findmatthewwilson

Supreme Court Abortion Decision

2012-01-14T19:00:00.000-08:00

After much deliberation and discussion, the Supreme Courthas returned a critical strike to the core of women’s rights in the abortionarena. The court in a 5-4 decisionbanned a medical procedure known as a partial-birth abortion or Dilation andExtraction. This abortion procedure wasperformed after the 20^th week of pregnancy. While the pro-rights crowd is naturally upsetover the ban, they are horrified over the fact that there are no exceptions tothe ban that would enable a doctor to save the life of a woman if it wasmedically necessary to perform the procedure.

Doctors can face up to 2 years in prison if they areconvicted of performing the procedures, which will greatly limit the numbers ofdoctors performing the procedures and likely increase the number of statesplacing bans of the entire abortion procedure as well. The decision came from a split Supreme Court,with two of the justices being hand picked by Bush himself. This is a cause of great concern, suggestingthat the Supreme Court has turned into a very conservative place, despite thelack of support for Bush and many of his ideas and practices on a broaderlevel. The Supreme Court's involvementin politics is usually noted, but given the gravity of this decision it isclear where certain allegiances lie.

Is the Supreme Court really following the wishes of themajority, do they really have the legal right to determine that a medicaldecision can or cannot be performed? Theanti-abortion camps in the GOP are happy following the decision and are busilylooking for more ways to put a damper on the rights of women in regards toabortions. How will this decision beregarded when it comes election time, and the Presidential elections comearound? What about the midterm electionsnext time they are scheduled?

Many people are left to wonder if the Supreme Court decisionis truly a legal decision, or nothing more than a very carefully selected groupof ultra conservative judge’s who are following Bush’s wishes and desires inregards to the case. The case wassitting before a panel of judge’s who seem to thrive off of the acceptance ofBush, and Bush was noted as being encouraged by the ruling and declaring it asa victory for his administration.

The court defended its decision by saying that it was doingnothing more than drawing a line between abortion and infanticide. There is a difference between killing achild, or an infant, and an abortion. One of the most notable differences is that a child or infant is notconsidered an infant until the first breath of air is taken into thelungs. An abortion does not allow theinfant to take that first breath of air, therefore, removing the term infantfrom their being.

While it is noble that the Supreme Court is looking andseeking to protect all forms of life, they should also concern themselves withthe lives of the mothers who carry babies, who should not be allowed tocontinue to term for medical reasons. There are numerous women each year who become pregnant who are unablephysically to carry a child to term, and must abort the child, or risk theirown life. What has the Supreme Courtdone in order to protect those mothers, or improve their quality of life?

Copyright

2012-01-12T13:00:00.000-08:00

Copyrightis a legal fiction designed to protect the works of artists, inventors andinnovators. In essence, it is a legalbar, allowing exclusivity for those who create works in the form of anintangible asset which can be sold or relinquished, and which expires upon acertain period of time. With the growthof the internet, and the creation of more and more content, the question ofcopyright is becoming increasingly more relevant, and one which more and morewebmasters are considering to protect their own interests. Additionally, with the rise of the freelancermarket, the issue of copyright is becoming a heated topic of debate for bothbuyers and sellers at every stage in the production chain, and the effects ofnot having the relevant rights could be potentially catastrophic. In this article, we'll look at what exactlycopyright is, and how it relates to the internet in content creation.

Copyrightis an artificial concept that gives the creator of a work, or the person hesells the right to, the legal right to use or modify in whole or in part, andto call their own. It has a differentmeaning in most jurisdictions, however the basic principle is the same: thecreator owns the original copyright to the work in question, and has thefreedom to pass this on at will, usually in consideration for money. Where a creator is working on commission,copyright is designed to act as a lien in his favor, meaning that if hecreates and passes on but does not receive payment, he can withhold copyright andsue for breach where applicable. Ofcourse, he would also have remedies under the ordinary law of contract, but thegrasp of copyright is a very powerful tool, which can even be used against thethird party buyer from the original commissioner.

Copyrightis designed as a tool to cover what is known as intellectual property. Committing intellectual thoughts and ideas topaper, or making them tangible is usually sufficient to give rise to thecopyright protection, which usually lasts for a number of decades in preventingothers from steeling ideas. This isprimarily designed to encourage forward thinking and art, and can be a vitaltool in protecting the financial interests of those responsible for some of theworld's most vital progressions. Consider the inventors of the seatbelt, Volvo. Volvo could have used their copyright toprevent other manufacturers from installing seat belts, and this would havebeen sufficient to protect any other manufacturer from doing so. Of course they waived their rights for thesafety of the general public, which is also a possible consideration for thecreator of something new and innovative.

