Sentences with phrase «political rights question»

Freedom is political rights question... Monbiot: [Interrupting] Yes, and at the moment the political rights of the smelters is to be able to produce these fumes which are doing other people in.

Not exact matches

A heated political climate is sparking some difficult questions for business leaders and entrepreneurs as they balance individual beliefs with what's right for their companies and customers.

But it does raise to the question of where moderate conservative voters and political activists will find a new home if Alberta's Conservative parties shift further to the political right.

The non muslim side is frequently bogged down by political correctess and is unable to ask the right questions.

So the obvious question is, why does Obama need political support right now at this particular moment?

Of the 2,004 adults questioned, statements around political debates were considered by many as extreme, however, almost half the public disagreed it was extreme to believe animals have the same rights as humans.

We spoke of the global dimension of the social organisation of society, of the political not only the economic dimension of the problem of the problem of refugees throughout the world, the process of democratisation, the problem of private property, of taxation, of the problem of unemployment, of the state, of oil and its significance for the Gulf War, of the question of the right to live and of nuclear apartheid etc..

Modern moral and political thought has often focused on the question of human rights: What rights, if any, belong to all human individuals solely because they are human?

We can say summarily that a neoclassical address to the question of human rights is a return to pre-Kantian and largely premodern thought in a way that virtually all contemporary political theories find incredible.

As I have argued in these pages and elsewhere, the «presumption,» by detaching the just war way of thinking from its proper political context» the right use of sovereign public authority toward the end of tranquillitas ordinis, or peace» tends to invert the structure of classic just war analysis and turn it into a thin casuistry, giving priority consideration to necessarily contingent in bello judgments (proportionality of means, discrimination or noncombatant immunity) over what were always understood to be the prior ad bellum questions («prior» in that, inter alia, we can have a greater degree of moral clarity about them).

«When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another...» But the Declaration then quickly moves, in the very same sentence, to the question of by what right or by what authority such a change is to be made.

Next is the simple question, and that is if Obama had Bin Laden sitting in a freezer for a couple years and then decided to thaw him out for political gain why do so now when doing so right before the next Presidental election would have ensured his re-election?

For instance, a bunch of stories from the Tulsa World showing how great questions of constitutional right and natural law are engaged in the political discourse of Oklahoma.

(i) the question of gay rights — funny I agree with gay rights, must be a political debate at its heart (ii) a wonan's right to choose — funny I agree with this, see above thought (iii) teaching evolution in school — again I agree (iv) my ability to buy a glass of wine on Sunday — definitely politics here (v) immunizing teens against HPV — got my kids immunized, not even politics here (vi) population control — this is religions fault??? no this is cultural (vii) assisted suicide at end of life — agree with that, still have my religion (viii) global warmning — agree it needs to get fixed, doesn't have anything to do with religion

Those who are involved in small groups often claim that these groups have influenced how they think on political and economic issues — for example, raising their interest in questions of peace and social justice or, in the case of conservative religious groups, generating ire about abortion and gay rights.

Hume's assertion that our «religious phase» may have been the «inevitable» precondition or «vessel» of secular morality (it isn't clear whether he means naturally or historically inevitable) can't get the ethical humanist secularist around the more haunting question of whether the secular political project of mass ethical secularism is viable, much less sustainable — especially if that social order is not to be grounded in philosophy, and especially if the politics in question must, as apparently it must, be one grounded in rights to freedoms.

History may be able to clarify Jesus» attitudes on social and political questions such as war and revolution, the rights of women and the poor.

Without question, religious people have a right to be involved in political activity and they can't be expected to leave their religious convictions behind when they enter the political arena.

In describing and accounting for the lives of the Religious Right, which we define simply as religious conservatives with a considerable involvement in political activity, the book and the series tell the story primarily by focusing on leading episodes in the movement's history, including, but not limited to, the groundwork laid by Billy Graham in his relationships with presidents and other prominent political leaders; the resistance of evangelical and other Protestants to the candidacy of the Roman Catholic John F. Kennedy; the rise of what has been called the New Right out of the ashes of Barry Goldwater's defeat in 1964; a battle over sex education in Anaheim, California, in the mid-1960's; a prolonged cultural war over textbooks in West Virginia in the early 1970's — and that is a battle that has been fought less violently in community after community all over the country; the thrill conservative Christians felt over the election of a «born - again» Christian to the Presidency in 1976 and the subsequent disappointment they experienced when they found out that Jimmy Carter was, of all things, a Democrat; the rise of the Moral Majority and its infatuation with Ronald Reagan; the difficulty the Religious Right has had in dealing with abortion, homosexuality and AIDS; Pat Robertson's bid for the presidency and his subsequent launching of the Christian Coalition; efforts by Dr. James Dobson and Gary Bauer to win a «civil war of values» by changing the culture at a deeper level than is represented by winning elections; and, finally, by addressing crucial questions about the appropriate relationship between religion and politics or, as we usually put it, between church and state.

Inasmuch as congregations are themselves social spaces with social forms, theological schooling focused through questions about them must attend critically to the scripture whose use creates the social space; and it must attend to the disciplines of the human sciences that provide understanding of the social forms that make congregations moral and political realities in their own right.

... Since man enjoys the capacity for a free personal choice in truth... the right to religious freedom should be viewed as innate to the fundamental dignity of every human person... all people are «impelled by nature and also bound by our moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth» (Second Vatican Council, Dignitatis Humanae, 2)... let me express my sincere hope that your expertise in the fields of law, political science, sociology and economics will converge in these days to bring about fresh insights on this important question andthus bear much fruit now and into the future.

The conservative judges tended to argue in this vein: The Constitution is silent on the matter of marriage; the judges are not in a position, then, to declare any «constitutional rights» on this subject emanating from the text or logic of the Constitution; and therefore this question should be left in the political arena for the people and their elected representatives to decide.

One area of overlap and potential conflict is what sociologists call the problem of legitimacy, which includes among other things the question whether existing political authority is moral and right or whether it violates higher religious duties.

He also calls into question our political consensus, which is that getting the right policies (always within the neo-liberal consensus) is what makes or breaks a candidate.

These manuals follow a common pattern, taking up individual cases and indicating how they are to be resolved, and the directions they offer are remarkably similar in character.53 The greater number of cases discussed deal with moral perplexities — questions involving family life, economic activity, military service, political issues, the relationship of master and servant, the right use of recreation — but spiritual perplexities — involving «the great case which the Jews put to Peter and the jailer to Paul and Silas «54 undoubtedly received equal attention in actual pastoral work.

Franke, like «S,» acknowledges that marriage constrains freedom; she, too, questions why the right to marry — versus issues like employment and educational opportunities or political participation — has been seen as the only way to gain equality and dignity for both groups.

I believe in a woman's right to choose the birth she wants, but I am also morally obligated to answer any questions she may have truthfully, frankly, and directly without having to worry about political repercussions.

Treasury questions Ten minute rule motion - Planning Applications (Community Right of Appeal) Debate - economy Adjournment debate - political situation in Israel and Palestine

The rather unexpected rise of the euro sceptic and national - conservative alternatives for Germany, namely the (AfD) might be a serious opponent to the CDU / CSU on the political right, challenging the CDU / CSU not to abandon all of its socially - conservative positions and questioning its recent rapprochement towards the centre - left.

So, the question remains: Does engaging hundreds of millions of people on the subject of conflict in central Africa «help» despite not actually confronting the root causes and longterm consequences, i.e. can it be celebrated as step, however small, in the right direction for social media, political activism and raising awareness about African issues?

However, if a referendum is based on (gross) misinformation and / or if the format is (grossly) inappropriate then the people have a right, if not the duty, to question, indeed to repudiate any alleged popular / political mandate of the outcome.

The dialogue that ensued engaged the authors with a series of questions surrounding the book's central thesis: despite the real progress in racial equality achieved by the 1960s civil rights legislation, the United States political institution has been caught in between two modes of conceptualizing, and enacting policy, about race — both of which have failed to close the tremendous gap in racial disparities in social and economic welfare that are a legacy of American history.

«Anyone can make a mistake about who they appear on a platform with, we are not always responsible for what our political opponents say but if you do it time after time after time it is right to question your judgement.»

Of course that includes the realization that many positions within the political spectrum are mere questions of taste, and not of right and wrong.

just to clarify, does the question include or exclude migrant workers (who don't really have residency and political rights as far as I know), who are common in UAE / Saudi Arabia?

I've noticed a question here asking on what grounds Trump can be impeached and there were no negative comments on it (at that time) so I'm a little confused on how some answers are on - topic and some are off - topic based upon political left / right leanings.

Questions - Heathrow peak times, Gangmasters Licensing Authority, disability benefits, household food waste Legislation - welfare reform bill Short debate - human rights and political situation in Saudi Arabia

It seems like an impossible question to answer right now, given today's political climate.

But I think that happens on all political platforms», adding «if it becomes consistent over days, then people have the right to question whether you are addressing the issues or you are just attacking the person of your opponents and that's where the problem is».

From political circles in New York City to cocktail parties on Capitol Hill, on right - of - center Facebook pages and among left - of - center donors, two of the biggest untethered threads in New York politics are being drawn together around a single question.

A question asked yesterday by Conservative MP David Burrowes suggests that Parliamentary authorities are restricting the rights of constituents to bring material of a political nature into Parliament.

Visitors may send communications and submit suggestions, ideas, comments, questions, or other information, so long as the content is not illegal, obscene, threatening, defamatory, invasive of privacy, infringing of intellectual property rights, or otherwise injurious to third parties or objectionable and does not consist of or contain software viruses, political campaigning, commercial solicitation, chain letters, mass mailings, or any form of «spam.»

NIGHT MOVES is undoubtedly a delve into political extremism but I'd think also set to question what's right and why people make such choices.

But with this bruising, powerful drama, he also asks a question: What if the broken social, political and judicial culture around you literally allowed you to do anything for them, without any regard for right or wrong?

The assessment itself was first given in 1969, but the underlying political compromises meant that (a) students were tested by age, not grade level; (b) results were reported either as percentages of test takers getting individual questions right or (starting in 1984) on a psychometric scale that included no benchmarks, standards, or «cut points»; and (c) the «units of analysis» were the entire country and four big regions but not individual states, let alone districts or schools.

«It's a right - wing think tank, and you have to question, what's the political game?»

And the other great moral and political questions of the great debate on salt and iron — the need for profits, the rights and obligations of nobility, aid to the poor, the importance of a balanced budget, the appropriate tax burden, the risk of anarchy, and the dividing line between rule of law and tyranny — have all remained unresolved issues.

The exhibition imagines futures in which different geological, political and scientific terrains could be inhabited and poses complex questions about how our right to privacy is negotiated in wider society.

In June 1970, in response to the tragedy at Kent State University where four students were shot and killed by National Guardsman, as well as the growing Civil Rights and Anti-Vietnam War movements, Artforum asked a number of artists to respond to the following question, «What is your position regarding the kinds of political action that should be taken by artists?»

«This exhibition offers an opportunity to view the pictures from the vantage point of the twenty - first century in a time when women's rights and the social mores that determine their behavior are being questioned, debated, and even protested in the political arena,» Lombino explains.