what if u or group of people of state want that a person indivisual to be headed on the post of any President Prime minister or any minister but the constitution of ur nation says that He is not capable of being headed on said post then will it amount be the voilation fundamental rights or rights of the people attach with the certain people and right to life and right to there wishes will it amount be proper justice and equality on that ground?
Ur opinion required
THNX
2006-12-23 03:44:51 · 6 answers · asked by SG 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I think I've dug through your poor spelling and refusal to use grammar rules and understand your question.
The answer is no. Every job has certain qualifications, so not everyone is qualified for all jobs.
A violation of basic human rights is something like beating, torture, false imprisonment, that kind of thing.
2006-12-23 03:55:59 · answer #1 · answered by Uther Aurelianus 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Nobody has a "fundamental right" to become a Head of State, Prime Minister or President. Thus, having restrictive guidelines (defining specific qualifications) does not violate a fundamental right. And I'm sorry, but what does any of that have to do with 'right to life' issues?
Right to Life issues typically address the act of terminating pregnancy through abortion. Whether one is for or against medical termination of pregnancy is not one of the qualifiers for becoming a political leader in the USA. I don't know enough about other countries restrictions to address their requirements.
The desires of one region may not outweigh the needs of the rest of the region. That's how democracy is intended to work. Thus, there is a delineation between federal law and state/local law. The states can pass laws that are more restrictive than federal law. If the opinion of a majority of states becomes popular, then the federal government may choose to include it, but even that is not a mandated reaction.
2006-12-23 12:00:06 · answer #2 · answered by kaylora 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope. If it is enumarated in the supreme law of the land, then it is justice. You see, law, justice, equality etc are all figments of our imaginations. So if the supreme law of that land says people with brown hair can not hold office, then is it unjust?
Well the law is there, so if its a democracy then it must not be sinc the majority says so.
Every governmental system has its faults, even democracy.
2006-12-23 12:54:32 · answer #3 · answered by Lamar - 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dude, don't mix Red Bull with Red Eye ever again!
2006-12-23 11:49:24 · answer #4 · answered by angry 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'll have to think about it for a while and get back to you, cause I think I just had a stroke and can't seem to follow anything you wrote.
2006-12-23 11:47:50 · answer #5 · answered by fredtubbs 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe you should read over your question and try to rephrase it, as it's written it makes no sense. Sorry.
2006-12-23 11:53:13 · answer #6 · answered by nimo22 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