Sentences with phrase «affront to society»

Not exact matches

In this is rooted their sense of sin, not simply as ordinary infraction of the moral standards of a primitive society, but as rebellion against God and an affront to his holiness.

If what is required affronts the Christian conscience of the worker, or if what is being produced in it is clearly not useful but harmful to society, one ought to look elsewhere for employment.

«Knowing the role of the press, we felt that it was an affront and insult, not to you alone, but the generality of the society, because no society can exist without information.

«Acts of violence and abuse towards Jews are an affront to any modern society,» said the group's chairman, former Foreign Office minister Denis McShane.

«Anyone who is truly concerned for the family as the building block of society, and is realistic about the mobility of British people today, must see both the folly of this policy and how it is an affront to the status of British citizenship,» Nichols added.

Throughout her work, she pursues art's capacity to affront sensibilities and jolt the senses — acting as a Heimlich manoeuvre within society.

To Judge Bolsby it was «inconceivable that the Legislature and Law Society [in enacting the Legal Aid Act] would affront a trial judge by compelling him to suspend the business before the court to allow a lawyer, not retained in any way, to interview a person appearing in answer to a charge.&raquTo Judge Bolsby it was «inconceivable that the Legislature and Law Society [in enacting the Legal Aid Act] would affront a trial judge by compelling him to suspend the business before the court to allow a lawyer, not retained in any way, to interview a person appearing in answer to a charge.&raquto suspend the business before the court to allow a lawyer, not retained in any way, to interview a person appearing in answer to a charge.&raquto allow a lawyer, not retained in any way, to interview a person appearing in answer to a charge.&raquto interview a person appearing in answer to a charge.&raquto a charge.»

It presages a law captured by the rhetoric of the right to freedom of expression without due regard to the value underlying the particular exercise of that right; a law in which, under the guise of the right to freedom of expression, the «right» to offend can be exercised without responsibility or restraint providing it does not cause a disruption or disturbance in the nature of public disorder; a law in which an impoverished amoral concept of «public order» is judicially ordained; a law in which the right to freedom of expression trumps — or tramples upon — other rights and values which are the vital rights and properties of a free and democratic society; a law to which any number of vulnerable individuals and minorities may be exposed to uncivil, and even odious, ethnic, sexist, homophobic, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, and anti-Islamic taunts providing no public disorder results; a law in which good and decent people can be used as fodder to promote a cause or promote an action for which they are not responsible and over which they have no direct control; a law which demeans the dignity of the persons adversely affected by those asserting their right to freedom of expression in a disorderly or offensive manner; a law in which the mores or standards of society are set without regard to the reasonable expectations of citizens in a free and democratic society; and a law marked by a lack of empathy by the sensibilities, feelings and emotional frailties of people who can be deeply and genuinely affronted by language and behaviour that is beyond the pale in a civil and civilised society.

The notion that domestic laws are privately owned by whomever drafted or lobbied for them is, in our view, an affront to the dignity of democratic society.