If you think that God grants and justifies human rights, does God endorse the right to freedom of religion?

Posted on May 26th, 2011 by admin

Or if you subscribe to the theory that human rights come from God, would you then have to believe that freedom of religion is the one right you DON’T have, since most religions teach that their god considers the practice of other religions an abominable practice?

I have to say, on the face of things, let’s say from the Bible, that God’s record on human rights is not very good. He seems at best very capricious, and toys with people, testing them arbitrarily, punishing innocent and guilty alike; at the very worst, he seems to emulate quite accurately a modern day totalitarian dictator. Ancient Israel reminds me a lot of Soviet Russia or North Korea in terms of a Mr. Big ruling by fear and reward.

Why do people lack freedom, equality, and rights?

Posted on May 24th, 2011 by admin

Does everyone have rights?

What are basic rights?

What are rights?

What is equality?

Should everyone be treated equally?

If so, why aren’t they?

What is equality?

Why do people lack freedom, rights, and equality?

Why do you repeat everything, repeat everything?

How effectively does the Canadian charter of rights and freedom protect your indivisual rights?

Posted on May 12th, 2011 by admin

I need help on a good introduction paragraph i started with this what should i add or remove ?

The Canadian charter of rights and freedom has changed many things since it was first put into act in 1982. There often was little that could be done about unfair laws being passed by the elected government and in some cases there was no protection for minority rights or freedom. The charter of rights and freedom has brought change to laws that discriminate against people because of personal characteristics. .The ccrf is effective in canadian rights and freedoms in many different ways. It gives people the freedom to choose their own religion, the freedom to express your own opinion and the freedom to associate with other people or groups.

Good.

Although it sound like we had of that before, and we did.

http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv1-&p=Canadian%20Charter%20of%20Rights%20and%20Freedoms&ei=UTF-8&type=

How do we have freedom rights when are thinking is influenced by others?

Posted on May 9th, 2011 by admin

Is it really freedom of thought when our family, the media, our social status, our religious believes, our country influence the way we think?
*our, instead of are, sorry

Well, first you must ask yourself, if there really is freedom of thought? The answer you may find is that there is no such thing as freedom of thought. Freedom in-fact is more of an ideology than a reality. We may have been brought to believe -through propaganda-that it is real, but in actuality it exist more in our mind that in the physical world. This is because everything you believe is influenced by individuals, your socio economic status and yes even the media. Except that the media is sometimes trusted more than people you know in person. This may be because the media reports its stories, by using expressive language and images, in such a way that they seem plausible.
In the end, no one is really free. What keeps up the farse is that we believe we are free. The truth about this is that it is both harmful (impedes what truly being an individual: unique) and protective (prevents others that are not in your collective, from harming you).
And yes where you live, your race, your religion can have great effects on how you think.
For example the bitter old lady that is constantly mean. The only reason she is bitter is because of the influence others have had on her life. The way you are treated or raised or both besides the media has such power over what you think, which influences who you are. That is if there is a who, anyway.

What do the Canadian Charter of freedom and rights and the bill of rights have in common?

Posted on April 26th, 2011 by admin

What do the Canadian Charter of freedom and rights and the bill of rights have in common?

The Canadian Bill of Rights is government legislation that came into effect in 1960. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enshrined into the Constitution and came into effect in 1983. The fundamental and mechanics of the documents are not similar at all. However each provided similar rights.

Freedom of speech and religion, some equality rights, many legal rights, and the right to life liberty and the security of the person are some of the rights that are common in both documents.

what are the benefits of the canadian charter of rights and freedom?

Posted on October 29th, 2010 by admin

i need help on my civics project! one of the things im having problems with is what are the benifits of the charter of rights and freedom, and are there some unfair rules in it?? plz help! tanx ;P

There are no unfair benefits and rules in it.
It allows everyone to be treated equally and fairly.

I don’t have the time to explain it all so just google it, it will make your life much easier. :)
Good luck with your project! :)

Explore historical background on First Amendment freedom of speech rights with particular focus on freedom of?

Posted on June 20th, 2010 by admin

Explore historical background on First Amendment freedom of speech rights with particular focus on freedom of expression in a public school setting and the Supreme Court decision in Tinker v. Des Moines.

Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969)

——————————————————————————–

Case Summary
In 1965, John Tinker, his sister Mary Beth, and a friend were sent home from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The school had established a policy permitting students to wear several political symbols, but had excluded the wearing of armbands protesting the Vietnam War. Their fathers sued, but the District Court ruled that the school had not violated the Constitution. The Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court, and the Tinkers appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Court’s Decision
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the students had the right to wear armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Justice Abe Fortas wrote for the majority. He first emphasized that students have First Amendment rights: “It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” While schools certainly have the right to establish rules relating to “the length of skirts or the type of clothing, to hair style,…[or] aggressive, disruptive action or even group demonstrations,” this case does not involve any of those issues. “The school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on the part of petitioners. There is here no evidence whatever of petitioners’ interference, …with the schools’ work or of collision with the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students.”

Justice Hugo Black dissented. He pointed out that the case involved a small number of students who refused to obey the instructions of school officials, and argued that allowing this behavior would have a negative effect on schools and on the country as a whole.

More on the Case
Mary Beth Tinker eventually became a nurse and worked with the Veterans Administration. She later wrote that it was “a privilege to work with our veterans who had sacrificed part of their lives.… I work with a lot of paraplegics and quadriplegics, and some of them were injured in the Vietnam War… So I don’t have any regrets about it at all. I’m proud to have been a part of anything that stopped the war.”

The Supreme Court has dealt with other school cases since Tinker. In Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 1986, the Court held that a high school student did not have the right under the First Amendment to use indecent language and sexual metaphors in a speech at a school assembly.

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988, the Court ruled that school officials could regulate the content of the student newspaper in any reasonable way. The principal had deleted student articles about teen pregnancy and about the impact of parental divorce on students at the school. In both Fraser and Kuhlmeier, the Court emphasized that students in public schools do not always have the same First Amendment rights as adults in other settings.

Can someone please describe freedom to me or how human rights work ?

Posted on June 17th, 2010 by admin

Can someone please describe freedom to me or how human rights work because the way I see it is if I was a murderer or or rapist , would it not be my human right to murder and rape , if I feel that that my right , so how can you someone take that right and freedom awy from me ?

Rights are balanced out by responsibilities. As a general rule, you do not have the right to violate someone else rights, and that forms part of your responsibilities.

To use your example, I have a right to live. You have no right to infringe on my right to live, and your are being responsible by not killing me.

For some further reading, try the 1948 United nations declaration of human rights

Why do Western men allow their women so much freedom rights why do they act like sissy in front of women?

Posted on June 14th, 2010 by admin

why do they act like sissy in front of women?

You Western women need to learn your place and stop being so fat and nasty.

Go run a couple of miles and learn to eat your veggies.

somebody has been rejected by american women one to many times huh

WHAT DO MY FREEDOM OF SPEACH RIGHTS COSIST OF?

Posted on June 9th, 2010 by admin

what do my freedom of speach rights consist of..can i message someone saying anything i want as long as its not a thret or i dont continue messageing them (i know that would be harassment)?can i say anything in public to anyone aslong as its not a thret?

There is no such thing as "Freedom of Speach."

I would suggest that you Google the phrase "First Amendment" and actually read what is says about free speech.

The short answer is no. Free speech does not give you the right to say whatever you want with no consequences. You’ve mentioned threats and harassment. There is also disorderly conduct, inciting a riot, defamation, and a whole host of other potential consequences.

  • Categories

  • Pages

  • Tags

  • Archives

  • Meta

  •