Sentences with phrase «majority in a democracy»

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».

It's their way or the highway and to compromise is to show a lack of faith which means you have one side willing to make exceptions for all peoples religions as long as they don't force it on others, and the religious side that says making exceptions or compromising is against their religion so if they are not a majority in the democracy they instead decide to play obstructionist.

The majority in a democracy is supposed to represent ALL people not only those who got them elected.

Not exact matches

All parties receive substantial public funding intended to support democracy, but it also means they are in varying degrees highly dependent on money that will disappear with a Conservative majority, making the Tories even more motivated to win and gain an advantage in the election after this one.

My mentor Michael Dooley once observed of employee participation in corporate democracy that workers will be indifferent to most corporate decisions that do not bear directly on working conditions and benefits: «As to the majority of managerial policies concerning, for example, dividend and investment policies, product development, and the like, the typical employee has a much interest and as much to offer as the typical purchaser of light bulbs.»

A single seat majority is as tight as things can get in a parliamentary democracy.

Only in the 1920s, after World War II and the closing of immigration to the United States from Eastern Europe, were democracies temporarily in the majority.

In a true democracy, those representatives present a platform that will act on the wishes of the majority; however it is up to the person seeking election to inform voters of their intent should they be successful in their pursuiIn a true democracy, those representatives present a platform that will act on the wishes of the majority; however it is up to the person seeking election to inform voters of their intent should they be successful in their pursuiin their pursuit.

To determine what that system would look like, we need only look at what the overwhelming majority of other industrialized western democracies have done in order to, according to the 2000 World Health Organization Report, make their systems far superior to our own in terms of overall quality.

Democracy was favored by a majority of Muslims in every country but Pakistan, although even there it received the largest share of responses.

Now let us consider what happens, in a democracy, and how a relatively small majority can control decision making.

A decade after having proclaimed the «end of history» and the arrival of a new world order of prosperity based on «democracy and the market», globalised financial capital has subjected the majority of the planet's working populations to the burden of international recession, which has spread out in leaps and bounds, from Asia: recession and deflation in the world's second economy, Japan; recession and even depression m various east Asian countries, since the first quarter of 1997; the collapse of the Russian economy six years ago and financial bankruptcy in July 1998; brutal recession in the leading economy of Latin America, Brazil; the beginning of the downturn in the economies of the OECD countries.

In a democracy, separation of church and state, or the opposite, will always be trumped by the majority.

Special care should be taken to discourage young people, who in their search for personal identity tend to be conformists, from interpreting and practicing democracy as majority rule, in disregard of individual and minority rights and careless of the proper subordination of the will of the group to the principles of justice.

It is represented in our day by liberal arts colleges, the Masons, Rotary, life insurance, Religion in American Life, the Anti-Defamation League, the League of Women Voters, Reader's Digest, the Jaycees, the Pro-Choice Movement, Robert Schuller, the WCTU, Common Cause, savings banks, the Moral Majority, William Buckley, the Institute for Religion and Democracy - and many preachers of the mainline denominations.

The two fundamental meanings to be represented in a democracy of desire are self - will and majority rule.

In a democracy of worth there is no majority rule, in the sense that the majority completely determine how life will be lived in the societIn a democracy of worth there is no majority rule, in the sense that the majority completely determine how life will be lived in the societin the sense that the majority completely determine how life will be lived in the societin the society.

In democracy, majority decides.

While we all should and do tolerate and accept each others right to worship, the majority should rule, just as in voting, as in democracy and in life.

One of the dead Wednesday was a 15 - year - old monk, who set himself alight with two other monks in a majority Tibetan region of Sichuan Province, said the Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy.

Thus good / bad is determined by a 51 % majority at any time, but that's only in a democracy.

So where I disagree with Larison is his claim that «Conservatives actually know very well that they do not speak for a majority in this country, and they are also well aware that changes that would allow for more direct, plebiscitary democracy, whether in presidential elections or in passing legislation, would work to the detriment of their smaller states and their overall political interests.»

Democracy ought not by any superficial synthesis to be identified with Christianity simply because in the democratic West the majority of the citizens profess to be Christians.

You and your church have an agenda far behind the times and the will of the majority, democracy has to suit your biased dogma or you will do anything in your power to fight it.

You and your church have an agenda far behind the times and the will of the majority, democracy has to suit your biased dogma or you will do everything in your power to fight it.

In the encyclical Evangelium Vitae, the Pope expressed this relationship within the framework of the common good: «It is urgently necessary, for the future of society and the development of a sound democracy, to rediscover those essential and innate human and moral values which flow from the very truth of the human being and express and safeguard the dignity of the person: values which no individual, no majority, and no State can ever create, modify, or destroy, but must only acknowledge, respect, and promote.»

