The Consequences Of Patriotism In A Civilized Society

The Consequences Of Patriotism In A Civilized Society
Objection 1. In a civilized society, government ratifies laws and endorses them while its citizens
acknowledge them and follow them; even if the laws may be despotic. The love of one's country
should be a sign that they are one–hundred percent loyal to the cause, even if there may be bouts of
moral violations. Patriotism has no grey areas in its ideologies. Socrates says that
You must either persuade [unjust law] or obey its orders, and endure in silence whatever [the law]
instructs you to endure, and if it leads you into war to be wounded or killed, you must obey. To do
so is right, and one must not give away or retreat or leave one's post [...] one must obey the
commands of one's city and country, or persuade it as to the nature of justice. (Plato 54)
In a polite society, it is mandatory to obey the law, no matter how bizarre or tyrannical. Therefore,
obeying an unjust law is not immoral.
Obj 2. Further, if you are living in a state and taking are advantage of the benefits they offer (e.g.
free education) then you are expected to abide by the laws or else there will be consequences; this
cannot be a one–way street. Imagine treating your own parents poorly even though they were the
ones who fed and clothed you. Socrates says that "once arrived at voting age and having observed
the affairs of the city and us the laws, we proclaim that if we do not please him, he can take his
possessions and go wherever he pleases" (Plato 54). Once a citizen reaches the age to exercise their
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Basic Laws Of Obeying Manslaughter
The average time of imprisonment for committing manslaughter is 13 years; Murder is a crime and
we strongly enforce this today. God states "You shall not murder." God says this to set a minimum
standard for humanity and the people of Israel. This is a basic law to keep one Holy and to abstain
from sin. To disobey this is a crime against man, and a crime against God. Obedience to this law
only brings goodness, as following the law ensures safety and tranquillity. God places this law to
keep his followers in the light of God, the people of Israel previously sinned against God's will, he
place these laws in hopes of freedom within structure.
"Now Cain said to his brother Abel, "Let's go out to the field."[d] While they were in the field, Cain

Morality, Law, and Politics Essay
I can imagine a perfect world. A world where morality is of upmost importance in our dealings with
each other, where morals are critically examined, and debated with reason as well as passion. This
world would be a pinnacle of human achievement. A pinnacle that we are nowhere near. Why is
this? Well, in today's society, morals are often associated with obeying the law, and since laws are
legislated by politicians, they are subject to politics. Laws are not right in and of themselves, and
morals are not a matter of a majority's opinion. Some matters that are in the domain of charity are
done through politics, often citing morality as a reason. Where exactly does charity fit in with
morals? With politics? In this paper I will explore the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These should be the only rules that may overrule a person's actions, for the more restricted a
person's action becomes, the less likely it is that they'll submit to those restrictions. The reason
morals may overrule a person's actions because these rules are justified. Without justification, there
is no reason at all for people to obey the rules, for in their eyes, the rules would be arbitrary, and
thus would lack any sort of authority over people.
Many people ask why morals should be able to prevail over people's desires. This is a valid
question, one that must be answered if morals are to be defended. Morals must not only be
reasonable for people to follow, but they must also have good reasons for people to follow them,
otherwise people would not bother adhering to them. These reasons should motivate people to
follow these rules. They must appeal to their perceived interests, but if these rules are to apply to all
people, they cannot serve the interests of just a few people. Moral rules are not for imposing your
own values and tastes on other people! As Narveson puts it, "[w]hat matters for morals is that its
rules are individually reasonable for people to accept and to follow, so long as others do too" (MM,
16).
Every nation today has laws, instituted by the ruling class (throughout this essay, when I mention
laws I am referring to legal laws, not moral laws). The

Family And Authority In Antigone
Antigone Essay Family and authority are common themes and misconceptions in the play Antigone.
When comparing the essential themes of family and authority, Creon and Ismene characterize the
theme of authority, while Antigone and Haemon value family.In the play Antigone, The protagonist
Antigone defends her rights to have a proper burial ceremony for her brother Polyneices who was
killed in war. Creon uses his authoritative power and puts a curse on whoever buries Polyneices, will
perish. Antigone proves that authority from Creon cannot stop the reckless love and concern for her
family. Creon and Ismene encounter many instances of authority,and obeying the laws in order to
please the Gods. Throughout the play, Creon and Ismene portray