Copyrightis an exhaustible right, and it usually expires on a given date, after whichall works enter the public domain. Thismeans that those who create new products have sufficient time to capitalize ontheir idea before the world at large can join in. Unfortunately for many musicians, this meanstheir artistic works can no longer make them money specifically, and can beused royalty free; a fact that has caused much uproar and unrest in recentyears.

Copyrightis a dynamic area of the law, and is particularly relevant to theinternet. As more and more content ofmore and more varieties is created online, there comes a need to findprotection in copyright law to prevent unscrupulous parties from using contentwithout authorization. In combatingthis, a number of international legal organizations have been established witha view to tackling copyright violation, and helping those without legal supportto fight cases for the protection of their work. It is undoubtedly an area of law that is onthe ascendancy, as lawyers worldwide strive to find a cohesive structure toonline intellectual property law, and the protections online authors should beafforded for creating their works. Atleast within national boundaries, it is highly possible to rely on copyrightlaws to protect and govern material.

The Potential Effects of The Iraqi War on the Election

2012-01-11T11:30:00.000-08:00

The upcoming election has many people wondering exactly howthe 'War on Terror' will effect the decision for our next President. With President Bush’s approval ratings takinga nose-dive in recent years it seems as if the American people are ready for achange, and want the troops that have been overseas for so long to be returnedhome to their families and loved ones. Many Americans are upset over the length of time the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have dragged on, andwith the steadily rising death toll brave soldiers and their families arepaying the ultimate sacrifice for something they no longer wish to be a partof.

The military is beginning to feel the effects of the war aswell, with almost 4,000 soldiers deserting in 2006 alone, the highest numberssince World War 2. Many are looking toavoid the war and chaos as much as possible, which leaves the country trying todetermine whether another Republican in office is going to make things better,or potentially worse for the country. Assome issues in Iraqare cleaned up, more appear on an almost daily basis, causing the troops returndate to be delayed even further.

Many Americans are also highly upset that while the troopsare overseas, there is no definite time frame for withdrawal, and no clear ideaof when they will return home. Notimeline has been determined, despite the long duration of military presence inthese conflict areas. People all acrossthe country are starting to feel as if this is potentially nothing more than agame that President Bush is playing, while using the troops as his personalgame chips. A deadline for returning thetroops has been discussed numerous times, yet has never materialized intoanything worthwhile.

Where does this leave the country? With thousands killed in Iraq there arenumerous votes that should have been counted in the next election that will bemissing, as the fallen soldiers are all missed. With Bush’s approval ratings in the mid to low 30’s range, it isstarting to look very bleak for the Republican party to manage to find a strongenough candidate to run on their ticket who can repair the massive 'goodwill'damage from the Bush administration.

It is suspected that the effects of the war will have adamper on the election, especially since in the course of the war the House hasmoved to a Democratic majority in power. With this major shift, as well as Bush’s approval ratings being so low,it seems obvious that the people are sitting up and taking notice of everythingthat is occurring all around the country, the question remains, is how deeplythis will upset the election and how heavily it will weigh on the minds ofvoters while they are standing in the polls casting those final ballots.

Many are rejoicing that Bush is unable to run, after seeingthe war, as well as the state of the economy and hoping for a much betteroutcome from the next election. With thenext election, looming in the horizon it will be very interesting to see howeverything plays out in the political arena and the attitudes and ideas thatthe candidates will be emphasizing.

Executive Compensation to the People

2012-01-09T16:30:00.000-08:00

There is a bill in the progress before the House ofRepresentatives that is trying to put the issue of the pay and compensationpackage that executives of publicly traded companies receive in front ofstockholders. This bill is actuallyexpected to pass through the house successfully; however, it is unclear howwell the Senate will receive it. Is thisbill the right direction for a modern America, or do we need to considermore intimately the economic implications of such a decision?

The White House has already formally registered itsopposition to such a plan, however the backers are unconcerned. Many feel that the compensation plans of themajor officers of the publicly traded companies should be tied to the performanceof the company and the officers themselves, and not to the figures that theofficers wish to receive.

This bill if passed could place an enormous amount of powerinto the hands of stockholders who are upset with the way several companieshave behaved lately, with declining profits and horrible business practiceswhile the officers of the companies have picked up large compensation packagesthat include their salary, benefits, and stock options. Each officer can end up with hundreds if notthousands in profits even while the company is performing badly, whichstockholders believe is an inequitable outcome.

