New Testament Essay Example for Free

New Testament Essay â€Å"This weakness is displayed in the special terms that are employed by the theory —innocent, combatant, aggression, authority and so on. These terms are subject to the slipping and sliding of deconstructive analysis and forever need further, technical definition. For example, what constitutes an act of ‘aggression’? Is it Ð ° physical assault on one’s territory? An insult to the national pride? Ð  trade embargo, an attack on one’s ally? Osama bin Laden justifies his attack on 9/11 as an act of self-defense against American ‘aggression’, which has destroyed the ‘religion and life’ of his people. For over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into Ð ° spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples. If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans’ continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as Ð ° staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but are helpless†¦ All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are Ð ° clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema [religious leaders] have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in ‘Al-Mughni’, Imam al-Kisa’i in ‘Al-Bada’I’, al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: ‘As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is Ð ° duty as agreed [by the ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life’. In fact, this same justification is not so remote from what we hear in our own country, where the left-wing often blames American imperialism and the international system of capitalism for raping the cultures of third world countries, exploiting the people, producing poverty, and sowing the seeds for Ð ° violent response. The criteria do not seem to help the special problem at hand. Most scholars seem to think that just war theory allows for pre-emptive strikes, but the conditions and details are not so clear. The Bush administration and the ‘National Security Strategy’ contend that pre-emptive strikes against Iraq are consonant with just war theory, international law, and Article 51 of the United Nations Charter. Legal scholars and international jurists are said to sanction the right of Ð ° pre-emptive strike based on the condition of an imminent threat. † (Gabriel 2006 27-33) â€Å"However, the Vatican seems to interpret its own codes as Ð ° justification for fighting Ð ° defensive war against Ð ° particular act of aggression, and most scholars seem to agree with its interpretation of the tradition. Jeff McMahan, Ð ° professor at the University of Illinois, says that the theory has Ð ° strong aversion to pre-emptive war. Normally we prefer to punish Ð ° crime already committed, rather than speculate over future possibilities. Just war theory does not like to exchange its certitude for Ð ° more problematic or sordid enterprise. 18 William Gaston, professor at the University of Maryland, finds it necessary to create more criteria to justify his opposition to the administration’s policy, he concedes that ‘anticipatory self-defense has Ð ° place in international law and just war theory’, but he does not concur with the current application of this most difficult step. His criteria would involve Ð ° consideration of the enormity, probability and imminence of the threat, as well as the cost of delay, According to these criteria, the Bush policy is unnecessary in the present circumstance—at least for the time being. Saddam Hussein is not Ð ° present danger (imminence); other options for Ð ° number of months could prove fruitful (cost of delay); and it is unlikely that Saddam would hand WMD to terrorists based on his past actions and present interest. The conclusion is that ‘the case for Ð ° pre-emptive strike has not been made’. Those who list criteria often cast Ð ° negative vote toward an action. Just war treatises often demand fulfillment of all of its conditions. Thomas Aquinas, when he composed his conditions for just war (proper authority, just cause and right intention), insisted that all three conditions must be met as Ð ° necessary apologia for war. The scholastics went on to develop the maxim bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu. â€Å"However, with the United States issuing Ð ° â€Å"with us or against us ultimatum after September 11 and simultaneously dangling the carrot of long-term economic and military assistance in return for logistic support for Americas war effort, each Central Asian state rushed to strike unilateral deals with the United States based on its own self-interest, thereby allowing the United States to establish Ð ° strategic foothold in Central Asia with little or no thought for Chinas concerns. For Central Asians, it was Ð ° golden opportunity to lessen the overbearing influence of their neighboring giants (Russia and China). They view the expanded U. S. military presence in the region as an insurance policy against any future bid by Russia and China to reassert control. However, the lack of strategic policy coordination post-September 11 among the SCO member states left the multilateral forum seriously weakened, undercut the groups solidarity, and represented Ð ° â€Å"major failure for the fledgling group† established to provide Ð ° regional response to terrorism in the region. 65 It also highlighted the tenuous nature of Chinas â€Å"strategic influence† in Central Asia where local ethnic and religious rivalries and conflicting interests present formidable obstacles to Beijings desire to knit the regions governments into Ð ° solid security partnership to further Chinas grand strategic objectives. â€Å" (Mohan 2002) This meant that an action cannot have any moral defect if it is to find justification before God. Ð  war must involve the perfection of God, or it cannot proceed under his blessing. The conditions of war is wholly good, universal and absolute. They do not serve as simple rules of thumb, which may have tensions and become subject to compromise between them. However, this preference for absolute, deontological ethics does not allow the tradition to meet the changing needs of the human condition. It becomes Ð ° pretext for doing nothing because it is based upon past concerns and does not relate to modern times. Its view of the world comes from the Greek philosophical notion of kosmos, not the biblical concept of history, Its world is Ð ° closed shell of eternal laws that contain no openness to the changes of history or the historical nature of humankind. It often strait-jackets its proponents into following rules and failing to take the best course of action in the present circumstance. It limits itself to Ð ° past set of rules that are composed without the prescience of future, historical constellations. The absolute dogmatic claims of the system are somewhat surprising since so much of the analysis depends upon the power of human reason. Its basis of authority does not reside in scripture so much—maybe because the questions it asks are removed from the basic message of the New Testament. † (Elizabeth 2004 6)

