Sentences with phrase «do by force of law»

Not exact matches

maureen: the problem is lots of christians do try to force their beliefs on others by attempting to legislate those beliefs into our secuar law

Motion does not happen at random but is an action by an outside force, for Newton's laws of motion says that (1st law) that an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted on by an external force.

A real and sustained effort was made to reconstruct the whole social order upon the basis of the Law of God, not only by giving it statutory force, but by «writing it on the heart», so far as this could be done by positive instruction and through the ordinances of public worship.

Israel never had the intention to conquer all countries of the world and impose its laws by force as Islamists do.

A clue: it does NOT mean pushing man - made Catholic dogma on everyone by force of law.

Curiously, however, the demand for the term «social justice» did not arise until modern times, in which more complex societies operate by impersonal rules applied with equal force to all under «the rule of law.»

What can be done is to support and aid the exinmate to make the changes his own rather than those which have been forced on him by the power of law, drugs, confinement, shock therapy, or control of privileges.

And so do laws become serviceable and adapt themselves to every one of our affairs by some wrested, forced, and biased interpretation.»

You may be confusing this with Newton's Third Law of Motion: «When two bodies interact by exerting force on each other, these action and reaction forces are equal in magnitude, but opposite in direction», or in it's simpler form, «To every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction», but somehow I don't think so.

More precisely: does the Constitution sanction the private use of lethal force, and if so, how can that understanding be squared with the unalienable character of the rights bestowed upon us by the laws of nature and nature's God?

Among them were pantheism and the positions that human reason is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood and good and evil; that Christian faith contradicts reason; that Christ is a myth; that philosophy must be treated without reference to supernatural revelation; that every man is free to embrace the religion which, guided by the light of reason, he believes to be true; that Protestantism is another form of the Christian religion in which it is possible to be as pleasing to God as in the Catholic Church; that the civil power can determine the limits within which the Catholic Church may exercise authority; that Roman Pontiffs and Ecumenical Councils have erred in defining matters of faith and morals; that the Church does not have direct or indirect temporal power or the right to invoke force; that in a conflict between Church and State the civil law should prevail; that the civil power has the right to appoint and depose bishops; that the entire direction of public schools in which the youth of Christian states are educated must be by the civil power; that the Church should be separated from the State and the State from the Church; that moral laws do not need divine sanction; that it is permissible to rebel against legitimate princes; that a civil contract may among Christians constitute true marriage; that the Catholic religion should no longer be the religion of the State to the exclusion of all other forms of worship; and «that the Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself to and agree with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.»

There isn't roomhere to do more than illustrate the case with a few examples, but an attempt will be made to show how rich Paul's view of ethics is, how his teaching on law is original and relevant, how his emphasis on love is important, and how he forces us to consider not only the human act that, as St Thomas says, is what moral theology is all about, but also the adjectival human agent transformed by the grace of the Holy Spirit into a friend, indeed a child of God.

The Los Angeles Times: Scientology did not violate forced labor law, appeals court rules Scientology did not violate a labor law by failing to pay for the work of two former members of the church's Sea Organization - a wing that restricts participants» outside communications, marriage and children, censors mail and monitors phone calls - a federal appeals court said Tuesday.

90 Congress did so with the express purpose of «encouraging the donation of food and grocery products to nonprofit organizations for distribution to needy individuals by giving the Model Good Samaritan Food Donation Act the full force and effect of law.»

«No free man [homo liber] shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land,» says Chapter 39 of Magna Carta.

No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will be proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.

If all people have inalienable rights and no individual can create, strip, or give rights to others, then by what «authority» does a group of people calling itself government derive the ability to force laws on you?

It also asked if you could be persecuted (sure, from non-police), or can you declare yourself publicly to be a communist (sure, you can do whatever you want), when what the question really is about is can you legally do so without being punished by the force of law.

«Carving out exceptions in a proposed law to change the definition of marriage will do nothing to protect the small businesses that will be affected by yet another mandate and could force more businesses to leave the state,» Long said.

By doing so, she is allowing the department to implement new directives and rules for all officers that reflect the goals of the Right to Know Act — including a requirement for officers to provide identification upon request and to obtain consent before a search — without the force of law.

«In the same way, the use of force (and so doing harm to others) by soldiers is heavily circumscribed and controlled by international laws -LSB-...] For example, recent international peacekeeping missions have been heavily criticized for not allowing soldiers to intervene when witnessing rape, murder, and even genocide (e.g., in Rwanda).»

Yesterday the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law that would have forced the closure of abortion clinics that didn't meet strict requirements — requirements the justices decided (by a 5 - to - 3 margin) didn't make women any safer and put an undue burden on their constitutional right to seek safe and legal medical care.

Harry is back on the force (doing stake - outs) and brought back to homicide to solve a slew of underworld slayings, and finds himself the patsy for a secret vigilante group of cops (including Robert Urich, David Soul, and Tim Matheson) who take out criminals untouchable by the law.

Loach's film very much is of a piece with Stéphane Brizé's The Measure of a Man; its French title, La Loi du marché means «The Law of the Market,» but the English title captures the way that the market forces governing «human resources» (another hideous cant term) function by quantifying humans, fitting them into predefined market categories.

While the No Child waiver gambit hasn't exactly helped on this front, largely because they don't have the force of law that comes with legislation passed by Congress, a new version of No Child can do so if the focus is on expanding accountability.

According to the account, the Republicans believe «the [Dept. of Education] is trying to reassert federal control by exceeding its authority with a rule that would require state and local spending in low - income schools receiving Title I funds to be equal or greater than non-Title I schools... and force schools to include teacher salaries when measuring spending between Title I and non-Title I schools...» At the same time, the story notes that «King is facing pressure from civil rights groups who want to ensure the new education law does not deprive low - income students of equal funding.»

That law is designed to keep a manufacturer from forcing dealers it doesn't like out of business by putting a more powerful dealer close by.

Many major retailers have argued that if Amazon were finally forced to abide by the same sales tax laws that the retailers do, it would even the playing field in terms of what customer have to pay.

The forced desegregation brought about by Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954 meant that inner city whites set up private schools of their own (often in the suburbs) which didn't have to follow the letter of the law.

As mentioned by James Webster, verbal contracts do have the force of the law behind them.

Together, we will bring an end to the systematic killing of animals by forcing our shelters, by law, to do their jobs with compassion, dedication, and integrity.

Mulcoy Travel does not accept any liability in contract or in tort for any personal injury, death, damage, loss, delay, additional expenses or inconvenience caused directly or indirectly by force majeure or other events which are beyond our control, including, but not limited to, war, civil disturbance, fire, criminal activity, floods, unusually severe weather, acts of Government or any authorities, accidents to or failure of machinery or equipment, or your failure to obtain a passport, visa or proper vaccinations or to comply with applicable laws and regulations.

I don't see why i should give up comfort when corporations like exxon, shell etc are not even forced by law (or anything else) to spend a few billion of their profits on causes that won't bring them financial gain per se.

People who want judicial answers to scientific questions are seeking one thing: to impose their views on the proper answers — by force of law — on those who don't share their views.

The change in effective radiative temperature is obtained by Stefan - Boltzmann law from the radiative forcing and it's telling the order of magnitude of related warming as well as the «no - feedback sensitivity» does.

The bottom - up approach to handling reform objectives was commented upon favorably even by the former Obama regulatory czar and noted expert on administrative law, Cass Sunstein, when on March 3 he wrote in Bloomberg, «Because the White House itself lacks the capacity to scrutinize the stock of existing regulations, the Trump administration was smart to call for task forces within each agency to do that — and to require them to engage with the public to see which regulations are really causing trouble.»

Failing to yield the right - of - way when required by law to do so can, sometimes, result in serious impact at speeds sufficient to cause major forces to be placed upon the human body to cause severe bodily harm and even death.

And I wanted to bring a whole new sort of business acumen and approach to law rather than it be run by the professionals, and that's what I wanted to do and was able to do, and finally in June 12 when the new ABS rules came into force.

The report confirms that the sharing (or gig) economy is extremely precarious — by forcing its participants to accept the status of «independent contractor», they are not employees and as such they are not protected by employment law and do not contribute towards employment insurance and other social safety net programs.

Neither did the ECJ accept the pleas that the General Court erred in law by stating that it was appropriate to refer only to the Charter of Fundamental Rights and not the ECHR (paras. 43 - 48), that the right to property can not be extended to the protection of commercial interests (paras. 49 - 63) and that the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples does not have binding force (paras. 64 - 69).

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, a person is not justified in using physical force if: (a) With intent to cause bodily injury or death to another person, he provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that other person; or (b) He is the initial aggressor; except that his use of physical force upon another person under the circumstances is justifiable if he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person his intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens the use of unlawful physical force; or (c) The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law.

The law that applies is Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act, which specifies that «a person must not use a motor vehicle... unless there is in force... a policy of insurance that complies with the requirements of this Part of this Act» (unless you provide your own third party insurance by depositing a large sum with the Court Funds Office: I do not believe this has ever been done).

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the force is used or threatened by another person for the purpose of doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully.

And, non-lawyers (even sophisticated, affluent business people) routinely fail to grasp that a Will only governs assets which don't have beneficiary designations and is subject to forced marital share and minimum family inheritance laws that act by operation of law as well as other «gap filling» presumptions that modify the literal meaning of certain kinds of language in a Will.

The Act, which comes into force on 30 September, will make law firms vicariously liable for criminal tax evasion by «associated persons» — including contractors, suppliers, agents or lawyers at other firms — if they do not implement reasonable procedures to prevent the facilitation of criminal tax evasion.

The European Commission is considering whether or not to progress the enactment of a new Directive on access to environmental justice which would reinforce the Aarhus Convention of October 2001, which, though ratified by the UK and other European states, does not in itself have the force of law internally within those states.

If they are recognized as having legal force, they do so by being absorbed as part of the body of Canadian common law.

In yesterday's ruling the Court did not set aside its decision in Chacón Navas, but did point out that this previous ruling was adopted prior to the entry into force of the CRPD — and that «the primacy of international agreements concluded by the European Union over instruments of secondary law means that those instruments must as far as possible be interpreted in a manner that is consistent with those agreements.»

Mr. Justice Denny Thomas of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench did not merely accept the arguments of the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees when he slapped an injunction on the Government of Alberta yesterday, indefinitely suspending a law that could have forced 22,000 civil servants to live with a contract imposed on them by legislative fiat.

Although they do not have the force of law, IRCC officials usually consider themselves bound by the Manuals when determining a case.