Lord Of The Flies Theme Essay
Kyle Saito
Mrs. Fox
English 10
Per. 3
23, October 2014
Lord of the Flies
There are many factors that decide/figure out how people conduct themselves in their daily lives.
From the day we are brought in this world we are ruled by a set of laws that have influenced how we
live. As children we are taught how to act by our parents and guardians, and as we become adults,
society keeps us peaceful, law–obeying and productive with laws and order. In William Golding's
novel,"Lords of The Flies" the setting helps develop the theme by showing that without the
influence of a peaceful, law–obeying and productive society, we can go back to our primitive
existence. Without law and order and a desire to preserve peace, violence will (in the end) erupt as
the need for power becomes greater.
In the novel, "Lord of the Flies" William Golding uses the setting to develop the theme by
presenting a situation without guidance can make people animal–like. An example of (violent,
animal–like behavior) is when Golding introduces a mentally sick kid , who had ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
An example is when Simon went to tell everyone that the "Beastie" wasn't really a Beastie at all, but
ends up getting killed by Jack and everyone else, including Ralph and Piggy. They tried to act like
they weren't involved in it the next day. Also, Jack is a very good example of turning animal–like
when he paints his face, hunts pigs, kills Simon, tries to kill Ralph etc. After Jack holds them down
and take Piggy's glasses, Ralph goes with Piggy to get his glasses back at "Castle Rock." When they
get there and talk to Jack, Roger loosens a huge boulder which rolls down the hill, hits Piggy in the
head, which knocks him off the cliff and kills him. After that Jack sets out to kill Ralph. He sets all
the bushes on the island on fire which eventually sets the whole island on

Laws In Antigone By Sophocles
Throughout the play of Antigone as seen in Sophocles by Robert Fables, there are various instances
displaying the importance of the laws of the gods versus the laws of the people for the character,
Antigone. She often chose to obey the godly laws more so than those made by man, Creon in
particular. Antigone prioritized godly laws over manly laws in regards to her own living and
decision making, thus setting an example for us all if for the common good. Antigone stated that she
will stand by her choices no matter the consequences or circumstances if it meant she was obeying
the laws of the gods. As it says on page 82 lines 509–511, "These laws – I was not about to break
them, not of fear of some man's wounded pride, and face the retribution

Importance of Obeying Traffic Laws Essay
The Importance of Obeying Traffic Laws Traffic laws are designed to protect you and other drivers
on the road. If we do not follow them we are not only putting ourselves at risk but also innocent
bystanders and drivers. By knowing the rules of the road, practicing good driving skills and
generally taking care as a road user, you help play a vital role in preventing a crash. You will also be
making road safety policies more effective. Many factors play a role in road safety including
following the speed limits that are posted and making sure safety equipment is properly installed
and used. I will also discuss the skills that are expected and needed to be an efficient driver
including the ability to act responsibly, the ability to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Basically the higher the speed of a vehicle, the more difficult collision avoidance becomes and the
greater the damage if a collision does occur. Speeding is defined as the act or an instance of driving,
especially a motor vehicle, faster than is allowed by law. Speeding is often one component of
aggressive driving which is defined as committing a combination of moving traffic offenses so as to
endanger other persons or property. There are strong direct relationships between the speed at which
we drive and the risk of crash involvement and the injuries sustained if a crash results. The
probability of injury and the severity of those injuries increases exponentially with vehicle speed.
Even small increases in speeds result in a large increase in the forces experienced by the vehicle
occupants or other road users. Put simply, the faster you drive, the harder you hit and the more
severe the injuries you or someone else are likely to suffer. Traveling over the speed limit can be
especially dangerous in bad weather conditions. Speeding was a factor in 53 percent of fatal crashes
that occurred when there was snow or slush on

