Law & Ethics - December 2006

2006-12-09 08:56:56 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-09 08:46:32 · 3 answers · asked by Petal J 2

If someone were to be charged with making a statement against a minority group, for the sake of this questions, lets use homosexuals. Say someone is sued for making derogatory remarks about homosexuals, and the ACLU is called in as counsel. Does the ACLU, who has advocated free speech in the past, take the side of the homosexual, or the person who made the comments? Since both issues have been argued by the ACLU, is it possible that lawyers from the ACLU could actually end up representing both clients?

2006-12-09 08:42:55 · 14 answers · asked by gtrplayer5555 2

If you listen to leaders in the church and the Republican Party they claim there is nothing they can do because the courts will not allow your views to be addressed. If this is true it is the fault of the republicans. The Supreme Court has 7 republicans and 2 democrats on the bench, 12 out of 13 Circuit Courts have majority republicans; there are a total of 156 republican judges on these courts and only 96 democrats, that is almost 40% more republicans than democrats. The republicans do not want abortion to be outlawed in the US because it keeps the conservative Christians in their party voting for them based on this one issue. Why would they want anything to change? If abortion is removed from the national political debate the Christians might leave the party. Those Christians that choose their candidate based only on abortion need to demand change from their party not rhetorical speech but no action to change the status quo.

2006-12-09 08:41:52 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-12-09 08:31:52 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

Like cultivate their own crops for their own food, etc..Why do we have to pay for their wrongdoings?

2006-12-09 08:27:02 · 15 answers · asked by ladysassafras 2

2006-12-09 08:22:41 · 28 answers · asked by Anthony M 4

I am talking about male+female relationships

2006-12-09 08:20:00 · 22 answers · asked by BrilliantPomegranate 4

a few evening's ago a man jumped my front gates and was walking around my property.....

now...my private security took him down (their licenced as Private Security)

now today i got a call from my assistant saying 2 of my security were being sued ....

is this possible..because i have it all on my cctv system so theirs proof that they were just doing their job....


so is it possible for them to be sued (no physical harm was put towards him)

2006-12-09 08:18:05 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

i.e. is it legal or illegal? if it is illegal what is the penalty? etc.

2006-12-09 08:17:01 · 5 answers · asked by hymmi_chan 2

i just dont see there is any moral difference between a cow being slaughtered to feed your pet and being slaughtered to feed you.
the experience for the cow is the same either way...
so if you are ok with the cow being killed to feed pusskins or fido,
why should you be any more bothered that its being killed to feed you.?
the fact of what is good for the pet to eat is a totally side issue that has no bearing on who takes reponsibility for the slaughter of the animal.

2006-12-09 08:13:05 · 13 answers · asked by catweazle 5

The ACLU Socialist Front

No single group has had as much a detrimental effect on our society in the last half century as the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU claims to be an unbiased, “neither conservative or liberal” organization devoted exclusively to protecting the civil liberties of all Americans. But their record proves just the opposite in that they almost always support the liberal anti-Christian side of every argument. In fact, if we only look into their background it is easy to discern this wolf in sheep’s clothing. Promoted as a patriotic group they actually would have us reduced to socialism or outright communist oppression. I’ll let the wolves themselves leak the real truth.

Board Member John H. Holmes admitted that they were only using the “civil liberties issue” in supporting the “cause of radicalism”

Founder Roger Baldwin said, “Civil liberties, like democracy, are useful only as tools for social change.”

Although they claim to defend constitutional rights, they don’t even believe in the document as written. They say that, “The Constitution as originally conceived was deeply flawed.” They even go so far as to brag, “The ACLU was the missing ingredient that made our constitutional system finally work.” This might explain why they say that, “The possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected” when the Bill of Rights plainly states that, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Such hypocrisy shows that the modern liberal is the contemporary equivalent of the ancient Pharisee. The Pharisees claimed to be defenders of the Law of God when in effect they dismantled it. Christ accused them in Matthew 15:6:” Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. “

This opposition to true freedom as established in our “Bible based” constitution is better understood, as we find out about the ACLU’s origins in the communist socialist cause. Roger Baldwin, the founder was greatly influenced by known communist Emma Goldman who tutored him in subversive ideology of Lenin as well as in humanism (based on the inherent goodness of man). He claimed Emma as “one of the chief inspirations of his life”.

During World War 1 Baldwin worked in the Bureau of Conscientious Objectors, a division of AUAM, to help draft dodgers with resistance and provide legal and financial aid. This resulted in controversy and Baldwin renamed the organization The Civil Liberties Bureau to avoid some of the flack. Roger refused to tone down his liberal talk and the AUAM sought a split, which resulted in the bureau renaming again; The National Civil Liberties Bureau.

One paper Baldwin wrote for the Bureau was called “unmailable” by the Post Office because of “radical and subversive views” which resulted in a FBI raid on their offices. Shortly thereafter he was drafted and upon resisting and openly spouting social reform propaganda, was imprisoned for a year.

In 1920 he moved his offices in with the Communist Party’s paper, New Masses and renamed the group a final time to the ACLU. He developed many ties with the communist movement and even wrote a book, Liberty Under the Soviets, which bragged about the “liberty won for anti-religion”. Roger joined many United Front causes, which he admitted to be communist front groups. He stated:

I Joined. I don’t regret being a part of the Communist tactic, which increased the effectiveness of a good cause. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the Communists wanted…”

For it’s first 60 years 80% of ACLU Board and Committee Members had Communist affiliations, and 90% of its cases were involved in defending Communists. Consider these cases and official positions:

- 1952 Led the campaign against exposing the Communist element in the entertainment industry.
- 1960 Fought to legally prohibit Christmas displays and celebrations at public schools.
- 1962 Argued that a daily prayer recital was an illegal “establishment of religion”.
- 1973 “Doe v. Bolton” case along with “Roe v. Wade” helped overturn anti-abortion laws.
- 1982 Positioned itself against teaching of Creationism in favor of exclusive Evolution.
- 1986 Argued against prayers before High School football games.
- Argued in favor of allowing open gays in the military.

