Individual Rights Advocate Analysis

Individual Rights Advocate Analysis
The United States of America is a country that was founded on the idea that all citizens would have equal rights and freedoms. For the protection of the
people, and to maintain order, law has been developed over time. Rights advocates are constantly pushing the boundaries of what the law should, or
should not be. Individual–rights and public–order advocates are in a battle of balance, leaving the justice system to decide what the best solution is for
all. An individual–rights advocate, by definition, is "one who seeks to protect personal freedoms within the process of criminal justice." (Schmalleger,
2008) A public–order advocate is "one who believes that under certain circumstances involving a criminal threat to public safety, the interests...show
more content...
She upholds that her religion as an Apostolic Christian prevents her from supporting same–sex nuptials. "This is a heaven or hell issue for me and for
every other Christian that believes," she said. "This is a fight worth fighting." (Starnes, 2015) Public–order advocates maintain the idea that an elected
official has a duty to uphold to the law. Individual–rights advocates continue to support Davis, such as Liberty Counsel Attorney, Mat Staver, who said
"if this country has come to this point where a judge jails someone like Kim Davis for their religious convictions – then we have lost our religious
liberty." (Starnes, 2015) The lack of tolerance for gay marriage has also been seen in Oregon where a bakery was sued for "emotional suffering"
(The Guardian, 2015) because the bakery owner refused to make a cake for a gay couple. "This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is
about a business's refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal," Oregon labor commissioner Brad
Avakian said in the final order." (The Guardian, 2015) Anna Harmon, one of the attorneys for the couple "said Avakian's order is unconstitutional,
because "the right to speak freely, to think uniquely, and to live according to our faith is the bedrock of this country." (The Guardian,
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Running head: ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS
Advantages and disadvantages of individual rights and public order
University of Phoenix
Advantages and disadvantages of individual rights and public order
Every human being deserves to have Individual rights and they are a very important part of the justice system. Without individual rights things would
be chaotic therefore, public order is brought into the system so that everyone's individual rights are in place for each individual to use as a backbone
for guidelines of what is acceptable and what is not. Although, there are disadvantages and advantages of both individual rights and public order they
are still very essential to maintain order. Individual...show more content...
He or she may not have nor still does not contribute to society as a working and taxpaying individual, but will receive free legal counsel not one or
two times, but several times over and over again during their lifetime. Over time it will become clear that he or she does not conduct themselves in
a law abiding and respectful manner and if and when arrested he or she will relied on the fact that they will receive free legal counsel as a result of
their own independent actions. As a result law abiding taxpaying citizens will be responsible for providing these repeat offenders (via taxes) with legal
counsel. This is a prime example of the disadvantages of individual rights.
Although we live in a nation that places a premium value on personal freedom, it is also a nation whose population considers its own safety and
welfare as paramount rights. This creates a need for some measure of public order. Such public order mechanisms are typically expressed in the form
of laws. The laws of the United States are an attempt to balance the desire for individual freedoms with the desire for universal safety. (D'Augostino,
2008)
The fundamental guide to our government, the US Constitution, lists the obligations of government. Among these obligations is the promotion of the
general welfare of the people of the United States. (D'Augostino, 2008) Personal safety is a primary advantage of public order. Sanction against and

The Concept Of Individual Rights
The concept of individual rights refers to the freedom each individual possesses to pursue life without interference from other individuals or the
government. A community is a collection of said individuals, with common interests and values, who take up community responsibilities to ensure that
the collection holds objective standards that are beneficiary to all. Even though these concepts are intrinsically linked, in that one cannot survive
without the other, there is often a desire to separate them and define where one ends and the other begins. Human social life can often be seen as a
unity of two seemingly contradictory behavioral ideas: status competition and reciprocity. Status competition is the practice of striving to establish
...show more content...
Considering the teacher–student relationship between Socrates and Plato, similarities between the two's philosophies are quite obvious, though they
might be conveyed in different ways.
In The Apology, Socrates presents his defense to his jurors when on trial for teaching nontraditional philosophies and, allegedly, affecting the
community adversely. In this account, Socrates explains that his behavior stems from a prophecy by the oracle at Delphi which claimed that he
was the wisest of all men. Recognizing his ignorance in most worldly affairs, Socrates concluded that he must be wiser than other men only in that
he is aware of his own lack of knowledge. In order to spread this peculiar wisdom, Socrates explains that he considers it his duty to question
supposed wise men and to expose their false wisdom as ignorance. In a famous passage, Socrates says that God specially appointed him to the city,
"as though it were a large thoroughbred horse which because of its great size is inclined to be lazy and needs the stimulation of some stinging fly"
(The Apology, 30e). Without him to rouse, persuade, and reprove the community, Socrates claims society is liable to drift into a deep sleep of
unproductive activity and ethical laziness. When people ask why Socrates cannot quietly mind his own