Is There a Moral Obligation to Obey the Law?
‘Must we only obey a just law; should we obey a law because it is just to do so; or else can we not
obey at all?'
ESSAY
The questions that shall be answered in this essay are ‘Must we only obey a just law?', ‘Should we
obey a law because it is just to do so?' and ‘Or else, can we not obey at all?' Before we can answer
these questions it is important to establish what is meant by the term ‘just'. ‘Just' in this case
means ‘morally just', I think, but differences of opinion exist as to its meaning. For the purpose of
this essay, I shall take ‘just' to mean ‘fair' in the way Rawls indicates when he writes about the
veil of justice in 1971: the every–day–sense of the term the average person would agree about.
Should we obey a law ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
First of all, it can be argued that the actions above do not mean giving consent, for two reasons.
The first is that citizens performing the above actions do not perceive them as giving consent to
obey their country's laws.
Secondly, many of them do not have an alternative. To leave one's home country, one needs money,
a passport and/or visa, an alternative and legally preferable destination and determination, a highly
improbable combination.
A second argument against the idea of consent is the following. Even if these actions can be held to
constitute consent, does that mean the individual has to obey whatever laws the government makes
from that day onwards? It can be argued that the act of voting e.g., or not leaving is maybe
insufficient to justify creating the broad obligation to obey any law the government makes. We
would possibly be exaggerating the weight of this single promise.
THE MORAL DUTY TO SUPPORT AND FURTHER JUST INSTITUTIONS
An argument Rawls gives in favour of a moral obligation to support the law is that there is a moral
duty to ‘support and further just institutions'. What is meant is that if a government is generally just
and democratic, its laws should be obeyed in order to support and further them. The origin of the
moral obligation is thus that just institutions should be helped and supported.
This argument raises the following question: how does one know what a just institution is? Although
an

The Pros And Cons Of Obeying The Law
Upon asking people their thoughts on obeying the law, many people respond with "I just don't, It's
illegal." This moral obligation to obey the law weighs far heavier than most people think. Many
people, who are privileged enough to not have to worry about breaking the law, don't really think
about how they feel about laws. However, those people who are in moral conflict with the law,
whether they be oppressed, indigent, or just an average person, must decide whether or not to obey
said law for their own good. In some situations, people are born into poor families where they must
break laws to survive. In some situations, people feel that certain laws are unfair or unjust, and that
it is their moral right to ignore these laws. However, In some situations, people break laws for
selfish reasons and are genuinely bad people. However, breaking the law does not automatically
make someone a bad person. Many people are born into indigent ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This is because of redundant and ludicrous laws made by the federal, state, and local governments
that do not make sense. For example, using a fake name is against the law and would result in some
sort of punishment. The same goes for preposterous laws like, using someones Wifi without
permission, or even sitting on the curb. City counsel In Colorado Springs is declaring, "people
sitting, kneeling, reclining and lying down threaten business, according to champions of a proposed
ordinance in which people using public planters, sidewalks, and curbs to rest could be subjected to
fines of up to $2,500, jail time up to 189 days or probation." Breaking laws like these does not
define someone's character, especially if one does so without knowing. Often times people are
unaware of these bizarre and absurd laws, which isn't their fault. However, if someone knowingly
breaks the law, regardless of how absurd, it is their fault and they should be ready to face

Similarities Between Antigone And Martin Luther King Jr
Antigone believes that the laws of the gods should supersede the laws of men. Personally, she feels
that the consequences of disobeying Creon's law are inferior to the consequences of disobeying
these higher laws. Morality is of greater importance to Antigone than her life, and ironically enough,
in the conclusion of Antigone she is sentenced to her death for her transgressions against the law.
Consistently throughout the play, Antigone struggles to understand how one could value the laws of
men more than the laws of the gods. "How savagely impious men use me, for keeping a law that is
holy" (942–943, Sophocles). Rather than succumbing to a law that she knows is not just, Antigone
demonstrates kleos by being steadfast in her morality.
Martin Luther King Jr. displays similar courage in fighting for justice rather than accepting his
situation, and the situation of all African American people, for what it is. Even though Martin Luther
King Jr. lived in a democracy, the laws that governed him were not democratic. African Americans
had little say in the laws that they were expected to follow, for many could not vote. As King says,
"Who ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Both were oppressed by laws that they had no control over, and both fought against those laws with
the reasoning that morality is more important than the words of men. Rather than obeying Creon's
decree, Antigone chose to display the respect she had for her brother. King placed his political and
social goals for equality in America over his personal safety. Consequently, both Antigone and King
paid the ultimate price for their actions and beliefs–with their lives. While Antigone's motive for
breaking the law was more personal, and King's was more politically inclined, the ideas they shared
in regards to the morality of breaking such laws were similar: a morally unjust law is not truly a law
at

