New material added at 2 pm Thursday. Click “Read More” below to see it:
Two days to go
Yes or No
Let me let explore this rather harsh reality which appears to leave no other room of interpretation. Yes is yes and no is no.
Guilty or not guilty. Free or prison. Life or death.
Narrowing the discussion or debate towards this point is no doubt a necessary process to get to a point of reference, a point of clarity, a point of closure.
There are guiding principles which determines the rule of law in every country. What might be lawful in Europe can be unlawful in Canada. What might be unlawful in Iran or North Korea might be lawful in Canada.
This is Justice as defined in one of the online ARDictionary!
Definition: The quality of being just; conformity to the principles of righteousness and rectitude in all things; strict performance of moral obligations; practical conformity to human or divine law; integrity in the dealings of men with each other; rectitude; equity; uprightness.
Definition: Conformity to truth and reality in expressing opinions and in conduct; fair representation of facts respecting merit or demerit; honesty; fidelity; impartiality; as, the justice of a description or of a judgment; historical justice.
Definition: Agreeableness to right; equity; justness; as, the justice of a claim.
Definition: A person duly commissioned to hold courts, or to try and decide controversies and administer justice.
Definition: To administer justice to.
Definition: the administration of law; the act of determining rights and assigning rewards or punishments; “justice deferred is justice denied”
Definition: the quality of being just or fair
Definition: the United States federal department responsible for enforcing federal laws (including the enforcement of all civil rights legislation); created in
Definition: a public official authorized to decide questions bought before a court of justice
© Copyright 2004-2010, ExoCrew. All rights reserved. [ Policies ]
These points are very important for everyone to consider and reflect on.
The questions arising are sometimes disturbing.
Do we confuse justice with the rule of majority. Can justice be determined by the majority?
Can justice be achieved by majority vote?
Do we confuse the governing framework for society with what justice is all about.
Does democracy means justice for all or only justice for those who are in the majority?
Who does in fact protect those in the minority.
If there needs to be a guiding principle of justice what should it be based on?
If we enter into a relationship where there has to be a clear commitment, a yes or no is required.
If I do not agree and commit then I should not be ruled on or condemned that I do not follow the rules.
Let’s be clear that whatever we do, it needs to be done consciously.
The question to be decided is: should Michael allowed to distribute raw milk to those who want to drink it?
No, the question that needs to be decided in principle is the following:
Should people have the liberty to decide what to put in their bodies?
Yes or no ?????
We’ll see, I guess.