When it comes to group rights in relation to individual rights, individual rights should encompass minority rights. The first question that this essay will
focus on is the one asking "How important are group rights in relation to individual rights?" Let's say that a group of people are writing a constitution
and listing out individual rights for people, kind of like the United States bill of rights. If they encompass what minority groups usually want, then there
is no reason to think one is more important than the other. In the modern era, it is kind of difficult to broadly establish group "rights" and blanket an
entire population with them. Even if all individuals accept this fact, there will be certain individuals that will supposedly always be unhappy and
distraught. In the American government, when looking at the constitution, there is a heavy emphasis on individual rights towards the end. However,
the founding fathers also wanted emphasis on protecting the rights of minority groups, which led to rights like freedom of speech and freedom of
religion. These are rights that many other nations would ideally like to incorporate in their constitutions, even if some countries don't do that and have
monarchies or governments led by a dictator of some sort.
South Asia is a region that has arguably been developing and modernizing much later than the Western nations like the United Kingdom and United
States. Taking that into consideration, people still do not have the rights that

The Constitution and Individual Rights Essay
The Constitution and Individual Rights
In the 1780s, many people agreed that the Articles of Confederation were not a strong enough plan of government for a newly born nation. Even though
The Articles of Confederation won the Revolutionary War, there were many problems with the plan of government. The Articles of Confederation was
made to prevent a strong national government and it only gave each state one vote in the Confederation Congress. It could not raise money and it only
had one branch, the Legislature. In 1786, delegates from each state went to Philadelphia to draft a new Constitution for the United States. Fifty–five
delegates came to Philadelphia convinced that the defects of the Articles of Confederation were so serious...show more content...
Smaller states wanted equal representation because they feared that larger states would run the national government. The voices in the smaller
states would be left out and the Constitution would not preserve equality among the states. A special committee was made to make a compromise
between representation. The compromise was called the Connecticut Compromise or the Great Compromise. The deal was that the House of
Representatives would be proportional and the Senate would be equal representation. The House of Representatives would develop all bills for
taxing and government spending and the Senate was limited to accepting or rejecting those bills. The two houses would form the national
Congress. The legislative branch had enumerated powers. Section eight includes matters such powers as 1) to lay and collect taxes, 2) to pay the
debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, 3) to regulate commerce with foreign nations and states, 4) to
declare war, 5) to raise an army and navy, and 6) to coin money. Other powers were clauses such as the necessary and proper clause and the
supremacy clause. The necessary and proper clause was a law given to Congress to make any laws deemed "necessary and proper" for running the
nation. The supremacy clause stated that the Constitution and all laws and treaties approved by Congress in exercising its enumerated powers are the
supreme law of the land.
The

Individual Rights in 1984 "When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fear the people there is liberty," (Jefferson).
Even though Jefferson was only around for the birth of America, he was an active participant in politics and pushed for a better tomorrow. Since then,
so much has taken place in society, including two world wars. Living in any part of the world was frightening during that era, unfortunately enough for
Orwell as he was alive for both of the wars from beginning to the end. Entailing some seemingly never–ending battles, and enlistments combined with
rations that starved populations and economy fail resulting in depression for numerous countries. Therefore, it is understandable to see that some of
the literature from him contained ideas of a different world and expressed some of his fears with the government and for the future. Such as 1984,
which illustrates a world in which there is continuous battles and wars, and the power is in the hands of a few. Where all the land divided into three
super–states and the governments controlling the people work together to restrict economic freedom. One of such regimes referred to as the Party, and
controls the area called Oceania which is the present day North and South America and the British Isles. Not only that, but the creation of Newspeak,
which is talking and communicating with increasingly smaller vocabulary over time so that eventually it ceases to exist. The novel 1984 written by

