Lina
Lv 4
Lina asked in Education & ReferenceHomework Help · 1 decade ago

Help with editing!?

Please help me edit this paragraph...Thank you!!!

[paper is on judicial restraint or actvism...i picked restraint]

Evidently, I’d base my decisions strictly on the beliefs and principles of the Constitution- so, indirectly, I would be basing mine on the founding fathers’ beliefs. My decisions would be based on the principles of the Constitution such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, and the rest of the Bill of Rights. These basics would be important to everyone because they would guide me through making decisions in court. I’d also base my decisions on laws, amendments, and other documents. In addition to this, I would assure that every person was treated equally, every person would be known as innocent till enough information was known to declare one guilty, and all helpless (endangered animals, children, and disable) would be protected.

[more coming]

Update:

Though it is hard for a human to put their emotions aside, I would try my best to do so and go just by the words of our Constitution…mainly because different punishments should not be given out for the same crime, because the Constitution is a living document and will be amended as it needs to be (in other words, we do not need to emend it ourselves since it causes “inequality”), and because without restraint from emotions, our country and our law system would be in a very bad condition.

Update 2:

I forgot to say Thank You to everyone! =]...Happy New Yearrr!

2 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    My decisions would be based on the principles of the Constitution: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the prees, freedom of assembly, and the rest of the Bill of Rights. My rulings would follow laws and amendments made by our governing bodies, as long as they do not interfere with our Constitutional freedoms.

    I would strongly emphasize the importance the right to the accused to a fair trial. Those who cannot speak for themselves, such as chilren, the disabled, and endangered animals, would be protected. I would make every effort to put my emotions aside and base decisions on the law and give consistent penalties for the same crime.

    Yikes. Why am I doing your homework for you? Cross out each sentence and see if the paragraph still makes sense. You do a lot of repetition and adding words that don't add anything to your meaning. Make your paragraphs a little shorter to increase readability.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • SINDY
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Okay.... I took a shot at it.

    Here ya go.....

    I would base my decisions strictly upon the contents of the Constitution. So, indirectly, I would be basing my decisions and beliefs upon those of the founding fathers. My decisions would be based solely upon those principals of the Constitution, such as freedom of speech, freedom to choose ones' own religion, freedom of the press, freedom to assemble, and the entirety of the Bill of Rights. Any decision that I were to make would be completely reliant upon my opinion that these "basics" are important to everyone, and these "basics" would guide me through all of my decision-making.

    Likewise, my decisions would be based upon laws, amendments, and other important legal/government documents. In addition, I would ensure that each individual would be treated equally. All people would be considered innocent until evidence were to, without question, prove guilt. All helpless, including endangered animals, children, and the disabled, would be protected by fair and just laws.

    Though it is hard for a human to set their emotions aside, I would try my best to do exactly that and to abide by the words of our Constitution…Firstly, because sentencing guidelines should be "across the board". (In other words, a crime should always carry the same punishment regardless of person, place, or circumstance.) The Constitution is a "living" document and will be amended as it needs to be, therefore there is no cause for individual interpretation.... The Constitution, and the amendments which have followed it, speak for itself/themselves. Individual interpretation and opinion cause “inequality”. The absence of emotional restraint presents the possibility of having extremely negative effects upon our country.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.