Sentences with phrase «human rights arguments»

The issue that their lordships had to consider was raised in declaratory relief proceedings in the High Court, in which YL sought to engage human rights arguments to resist her removal from the home.

She now has substantial experience in immigration and asylum cases which invariably involve Human Rights arguments and arguments about the proper interpretation of the Immigration Rules.

Noting that «there is no reason why the fact that the applicant has a private interest in the outcome should be fatal, provided that the public interest test is satisfied», Jackson LJ's initial report identifies the apparent contradiction between the «no private interest» test and the requirement in claims involving human rights arguments for the claimant to have been «personally or directly affected» by the violation.

We have a particular expertise in cases involving human rights arguments and politically motivated requests.

By its decision in McDonald, the Court of Appeal has provided a degree of certainty as to the position of human rights arguments as defences to residential possession claims brought in the private sphere.

With respect to those, who put forward the Human Rights argument, I believe it is misconceived.

With respect to the human rights argument, the court held that the landlord was unable to establish that the by - law discriminates based on family status (or on any other protected status).

Not exact matches

Guzman's lawyers cited the a decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Human Rights Watch, and congressional testimony to underscore the dangers of solitary confinement and bolster their argument to release him from it.

His argument is basically that Canada's oil is ethically preferable to the oil produced in other places, considering especially places with serious histories of human rights violations.

Harper even drew on Canadian John Humphry's drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as an argument for militarizing Canadian foreign policy.

A thorough review of the arguments for and against abstinence programs in Uganda specifically is available on the Human Rights Watch website.

The arguments here are, for the most part, human beings who want to be right, right in their own belief of God, Church, Religion, or Non-Believers of any or all of the above.

None of these arguments give the Israelis the right to continuously violate the basic human rights of the Palestinian people who live in abject poverty.

As a participant in that 1998 Ramsey Colloquium, a longtime supporter of the cautious use of rights language, and a frequent critic of its misuses, I was moved by Reno's arguments to ponder whether the noble post — World War II universal human - rights idea has finally been so manipulated and politicized as to justify its abandonment by men and women of good will.

We are not likely to win this battle for basic human rights using the argument that the bible has no value.

Of course, to put abortion in such simple, black and white terms can be shocking to some — and many pro-abortion activists would disagree, saying that a child is not human or nor a person or does not possess rights, or some other such argument.

Though he verbally defended the old New England idea, it is interesting that he defended it more on the basis of reason and human rights than on the basis of Scripture, and this defense of congregational independence later provided arguments for advocates of the revolution against England.

Many of its arguments to this effect are derived from human rights «data,» which the Administration has used in turn to justify its support for the contra rebels... [W] e find the Administration's approach to Nicaragua deceptive and harmful....

Pius XII, in a further clarification of the standard argument, holds that when the State, acting by its ministerial power, uses the death penalty, it does not exercise dominion over human life but only recognizes that the criminal, by a kind of moral suicide, has deprived himself of the right to life.

John Warwick Montgomery, a lawyer and philosopher as well as theologian, provides perhaps the most comprehensive argument by a conservative in his recent book Human Rights and Human Dignity: An Apologetic for the Transcendent Perspective (Zondervan, 1986) He concludes that rights derived from the inerrant teachings of the Bible give authority to the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration, even exceeding its claims in significantRights and Human Dignity: An Apologetic for the Transcendent Perspective (Zondervan, 1986) He concludes that rights derived from the inerrant teachings of the Bible give authority to the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration, even exceeding its claims in significantrights derived from the inerrant teachings of the Bible give authority to the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration, even exceeding its claims in significantrights set forth in the Universal Declaration, even exceeding its claims in significant ways.

Instead, I will assume that the case for neoclassical metaphysics can otherwise be made and attempt programmatically to show that the comprehensive purpose it formulates grounds justice as compound, grounds a substantive principle of justice that consistently implies the formative human rights of communicative respect.7 Toward the conclusion of this argument, I will also seek to identify an inclusive human right that is substantive in character.

Rather than drawing attention to the distinctiveness of the Judeo - Christian tradition, liberal civil religion is much more likely to include arguments about basic human rights and common human problems.

Indeed, Arkes recognizes as much elsewhere in his argument, for he writes with approval: «During the First Congress, James Madison remarked that the natural right of human beings to be governed only with their consent was an «absolute truth.»

«Religious arguments,» he writes, «must never trump the protection of children's basic human rights.

David R. Carlin presents a believable argument in the first few paragraphs of «Rights, Animal and Human» (August / September).

Those who made and continue to make cogent, well - reasoned, loving arguments for marriage as it has been defined throughout human history continue to get branded as hateful bigots, not because they are, but because others who have opposed gay rights have been.

The argument over the right or wrong of a human being property is a separate issue.

lol, yes clay i am an atheist... i created the sun whorshipping thing to have argument against religion from a religious stand point... however, the sun makes more sense then something you can't see or feel — the sun also gives free energy... your god once did that for the jews, my gives it to the human race as well as everything else on the planet, fuk even the planet is nothing without the sun... but back to your point — yes it is very hypocritical of me, AND thats the point, every religious person i have ever met has and on a constant basis broken the tenets of there faith without regard for there souls — it seems to only be the person's conscience that dictates what is right and wrong... the belief in a god figure is just because its tradition to and plus every else believes so its always to be part of the group instead of an outsider — that is sadly human nature to be part of the group.

