Justícia : Diferéncia entre lei versions

Contengut suprimit Contengut apondut
Ponto de vista
Jiròni (discussion | contribucions)
escafament d'un tèxt en anglés
Linha 7 :
Tomàs d'Aquin defendèt l'idèa que cada persona a de dreches pel fach de nàisser e èsser d'uman e que lo Drech natural es la basa de tot sistèma de reglamentacions posterioras. Segon [[Tomàs d'Aquin]], aquestes drechs emanavan de Dieu. Aquesta concepcion es ara l'origina de l'idèa dels [[Dreches de l'òme]] actuals. L'utilitarisme liga la justícia e la felicitat, per qu'es just d'ensajar que cadun obtenga la maxima parcèlla de jòia sense perjudiciar als autres. Pels ancians, la justícia es una de las vertuts cardinalas, per aquò un trach de caractèr que se pòt educar e que fa qu'una persona siá imparciala e benvolenta amb los autres.
 
 
Justice is a topic that, even though is not as intensely discussed as abortion or gay marriage, has still been cause of much polemic. It is one of the most universal concepts that roam the human mind, in the sense of, while people have different perspectives for topics like abortion, when it comes to justice, the parameters are so often the same.
It is, for example, rare to find situations which some would find fair, while others would completely disagree about the moral that was applied in its resolution. Now what would differ between many minds is what they would do when facing an unfair situation themselves. For instance, if the government forces one to move, disrupting their whole lives, and after some years releases them, what should they do?
The best alternative in this case would most certainly be the fresh start in another country. Of course, things don’t work that easy, and all the implications of moving can make one permanently traumatized. The fact is, however, that one is already traumatized from moving to the unfamiliar base. The term mutually describes the relation two parts have when they respect and are righteous to each other. If one of the parts lacks respect to the other, then it’s perfectly acceptable for the violated side to pursue improvement by changing its situation.
No matter how important it was for the Country’s National Security, those people were citizens. It is completely incorrect and out of their jurisdiction to disturb their lives like that. There were many other alternatives that the country could have followed, and doing what they did was a clear sign of desperation, irresponsibility and bad planning. Not only should the immigrants have all the right to move, if I were in their shoes, I’d sue the government.