The arguments made against giving women the right to vote before the world war were far and wide. Many of the arguments included that a woman's place was in the home, and that women were not knowledgeable enough to vote, because it was a man's world.
Equal rights was the pro argument. Women were believed at the time to be afraid to vote to go to war, which was the con argument.
I'm not sure ask yourself or read your social studies book because none is going to be there to help you with your Starr test so stop playing and start studying!
ok so inthe election right before the civil war ulesse s grant lost to Abraham Lincoln
wyoming
The 19th amendment was passed giving the right to vote.
Harriet Beecher Stowe
Arguments FOR -Certainty and Legal Consistency - makes sure like cases are treated similarly. As a result increases the confidence in legal system if there are logical explanations of approaches. -Increased efficiency - don't have to waste court time rearguing similar points of law. -Allows some flexibility - judges can change the law without having to wait for Parliament to pass legislation although there are moral questions if this is right? Arguments AGAINST -Rigidity- Slow moving precedent only decided when next case comes up. -Can mean a consistently wrong precedent is reinforced -Complexity + Uncertainty- if it is undermined by exceptions -Unconstitutional - for judges to take this role? -Principles do not develop unless cases are brought
For the most part, creditors cannot do this; the creditor will have to obtain a judgement against you first giving them the right to do so. You'll be notified of the pending court case.
a girl puts a mint in her mouth right before giving oral sex.
he argues thatb napoleon was right when he said "Women are just machines for producing babies.
Prior to collecting blood, giving medications, giving treatment or executing a procedure the patient's full name and birth date should be checked against their record.
If we accept that animals can suffer and that there should be justice in the world, then it is obvious that no one has no right to inflict suffering or illness or disfigurement on any innocent creature.
The right to know the charge(s) against him - the right to be faced with his accuser - the right to counsel - the right to be tried by a fair and impartial jury of his peers.
We need to observe the symptoms of the disease and age of the patient while administering medication. One should also be careful about the expiry date of the medicine before giving it to the patient.
The right to use pornography.
Some arguments for censorship are that some things are so disturbing or such a bad influence on people that they should be censored. Some arguments against censorship are that the people making the decisions are deciding what's right for everybody based on their own personal feelings, and also that people have a right to know about the things that affect or interest them.
There is no such right. You have no right to see ANY of the evidence to be used against you until the Discovery phase of the trial.
Red Star Belgrade
they have upheld the right of society to protect itself against drunk drivers and rejected individual rights arguments