The opinion was of a kind we are used to seeing by now from Justice Kennedy: long on windy rhetoric about «dignity» and ad hominem attacks
on the basic human decency of the law's defenders, and short on actual coherent legal reasoning from recognizable constitutional principles.
Grant's final suggestion is to fall back
on basic human decency and respond, «If I helped you, I'd be letting others down.»
Not exact matches
I've traveled through different theologies, read countless books and commentaries, and have reached a point in my own personal journey where I honestly feel that way too many «serious» committed Christians put far too much emphasis
on theological principles than they do
basic human decency.
Michael Gove's defence of his leader
on the grounds that he possesses «
basic human decency» shows just how desperate the Tory high command's position now is.
Honor, at the least, means not exploiting the trust of vulnerable others for your own advantage — including strangers — who are relying
on certain
basic standards of
human decency.
It has cast doubts
on the integrity of many individuals, and ultimately has denied Indigenous people
basic human dignity and
decency.