Many have wondered if the officers in charge of thesecompanies would tighten the belts on spending if their own pay was tied totheir performance rather than their wishes, and with numerous companies fallingshort of profits with huge pay packages going out, and raises occurring almostyearly many investors have started complaining loudly.

While current President Bush has urged the officers of thecompanies to step up and take responsibility. He has also said that it is not an issue that the government shouldbecome involved in. How far should thegovernment extend into a private business? How many people would really feel comfortable with the idea of havingthe government determine what their pay could be? Most Americans can agree that they would notlike the idea of the government interfering with their job and pays.

At the same time, while most Americans do not wish to havethe government intruding into their jobs and careers, many still want somemeasures put into place to hold the executives accountable who are responsiblefor multi-million and multi-billion companies that employ hundreds to thousandsof people.

Many have argued that the concept is nothing new; it issimilar to ideas that are currently in place in countries such as Sweden, Australiaand even in Britain. With examples such as those to follow, itmakes people wonder if this actually does have the chance to pass through theHouse of Representatives and the Senate once the voting time has arrived.

With time as the key factor, there is scheduled to be a voteon the issue in the House of Representatives in the very near future, which isvery much expected to pass without much opposition. It is the next step in the Senate that iswhere it starts getting sticky with people unsure of the results once thevoting in the Senate starts. However,with increasing support from the people, many of whom work for companies affectedby this issue, there is scope for a mass political influence, which willcertainly make the outcome interesting.

Minimising Tax Liability On Death

2012-01-08T16:30:00.000-08:00

When wedie, most of us leave behind a fairly substantial and intricate web of assetsand liabilities, including money, our home and our other possessions. In most jurisdictions, there arises aliability to tax on death that must be borne from the totality of the estate,and this can lead to a significant reduction of inheritance for our lovedones. Having said that, there are anumber of ways in which liability to tax on death can be vastly reduced whilststill ensuring sufficient legacies and provisions mortis causa. In this article, we will look at some of themost salient ways in which one can seek to minimize his estate's liability totax on death, and ways in which careful planning can help increase the legacieswe leave behind.

Taxliability on death usually arises through bad inheritance planning, and a lackof legal consideration. Of course to acertain extent it is unavoidable, but with some care and consideration it ispossible to reduce liability overall. There'sabsolutely no point in making legacies in a will which won't be fulfilled untilafter death and which haven’t been properly considered in light of the relevantlegal provisions. If you haven't done soalready, it is extremely advisable to consult an attorney on minimizingliability on death, and on effective estate planning to avoid these potentialproblems and to ensure your family are left with more in their pockets.

If youintend to leave legacies to family members of a specific quantity or nature, itmay be wise to do so at least a decade before you die, which will ultimatelydivert any potential legal challenges upon death which would give rise to taxliability. Obviously there is seldom anyway to tell precisely when you are going to die, but making legacies at least adecade beforehand avoids any liability that might be attached on death. In effect, donating during your lifetime wellbefore you die means you can still provide for your family and friend withouthaving to pay the corresponding tax bill.

Anothergood way to minimize tax liability is to get rid of assets during your lifetimeby way of gifts to friends and family. One of the most effective ways to do this is to transfer your house toyour children during your lifetime, or to move the house into a trust for whichyou are a beneficiary. This means youremain functionally the owner, but legally, the asset doesn't feature in yourestate on death and therefore doesn't attract tax liability. Again, it is of great importance to ensurethat the transfer is made well before death to avoid potential challenges andpotential inclusion in the estate which would lead to inheritance taxliability.

Death is aparticularly important phase in our lives, particularly in legal terms. The change between owning our own propertyand distributing owner less property provides a range of challenges, and thecontroversial tax implications can cause serious problems. Without careful planning and an expert hand,it can be easy to amass a significant tax bill for your loved ones tobear. However, with the right direction,it can be easy to use the relevant mechanisms to minimize the potentialliability to tax on your estate upon death.

Natural Law Theory

2012-01-06T11:00:00.000-08:00

Inattempting to garner an understanding of the nature of law, early legalphilosophers and academics formulated what has come to be known as the naturallaw theory, and has become a literal cornerstone of the development of modernlegal thinking. Although somewhatlimited in modern jurisprudential thinking, natural law has had a tremendousimpact on our understanding of what law means in society as a baseline fromwhich to build more complex theories. Inthis article, we will look at some of the major propositions underpinning theconcept of natural law, and the corresponding strengths and weaknesses of thisfundamental interpretation of the legal function.

