Sentences with phrase «means of coercion»

(iii) Careful consideration had to be given in all cases, but particularly where there was a significant discrepancy in age, to the extent to which ostensible consent had been obtained opportunistically, or by means of coercion, which might be subtle, or exploitation, which would be particularly relevant in cases where there might have been an element of grooming.

I'm concerned that the «14 year maximum» will be used as a means of coercion to get suspects to give over information and to confess to crimes they may have not committed.

If you do not have a means of coercion to control the means of production (army, police, etc.)- then you do not have a state.

Disputes are perhaps frequent in any organization that does not operate by means of coercion, provide pay for services or have a clear system of rewards and punishments in this life for actions taken.

Here is the definition of terrorism: «the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.»

Because of the cross, then, we are freed to pursue justice and righteousness in the political order; and Christians can do so without experiencing the compulsion to use politics as a means of coercion and manipulation.

ter · ror · ist: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion I can think of many who are guilty of this.

Not exact matches

Look up «hustle» in the dictionary and you'll see the word commonly means to sell something by force and / or coercion, and / or to maintain a flutter of activity, as in «the hustle and bustle of the daily grind.»

He quoted the second Sura, verse 256 (strangely fallible, for a pope, he meant verse 257) which says: «There must be no coercion in matters of faith».

If they are all adults... by that I mean 21 or older, and are consensual... for all parties free of coercion and trhreats... If the «marriage and home and children» are happy and well cared for... why should we care...???

Since political principles identify the proper relations between humans, and since these relations are not constitutive of happiness, freedom has meant the absence of authority or coercion, i.e., the liberty to pursue happiness without human interference.

This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.»

I also agree, religion has been used as a means of nefarious coercion, and that is something I deplore as much as you do.

With the term «external coercion,» I mean coercion that is not specific to the practice of discourse.

Generally defined as «dominating, restraining, or controlling another forcibly,» coercion involves interference with freedom, where «interference» means that the freedom in question is lessened in comparison with what it would have been had the interfering individual or group not acted at all, and this broad designation leaves open to dispute what kinds of interference are immoral.

Granting this does not mean, however, that churchly legal systems that function generally in close analogy to worldly structures of polity, even if indeed lacking police and means of physical coercion, are appropriate.

To be sure, this world of desires and means is not neat, and some coercion is inevitable.

Society must strive for justice, even if it is forced to use means, such as self - assertion, resistance, coercion, and perhaps resentment, which can not gain the moral sanction of the most sensitive and moral spirit.

A case in point is Childs's recurring use of the term «coercion,» by which he apparently means that the text itself, in its deep authority, requires a certain exposition, redaction or reading.

If God believes that some coercion is a useful and morally acceptable means of achieving a desired end, then there appears to be no reason why such coercive power would not be used if it were available.

Where group loyalties are involved, for example, coercion is often the only means of attaining justice.

Coercion in the home certainly means that there is some conflict between the immediate desire and will of a child and his parents, and the exercises of coercion by a parent perhaps always produces some conflict in thCoercion in the home certainly means that there is some conflict between the immediate desire and will of a child and his parents, and the exercises of coercion by a parent perhaps always produces some conflict in thcoercion by a parent perhaps always produces some conflict in the child.

It is one of the greatest weaknesses of our time that we lack the patience and faith to build up voluntary organizations for purposes which we value highly, and immediately ask the government to bring about by coercion (or with means raised by coercion) anything that appears as desirable to large numbers.

At the ontological level, the level of efficient causality, divine persuasion is not operative; «forbearance would mean non-existence...» But once humanity is created and God resolves to relate himself to humankind in terms of persuasion and not coercion, God «would have to be uncertain about a number of details of the future... and in some respects unable to accomplish his will at all.»

Their concepts of coercion and persuasion are closer to the meanings given in section III whereas God's persuasion and coercion are better described with the meanings in sections I and II.

With these three sets of meanings for the terms persuasion, coercion, and freedom it is now possible to make some clarifying distinctions in the discussion of the criticisms made by Hare and Madden.

In this third set of meanings coercion refers to the inducement of behavior through the application of extrinsic motivation, and persuasion refers to the communication of information about the natural consequences which will occur with various alternative behaviors.

