biggest distributor and spearheads marketing of soft drinks as well. It sells an estimated 6,000,000 drinks a day. The company serves over 200 states globally and has a vision of making the best profits and creating the best job platform, where employees derive motivation from what they do (Cola, C. 2011). The company’s mission is that it aspires to refresh the globe with their wide range of drinks as well as make a difference in their manufacture and supply of

The United States Constitution Essay Example for Free

The United States Constitution Essay Introduction The Revolutionary War had come to a satisfactory conclusion, and no particular cause of urgency gripped the delegates to the Constitutional Convention, as they gathered in Philadelphia in the spring of 1787. The Continental Congress conducted all functions of the central government since the commencement of its first session in September of 1774, on the heals of the Boston Port Act. News of this latest move of the British Parliament, which ordered the closing of Bostons harbor pending the repatriation of losses suffered by the East India Company on account of Bostons infamous tea party, reached American shores in May of that year (Rakove 21). The rallying cry during the American Revolution was for American sovereignty to establish independence from Britain, while the major issues that motivated that cry centered on the protection of colonial property from the long arm of the British Parliament. Acts of Parliament in the 1760s and 1770s, such as the disturbingly invasive Stamp Act of 1765, struck many colonists as overly demanding, and intolerable violations of local control (Keane 89). While the Stamp Act was particularly inflammatory, Parliament passed numerous acts during this period, including the Sugar Act of 1764, the Declaratory Act and Townshend Acts from 1767 to 1769, and the Boston Port act of 1774 (Rakove 22). The predominant substance of these acts was taxation; the mother country felt such taxes should be expected from the colonists to assure they contributed their share toward supporting the empire and preserving the benefits all English citizens enjoyed from this empire. The safeguarding of global trade provided a prominent example; it augmented the wealth of the empire and her mercantile class. Parliament regulated this trade, and protected its continuation by the provision of war ships. But the extractions of wealth Britain demanded from her American colonists to support the empire were not seen as justified by many in America. Britain was embroiled in a long-standing war against France. The colonists believed they were being taxed excessively to support this war effort. Many colonists felt they paid their dues to the empire by suffering direct exposure to the French and Indians during recent conflicts, and resented the additional imposition of greater taxation (Keane 88). They demanded greater local control over the levels of revenue to be submitted to Britain, and an exclusive right to determine the means of collecting that revenue. Many patriots, such as Samuel Adams, worked for years to pull together a more unified American resistance to British claims. On the heals of the Boston Port Act, Adams noted that American response to it suddenly wrought a Union of the Colonies which could not be brought about by the Industry of years in reasoning on the necessity of it for the Common Safety (Rakove 40). Urgency beset the delegates as they gathered to coordinate a response to recent onerous Parliamentary measures, and government under the First Continental Congress got underway. Within a year they shifted from evaluating diplomatic responses to coordinating the American military preparedness for war against British troops. By the summer of 1776, they issued the Declaration of Independence, declaring for King and country that reform, compromise, and reconciliation no longer sufficed. Events now necessitated a clean break with the mother country. The Continental Congress, operating under the framework established by the Articles of Confederation, fulfilled American requirements for centralized government through the successful completion of the Revolutionary War in 1783, and until the fateful spring of 1787 (Bowen). What conditions caused the delegates gathered for the convention in Philadelphia in 1787 to propose a radically different government? What motivated them to propose the dissolution of the Continental Congress, and suggest that the sovereignty of their respective states be usurped by a newly formulated national government? How did issues of control over property enter into this dynamic? This paper examines and gives answers to these questions. Conditions Leading Up to the Constitution Radical in nature and revolutionary in result, the proposal formulated by the Convention of 1787 far exceeded the evolutionary goals set forth in the guidance given to delegates prior to their arrival. The state legislatures, firmly sovereign under the Articles, did not send delegates in the expectation that the result would be a Federal government subjecting the states to the will of a national sovereign. The Continental Congress sanctioned the Philadelphia convention for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation (Bowen 4). Instead of revising the Articles, the proposal emanating from the Convention turned the Articles into a dead letter, upon its adoption by state ratification conventions. Moreover, the delegates formulated a government so radically different in nature that its breadth and scope was not even contemplated as a realistic possibility by the population at large in the Spring of 1787 (Larson). Defects of the existing system, more than the pleasure of free intellectual discourse, provided the principle motivation for the delegates to generate the solutions contained in the new Constitution.  Ã‚   Two prominent problem areas compelled them to formulate this radical proposal for change. First, vices of the state governments, which could not be adequately restrained under the existing system, resulted in numerous problems motivating reform (Madison 4). The second set of forces at work for change was the insurmountable limitation besetting the Continental Congress in its effort to carry out its assigned functions. These forces formed pincers of change operating on the delegates. Property rights played an important role in both arms of these pincers. Many delegates at the Convention believed that the state governments often abused their authority by unjustly impacting private property rights; they looked for opportunities to curb these abuses through a newly formulated national power (Nedelsky 22-23).   