Natural lawstarts with the basic premise that the law is driven by morality, andconsequently is affected by it. With ahistory extending back to Aristotle and other early philosophers, the naturallaw theory has traditionally linked the law with religion and an innate senseof justice, rather than the more pragmatic approaches of some othertheories. Although this might soundrather basic, the principals have been developed and refined through academicdebate for centuries ultimately leading to a far more sophisticated theory ofthe nature of law. The idea that all lawis subject to an unwritten code of morality is fundamental to natural law. This also throws up some potential problemsin terms of civil regulation. Certainnatural law theorists suggest that for a law to be binding on the citizen, itmust conform to this sense of natural justice. However, there is clearly no definitive objective concept of morality,which casts doubt over this principle. Additionally, the prospect that a law may be disregarded in favor ofsome higher sense of morality doesn't conform in reality, considering thepotential implications of consistently disregarding law on the grounds of thesubjective concept of justice.

Furthermoreon this primitive understanding of natural law, the citizen in contravention tothe laws of his state, could attempt to excuse his actions through ajustification of 'immoral' laws. Thiswould also create a state of disorder, given the natural variation of personalopinions, which would ultimately render society unworkable. For this reason, the natural law scheme hasfailed to garner modern academic acceptance, of course with a few exceptions.

Natural lawhas been proposed as a consideration in trying war criminals, on the basis ofthe retro spectivity principle, i.e. no man can be tried for a crime that wasnot a crime when he committed it. Manywar criminals are merely cogs in the machine of a legal regime, whichultimately permits their actions, however unjustifiable morally. Natural law theories give a basis forchallenge on these grounds, whilst avoiding the awkward question of directlegal contravention, which ultimately works to serve justice. In this sense, it is perhaps useful as acanon of interpretation and in determining just and equitable outcomes in'difficult' cases. However, as a widerlegal concept, natural law and the proposed intersection between law andmorality seems too awkward to reconcile with considered academic legalunderstandings. Having said that,natural law has provided an excellent starting position for further advancedargumentation, and has provided a platform for critique that has been essentialto the development of the more sophisticated ideas held in regard in thismodern day.

No Child Left Behind

2012-01-05T15:30:00.000-08:00

What exactly does NoChild Left Behind really mean? Does thatmean that a school bus driver agrees not to leave my child at school, or doesit have a deeper meaning for parents to look into? What it really means, is that schools areforced to link the money they receive from the federal government in directconnection to how well students perform academically. Looking at the sheer facts of life, schoolsmust have money in order to educate students.

Yet with the needfor money in the schools rising steadily there needed to be a solution toensure that students were, being taught the skills they needed in order to besuccessful adults who are capable of securing a job. Many students have graduated from high schoolin the last several years without the ability to complete many basic tasks suchas reading, writing, and elementary level arithmetic.

After experiencingthis phenomenon for several years, President Bush stepped up to the plate andproposed tying the results of students to the financial assistance that schoolsreceived as an incentive for schools to perform better. A grade was also assigned to schools eachyear based upon the standardized test scores that would tell parents, educatorsand the country as a whole how well the schools in a district wereperforming.

If a school performsbadly, parents and students are given the option to transfer to another schoolthat received a better grade; this directly affects the amount of money eachschool is capable of receiving. Thisputs a great pressure on schools to perform better. Schools are forced to start taking note, andanswering questions in regard to why students are not performing on an acceptableacademic level when the report cards come out. Each school has the ability to improve their grades and scores simply byteaching students the information needed.

Many parents areupset by the program; they feel their children are being pushed too hard inclasses. Many other parents are veryhappy with the program; they feel that the schools are just now being forced tobe accountable for the education that students are receiving. As the future draws more into thetechnological era, it becomes clear, that technology is king. In order for students to be able to securejobs, they must have basic skills and be able to handle the pressures of life.

Students must leaveschool fully prepared to take on a job, make a name for themselves, and improvetheir lives. Many students upongraduating from school were forced previously to go onto welfare and take jobsonly in low paying jobs that were unable to turn into careers. Many students now are able to go onto decentpaying jobs that show the possibility to grow into careers, thus avoiding thewelfare trap that many recent graduates were forced into.

How the schoolsperform in the next few years will really determine how well our outlook is forthe job market. With more jobs movingoverseas to cheaper labor, it is very important that students leave school withthe knowledge and ability to help keep jobs here for the future generations,for it is only with a graduate-led economy we can remain competitive on aninternational level.