Effectiveness of International Institutions for Human Rights

Effectiveness of International Institutions for Human Rights Hosea Luy How effective are international institutions in protecting human rights? International institutions face many problems in their effort to protect and promote human rights. They are therefore only moderately effective in their protection of human rights. Although these institutions face limitations to their success, their work and achievements have been crucial to the advancement and promotion of human rights world-wide. It is also important to note that â€Å"until 1945, human rights was generally considered to be a matter within the exclusive domestic sovereignty of states† (Cassel, 2001, p. 134). Consequently international human rights institutions are still young and rapidly growing so we cannot fully analyse their effectiveness. This essay will explore the role and effectiveness of international human rights law through the United Nations, nongovernmental organisations namely Amnesty International and the impact of state sovereignty. It is difficult to pin-point evidence that directly supports the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of international institutions. This is because international institutions work in tandem with other mechanisms to protect human rights, and only together are they successful (Cassel, 2001, p. 123). These mechanisms include the human rights consciousness of the public, nongovernmental organisations and domestic human rights institutions all of which influence each other. This essay will focus on the protection of civil and political rights excluding a major category of human rights, economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights. Progress in these areas has been limited when examined in the context of all those in need of food, medicine, housing and other ESC rights. â€Å"International human rights activists see how little impact they have in taking on matters of purely distributive justice† (Roth, 2004, p. 72), and this is combined with the need for a huge amount of material resources to protect and promote ESC rights (Cassel, 2001, p. 124). The United Nations (UN) is the top global institution and is unrivalled in its capability â€Å"to reach out or into virtually every society, and to establish universally applicable norms† (Gaer, 1995, p. 393). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) is the primary piece of international human rights law and has been signed and ratified by many countries. Any nation state that has signed and ratified the UNDHR is obligated to: â€Å"make laws that protect and promote human rights for all its citizens support non-government organisations that carry out programs to help people who are victims of human rights abuses† (Human Rights: Organisations and Institutions, 2000, para. 12). However there is no legal obligation exists to force signatories to introduce domestic law to follow the standards set by the UNDHR (Steinerte Wallace, 2009, p. 9). This is combined with the sometimes illegitimate excuses of national security and sovereignty that have often been used to â€Å"conceal, excuse or justify human rights abuses† (Human Rights: Organisations and Institutions, 2000, para. 6). International human rights law has quite short history and has since its inception been useful for the protection of human rights (Cassel, 2001, p. 134). It has been most effective through its indirect impacts, setting global standards for nations to follow. This has then influenced action on the domestic level in important areas such as politics, the media and the public consciousness (Cassel, 2001, p. 122). The UN’s direct mechanisms to enforce human rights also have a beneficial impact although this is much more limited (Haynes, Hough, Malik, Pettiford, 2011, p. 452). These mechanisms, such as the Human Rights Committee designated to enforce the standards documented in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, investigate human rights abuses, communicate with governments for emergencies and publicly present their findings and proposals (Gaer, 1995, p. 393). In 2006, a new body, the Human Rights Council (HRC), was created to replace the poor performing UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) (Haynes, et al., 2011, p. 452). It is hoped that the HRC may be able to advance human rights in the future with several changes, such as meeting three times a year whereas the UNCHR only met once a year (Haynes, et al., 2011, p. 452). The UN performed a significant role in coordinating an international effort to end the human rights abuses arising from the policy of apartheid in South Africa. Evidence suggests that economic pressures and sanctions during the 1980s, played a crucial role to end the discriminatory regime (Grundy, 1991, p. 85). Nel son Mandela confirmed the large role of the UN in ending the apartheid regime when he addressed the UN General Assembly in 1994. â€Å"We stand here today to salute the United Nations Organization and its Member States, both singly and collectively, for joining forces with the masses of our people in a common struggle that has brought about our emancipation and pushed back the frontiers of racism.