Even in a democracy, it is a dubious interpretation which says that the individual must always conform to the opinion of the majority.

They will not be with you in Heaven of course, for Heaven is a Gated Community that is off - limits to middle - class losers, but they are useful in a democracy where the majority rules instead of Your Holy Upper Class.

In a Democracy the right of the majority is the right.

If the American experiment in representative democracy is not in conversation with biblical religion, it is not in conversation with what the overwhelming majority of Americans profess to believe is the source of morality.

In a democracy, this minority is easily outvoted, especially if populist politicians agitate the majority that either feels the pain or, minimally, does not see any tangible benefits as yet.

To exacerbate the problem, in a democracy many beliefs attain unquestioned acceptance because the only intellectual authority is the opinion of the majority.

However, the majority of Americans think it is necessary and in a democracy that should be the deciding factor, not your book.

Please try to keep in mind that the vast majority of atheists you're likely to come across believe in democracy, perhaps even more than conservative Christians who believe that simple majorities ought to dictate over minorities.

In Age of Folly, Lewis Lapham laments the decline of America's democratic spirit, noting: «A majority of Americans apparently have come to think of democracy as a matter of consensus and parades, as if it were somehow easy, quiet, orderly, and safe.»

Wait, no, we're not simply a democracy, we have rules in place specifically to prevent a majority from trampling the rights of minorities.

The chief strongholds from which it had most of its spread, and in which the majority of the movements and organizations through which it affected civilization took their rise, were two of the leading democracies, Great Britain and the United States.

It may of course still be racist (depending on the composition of the majority that voted them in), but it's hard to say it's undemocratic (though all the reasons most democracies are not direct democracies still apply).

An important distinction: in a democracy, it is the fundamental premise that the Majority Rules.

I have read a proposal (not supported by Mr. Wilders) to require parties that wish to participate in the elections to be democratically organised and member - based, arguing that it would make democracy less vulnerable (the wannabe - dictator could then be ousted by his own party members even if he has a majority in parliament).

In a discussion about the recent French presidential election at the Personal Democracy Forum unConference this past Saturday, Pascal - Emmanuel Gobry presented an interesting thesis: not only did Ségolène Royal's «net - centric strategy fail to win a majority at the polls, but her campaign's emphasis on citizen participation may have actually backfired entirely by undermining her perception as a leader and by leaving her dependent on a fatally unrepresentative group of voters.

And a united Labour, he adds, is the only way to win power from the Conservatives, because «if we learned lessons in 1981 to 1983, it's if social democracy is in real trouble and you split it still further you merely reinforce the majority of your opponents and that would happen - there is no question about it.»

It's all rather a good advert against that most overrated of ideas: direct democracy - the silly notion that encouraging everyone to shout as loudly as they can won't result in the domination of the weak by the strong (or by those who are able to effectively bamboozle the majority).

In Harris's hometown of Frome in northeast Somerset, a network of independent councillors has gained a majority on the council introducing bold new measures and new participatory ways of working modeled on Peter Macfadyen idea of Flatpack DemocracIn Harris's hometown of Frome in northeast Somerset, a network of independent councillors has gained a majority on the council introducing bold new measures and new participatory ways of working modeled on Peter Macfadyen idea of Flatpack Democracin northeast Somerset, a network of independent councillors has gained a majority on the council introducing bold new measures and new participatory ways of working modeled on Peter Macfadyen idea of Flatpack Democracy.

Its victory in the Spanish national election of November 2011, was counteracted in Catalonia with a secessionist majority in its Parliament for the first time in democracy.

But if in majority, democracy allows them to government.

Given the republican interest in social cohesion, and given its necessity for genuine democracy, it is similarly disappointing that republicans have thus far largely overlooked cultural relations between the have - nots and the majority group.

So in real sense, democracy is the government by people in majority.

I often share digital best practices at national and regional conferences such as AAPC, Art of Political Campaigning, CampaignTech, Campaigns & Marketing Summit, NTC, Netroots Nation, Organizing 2.0, the Reed Awards, and RootsCamp, webinars for Progressive Majority, Salsa Labs and others, and trainings in - person for small groups around the country including for Wellstone's Advanced Campaign Management School, Amalgamated Transit Union, Camp Wellstone, Center for Progressive Leadership, Clean Air Task Force, Democracy for America, HRC, New Leaders Council and New Organizing Institute.

The wider point I was making was that electoral democracy is only the first step on the pathway to civilisation, and a society in which it was universally applied would be hellish — the dictatorship of the majority over every aspect of life.