Natural Law vs. Positivism

2012-01-04T15:30:00.000-08:00

Thephilosophy of law is a complex and in depth study, which requires an intimateknowledge of the legal process in general as well as a philosophical mind. For centuries, the scope and nature of lawhas been debated and argued from various view points, and intense intellectualdiscussion has arisen from the fundamental question of 'what is law'. In response, several major schools of thoughthave been born, of which the natural law scholars and positivists are two ofthe most notable. These two camps holdstrictly contrasting views over the role and function of law in certaincircumstances, and have provided in themselves platforms for criticism anddebated which continue to be relevant today.

Althoughthe classifications of natural law and positivism are frequently used, it isimportant to remember that they cover a very wide range of academicopinion. Even within each camp, thereare those veering towards more liberal or more conservative understandings, andthere is also naturally a grey area. Having said that, academics and philosophers can be enveloped by one ofthe categories on the basis of certain fundamental principles within theirwritings and opinions.

Natural lawhas always been linked to ultra-human considerations, that is to say aspiritual or moral influence determinant of their understandings of the way lawoperates. One of the founding principlesis that an immoral law can be no law at all, on the basis that a governmentneeds moral authority to be able to legislate. For this reason, natural law theories have been used to justify anarchyand disorder at ground level. This hadlead to widespread criticism of the natural law principles, which have had tobe refined and developed to fit with modern thinking. On the flip side, natural law has been used asa definitive method of serving 'justice' to war criminals and former-dictatorsafter their reign.

Some of thestrongest criticisms of natural law have come from the positivist camp. Positivism holds at its center the beliefthat law is not affected by morality, but in essence is the source of moralconsiderations. Because morality is asubjective concept, positivism suggests that the law is the source of morality,and that no extra-legal considerations should be taken in to account. Positivism has been criticized for allowingextremism and unjust actions through law. It has also been suggested that positivism in its strictest sense isflawed because it ignores the depth and breadth of language in legal enactment,which means the positive law can be read in different lights based on differingmeanings of the same word. Despite this, positivism has been seen as one of thefundamental legal theories in the development of modern legal philosophy overthe last few decades, and is winning widespread favor through a contemporaryacademic revival.

Natural lawand positivism have been the subject of an ongoing academic debate into thenature of law and its role within society. Both respective legal schools have criticized and built on one andothers theories and principles to create a more sophisticated philosophicalunderstanding of the legal construct. Although the debate is set to continue with a new generation of promisinglegal theorists, both natural law and positivism have gained widespread respectfor their consistency and close analyses of the structure of law.

Online Campaigns

2012-01-03T17:30:00.000-08:00

Where in the world can a person check their mail, pay bills,check bank balances, book a vacation, and show support for their favoritepolitical candidate all in the same place? Simple - online of course. Candidates and politicians are looking to cash in on the most impact fortheir time and what better way to become a part of that powerful trend thanwelcoming cyber space into their lives? Who knew that a craze that started a few short years ago with socialwebsites such as MySpace.com would turn into a tool to be used so heavily incampaigns?

Barack Obama has enjoyed adding 100,000 friends to hisMySpace page, and other campaigns are even adding other MySpace pages as wellas joining into the Second Life craze that has struck recently, with manypeople looking to expand the internet as one of their major sources ofadvertisement. Each candidate has theirown website of course, with a great amount of information on their individualviews, their position on the issues, and what they wish to see happen in thecountry. Never before has the democraticprocess reached so close to home, now pulling in a new generation of voters toguide the future of the country.

Is this a good idea? Should candidates really be losing that personal and physicaltouch? However, this is actually one ofthe most prevalent ways to get information out recently, with websites poppingup everywhere where political opinions can be viewed, and with sites such asdigg.com becoming popular it enables sites with good content that is full ofinformation people find fascinating or helpful to rise to the top, and helpspread the word to the masses.

Seems almost like a grass roots type campaign. Yet it does not involve any physicalinteraction from the candidates. This isthe ultimate tool that can be used to spread the word quickly about progressand updates in their campaign without ever leaving their house or office andinteracting with those they so desperately need votes from. This seems to be abit of a strange position to be taking, but with the internet reaching so wideand far, it is a tool that many politicians are utilizing, and to greatpractical effect.

Many are even recruiting volunteers to manage their spacesin Second Life as well as MySpace so that their time is better spent and theirability to reach even more people is extended further. Seems almost strange that volunteers are nowable to help on campaigns that they never would have been able to work onbefore, but thanks to the internet, they are able to show support for theirfavorite candidate in a way never before seen.