Additionally, the Continental Congress lack of authority over property contributed substantially to its ineffectiveness. Restrictive trade measures pursued by both Britain and France within a year of the Treaty of Paris proved to be more detrimental to American interests than the British retention of forts on the new countrys frontier.   Britain discriminated against American commerce in numerous ways, including the closure of its own ports and those of the West Indies to ships from her lost colony. Such provocations should have been met with retaliatory commercial measures. Unfortunately, the Continental Congress lacked the authority to coordinate such measures, and since the impacts of various options fell with different force upon each state, no particular option would be readily agreed to or complied with by the various legislatures. While the British parliament coordinated trade policy to punish American commercial interests, the Americans could not coordinate a retaliatory policy to force the British to reverse their practices (Mee 30). Secure access to the Mississippi River was pivotal to the issue of commerce for all inhabitants of the Western frontier, and proved to be another source of consternation for those counting on the Continental Congress for solutions.  Ã‚   The movement of products to ports from interior lands relied on shipping them down the Mississippi, through the Gulf of Mexico, to ports on the Atlantic Ocean. Relying on over-land routes to ports on the Atlantic was unpractically expensive, in 1784, Spain declared that the Mississippi closed to American navigation (Keane 94-5). In addition to grappling with Mississippi navigational rights, Congress was also attempting to guide the development and settlement of Western lands. Setting up the framework of the nations expansion to the West, and the admission into the Confederacy of future states resulting from this settlement, was another key challenge facing Congress. As settlers streamed to the West, they required protection from the native populations, who were typically displaced without fair compensation, and who often heckled and attacked settlements in response (Mee 207-208).   Protection for such settlers could not be provided in earnest, due to the ever-present incapacity of Congress to find funds to appropriate to the cause, as well as substantial disagreement about the details of how Western settlement should proceed. During American history around the time of the crafting of the Constitution, poverty very likely did mean sloth and idleness (Bowen 70). At that time, land was an abundant resource and three-quarters of Americans earned their living in agricultural pursuits. Labor was relatively scarce; no large pool of unemployed people existed to keep downward pressure on wages. Eligibility to vote during this period typically required that one own enough property to qualify as a freeholder. Most citizens possessed property exceeding these prescribed thresholds. Robert Morris, one of the nations leading financiers, and a delegate to the Convention, estimated that ninety percent of those otherwise eligible to vote in America met the requirements to be considered freeholders (Nedelsky 77). To qualify as a freeholder in Virginia for the first elections held under the new Constitution, a white male over twenty-one years of age needed to own either fifty acres of property, or twenty-five acres with a house (Labunski 152). Even poor immigrants could normally find work that paid well enough to allow them to accumulate adequate savings to purchase land. Americans of the revolutionary era were particularly susceptible to political arguments stressing property rights. Easy availability of land had long characterized colonial society, and by the time of the revolutionary crisis the ownership of land was widespread. Indeed, this broad distribution of property was one of the most distinctive features of colonial life, in marked contrast with the situation in England. Even landless persons could reasonably hope to become owners eventually (Labunski 160-3). Achieving any reform through amending the Articles of Confederation required the agreement of all thirteen states. All prior attempts at amendments failed to achieve such a consensus. Rhode Island did not send delegates to the Convention, and for years openly admitted that the state had no interest in allowing modifications to the Articles. While the delegates ostensible purpose was to propose an evolution to government under the Articles, such a path already had a track record of failure. The performance of the state governments caused much concern. The Continental Congress lacked the authority to check the transgressions of the states or carry out essential national functions on their own accord (Bowen 235). These conditions convinced the gathering delegates that action was required. Many of their most significant concerns with governmental operations at the state level and national level were connected to the issue of property rights. The Founding Fathers gathered in Philadelphia with a desire to retain a government founded on the republican principle of majority rule, while also formulating new safeguards for the protection of property beyond those present under state governments. Previous attempts at evolution proving fruitless, the delegates turned to revolutionary proposals in pursuit of these aims. Constitutional Convention As Madison entered the Pennsylvania State House to attend the Constitutional Convention, in May of 1787, he struggled to resolve the tension between formulating a republican government based on the will of the majority, and preserving justice for the minority in matters of personal liberties, such as the protection of property. Establishing a strong enough tether to protect the minority from such measures while still preserving republican principles would not be easy. What steps did the framers take in establishing a republic to protect property rights from being plundered by the majority? They successfully pursued both explicit language to protect property, and a structural design that implicitly lead to the protection of property. The resulting construction left many particular questions about property unanswered, but bestowed to future generations a government framework that rested on republican principles while also assuring a relatively high level of protection for the rights of the propertied minority.  