Cardinal Dulles paraphrases the standard argument this way: «By giving the impression that human beings sometimes have the right to kill, [capital punishment] fosters a casual attitude toward evils such as abortion, suicide, and euthanasia.»

In the ethical version of the argument from cruelty, animal activists argue that humans have no more right to inflict suffering or pain on a sentient being, such as a raccoon, than they would have a right to inflict pain on a mentally retarded child.

[37] In the ethical version of the argument from cruelty, animal activists argue that humans have no more right to inflict suffering or pain on a sentient being, such as a raccoon, than they would have a right to inflict pain on a mentally retarded child.

By establishing the congruence of religious teachings central to all the major traditions with the legal definitions of basic human rights, Lepard strengthens the argument that the core principles of international human rights law are indeed «universal.»

Before Roe, the arguments of the pro-choice advocates raised difficult questions: When is it morally right to stop a developing human life?

Just last December, in the Artavia case, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights announced a new human right to subsidized in vitro fertilization, pushing aside arguments that IVF may be dangerous to women and to the children born theHuman Rights announced a new human right to subsidized in vitro fertilization, pushing aside arguments that IVF may be dangerous to women and to the children born thehuman right to subsidized in vitro fertilization, pushing aside arguments that IVF may be dangerous to women and to the children born thereby.

The second major argument, originally not intended as a cultural relativist argument, is the claim that societies which lack certain cultural prerequisites are not suited for democracy and human rights.

Turning first to the Asian values claims, I offer a four-fold critique of the these culture - based claims: first, I will briefly address the Asian values claim on a substantive level; second, I will address a related cultural prerequisites argument which seeks to disqualify some societies from realization of democracy and human rights; third, I will consider claims made on behalf of community or communitarian values in the East Asian context; and fourth, a recent shift to concern with institutions and their role in social transformation will be considered as a prelude to the constitutionalist argument addressed in the second half of this essay.

Permits the Irish courts to hear arguments about the European Convention on Human Rights in cases before them

These arguments maintain that it is extremely painful and is a violation of human rights.

However, democracy should not be about half measures - surely all prisoners should have the vote or the argument can also be made that they have forfeited that human right.

It also accepted the Home Office's argument that sending the man back was not in breach of human rights law, which state that a person can not be sent to a place where they may face torture or ill - treatment.

The European Court of Human Rights rejected his argument that he would face inhumane conditions across the Atlantic.

All four claimants» arguments rested on articles nine, which guarantees freedom of religion, and 14, which prohibits discrimination, of the European Convention of Human Rights.

However, the idea that if society needs to bring resources to bear it is somehow not a fundamental human right is an argument that seems to make assumptions about being somehow valid more than any demonstration of validity having been made.

The argument would be that the prohibition itself is not comprehensive but rather a more limited one that does not extend to uses of force to protect human rights.

The bearded Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn criticised the Tory benches and their position on Human Rights and their support for a «Bill of Rights», making an emphatic argument that MPs should, «take a moment to praise the European Court of Human Rights & European Court of Justice and stop listening to the neanderthal voices behind him [the Tory backbenchers] in what was a very important step in improving the human rights after the second world war.&rHuman Rights and their support for a «Bill of Rights», making an emphatic argument that MPs should, «take a moment to praise the European Court of Human Rights & European Court of Justice and stop listening to the neanderthal voices behind him [the Tory backbenchers] in what was a very important step in improving the human rights after the second world war.&Rights and their support for a «Bill of Rights», making an emphatic argument that MPs should, «take a moment to praise the European Court of Human Rights & European Court of Justice and stop listening to the neanderthal voices behind him [the Tory backbenchers] in what was a very important step in improving the human rights after the second world war.&Rights», making an emphatic argument that MPs should, «take a moment to praise the European Court of Human Rights & European Court of Justice and stop listening to the neanderthal voices behind him [the Tory backbenchers] in what was a very important step in improving the human rights after the second world war.&rHuman Rights & European Court of Justice and stop listening to the neanderthal voices behind him [the Tory backbenchers] in what was a very important step in improving the human rights after the second world war.&Rights & European Court of Justice and stop listening to the neanderthal voices behind him [the Tory backbenchers] in what was a very important step in improving the human rights after the second world war.&rhuman rights after the second world war.&rights after the second world war.»

Sadiq Khan MP, shadow justice secretary, said: «The energy and time this government is spending on arguments about the Human Rights Act shows how completely out of touch it is with the British people who are not interested in cat fights between ministers but how the safety of their communities will be protected after cuts in police budgets which go too far and too fast.»

@PoloHoleSet: I think ColinZwanziger was debating my argument of SA having a «significantly worse record on human rights than Iran», not the fact that they both have crap records on human rights.

The government's lawyers are due to lay out their argument in more detail tomorrow but at an initial hearing earlier this month, they claimed that a first tier tribunal only has the power to identify that legislation is incompatible with the Human Rights Act - not to rule on a case on that basis.

Today the state Division of Human Rights heard arguments about a Capital Region farm's refusal to rent out space for a same - sex couple's wedding.

And this is actually, these arguments are counter to the Canadian Human Rights Code.