The Law Why We Should or Shouldn't Obey
The Law The law has been around for centuries since the beginning of time. It was used as early as
the era before Jesus' birth. Although ideas have changed over time, the law in general still exist in
today's society. The idea of law was intended for order and avoiding citizens from revolting and
rebelling against the government. People should obey the law because the law creates a stable and
safer society. There are many reasons why people obey the law People obey the law because of
religious values, fear of punishment, costs, and it protects the weak. Obey Citizens can choose to
obey the law because of religious beliefs. The law was strictly enforced in the bible. The story of
Jesus of the Nazareth death can be related to the use ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Of course you will have the few people who think the law in general is just ignorant and doesn't
apply to them at all. These people disobey the law so that they can portray a certain imagine or boost
their reputation in society. In some cases, breaking the law can be fun while your in the moment. For
example running a stop because you're involved in a street race can feel risky but overall the feeling
of breaking the law and getting away with it is a fun experience. There is a theory that the hot or
attractive women like men who are in trouble with the law. Although this is a myth, I have
personally seen this in action before. Having the persona of a "bad boy" gives men especially an
advantage on women. To some women, men who break the law seem to be tough and physically
strong. Citizens also break the law when they don't agree with government regulations. A perfect
example is the era's of Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr., etc. Parks specifically,
refused to give her seat near the front of the bus for a Caucasian male. The law in her state was any
black or colored citizen had to give up their front row seat if a white person got on the bus. Also if
the bus was crowded with riders, blacks were suppose to give up their seat regardless of its location
to a white person. Rosa Parks decided to go against the law at that time and not relinquish her seat to
a white man. She was therefore thrown in jail for going breaking the law. Parks went against

The Power Trip Analysis
Obedience is an act of faith; Disobedience is the result of unbelief. Obeying to a higher authority
shows that someone has faith in the judgment of the one giving the orders, while it is the result of
unbelief when someone disobeys against the word of those who are higher in authority. In some
cases it is necessary to obey to the orders one is given, but in life there is always the tough decision
one must come to, whether to obey the authority and cower down or disobey their request and do the
right thing. I believe that obedience is the conventional way of life and is needed in a day to day
basis, although I do believe that disobedience is needed during certain situations. Obedience is the
process of bowing down and taking orders one is given. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Many obey to conformity because they are afraid to speak their own mind afraid to be alone. Going
against conformity means you are making the bold decision to stand up against the majority of
people alone speaking your mind and thoughts that those around you do not agree on. In many cases
obeying to higher authority is the best way to go, but disobeying is needed in your day to day life. In
the article "The Power Trip" by Jonah Lehrer mentions that leaders are chosen by their good traits,
but their traits disappears when they raise to power. Instead of being nice, honest, and outgoing they
become mean, cruel, and hostile towards others (Lehrer 654). When a higher authority becomes this
way it takes a great act of disobedience to stand up and release people back into freedom. For
someone to be a good leader and show that they are someone you can obey you must have just
authority. In "The Follower Problem" by writer David Brooks he mentions that "Lincoln and
Jefferson are presented as the embodiments of just authority. They are strong and powerful but also
humanized" what Brooks is saying is that their can be good in obedience, but those who want it
should be strong and powerful, but also understanding and civilized. With these traits a leader can
provide the responsibilities needed to successfully guide others to a life of