Ã‚   The success of Madison and his compatriots at this endeavor, in the form of our Constitution, placed American government on a strong foundation from which to proceed (Labunski 189-94). The Constitution contains explicit language establishing authorities related to property rights and safeguards for the protection of private property. Before addressing the way the new governments structural design implicitly protects the rights of those holding property, these explicit provisions will be reviewed. They are predominantly located in Article I of the Constitution, which outlines the legislative framework of the new government. The framers aimed to place significant new limits on the ability of states to enact legislation assaulting property rights or redistributing property, such as the troublesome wave of debtor relief laws states subjected creditors to in the years following the Revolutionary War. Language in Article I, Section 10, established specific restrictions on the power of states.   Included therein was a prohibition on forcing creditors to accept payment tendered in anything other than gold or silver coin, also known as specie (Larson 198). Section 8 of Article I, which delineated the powers given to the new national Congress, granted that body the power to coin money and regulate its value, while Section 10 prohibited the states from doing so.   This language took aim at the notorious practice of printing money, which often turned out to be valueless, and forcing creditors to accept it as payment for debt. The framers also attempted to protect the property of creditors from plunder by reinforcing contractual obligations binding debtors and creditors (Ely 45). In a move destined to have far-reaching implications relative to the sanctity of contract law, and its importance in protecting propertied interests under all contractual arrangements, Section 10 prohibited states from enacting any law impairing the obligation of contracts (Larson 207). These provisions, along with the assurance provided under Article VI that all debts valid under the Confederation remained enforceable under the Constitution, were all efforts to protect the property of creditors. They shielded the minority creditor class from the political muscle the debtor class brandished so successfully under the Articles of Confederation. The regulation of commerce impacts private property, by influencing its value in numerous ways and providing a venue for its fair trade. As with the production of coins, the framers both explicitly granted Congress the power to regulate commerce, and prohibited states from interfering with such regulations. The previous section explored many of the areas in which the limited authority the Continental Congress exercised over commerce between states and with foreign powers caused difficulties.   The gathering of the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 followed a Convention held in Annapolis, Maryland in 1786, which gathered primarily for the propose of proposing amendments to the Articles of Confederation that would allow for the national regulation of commerce (Larson 207). Delegates from only five states arrived at the Annapolis Convention; such meager participation made it clear that any substantive measures emanating from the gathering would be stillborn. But, instead of dispersing with no action at all, Madison and others present called on the states to send delegates to Philadelphia nine months later to devise such further provisions as shall appear to them necessary to render the constitution of the federal government adequate to the exigencies of the Union (Rakove 374). The weak Continental Congress could not prevent such measures, and commercial regulations between the various states and between states and foreign powers often despoiled the value of property by establishing regulations to assist some groups with little regard for the interests of others. The explicit limits in Section 10 on state powers included language clarifying that states could not lay any imposts on imports or exports or enter into any compacts with other states without the consent of Congress. Particularly important to delegates from the land-rich southern states, Section 9, which spelled out specific limits on the power of the national Congress, provided protection for the propertied agrarian interests by banning any tax on exports (Ely 43-4). The state governments demonstrated their lack of resolve to provide adequate protections to property rights under the Articles of Confederation. In all the areas discussed above, delegates attempted to remedy this within the republic being constructed by explicitly placing matters in the hands of the national government and limiting the power of state legislatures. Madison feared this would not be enough, and worked hard to achieve another safeguard from the destructive power of the states. While constructing a government based on the principle of majority rule inherently resulted in some threat to the personal liberties of the minority, Madison believed the new national government afforded better protection for such liberties than the state governments. He therefore fought to provide the national government with the power to veto any measures passed by the state legislatures, as a means of holding the untrustworthy state governments in check (Labunski 247). On the issue of taxation, those desiring more power be shifted to the central government won a major victory at the Philadelphia Convention. Experience under the Articles of Confederation demonstrated that for the national government to be effective, it must not be left to rely on the willingness of the states to provide revenue. Unlike the issues above, no language would prevent states from taking action in the area of taxes; this would be an area of mutual responsibility. The list of powers explicitly granted to Congress in Article I, Section 8, begins with the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises (Larson 205). Under the Articles of Confederation, the central government lacked the means of carrying out most measures, because the states often refused to provide funds when requisitioned to do so. Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist Paper #15, claimed that this inability to raise revenue by acting directly on citizens was the great and radical vice in the construction of the existing confederation (108). The delegates agreed with Hamilton and others that this limitation must be remedied to allow any central government to operate effectively. Many believed the best solution would leave the power of direct taxation only in the hands of the state government, and grant a coercive power to the national government, by which it might force the states to comply with requisitions. However, the Federalists believed this position to fanciful, pointing out that coercing states resulted inevitably in coercing actual citizens. In mustering military force against a state that did not fulfill a requisition, it would inevitably be the citizens of that state receiving the blows, for example. The state, an ephemeral geo-political entity, can not itself be coerced (Doughtery 171). Worse yet, any measures meant to induce obedience would inevitably punish indiscriminately. It would not be only those unwilling to pay their share of a requisition in a state that would suffer from such measures. Applying coercive measures could not be a surgical exercise of carving out only the malignant specimen. It would instead be like a knight charging toward a phalanx landing his blow upon any member of the line present at the end of his lance. All citizens of a state would be subject to the suffering resulting from any coercive measures. Ratification of The Constitution Vesting the central government with the ability to raise taxes and thereby redistribute property directly, without working through the states, required achieving a proper balance between providing the central government with inadequate power and excessive power.  Ã‚   The resulting compromise required that any direct taxation by the national government would be apportioned according to population, which shielded those with land wealth from shouldering exorbitant shares of federal expenditures (Ely 43-4). Despite the efforts of those at the Convention, the issue of taxation proved to be one of the most contentious issues during the Constitution ratification debates held in each state. In the debate leading up to the slim margin of victory for the Federalists supporting the Constitutions ratification, the Anti-Federalists kept bringing this issue to the surface as a prominent example of the new governments excessive power. After this vote, the Virginians turned to developing Constitutional amendments to forward to the new government for consideration and adoption. The vote to forward an amendment limiting the central governments ability to directly tax passed by a wider margin than the vote on the ratification of the Constitution itself, indicating that even some of its supporters harbored concerns about giving the new government such power (Labunski 115). Though the word slave does not appear in the Constitution, three specific provisions strengthening the hands of slave-owners in the protection of their property interests were granted, in an effort to attain Southern support for the resulting document. First, it was agreed in Article I, Section 9, that importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit could not be regulated by Congress prior to 1808 (Larson 206). Second, language in Article IV established that fugitive slaves must be returned to their owners, even in the event they cross state lines. While these two provisions treated slaves as property, the third provision dealt with determining the strength of each states representation in the House of Representatives. Southern delegates wanted them counted as people in formulating the distribution of representatives in Congress, to assure the adequate protection of their interests at the national level. On this last point, the delegates reached a compromise of counting three-fifths of the slave population for the purposes of Congressional apportionment (Larson 208). These provisions all strengthened the position of slave owners, and substantiate the claim that slavery was more clearly and explicitly established under the Constitution than it had been under the Articles (Ely 46).   However, it would be a mistake to accuse the delegates to the Convention of being oblivious to the moral implications of slavery. Indeed, the ability to hold other humans as slaves under established property law placed vexing restraints on the delegates ability to claim that property rights flow out of natural law. No one in 1787 defended the ownership of slaves as included among the natural rights of property. And yet most of the framers believed that since slavery existed as a matter of positive law, slave owners could claim the right to have their property secure. This painful reminder that not all positive rights of property were natural rights, or perhaps even consistent with natural rights, meant that the arguments for the security of property could not simply rely on claims of natural right (Nedelsky 153). It would be more accurate to conclude that slavery protections were an inevitable extension of the general importance the delegates placed on property rights, than to reach the conclusion that slavery itself was hotly contested, and that property protections grew out of any overarching debate on the topic of slavery. Many present at the Convention despised the peculiar institution, and most were morally uncomfortable with it, but accepted its existence as an extant political reality. Its management was incidental to the larger issue of protecting property rights in general, and its existence limited the ability of the delegates to claim that those protections flowed inextricably from mans natural rights (Larson). The framers achieved a desirable balance on the issue of property rights in the development of the Constitution. They enhanced the autonomy of individuals living under the resulting government by their efforts to balance governments power over property against the rights of individuals over property.   