Rights, Duties and Freedoms Essay example
Rights, Duties and Freedoms
Under the Human Rights Act 1998, which came into force in October 2000, there are certain rights and freedoms that are protected. The significance
of this act is to offer legal rights to everyone in a democratic country. The United Kingdom does not have a written constitution, this is very unusual in
a democracy, and our rights and freedoms have traditionally been protected by a presumption that we are free to do anything that is not covered by a
specific forbidding law or piece of legislation. Under the Human Rights Act we now have that written confirmation of our rights, duties and freedoms.
Anyone withholding those rights, for example wrongful imprisonment or racism is now liable for prosecution and...show more content...
The acts states that a public authority must act according to the rights given by the convention, any person who feels they have suffered a breach may
sue that authority, as in the case of wrongful arrest or imprisonment, over the past number of years there have been many such cases of prisoners being
released from prisons on these grounds, with large, often excessive as some might say, amounts of compensation paid to those released. A public
authority includes courts, councils, tribunals but not parliament.
Under Article (12) Heterosexual people have the right to marry at 16 with judicial/parental consent and without consent at 18, this act enables such a
union to bring with it certain safeguards, for example the rights associated with property,

Individual Rights and the Business Organization
Running Head: Individual Rights and the Business Organization
Individual Rights and the Business Organization
Introduction
In today's highly uncertain business environment, businesses and individuals face a number of ethical issues which arise due to different internal and
external environmental factors and impact the individuals within and outside the organizations. The ethical issues which negatively impact the privacy,
morale, and societal values of individuals include fraudulent business practices and unethical tactics to grow business operations and profitability
(Harbert, 2007). The major ethical considerations for organizations must be focused on implementing sound business practices in every aspect of their
business; including Marketing Management, Human Resource Management, use of Information Technology, local and International trade, Corporate
Social Responsibility efforts, and the like. Ethics within the Organization's Internal Environment An organization's internal environment is made up of
common values, beliefs, and thoughts shared by its workforce at all organizational levels. These values and thoughts are collectively called as
organization's culture. In contemporary business landscape, ethical issues also arise within the organizations' internal environments which badly
hamper their corporate cultures if not managed in an effective manner (Jennings, 2012). These issues are discussed below in detail: 1. Employee
Privacy: It is the sole

INTRODUCTION
Throughout the history of mankind, societies have tried to balance the relations between Individual and the State. The Constitution of India in its
original un–amended form had deftly balanced individual right and the power of state, vis–Г –vis, Right to Property. However, this was soon
overwhelmed by the socialistic philosophy, and the right to property was relegated from a fundamental right to a mere legal right . This gave tenacity to
the government 's acquisition of private property under the doctrine of eminent domain, for the greater good and development purposes. This doctrine
of eminent domain is itself contended, as it raises the classical debate of power of State versus individual rights.
One of the key challenges facing the development of infraВ¬structure in India is the acquisition of land. LandownerВ¬ship confers tangible benefits
such as shelter and liveli–hood, as well as intangible benefits such as security and a standВ¬ing in society. Landowners are thus often reluctant to part
with their land unless mutually acceptable terms including compensation are agreed upon. Problems arise when land is required for "pubВ¬lic
purpose" and the state can invoke laws that allow for comВ¬pulsory acquisition through 'eminent domain' . Often, the land acquisition process is
neither consultative nor transparent. Further, land–titles are unclear and identifying parties eligible for compensation is rendered difficult. Finally, the
compensaВ¬tion, and resettlement and