Summary Of Breaking The Law By Frank Trippett
Everyday there are people in the world who are breaking a law, either it is loitering, speeding,
making prohibited turns on the roads with cars, running a red light, or smugglers. Law breakers
appear a lot more often which includes people who regularly obey the laws. Frank Trippett, in his
passage states that social order is awfully unstable when regular law obeying citizens end up
disobeying the laws. He claims that these law breakers and citizens who were once law–abiding
citizens are either breaking laws involving taxes or simple laws like speeding. Frank speaks in a
worried tone that is intended for audiences of people who often break the laws and ones who may
intend to in the future. Breaking of laws are prohibited and there are people who regularly break the
laws, but it is problematic when ones who regularly obey the laws end up being law breakers. ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Scofflaws break laws often, they break even the simplest laws that are very easy to follow. Trippett's
passage claims, " When it comes to tax codes, or laws against littering or speeding or noise
pollution, more and more ordinary citizens are becoming scofflaws [People who usually break the
law]". Ordinary citizens are even becoming scofflaws, which just adds to more people who casually
break the law. The breaking of laws may lead to many issues including traffic accidents by law
breakers on the road, theft, pollution of our environment, or threats to the daily life of citizens due to
murders. Some break laws by choice, others do not care, some may have been influenced by others,
or some did it for justice to prove a law is

Obeying The Law Research Paper
Obeying the law, or rules is very important. There are many rules you need to follow. The law that I
think is very important, is that children, and students have to go to school. It is a state law. I think it
is fair, because we are so much smarter then we would be if we didn't go to school. We
students/cadets get to go to school. People all arround the world eather can't go to school, or can't
afford it. We are so lucky. Shool might not be fun, but it will help us in the long run. We will have an
education, we can then get a degree, then we can get a job and afford all kinds of things. At school
we can make frinds, and learn to do things we have never done before, we can learn respect, because
in some families the parents ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For instance: parties, dances, fun P.E. games, ecetra. School is not just zitting at a desk doing work
on papper. The adults can make it that way if they wanted to, but they don't they want to make it fun
for us, and they make fun things for us to do to learn the subjet. The adults want us too feel
comfrontable. School is a place for us to get knowledge and learn new things. Ya there might be a
few subjects that studets do not like, but there are also subjets students love. Friends will usually be
there unless they have something going on. For instance: they are sick, or they are bussy doing
something or they are on vacation. Sometimes school just doesn't work out for some students. They
just have to work harder than others. Something most people learn at or from school is 'Work
smarter not harder'. When people are having trouble they will ask for help, or sometimes they will
give up. Giving up is never good. You can loose friends, grades go down, and life will just get
harder. School is supposed to help you in all these ways, like: with your brains, and problems in life,
or how to controle them. School is fun for most people, the people that do well the other people are
just always crabby, because life just sucks. School does bring good people out of their shells, and
they get good jobs and degrees. School means great

How Does The Odyssey Relate To Life Today
A work of literature becomes important to us when we feel that it relates to our lives. The Odyssey
relates to life today in many ways, courage, trust, discipline, loyalty to family and community, and
obeying human or divine laws. In today's society courage, trust, and discipline are very important,
this is also true in the Odyssey. Odysseus showed great courage with his plan of blinding
Polyphemus the cyclops, with a huge heated spear. Odysseus also showed trust in his men when
passing the singing sirens, trusting them to keep the bees wax in there ear and keep him tied up
against the mast of the ship. Odysseus also has great discipline and wisdom, when he warns his men
to leave the city of Ismarus after they plundered it, before the Cicones

Martin Luther King, Just and Unjust Essay
Justice in the Eyes of Martin Luther King What is law? Law is a system of rules used to govern a
society and control the behaviors of its members. In this case, Martin Luther King is charged for
breaking a law. King questions the differences between just and unjust laws to justify his actions in
Birmingham and the charges of breaking laws willingly. Defending his willingness to break laws,
King argues, "How can you advocate breaking laws and obeying other?" He answers to accusation
of his willingness to break laws with a well–written argument of what is just and unjust laws. Martin
Luther King uses the definition, the categories, and the implication of the law excellently to answer
the charges of breaking laws willingly. King ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
To further support his analysis of the law, King states a third definition of "an unjust law is a code
inflicted upon a minority which that minority had no part in enacting or creating because they did
not have the unhampered right to vote" (PAR 14). This definition is given to show that there are
unjust laws occurring. This implies that the white people are devaluing democracy and what it
stands for. He states after that, clearly, Negroes are not allowed to vote in the state of Alabama
regardless if they are the minority or not. He is stating that it is unjust for Negroes not to be able to
vote. Although these statements do not directly answer the charges of the clergymen, King is
building up to that answer. While defining the laws, King is focusing on what he believe is wrong
and its relationship with unjust laws. King uses this technique to support breaking unjust laws to
obey just laws. Defending his willingness to break laws, King argues, "How can you advocate
breaking laws and obeying others" (PAR 11)? King uses the strategy of answering a question with a
question. King was arrested for parading without a permit in Birmingham, AL. The ordinance used
against King was deemed unjust because it denies citizens the First–Amendment. King's arrest is a
prime example of breaking laws and obeying others. He accepted the charges of breaking the law,
while,