They substantially enhanced the power of the central government over property compared to government under the Articles of Confederation, while curbing the ability of state governments to impact property. They retained republican principles such as the rule of the majority. Thereby, no individual possessed absolute control over property. Nobody could think of themselves as a king with rights to property granted by God, and count on complete immunity from governmental impacts on property or redistribution of property (Ely). On the other side of the balance, explicit language and implicit structural safeguards were established to protect property rights and other essential liberties for everyone, even those in the minority. No large republics existed when the framers did this work, so they could not simply draw on the experience of others. They were familiar with a long history of monarchs and nobility holding onto power and wielding it to protect their property rights. They were also familiar with government under the Confederation, which brought the benefits of republican government to the citizens of America, but did not adequately safeguard property from the political agenda of a majority looking to improve their position at the expense of property owners. In the Constitution, the founders achieved a desirable balance, and succeeded in constructing a government that preserved republican virtues while also protecting minority liberties, such as the protection of property rights. Conclusion The framers of the Constitution placed a high priority on protecting the rights of individuals to acquire, accumulate, and appropriate property. Balancing the protection of property rights with the establishment of a national government founded on the republican principle of upholding the interests of the majority provided a key challenge for the members of the Constitutional Convention. The Articles of Confederation left sovereign power in the hands of each of the confederated states. The state constitutions, while far from uniform, all provided republican forms of government. As such, state legislative bodies responded readily to the outcries of their constituents. The majority wielded substantial power to achieve their aims, regardless of the justice of their cause. This often resulted in a lack of protection for the property of the more affluent minority, as they struggled against the will of the majority to redistribute property. The Founding Fathers judged many state legislative actions, pursued by the will of the majority, to be an unscrupulous taking of property from one group to benefit another. In particular, debtor relief acts, passed in the wake of the Revolutionary War, often heavily favored the debtor class over the propertied financiers of the war effort. The delegates that gathered at the Philadelphia Convention in May 1787, felt compelled to formulate a government providing greater protection for individual property rights. At the same time, they remained committed to retaining a system predicated on republican principles. No legitimate republican government could simply disregard the will of the majority by placing a cabal of the propertied few perpetually in power. The structure and operation of the government that grew out of the Constitution they created came about in no small measure due to efforts to balance tension between protecting the rights of individuals to safeguard property, and the rights of a republican government to exercise control over property for the benefit of the majority of the public. Viewed within the context of their place in history, the compromises they established in response to this tension were appropriately crafted to enhance the autonomy of those citizens living under the resulting government. Bibliography Bowen, Catherine Drinker. Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention May to September 1787. Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brown and Company, 1986. Ely, James. The Guardian of Every Other Right: A Constitutional History of Property Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Keane, John. Tom Paine, A Political Life. Boston, Massachusetts: Little, Brown and Company, 1995. Labunski, Richard. James Madison and the Struggle for the Bill of Rights. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Larson, Edward F. and Michael P. Winship, Eds. The Constitutional Convention: A Narrative from the Notes of James Madison. New York: The Modern Library, 2005. Madison, James. Vices of the Political System of the United States, 1787, Teaching American History, 2007 http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=802 Mee, Charles L. The Genius of the People. New York: Harper Row, 1987. Nedelsky, Jennifer. Private Property and the Limits of American Constitutionalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990. Rakove, Jack N. The Beginnings of National Politics. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1979.

Crusades :: essays research papers

Crusades   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Crusades began in 1088 when Urban II preached the First Crusade at the Council of Clermont. The reason for such a mass following of people to leave their homes and travel to the Holy Land to fight is unknown. There are numerous plausible causes, which will be discussed in this paper.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The reason the Pope preached the Crusades originally was the supposed threat of Muslim rule. In truth the Muslims and Christians in the Holy Land had lived peacefully for years, but the Pope was also a politician. Many believe that his motive was to gain political power by gaining control of all of the Muslim territories. This feat was accomplished by the and of 1099 and four new states were set up after the first crusade had ended.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  It is fairly easy to see why the Pope would want to incite the crusades, but why would normal people leave all they had to carry out this Holy War? Many people believed (because this is what the Pope told them) that all of their sins would be forgiven if they carried out this momentous task. They were practically guaranteed a place in heaven. Other crusaders went in search of gold and riches that they would take after plundering the Jewish and Muslim villages. Many younger sons of aristocrats went in search of land because their older brother had inherited the family’s land. An additional reason for men and women to go fight may have been pride. “Keeping up with the Jones’s'; is not a new concept. Many people may have felt pressured to join the crusades along with their neighbors and after committing to go one could not turn back with the penalty of excommunication. The crusades also created business for maritime cities.