An action is considered racially unjust when it discriminates against individuals based on their race or ethnicity, reinforcing systems of oppression and inequality. This can manifest through unequal treatment, limited opportunities, or biased policies that disadvantage certain racial groups.
Try one of the related links below .
Some may argue that laws related to mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenses or voter suppression tactics could be considered unjust in America today. Additionally, laws that disproportionately impact marginalized communities, such as laws criminalizing homelessness or immigration policies separating families, are often criticized for being unjust.
Yes, it is. Any law, no matter how just or unjust, is held to be legally enforceable. To break one, even for good reasons, is illegal.
Unjust enrichment refers to a situation where one party has received a benefit or payment that they are not entitled to, usually at the expense of another party. It often leads to legal claims or actions seeking to recover the unjustly gained benefit.
"One has not only legal but moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws."and... "Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust."These are not the only two within the letter, but just the two I saw first.
Henry David Thoreau broke the law by refusing to pay taxes because he believed it supported unjust institutions like slavery and the Mexican-American War. He wanted to protest these injustices and demonstrate his commitment to civil disobedience as a form of protest against an unjust government.
NO... Most scenario may have a loop hole in it that it justifies the "braking" of that law ... If the law is an unjust one ... then you have a morale and constructional right to not abide by it ... there are other scenarios that are more comical then profound that permits the "braking" of said law ...
Are women unjust to men. Generalities are never wholly true. Including that last one.
You are confusing Law and Morality (or Ethics). A law may or may not be "just" -- that's your ethical judgment about it. Your question cannot be answered: one man gathers what another man spills. A law abiding citizen breaks no laws, by definition. It is part of our collective social contract that we abide by the law, whether we agree with it or not, or even if we know what it is. If one doesn't like a law, he or she should seek to change it, through political activity. Some laws are solid -- the vast majority of people are in agreement with them -- others are sketchy -- less people are in agreement. These things shift over time. Different people will find different laws just or unjust, or even the same law in a different situation . . . . Is it wrong to steal? Yes. Is it wrong to steal if your child is starving and there is simply no other way for you to get him or her food? I don't know.
Trick or treat
trick or treat