† (Reddy, n.d.) International law and the treaties established through the UN should be recognised as a â€Å"useful tool for the protection of human rights, and one which promises to be more useful in the future† (Cassel, 2001, p. 135). Nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) are widely understood to be influential players in the field of international relations. They cooperate on a close level with departments of the UN, providing information on human rights situations, giving advice to commissions and committees to set agendas and policy as well as working together with operational agencies to carry out missions (Martens, 2004, p. 1051). Importantly, NGOs seek to be independent of governments and groups attempting to obtain political power (Wiseberg, 1992, p. 372). The primary goals of NGOs include monitoring and reporting on the human rights progress of nation states, especially violations and building pressure on abusers of human rights (Gaer, 1995, p. 394). Amnesty International is one of the largest human rights NGOs (Human Rights: Organisations and Institutions, 2000, para. 15). The creation of the first mechanism that had the ability to take international action in emergencies was a result of detailed NGO repor ts of human rights violations. The Working Group on Forced or Involuntary Disappearances sought to respond to reports in Argentina of the kidnapping and torture of people under the rule of military president Jorge Rafael Videla (Gaer, 1995, p. 392). Following a research mission in 1976, Amnesty International produced a detailed report explaining the existence of detention without judicial order and torture as well as a list of those who had â€Å"disappeared† (Gaer, 1995, p. 392). According to Mariela Belski the Director of Amnesty International in Argentina, â€Å"Argentina led the way in the prosecution of those responsible for the torture, killing and disappearance of thousands of people during the many military governments across Latin America† (Argentina: Death of former military leader who did not escape justice, 2013, para. 2). Amnesty international and other Human rights NGOs have acted as the driving force behind the vast majority of progress in the human righ ts field by the UN (Gaer, 1995, p. 389). They should be considered as crucial elements for the advancement of human rights and they will increase their effectiveness as they grow in the future. A major setback to the effectiveness of international institutions seeking to advance human rights is that national sovereignty overrules international treaties (Human Rights: Organisations and Institutions, 2000, para. 10). The concept of sovereignty was first formally adopted in the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 (Haynes, et al., 2011, p. 29). Westphalia gave state uncontested rule over their nations and legally prevented international interference in a country’s domestic, religious affairs (McCormick, 2012, p. 1). Sovereignty is also stated in the Charter of the United Nations in Article 2-4, barring any attacks on the â€Å"territorial integrity or political independence† of any country and Article 2-7 which limits intervention (McCormick, 2012, p. 1). Each signatory to a global treaty has an obligation to and is responsible and for enacting the international human rights standards in their state’s domestic law (Steinerte Wallace, 2009, p. 12). Often commitmen t to UN treaties leads to an improved respect for human rights. This is mainly true in countries with â€Å"democratically accountable governments or strong civil society† (Neumayer, 2005, p. 930). Although a strong democratic state does not always lead to compliance. Many states, including those that have strong liberal-democratic values continue to use their sovereignty to shirk international law. According to the president of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Gillian Trigg, Australia’s government has breached international law by placing asylum seeker children in detention. As a matter of very clear international law children should not be detained for anything more than what is absolutely necessary for health checks and security checks. (Children in detention: Is Australia breaching international law? 2014) Recent studies suggest that human rights laws have the least effect on nations that need it most, countries with oppressive