They are in no way meant to endorse any form of coercion.

In calling for a new evangelization, the Pope precisely chose as a model what happened before Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, in other words, before it could even be tempted to impose its creed by means of political coercion.

Granted, the outcome may not be a sharply defined «civil religion» — one that could be universally recognized as such — but at the least it can be anticipated that some kind of «political religion» will be more likely to emerge in societies where legal structures take on meaning - bestowal qualities.6 Obviously such political religion can emerge in «totalitarian» as well as «democratic» societies, but in either setting it will be the law and not mere coercion that facilitates social development.

The United Nations defines modern slavery, or human trafficking, thus: «the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.

While he qualifies and conditions this in various ways, the basic point is still the same: that the good aimed at (defending democracy from terrorism) justifies the doing of evil (using means that involve violence, force, and coercion).

And war, he clearly claims, entails the use of means that are evil» such means as coercion, force, and violence.

Teilhard's belief in totalization without coercion may have been naïve, but his understanding of the bankruptcy of violence (as a means of personalization) made him, in this respect, wiser than all the Marxists.

Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting «Jesus Christ,» so that it would read «A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;» the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.

The secondary sense in which God is law refers to the means - end structures of coercion designed to keep the human situation integrated so that his law and love in the primary sense can operate with enhanced effectiveness.

In practice, the main source of said coercion since at least 1930s comes from the government; therefore in practice this means that achieving this philosophical goal requires limiting the power of the government.

Social anarchism calls for a system with common ownership of means of production and democratic control of all organisations, without any government authority or coercion.

The plea of guilty in any court, the decision of guilty by any court, the forfeiture by the teaching certificateholder of a bond in any court of law, or the written acknowledgment, duly witnessed, of offenses listed in subsection (1) to the district school superintendent or a duly appointed representative of such superintendent or to the district school board shall be prima facie proof of grounds for revocation of the certificate as listed in subsection (1) in the absence of proof by the certificateholder that the plea of guilty, forfeiture of bond, or admission of guilt was caused by threats, coercion, or fraudulent means.

The trouble with the Common Core is not that it was the handiwork of anti-American ideologues or anti-teacher dogmatists, but that it was the work of well - meaning, self - impressed technocrats who fudged difficult questions, used federal coercion to compel rapid national adoption, and assumed that things would work out.

And the more Amazon uses coercion and retaliation as means of negotiation, the more it looks to be restraining competition.

No collection agency shall collect or attempt to collect any debt alleged to be due and owing from a consumer by means of any unfair threat, coercion, or attempt to coerce.

It reflects a culture of coercion where bodily autonomy and «no» actually means «convince me.»

Coercion, it should be noted, means the denial of free and informed consent.

Although it is indisputable that sexual abuse of a 14 year old minor, sexual coercion and rape constitute a particularly serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society, I do not think that this type of act is covered by the concept of «public security» within the meaning of Article 28 (3) of Directive 2004/38.

Article 28 (3) of Directive 2004 / 38 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64 / 221 / EEC, 68 / 360 / EEC, 72 / 194 / EEC, 73 / 148 / EEC, 75 / 34 / EEC, 75 / 35 / EEC, 90 / 364 / EEC, 90 / 365 / EEC and 93 / 96 / EEC, is to be interpreted as meaning that sexual abuse of a 14 year old minor, sexual coercion and rape are not covered by the concept of «imperative grounds of public security» where those acts do not directly threaten the calm and physical security of the population as a whole or a large part of it.

The Court is asked to rule whether that provision is to be interpreted as meaning that sexual abuse of a 14 year old minor, sexual coercion and rape are covered by the concept of imperative grounds of public security.

(a) «Domestic violence» means an act of violence or a threatened act of violence upon a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship, and may include any act or threatened act against a person or against property, including an animal, when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge directed against a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship.

Other means of abuse are using the children to maintain control, such as threatening to take children away or using the children to relay messages to the other parent; using economic abuse such as not allowing one partner to know about or have access to family income or giving an allowance and expecting receipts for all purchases; using emotional abuse such as putting one partner down, making them feel crazy or making them feel guilty for other's inappropriate behavior; using threats and coercion to make one partner drop charges or do illegal acts.