How much further can this really go, with the possibility ofthe internet growing into an even larger portion of the campaign, it is verymuch possible to keep track of all the happenings and events in almost everypolitical campaign and race without ever leaving the comfort of your home. Whether this engages the ordinary citizen ona more direct level will remain to be seen, and the outcome this will have onthe voter demographic at the next election will surely be profound. Now if onlythe election voting could be handled online, securely it would truly be avirtual world.

Sex Offender Laws

2012-01-02T11:30:00.000-08:00

With the high rise in the number of sex offenders who arealso repeated offenders the federal government decided to impose laws requiringall convicted sexual offenders to register with the states in which theylive. Although this measure iscontroversial, government officials are claiming that it is an increasinglyeffective method of avoiding re-offending in some of the most seriouscriminals. Is this an invasion ofprivacy that the states and politicians have imposed upon someone who hasserved their sentence, or is this a legitimate measure of control for some ofsociety's most dangerous offenders?

At some point in time, it became acceptable for thegovernment to track former criminals; in requiring them to register as anoffender, they are essentially tracking the criminal. They do nothing more than monitor closelytheir whereabouts, actions, friends, lifestyle, etc. How this came to be is quite scary, while ithas occurred for a crime that fits the punishment, after all our childrenshould be protected. It also comes witha price. Many people see this as anintense invasion of privacy and human rights, and in Europeunder the banner of the European Convention on Human Rights, such procedureswould almost certainly not be allowed.

Since beginning this and requiring that all sexual offendersregister with their respective states, it opens the door for criminals of othercrimes to be required to register. Oncethat occurs, it allows the governments to start requiring slowly that everyonebe registered for one reason or another. Is this something that the people are willing to let happen? Should the government have full knowledge andcontrol over where you go, who your friends are and where you work?

Many feel that the laws for the sexual offenders are notstiff enough; they call for stricter punishments and heavier penalties forthese most despicable of criminals. Thiscomes from the side of people that wish to seek nothing more than revenge. At the same time, if someone commits a crimewhom is sent for mental help, instead of jail they are not required toregister. Their offenses are recordeddifferently, and their punishment is much easier.

This can cause serious problems in terms of people not beingregistered that really should be registered as an offender. The main goal of the program is to protectthe interest of the children; after all, they are the main resource worthprotecting in society. Nevertheless, howfar is too far? Some have suggestedimplanting the offenders with a microchip that would enable law enforcementagencies to track the offenders’ movements continuously. Is this something that the American public iswilling to accept?

With this being talked about, what are the chances of thisoccurring for other crimes as well? Whatis the point of releasing someone from the judicial system if they are sodangerous that they must be continuously tracked? As a woman, or a child how safe do you feelknowing that there are people surrounding you whom have been convicted ofserious crimes against others? Whatabout as a man, does this change your opinion? The requirement for registration causes social problems andvictimization for those offenders, arguably justifiably, who have shownthemselves to be dangerous. This has theknock on effect of altering the course of justice, given that these people willhave served the appropriate sentence for their crime, and hopefully haveprogressed through the systems of rehabilitation in place.

How do you think it should be handled? There are some people who truly believe thatthe registrations processes should be removed, that once their time is servedthe offenders should be allowed to disappear back into the woodwork and free tolive their lives without being under the public scrutiny. These are the people who are looking to haveyet another law changed, that could have some very devastating effects onsociety, particularly for our children in the coming generations.

Positivist Legal Theory

2012-01-01T13:00:00.000-08:00

Thequestion of the character of law is primarily a simple one, although itpresents a diversity of argumentation to make it an academic favourite and athought-provoking topic of debate. Positivism is the term describing the schoolof legal thought that follows that law is an authoritative, binding, regulatoryconstruct. It holds at its core the ideathat law is enacted as an authoritative statement of how society must behave. It rejects the concept of any connection withmorality, and suggests that there is no room for subjective consideration ofthe law – the law is, with no room for negotiation. Positivism has been criticised, particularlyin Germany,as a means of affording tyranny and extremism to enter mainstream politics. It is said that the general concept ofaccepting and enforcing the law by virtue of its status allows unjust lawsenforcing prejudice and discrimination respect by virtue of their enactment,placing an indefeasible trust in the legislature. As compared to other legaltheories, positivism has gathered a great deal of respect and support acrossthe world, making it one of the most prominent considerations of the nature oflaw.

Positivismplaces strength on the rules as they are laid down, on the premise that theprocess of the legislature is the time for challenge and interpretation. Although this may generally be the case, itdoes throw up some problems in relation to the practical consequences ofcertain enactments, which reflect better with experience the level ofeffectiveness. Another feature of thepositivist movement is that rather than be guided by moral considerations, thelaw can be used in certain circumstances to determine what is right and what iswrong, on the basis of its status as in accordance with or against thelaw. Again this causes problems thathave formed the basis of much academic argumentation in the area.