governments â€Å" without in ternal advocates for reform† (Hafner-Burton Tsutsui, 2007, p. 408). Taking into account cases where international law has been disregarded, we should not be pessimistic about the ratification of human rights treaties by nations including those ruled by repressive governments. This should raise hopes for future progress. The main factors preventing state commitments to international institutions are not the poor and ineffective design of these institutions but the failure of governments to commit themselves to the treaties they have signed (Moravcsik, 1995, p. 181). Much progress has made by international human rights institutions in their short history and they should be commended for that fact. However many barriers still exist that prevent human rights being upheld across all states. The main of which is state sovereignty. Nations may choose to sign international treaties but compliance to these documents and effecting changes in domestic law is not a legal obligation. As a result, it could be argued that international institutions have been weak in their promotion and protection of human rights. Instead we should understand to see these institutions as growing establishments that are still in their infancy having remarkable achievements in a short amount of time. Institutions, in particular the United Nations and NGOs have a crucial role to play in the advancement of human rights and the full effectiveness of their operations is still to be seen. Reference List Cassel, D. (2001). Does international human rights law make a difference? Chicago Journal of International Law, 2(1), 121-135. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/237215195?accountid=10344 Gaer, F. D. (1995). Reality Check: Human Rights Nongovernmental Organisations Confront Governments at the United Nations. Third World Quarterly, 16(3), 389. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3992883 Grundy, Kenneth W., 1991. South Africa: Domestic Crisis and Global Challenge. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. Hafner-Burton, E. M., Tsutsui, K. (2007). Justice Lost! The Failure of International Human Rights Law To Matter Where Needed Most. Journal of Peace Research, 44(4), 407-425. DOI: 10.1177/0022343307078942 Haynes, J., Hough, P., Malik, S., Pettiford, L. (2011). World Politics. London: Pearson Education Limited. Martens, K. (2004). An Appraisal of Amnesty Internationals Work at the United Nations: Established Areas of Activities and Shifting Priorities Since the 1990s. Human Rights Quarterly, 26(4), 1050-1070. DOI: 10.1353/hrq.2004.0052 McCormick, C. (2012, September). UNHRC: The Debate over Sovereignty and Human Rights [Lecture Notes]. Retrieved from: http://modelun.ucsd.edu/TopicSynopsis/TritonMUN UNHRC Tibet 9-24-2012.pdf. Moravcsik, A. (1995). Explaining International Human Rights Regimes: Liberal Theory and Western Europe. European Journal of International Relations, 1(2), 157-189. DOI: 10.1177/1354066195001002002 Neumayer, E. (2005). Do international human rights treaties improve respect for human rights? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(6), 925-953. Retrieved from: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/612/ Reddy, E. S. (n.d.). Nelson Mandela International Day, July 18, For Freedom, Justice and Democracy. In UN.org. Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/en/events/mandeladay/apartheid.shtml Roth, K. (2004). Defending Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Practical Issues Faced by an International Human Rights Organization. Human Rights Quarterly, 26(1), 63-73. DOI: 10.1353/hrq.2004.0010 Steinerte, E., Wallace, R.M.M. (2009). United Nations protection of human rights. London: University of London Press Wiseberg, L.S. (1992). Human rights non-governmental organizations, in R Claude B Weston, Human Rights in the World Community, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press Wotipka, C., Tsutsui, K. (2008). Global Human Rights and State Sovereignty: State Ratification of International Human Rights Treaties, 1965–2001. Sociological Forum, 23(4), 724-754. doi:10.1111/j.1573-7861.2008.00092.x (2000). Human Rights: Organisations and Institutions. In Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved from: http://www.abc.net.au/civics/rights/organ.htm (2013). Argentina: Death of former military leader who did not escape justice. In Amnesty International. Retrieved from: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/argentina-death-former-military-leader-who-did-not-escape-justice-2013-05-17 (2014). Children in detention: Is Australia breaching international law? In ABC News. Retrieved from: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-31/children-in-detention-is-australia-breaching-international-law/5344022 1