They have also sought the following restrictions:

- Halt the singing of Christmas Carols in public facilities.
- Deny tax -exempt status for Churches.
- Remove all military chaplains.
- Remove all Christian symbols from public property.
- Prohibit Bible reading in classrooms even during free time.
- Remove In God We Trust from our coins.

Our enemies certainly know who they are battling against it’s just too sad that we are so naïve and ignorant not to recognize them as just that, enemies. 1 Peter 2:16 speaks of these people:

As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.

And again in Galatians 5:13:

For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.

Our best service to one another is to share our understanding and expose those who seek to steal our liberty and put us into bondage in their global plantation.

(Gal 2:4 KJV) And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:

(All quotations are from the King James Version Bible)

2006-12-09 08:11:31 · 15 answers · asked by Anthony M 4

2006-12-09 08:07:50 · 6 answers · asked by qtwendi 1

2006-12-09 07:58:48 · 1 answers · asked by johmson420@verizon.net 1

I was reading on a couple websites that it's legal in some U.S. states for someone under 21 to drink at their private residence or if under 18 in the company of their parents or legal age family members. It is also legal in certain other events. Does anyone know if these exceptions apply to Pennsylvania?

2006-12-09 07:53:11 · 6 answers · asked by InternetJunkie83 2

2006-12-09 07:52:39 · 6 answers · asked by alexis 1

Rich people , well some not all donate to charitys and donate. More than what most people will in a lifetime and they're still being called greedy/spoiled Why is that?

2006-12-09 07:46:15 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

I dated this guy for 4 years and we broke up in May. I let him borrow an extra car of mine as long as he makes payments. But yesterday he got a DUI in New Jersey. He lives in Maryland and I live in Oklahoma. I told him I want my car back but he is avoiding all my calls, emails, text messages. I don't know what to do!
I know letting him borrow the car was so stupid! He may end up going to jail for 90 days. I just need to know how to get the car back without having it repossed and ruining my credit. Can I report the car stolen, even if I know who has it?

2006-12-09 07:45:32 · 3 answers · asked by knesa27 2

Do you think it should be made illegal in the US/Canada? I do. Murder is a crime. If a women was raped I understand not wanting the child but it doesn't give her any right to kill it. She should have the baby and give it to foster care not commit murder. If she wasn't raped and had unprotected sex , the women shouldn't have an abortion she should give up the child if she didn't want it. All women have to do is take your baby to a police station fire department and give it them. Don't throw it in a microwave , don't have an abortion don't throw it in a trash cane.

Opinions? Not insults , thanks.

2006-12-09 07:43:13 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Do I have any rights here in Pa.? I've been employed there since 1997 and always had excellent appraisals. Any advice would be helpful

2006-12-09 07:42:16 · 3 answers · asked by kittysrus1 1

2006-12-09 07:35:23 · 6 answers · asked by CigarMike 2

2006-12-09 07:34:57 · 2 answers · asked by fkoober 2

2006-12-09 07:31:48 · 3 answers · asked by fkoober 2

2006-12-09 07:17:18 · 16 answers · asked by ? 1

i've got this research paper on media news censorship.. i just don't know where to look.. if anyone knows any books, online books or online articles or paper.. even papers in journals.. i'd be very thankful

2006-12-09 07:12:35 · 2 answers · asked by looby 2

why is it that the american medical association can directly pinpoint smoking as the cause of lung cancer but they can't pinpoint any cause for any of the other cancers? Could breast cancer be caused by the simple wearing of a bra? Could bone cancer be caused from drinking too much milk? Could cervical cancer be caused from having sex? I don't think so. The doctors say these cancers are all hereditary. Explain to me how a 50 year old acquaintance of mine has smoked for 35 years and has a 98% lung capacity and no sign of cancer. wake up people this is one more way for the government to scare people. the more your scared the higher taxes they force you to pay.

2006-12-09 06:43:21 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Drinking is bad for your health. By choosing to sit in a bar and get drunk and then driving home you not only put your own life in danger but the life of people innocently driving on the road with you. If the surgeon general was so damn positive that smoking causes all sorts of health problems than his warning label would say does cause instead of may.

2006-12-09 06:36:59 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

This is for my paralegal course - I can't seem to find the answer to this anywhere!! The client is charged with shoplifting - she confesses that she did the crime to me, the paralegal. I inform my boss of her confession... Are we (my boss and/or I) then required to testify at her larceny trial? Thanks for any help :)

2006-12-09 06:32:24 · 18 answers · asked by Xx-Kai-xX 2

2006-12-09 06:30:04 · 4 answers · asked by leida r 1

To my knowledge segragation was outlawed years ago. By enforcing this ban that forces smokers to go outside you might as well send Rosa Parks back to the back of the bus. This country becomes more and more of a dictatorship every year and everyone just sits back and takes it. How many more rights will be taken from us? The same people who pushed for this ban are the ones who give no thought to drinking and driving. Obviously they feel that they have a better chance of dying from second hand smoke than they do of killing themselves and innocent bystanders while they're pounding down beer and rum and coke.

2006-12-09 06:21:29 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous