Is this: (a) a good idea, and (b) even remotely possible,
even by force of law?
Not exact matches
Huge percent
of Muslims want Sharia
law (
even if not the majority) Only 4 % believe Al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11 Here is a Guardian article stating that 1/2
of all Muslims feel homosexuality should be ILLEGAL (not just wrong, but punishable
by force).
@KatMat: your analogy would begin approaching realism if: — during the pledge
of allegiance kids were
forced to say «one nation under The Orioles» — our nation's currency said «In Dallas Cowboys We Trust» — if millions were slaughtered, tortured and burned to death because they weren't fans
of The Pittsburgh Penguins — if NASCAR fans endlessly attempted to have Intelligent Car Driving taught beside Evolution in science class as a possible explanation for how mankind developed — if «the 5 D's»
of Dodgeball (Dodge, Duck, Dip, Dive, Dodge) were constantly attempted to be made into
law so everyone would live
by the same ridiculous notions,
even if those notions knowingly discriminate — if nutters constantly claimed America was founded on the principles
of Darts,
even though our country SPECIFICALLY calls for a separation between Darts and State because the founders knew the inherent dangers
of Darts becoming government instead
of staying in the realm
of sport where it belongs
Even business people who really want to be ethical and
law abiding may be
forced to behave immorally and illegally in order to survive in a world that is ruled
by the service
of wealth..
I'm against allowing any sort
of moral
law decided
by some,
even if it is a majority in a democracy, to be
forced on the rest with no other support than «thats what God wants».
Whatever balance may be struck in these areas
of mixed secular and religious services funded
by tax money, the mixture is inherently unstable and will tend to move in one direction or the other, usually toward increased responsiveness to broader interests than those
of the sponsoring church (which is often called «secularization»)-- a process seen in church - related colleges and hospitals
even without tax funding, which merely makes it happen quicker and sometimes with the
force of law.
But it must be evident that
even a «successful revolution» destroys more than it builds, and that, when the revolutionists are compelled to engage in construction, they are
forced to obey the
laws of historical continuity
by adjusting themselves to the world as it is and has been.
We are aware that all material beings are composite, composed
of atoms, that these particles are discrete within the continuity they integrate, that in themselves
even they are miniature solar systems, and that these orbits are wide open spaces in relation to the miniature elementswhich are bound within them: bound and determined
by the fixed
laws that define the still mysterious phenomena
of centrifugal and centripetal
force.
A recent example: California attempted to ban the sale
of foie gras if it was produced
by the
forced feeding
of geese (
even if that feeding occurred in another state), and a company attempted to claim that the state
law was preempted
by a federal
law which said that states can not impose ingredient requirements different than the federal regulations.
Note that there is no relationship (at least legally) between the death penalty and use
of weapons
by police
force;
even in countries with death penalty police follows the same Rules
of Engagement (use weapon as self - defense or when other people are in danger), death penalty is stablished
by a jury or judge (police is a
law enforcement agency, sentences are issued
by judges or juries)
Executive orders only have
force of law for executive branch agencies or other situations in which Congress has given executive orders legal significance
by statute (and
even that may not be quite constitutional).
«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).»
This is particularly true for the form
of vouchers espoused
by DeVos, in which recipient schools would face no accountability and could
even force students to waive their civil rights under federal
law.
And he nodded when I speculated that Florida's chances seemed
even better for the second round because a new
law — passed
by both houses
of the Legislature after the first round ended — would
force accountability on all teachers without the union's agreement.
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.
Dog barking
laws often have very severe penalties for the dog and the owner, including taking the dog from the owner, «de-barking» the dog (
forced surgical removal
of the vocal cords
by a surgeon), fines, euthanasia for some dogs, and
even jail time for the dog owners.
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.
«
Even the most cursory review
of the text
of the Paris Agreement discloses a careful, purposeful alternation between the mandatory «shall» — indicating a binding obligation governed
by international
law — and the hortatory «should» — nonbinding statements
of strictly political intent without legal
force,» Wirth wrote.
We can thus see that scientists, once again, are
forced to admit the possibility,
even the necessity,
of the supernatural, «some unknown agent» that caused what is impossible
by the natural
laws we know to happen anyway.
It is clear to me, that the variance observed from region to region behave other than the influence
of a well mixed gas; rather, the warm and cold spots reflect powerful
forces, moving through gigantic masses governed
by laws of mixing
by eddies and turbulence not
even remotely captured
by program code.
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.»
According to Newton's Second
Law of Motion (F = ma), if the venerable Queen Mary were set to float freely, absent any other
forces, and a line attached to the bow were to be pulled
by even just one person, the ship would respond immediately to the steady application
of that
force by experiencing a very tiny acceleration in the direction
of applied
force.
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.
The Court —
even though not explicitly — relies on the principle
of tempus regit actum, which implies that any action should be regulated
by the
law in
force at the time it was adopted.
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.
Change will be driven more
by economic
forces brought not just from women leaving
law firms but from clients, younger male lawyers, increasing global competition, rising costs in both housing and commercial space, technology — and a host
of other societal and business factors that we can not
even imagine.
Unfortunately,
even when the facts
of the accident are clear - cut and unambiguous, there's no
law requiring the insurance company to accept liability or pay you a single penny unless they're
forced to do so
by way
of a lawsuit.
the relevant EU
law only ceases to apply once the withdrawal agreement enters into
force or, absent that, two years after the UK has notified the EU
of its intention to withdraw (
even though this deadline can be extended
by unanimous agreement between the UK and all the member states
of the EU).