Euthanasia Essay: Assisted Suicide -- Euthanasia Physician Assisted Su

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide   Ã‚  Ã‚   In her paper entitled "Euthanasia," Phillipa Foot notes that euthanasia should be thought of as "inducing or otherwise opting for death for the sake of the one who is to die" (MI, 8). In Moral Matters, Jan Narveson argues, successfully I think, that given moral grounds for suicide, voluntary euthanasia is morally acceptable (at least, in principle). Daniel Callahan, on the other hand, in his "When Self-Determination Runs Amok," counters that the traditional pro-(active) euthanasia arguments concerning self-determination, the distinction between killing and allowing to die, and the skepticism about harmful consequences for society, are flawed. I do not think Callahan's reasoning establishes that euthanasia is indeed morally wrong and legally impossible, and I will attempt to show that.    Callahan first goes on to state that euthanasia is different from suicide in that it involves not only the right of a person to self-determination, but the transfer of the right to kill to the acting agent (presumably a physician) as well. This right, however, is temporary and restricted to killing the patient only. It is not clear why this temporary transfer makes euthanasia wrong, for if this is wrong, then letting a patient die (in the case where the patient already has the assistance of life-supporting equipment) is also wrong, if there is no distinction between killing and letting die. So, we must return to this argument after addressing Callahan's claims of a distinction between killing and allowing to die.    The argument for the distinction is based on the cause of death. In the classic example of a doctor unplugging life-sustaining equipment, the cited cause of death is disease or... ... I have brought forward considerations that counter Callahan's reasoning against three types of arguments that support euthanasia: the right to self-determination, the insignificant difference between killing and letting a person die by removing their life-support, and euthanasia's good consequences outweighing the harmful consequences are all positive, relevant and valid factors in the moral evaluation of euthanasia. Callahan's objections against these reasons do not hold.    Works Cited       MI: Narveson, Jan, ed. Moral Issues. Toronto: Oxford, 1983.    EI: Soifer, Eldon, ed. Ethical Issues. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1997.    MM: Narveson, Jan. Moral Matters. Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1993.    Callahan, Daniel. When Self-Determination Runs Amok, in Hastings Center Report, March-April 1992, pp. 52-55. In EI, pp.409-415.   

Is the Impeachment in the Nations Best Interest? :: History Clinton Scandal Essays

Is the Impeachment in the Nations Best Interest? The President of the united States obstructed justice by encouraging Monica Lewinsky to file a false affidavit in the case of Jones v. Clinton. Then he committed grand jury perjury when he stated that he told Ms. Lewinsky she might be able to avoid testifying in the case by filing an affidavit. He also obstructed justice by allowing his attorney to use this false affidavit in an attempt to cut off a legitimate line of questioning during his deposition. He then lied about this obstruction before the grand jury. The President still denies he broke the law. He knows, however, that as soon as he does admit this then it’s all over for him. Personally I think the President did break the law. But is it worth sacrificing the wellbeing of the nation over this? Do we really want to look our kids in the eye and tell them that the nation’s economy was ruined over the Presidents penis? How could this impeachment be good for the country? Is it somehow going to make the country stronger for people to see that even the President is not above the law. Every day people see cops fixing tickets, judges fixing tickets, politicians getting the children of their â€Å"friends† off the hook when they screwed up and there are hundreds of other ways people in this country avoid the consequences of the law. Americans are used to washing each others backs and looking the other way. Yet now the President can’t get away with exposing himself without being charged with obstruction of justice. It’s down right scary to think the President of the wealthiest country in the world doesn’t have enough pull to get out of this. I submit that O.J. Simpson got away with killing two people and with a mountain of evidence against him. So if you can’t trust this Democratic President who can you trust? Certainly not the Republicans, they said â€Å"Hey Bill just admit wrong doing and all will be forgiven† but that obviously was a lie. Now the war against the two parties has taken on a new ferocity. The next thing you know neither side can trust the other. Take this as a hypothetical senario. Tensions build between the two groups, a Democrat bombs the Republican headquarters, the Republicans retaliate, and hard lines are drawn in our country.

Treatments for Depression Essay -- Biology Essays Research Papers

Treatments for Depression Clinical depression is a disease that involves feelings of sadness lasting for longer than two weeks and is often accompanied by a loss of interest in life, hopelessness, and decreased energy. (3) Depression affects 340 million people in the world today. One in every 4 women and one in every 10 men develop depression during their lifetime. About half the cases of depression are untreated and about 10 to 15 percent of all depressed people commit suicide. (4) There are many different types of depression including major depression, Bipolar Disorder, Dysthymia, and Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), and there are different degrees of depression ranging from less severe to major severe. (3) There are various ways to treat depression, but what most people do not know is that depression is one of the most treatable mental illnesses. There are a variety of drugs called antidepressants which help to increase certain neurotransmitters in your brain. There are also various types of counseling, psychotherapy, self-help techniques, and alternative therapies to help a person overcome depression. In many cases, doctors combine different forms of therapies and treatments to produce the best result in depression cases. (1) The most widely used therapy today is antidepressants. Antidepressants are usually divided into three categories: Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI), Tricyclic Antidepressants (TCA), and Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors (MOAI). (1) SSRIs raise the level of serotonin in the brain because low levels of this neurotransmitter have been connected to depression. TCAs increase the level of norepinephrine in the brain. MOAIs increase the levels of epinephrine, norepinephrine, and serotonin in ... ... because of the many dangerous side affects associated with them. Maybe one day there will be a cure for depression just as we are searching for a cure for cancer or AIDS, and then people will not have to deal with this disease that causes them to lose 10 percent of the productive years during their lives.(4) References 1)Depression Treatment and Help http://www.about-depression.com/treatments-for-depression/treatment-overview.php 2)50+Health-Home/Treatments for Depression http://www.50plushealth.co.uk/index.cfm?articleid=461 3)Other Treatments for Depression http://www.ehealthmd.com/library/depression/DEP_other.html 4)Depression- Net, Info on Depression http://www.depression-net.com/ 5)Major Depressive Disorder: Treatment http://www.mentalhealth.com/rx/p23-md01.html#Head_2 6)Depression Treatment http://www.apa.org/journals/anton.html

Political Economies

Contemporary political economies are mixtures of fascism, socialism, capitalism, anarchism, etc. Most of them stress aspects of certain systems more than those of others but in each one will find a mixture. Recent largely fascist systems are those of Mussolini's Italy, Peron's Argentina, Hitler's Third Reich, Chavez' Venezuela, and several of recent Middle Eastern regimes (e. g. , Libya), Egypt, et al. So called communist regimes are also effectively fascist since they tend to be ruled by an undemocratic group of rulers†e. . , North Korea, Cuba. Welfare Statism The welfare state or, from the economic viewpoint, the mixed economy, may be understood as a combination of the principles of capitalism and socialism. Sometimes the emphasis in this system is placed not so much on economic as on certain moral considerations. Basically the welfare state consists of a legal system that aims at securing for everyone the negative right to liberty and the positive right to well being.The wel fare state, which is to say most Western countries, balances the two values that together seem to its advocates to be the bedrock of a civilized society. No one ought to have his or her sovereignty seriously compromised, nor should anyone be permitted to fall below a certain standard of living. This is difficult to maintain ecause at different times one or another of these objectives will probably take priority and in mostly democratic systems political leaders will vacillate between giving more support to one or the other.The right to strike, for example, which is the negative liberty to quit one's Job in an effort to gain respect for one's terms of employment, may conflict with the positive right to be provided with various services–e. g. , health care, mail delivery or education. It is indeed a prominent feature of the welfare state that both negative and positive rights receive their legal protection. Negative rights involve respect for a person's life, liberty and proper ty–that is, everyone is by law supposed to abstain from interfering with these.Positive rights, in turn, involve respect for a person's basic needs–that is, everyone who is unable to secure the requirements ot survival and even tlourishing is supposed to have those provided by way of the appropriate public policy (e. g. , taxation, mandated services, public education, national health care). The moral underpinnings of the welfare state can be utilitarianism, altruism or certain intuitively held moral precepts. Utilitarianism requires that all pursue the eneral welfare and whatever public policies to facilitate this were needed would be justified.Although many utilitarians believe that the general welfare is best achieved when government operates in a largely laissez-faire fashion, there is no objection to government intervention in social affairs if without those many in the society may fail to achieve a decent and prosperous form of life. Altruists, in turn, often hold that to make certain that people fulfill their primary obligation to help others, it is necessary to introduce public measures that will secure such help, given that many might wish o breach their duty to do the right thing.Finally, there is the claim that by our common intuitions it is evident that both a measure of personal liberty and social welfare must be guaranteed to all, lest the quality of life in society fall below what it should be. While people object to the welfare state from several other perspectives, it is thought by its supporters to be the most stable modern political orders. Although it is characterized by much dispute and controversy, in the long run, its supporters maintain, the system seems to be overall satisfactory and Just.

Eradication of poverty Essay

The International Day for the Eradication of Poverty is celebrated every year on October 17 throughout the world. It was officially recognised by the United Nations . It is to honour the victims of poverty, hunger, violence and fear. One of the main aims of the day is to make the voice of the poor heard and Raising awareness of the need to eradicate poverty. Poverty is the state of one who lacks a certain amount of material possessions or money. That is, they have little or no material means of surviving—little or no food, shelter, clothes, healthcare, education, and other physical means of living and improving one’s life Poverty reduction is a major goal and issue for many international organizations such as the United Nations and the World Bank. The World Bank estimated 1.29 billion people were living in absolute poverty in 2008. Of these, about 400 million people in absolute poverty lived in India and 173 million people in China. Poverty has been a serious problem over centuries. Every year, there are millions of people at the risk of hunger. we have to fight corruption. This is one of the great sources of poverty. A country with a lot of corruption will grow slower than others, and eventually, the economic activities will decline. The principal cause of why poverty exists is because of this simple fact. The Earth, on an environmental and economic standpoint, cannot satisfy every single human being’s wish, desire and demand when it comes to the consumption of goods and services because of scarce natural resources. This harsh reality will always be present within an economically driven society given the exploitation of natural resources and the constant pursuit of economic growth. the problem lies in the distribution of this consumption where extremely few people consume almost 70% to 80% of these resources while large numbers of people consume just under 20% of the same resources. poverty results in the lack of resources. poor students do not have the opportunity to study in good schools, get good coaching, study good books. poverty also leads to crime. when one is unable to earn money from fair mean, they turn to become thieves, robbers, pockpocketers, even terrorist.. poverty also leads to overpopulation which is itself one of the big challenges faced by us. people think that by having more children, they will have more earning hands. thus, leading to increased population of the country. to set all things in order, it is necessary to remove poverty.(ERADICATION OF POVERTY) In order to prevent poverty, the causes that create poverty itself have to be recognized and fixed. 1.overpopulation 2.distribution of resources 3.lack of education : 4.economic trends : rich becoming richer and poor becoming poorer.ment 5.corruption 6.unemployment However, the essence in the prevention of poverty lies in the fixing of causes and not in the fixing of factors that create poverty. Poverty cannot be removed overnight. it is a long job. it can be wiped step by step. Educational facilities should be provided to all the poor families so that their outlook/ way of seeing things is broadened. the exploitation of poor should be stopped. the programs/money issued by the government should be provided to the poor in full. Then and then only can poverty be removed.