Police Authority vs Individual Rights
It is easy for police to get caught up in the idea that it is them against the rest of society (Barkan, 2012). Many citizens in today's democratic society
have a negative or fearful view of our law enforcement. Think back to grade school, who was that one kid in class that everyone was annoyed by or
despised? Most people would answer the teacher's pet or the tattletale. We have grown up from a young age to have a negative view towards those that
get us into trouble when we think we can get away with something we know is wrong. In the adult world, the police force can equate to those tattletales.
The overall basis for a democratic society is freedom. We stress that freedom allows us to be individualistic. Herbert L. Packer, a law...show more
content...
Throughout all realms of the criminal justice system, it is hard to use discretion when arresting or prosecuting people. Another difficulty that
police in our democratic society face is the discrepancy between their own personal freedoms and upholding the law, their job (Barkan, 2012).
Police officers are allowed to think what they want or say how they feel, a right granted to them in the Bill of Rights. However, under the badge,
police officers are required and expected to abide by the laws of the United States. Sometimes, the level of authority police hold in this situation can
get them into trouble legally. This is what we call police misconduct (Barkan, 2012). One of the most notorious police scandals in history was the LA
antigang Rampart Division scandal. In 2000, Rafael Perez, an LA police officer was arrested for stealing drugs. In exchange for a plea bargain Perez
notified authorities of other corruptive instances in the Rampart Division. More than 70 officers were scrutinized for these acts (Barkan, 2012).
Overall, it is agreed upon that there needs to be a definite balance between public safety and individual freedom (Barkan, 2012). This balance, which
rides on a fine line in our society, is difficult to determine. That is why police, prosecutors, and any members of our criminal justice

Individual Rights Of The Citizens
I, James Madison from Virginia, have noticed the criticism from the anti–federalists over the lack of liberty and security. In order to unify the country
alongside all of the citizens, I propose amendments that emphasize the individual rights, rather than the rights of the states. These individual rights
would include the following: freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and the rights of property. By
doing this, the citizens will feel less at risk of being controlled excessively and more loyal to their country, now that the government has acknowledged
and granted the people their rights. In order to strengthen and stabilize our country, we need the citizens to be supportive and obedient, rather

Public Safety And Individual Rights Essay
Prioritizing individual rights and those of the public has long been the subject of debate. Do the rights of the individual outweigh those of the
community? Arguments for both are strong and valid, yet defining the line between individual rights and public safety proves to be challenging.
Individual rights are vital to living freely, however freedom without security is not possible as citizens are not truly free if they are not safe. Public
health is becoming more of a concern for citizens. A controversial public health issue often reported in the news is vaccinations and the right of parents
to opt not to vaccinate their children. Immunization from diseases has eliminated the spread of many infectious and possibly deadly diseases. Measles,
...show more content...
(Bill or Rights, n.d.) Attempting to keep the country safe while supporting its citizens' rights is a continuous struggle for the government and its
agencies. Absolute privacy with absolute safety, albeit utopia, is a lofty expectation and a challenge to procure. The Associated Press– NORC Center
for Public Affairs Research reports 42 percent of Americans feel their security should be a vital objective of the government. While civil libertarians
may strongly disagree, 54 percent of Americans feel individual rights may need to be forfeited in order to avert terrorist acts. Warrantless surveillance
has been a very contentious subject relating to this right, especially surrounding the abilities granted to governmental agencies such as the National
Security Agency (NSA) via The Patriot and USA Freedom Acts. Despite this controversy, more than half of Americans, 56 percent, still believe the
government possesses the right to surveil internet correspondence, conversations, and phone calls without a warrant for suspicious or terrorist activity.
This may be due to the fact that the number of Americans who fear that they or someone in their family could eventually become the victim of a
terrorist act has doubled since 2013. (Americans,

Human Rights And Individual Rights
Individual Rights are rights that a person has that include the freedom to think, act, work, and behave. Freedom of speech, the right to live, liberty, the
pursuit of happiness, and many more similar rights are rights that we have as individuals. It all started on December 10, 1948 when the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights was adopted. Individual Rights provide us with freedom that cannot be interfered by no one including the government.
The moral principle of the Individual Rights is "right" which symbolizing the freedom we each have. We hold the freedom of action meaning us
as individuals get to do what we desire. Right shows a positive which is what we hold when we have the obligation of doing something. The
Individual Rights is one of the seven principles of the Texas Constitution, which protect the rights of the people such as their freedom of religion,
freedom of speech, and gender equality. The first article of the Texas Constitution protects these rights, which is known as the Bill of Rights. The
Bill of Rights was made up by the ten amendments, it was written by James Madison that had lots of comments from a lot of states relating to the
protection of the individual liberties, which were people free from complete control over them from the government. Freedom of Speech is
expressing oneself without anyone stopping you, since it is a right we have. For example, we have the right to give an opinion and say what we
want to say. We use this every day it's part of our way we express ourselves about a situation in our daily life. Freedom of Religion is that you have
the right to follow whatever religion you desire without the interference of no one as stated in article eighteen of the Texas constitution. For example,
we have the freedom to change our religion and express it in public or if not just keep it private. This way no one is titled to one religion that is not
wanted. Gender Equality is that everyone should be treated the same no matter what gender you are. For example, both females and males have the
same privileges and chances. There are also other genders that people identify themselves with and they also have the rights. No matter what gender

INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS TO SERVICE USERS Essay
FORM 1: Assignment brief – BTEC (NQF)
Assignment title
Individual Rights in Health and Social Care
Assessor
Tracey Simpson
Date issued
16/09/14
Hand in deadline
Duration (approx)
6 hours
Qualification covered
BTEC First Diploma in Health and Social Care
Units covered
Unit 8: Individual Rights in Health and Social Care
Learning aims covered
Learning Aim A: Investigate the rights of individuals using health and social care services
Learning Aim B: Examine the responsibilities of employers and employees in upholding service users' rights in health and social care
Scenario
You are about to go on work experience at a training centre for young adults with learning disabilities. Some of the young adults also...show more
content...
and Scott, J. (2008) BTEC First Health and Social Care, Revised Edition: Student Book, Oxford: Heinemann, 978–0–43550–026–9
Gresford, P. (1997) Case Studies in Health and Social Care, Oxford: Heinemann, 978–0–43545–273–5

Haworth, E., Higgins, H., Hoyle, H., Lavers, S. and Lewis, C. (2010) BTEC Level 2 First Health and Social Care Teaching Resource Pack, Harlow:
Pearson Education, 978–1–84690–671–8
Moonie, N., Bates, A. and Spencer–Perkins, D. (2004) Diversity and Rights in Care (Care Management Series), Oxford: Heinemann,
978–0–43540–126–9
Nolan, Y. (2003), S/NVQ Level 2 Care Candidate Handbook: Student Handbook, Heinemann, 978–0–43545–221–6
Websites www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=5145524 Equality Act 2010 www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/law.pdf Health and Safety at Work Act 1974
Note to Assessors:
We're committed to ensuring that teachers and students have a choice of resources to support their teaching and study.
We would encourage you to use relevant resources for your local area such as local employers, newspapers and council websites.
A range of publications, from a number of publishers, is available to support delivery and training for all Edexcel and BTEC qualifications, so students
and teachers can select those that best suit their needs.
Please find above some examples of textbooks. Further useful resources may be found at http://www.edexcel.com/resources/Pages/default.aspx.
If you have not achieved the Level 2 criteria,

Individual Rights Vis A Vis Collective Rights
Individual rights vis–Г –vis collective rights or why should social reality overcome theoretical approaches
Academia, policy makers, politicians and decision makers, constantly found themselves in a paradoxical position. They try to pursue a political project
strongly supported by the so–called scientific knowledge under an already given formula that, supposedly, has to fit every situation. Here we find the
paradox, since in order to provide broad definitions we have to divest concepts from all the relevant theoretical considerations. Therefore, they come
with a "Frankenstein–like" concept. The aim of this paper is to analyze two specific concepts that fit into this category: culture and minorities. This
would be done by explaining the way in which they negatively affect certain social groups.
The concept of culture is polisemantic, to an extent that has almost become impossible to reach an agreement on what exactly culture means.
However, the academia has found certain concomitants: it is learnt within a specific social group (Turner), it is a language of shared, symbols, values
and moral constraints (Geertz) and it is constructed through experience (Vigotsky). However, when the world culture is used within law, policy or
daily life, it loses its meaning, and somehow it becomes a "label" composed by a list of nouns (it used to contain adjectives, but since political
correctness became the dominant discourse, this changed); somehow its meaning and foremost political