One of themain criticisms of positivism as a theory came in light of the linguisticconsiderations of HLA Hart, a leading international legal philosopher. He stated that the positive law is far fromfixed in nature, for the simple reason that language is not fixed. For example, the famous scenario offered forthis point is a sign in a local park stating 'no vehicles allowed'. This is by no means a fixed and definitivestatement of the law, because 'vehicles' can be taken to mean a broad range ofthings. For the most part it will befairly obvious what falls within the scope – no cars, vans, trucks or trainswould be permitted. But what aboutskateboards? Bicycles? Are these coveredwithin the definition of vehicles? There is no way of knowing from the textexactly what is intended by the law, so to positivism in this strict sense isflawed. Rather, a more sophisticated approach is required, which allows the lawto be read in the light of pragmatic and policy considerations. This makes positivism more palatable as aconcept, and strengthens its validity at the heart of legal philosophy.

Positivismis only one in a series of mainstream legal theories which satisfy the rationaland logical requirements of academics and practitioners alike. Its intellectual sophistication sets it apartfrom the more basic natural law theory, although it is by no means an utterlydefinitive set of beliefs. All in all,this is an area of study that is rapidly developing, producing new and morecomplex arguments with every empirical text.

Straight Marriages – Gay Unions

2011-12-31T13:00:00.000-08:00

The debate of gay marriages has been a very hot politicaltopic for many years and with being such a hot topic it is almost astoundingthe number of places that have come out publicly either for or against thetopic. While there are few states whoallow the idea of a gay or same-sex marriage there are those more liberalaffording almost equal rights. Massachusetts is the only state currently in the United Statesthat allows same-sex marriages. Thestate of Rhode Island is generous enough torecognize as legal marriage any same-sex marriage that is performed in Massachusetts, which isa major victory for many same-sex supporters.

The elections of recent years have seen this as a very hottopic button, and with the White House, stressing that marriage involves a manand a woman only, not same-sexes many states have been very reluctant to allowthe same-sex marriages. However, a few states have come forward and allowedsame-sex civil unions, which are very similar to a marriage.

These states are California,Hawaii, Maine,Connecticut, New Jersey,and Vermont. The District of Columbia also recognizes same-sex unions and soonthe Governor of New Hampshire has stated publicly that he will sign a billgiving the ok to same-sex unions. Thisis a major victory for those who are supporting the movement.

While many states have not given the green light on thesame-sex issue, there are states who are sitting around discussing theissues. Many couples who are fightingfor their rights have argued that there is no difference in the way they runtheir households compared to their heterosexual counterparts. They have also stated that while they may bewith a partner who is the same sex as them, they do still love their partnerand should have the right to get married.

This has always been a hot topic, and likely will continueto be a hot topic for many years to come. With the issues raging within the states and at the national level itwill likely be a very long time before the gay and lesbian rights groups areable to truly declare a victory for their cause. Nevertheless, there is some solace to betaken in the small victories as they occur, and another Governor of a statebeing willing to allow a civil union is at least a step in the directiontowards a victory.

The fact remains that often the views of the individualstates tend to reflect the views of the President. With a President in office who is a staunchopponent to the concept of same-sex marriage as well as civil unions it isunlikely to allow much room for many victories until a more accommodating, orrather liberal, President is in the White House.

Once the bill passes all of the channels, it can go intoeffect as early as next year for the New Hampshire residence who have long been awaiting thisvictory. With each state that gives thisright to its residents, it opens the doors to more states to start becomingmore tolerant of all their inhabitants. Finally, this is paving the way for Americato join the bulk of Europe in recognizing thelegal inequalities between straight and gay couples nationwide.

Stem Cell Research- Good or Bad?

2011-12-30T09:00:00.000-08:00

This is a very 'hot button' issue that keeps arising in theface of politicians everywhere in the country. What if anything should the government involve itself in for the issuesof stem cell research? How far shouldthe government press into the fields of medical science research? Should the government interfere at all, orstand back and come up with laws to handle the consequences of such research?

It comes into question, how many ordinary Americans reallyknow and understand what stem cell research is, how it can effect our lives,and what does it have the ability to do in the future? With topics such as abortion being very hotand causing pressures on all sides, it only seems natural that stem cellresearch should cause just as much controversy. Many supporters argue that the research gathered will be able to savemillions of lives, while those opposing the research all argue that they arekilling thousands of innocent children in the process.