Bill Of Individual Rights
All people are entitled to their rights, regardless of what the law might say. People should be authorized to rebel if the government is not performing its
job, to protect the individual rights, otherwise, the laws should be considered illegal. Rights of a citizen are needed for moral vision, protection, and
political vision. The dangers of ratifying the constitution go against the job of the government. Individual rights and states power are weakened, due to
the purpose of a constitution which was to create a strong federal government. In order to retain individual rights they must be written in the
constitution, the proposition of the Bill of Rights must be affirmed. Within the reasons for rights because of moral vision and protection,...show more
content...
Debating over an individual's rights comes down to two things either we protect them or we get rid of them, and again I say that this is exactly what the
constitution is doing. I want the constitution gone or I want the proposal of the Bill of Rights added to the constitution. By drafting the rights of an
individual, especially to the constitution serves as saying that civil liberties are important to the government. The Bill of Rights will keep the
government in check from becoming overpowered. It will have ten amendments dedicated for protecting the citizen and their rights, and when doing
this the Bill of Rights is portrayed as a major piece of legislation in the government. Federalist disagree with the claim of introducing the Bill of Rights
to the constitution because they feel that the constitution does enough in protecting the individual, thus they don't see the need for the Bill of Rights.
This to me is wrong on many levels. I already discussed how the constitution's purpose defeated the crucial job of the government, protecting the rights.
Due to the immense federal government that they intended to establish, the state's power is lost and the government begins to ignore the citizens, and
this is why the anti–federalist support the proposition for the Bill of Rights, for the sole importance of the individual and of course their rights. It
can be noticed that I truly respect the rights of the people of this nation, although when I discussed that "that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" in the Declaration of
Independence people presumed me as being a hypocrite because we still have enslaved blacks in our nation, and because I occupied slaves myself,
but my views on slavery changed over the years. I remember thinking blacks were inferior to me but as time went on I slowly

Declaration Of Independence And Individual Rights
July 4, 1776 is the United States Independence Day, "the United States Declaration of Independence" is the United States one of the most important
founding documents. The Declaration of Independence consists of four parts; the first set out the purpose of the Declaration; the second part shows the
political system; the third part tells the people against the British government oppression; in the final part of the declaration, the United States declared
independence. After the American Revolution, the United States became independent and became a powerful nation. Because the United States is a
democratic system so every citizen has the right to express their views, so today I would also like to discuss what is right. Individual rights are

There are many ways the Constitution protect individual rights that people might not much recognize. In 1787, the representatives of each state in the
United States gathered in Philadelphia and prepared for the strong central government. At that time, they had to make the document for the new
government, it was the American Constitution. They control many varied things such as protecting individuals' rights and, the way to elect
government administration, organization of the government. The constitution signed on September 17, 1787, however, the government thought the
constitution was not enough to protect the rights of citizens, so they edited it. Each states added the first amendments called The bill of Rights in
1791. The bill of Rights has...show more content...
However, Republican, also known as the Anti–Federalist, is the group of people who believe the facts that people should have their freedom and the
government should have less power. At that time, the representative of Federalism was John Adams and the Anti
–Federalism was Thomas Jefferson.
Obviously, Anti–Federalist disagreed that the federal government has too much power so that citizens cannot have voice in public. They think it was
very important that citizen should have safe liberty. So they tried hard to protect citizens' rights and they eventually made 10th Amendments into the
Constitution. Anti–Federalists thought that it would be hard if the government has much power to control people and has certain goal which could be
dangerous challenge. So that Anti–Federalists worried that citizens would not be able to have their own rights to speak up to the politics. In addition,
the bill of rights added in 1791. However, at that time, Federalists had much power so they made a deal that if the Anti–Federalists would vote for the
Constitution then Federalists would like to add the bill of

Individual Rights Vs Sixth Amendment
An individual, whether they are suspects or witnesses, cannot be compelled to give self–incriminating testimony. This is a constitutional right under
the Fifth and Sixth amendment used as a basis when discussing the rights of an individual being interviewed or interrogated. The Fifth Amendment
refers to no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against themselves. The Sixth amendment requires the accused to be
informed of the charges against them; any statement they make can be used against them in court, and the right to have counsel present to assist in
their defense. The explanation of the individual's rights is called the preinterrogation warning or the "Miranda Warning." The Miranda Warning consists
of four

Individual Rights Advocate Analysis

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)

Individual Rights Advocate Analysis