This brings the question, where do the embryos comefrom? The majority of the embryos usedin the research come from couples that have donated them, following a treatmentfor infertility; there are often 10 or more embryos left over after suchprocedures, which can be put to use in the laboratory environment. The options for those embryos are limited;they can be preserved, adopted to a needy couple, destroyed, or donated tomedical research.

The embryos are only a few mere days past conception whenthey are frozen, and are unable to sustain life in any form on their own. From a legal standpoint, they are not livinghumans, and are not an infant since legally an embryo becomes an infant oncethe first breath of air is taken. Thisleaves the questions of who has the right to determine what can happen tothem.

The embryos are the building blocks of people, yet, theyhave no rights themselves. Whom do theybelong to? Who is responsible forensuring they are taken care of? Manyconsider the embryos being used in research as the same category asmurder. Is it actually murder when thechild is never born, and is only conceived in a test tube? Who should really make the decision about howthese embryos should be handled?

The embryos themselves are rich in stem cells, whichscientists have said can help cure some of the worst diseases and conditions inthe world. This makes the concept verytempting, but is this dabbling in aspects of science that shouldn’t be used? Should humans really be trying to recreatewhole body parts and organs from the stem cells in order to help a few, but atthe expense of a few other lives?

The current administration has tried to place a ban on thisresearch and block the use of the embryos. This has upset many supporters who feel this research is vital to thesurvival of the human race, while those who digress the ideas are upset that ishas not been banned fully yet. Where isthe better side to stand? Should weallow the government to meddle into the scientific aspects of medicine, or shouldwe continue the research to save thousands, or millions of lives?

Succession Law: The Importance of Having a Will

2011-12-29T22:58:00.001-08:00

Although wemight not like to think of it, death is a certain fate for us all. When we pass away, our families will gothrough a stressful and traumatic time as they come to terms with their loss. At the same time, there is a requirement forthe administration of our estate, and this is usually bestowed upon a closerelative or friend during this already painful time. However, a lack of foresight and planning canbe catastrophic, leaving behind a tangle of assets and liabilities and possiblya hefty inheritance tax bill, depending on jurisdiction. On top of that, the absence of a will canmean a distribution of assets on the basis of standard 'default' rules, rather thanon the basis of your individual preferences. In this article, we will look at some common provisions in the absenceof any will, and aim to justify the benefits of making a comprehensive andclear will during your lifetime.

Mostjurisdictions will bear some liability to tax on death. This can be a specific problem for theadministrators of estates, usually close friends, who must ensure every knownasset and liability is accounted for before making legacies and signing off thetax bill. A major problem comes with thepersonal liability attributed to the administrators, which means that shouldanything 'slip through the net' which is later discovered, there may beincreased liability to tax. In practicalterms, this could mean a surprise bill for several thousand which has alreadybeen distributed in legacies and for which the administrator must personallyaccount. Providing for these outcomes ina will is one of the best ways of avoiding this hassle and stress, and it canalso be the best way to ensure all assets and liabilities are uncovered. By drafting an effective will, you can besure your loved ones don't face financial hardship after you're gone.

In theabsence of a will providing specifically for the administration of a deceased'sestate, it is up to the laws of intestacy to determine what happens to theentirety of our worldly possessions. Unfortunately, this doesn't usually correspond with the way we'd likethings to turn out. For example, in a numberof jurisdictions there are automatic provisions for spouses and kids, meaningyou can disinherit, even with a will. There is also usually a default order of preference of who gets what andhow much they get, which doesn't necessarily match your favourite relatives, orcorrespond to actual family set ups. Infact, cohabiters might run into problems getting anything, including the housein which they live without proper testamentary provisions in their favour.

As you cansee there are a number of obvious benefits to drafting a will during yourlifetime. Sadly, many thousands ofpeople die each year without making these provisions, and it really is a realheadache for their friends and relatives who are left with the burden of a fairsettlement. Intestacy causes hostilityand stress, which can be readily avoided by just simply making a writtenwill. If you haven't made a will, it isprobably a good idea to make a appointment as soon as is convenient with alegal adviser to do so, to ensure your family are provided for as you wouldintend and to promote a favourable distribution of your estate on death.

2010-11-15T21:40:00.001-08:00

Just Have Fun and Enjoy Your Life!!

We all complain about our lives from time to time. An unexpected expense comes up or we get laid off from our jobs. So many things can happen to us in even just one day. Unfortunately, complaining is a waste of time. It is a grown up version of whining, and yes, we too have tantrums. The key to enjoying life is in how we react to the events and mishaps in our daily lives.