Political Ideals And Ideology : Take Home Test 1
Korede Kazeem 7707916 Political ideals and ideology Take home test 1 Do we have a political
obligation to obey the law? We have a political obligation to obey the law in our society , this belief
is backed up by the justifications of fairness, consent, utilitarianism, and morality, but the most
compelling arguments found for the justification of why we should obey the law are consent,
fairness and morality, Utilitarianism. Although there are many justifications for why we should obey
the law but these concepts are the strongest justifications in my opinion. Consent: This justification
often referred to as consent theory or contract theory claims that we should obey the law because we
have consented to it (p.11) The consent theory describes that our obligation to obey the law is
because of a voluntary pledge on our part. If we have given consent to our society to implement
these laws for us or if we have given the consent to these laws themselves, there should be no reason
for us not to have a political obligation to obey the law. The consent given to these laws may not be
explicit, expressive or put in writing but the theory explains that tacit or passive consent is another
form of voluntary pledge given to obey these laws. Passive or tacit consent is can be given through
being a resident in that societies territorial jurisdiction and through voting. Because being a resident
in a society is a consent to that societies government, we have an obligation to obey

The Electoral College : The Purpose Of The Electoral College
We as citizen get the opportunity to vote on our leaders for the community and country, but not all
citizen actually vote during election. The percentage of the eligible voters that actually voted is
called voter turnout. Within the recent presidential election, the voter turnout was 58 percent. So by
the other 42 percent of eligible voters not voting the true outcome of all of the US citizen has not
been included in the election. You would think if the entirety of the US citizens voted then the
outcome of the election would have changed.
I say false because of the electoral college still being implemented in the presidential voting system.
The original purpose of the electoral college was justifiable due to the fact the most people back in
the day were uneducated of the world of politics to make the right decision on who will be
president. Though now it is not justifiable because of the ease of accessibility for the information on
the world of politics for citizen to make the right decisions. There also was the problem of counting
all of the ballots submitted by all the citizens, but now that is not a problem because of the
technology that is accessible today. Also, the members consisted in the electoral college are not
selected by the citizen, but by the political parties. What actually causes the electoral college to
make the voting system incapable to be at it's best potential given that in some states allow the
members of their electoral college not go with what the

A Good Sheep Are Law Obeying Citizens Essay
125– Word Essay
Some man are stronger then others. They are born into ruling over others becoming the shepherd
over the sheep. A good sheep are law obeying citizens. This brings good things to come when the
sheep is peaceful and hard working for the shepherd. The shepherd allows the sheep to have food
and shelter, so they can work hard. This shows that all men are not created equal.
Are action are benefitting or harming others all the time. But, if that is true how can justice be define
as helping friends and harming no one. In the geek time people wanted to do what the gods do,
which is misbehaving. (Killing, Rapping) The unraveling of Geek–sociality. We can see this
happening in the US in present time. The sophists offered young wealthy Greek men an education in
aretē (virtue or excellence), thereby attaining wealth and fame. If we lives in a unjust world if could
led to violence.
To love something is to lack it (needs, wants, desires). Someone can desire to be like a certain
person. It is what you lack, that is what you desire. For example, a men could be the biggest Red
Sock fan but can 't even hit a ball.
A philosopher doesn't give a hoot about money and honor. Love wisdom.
600–800 Word Essay
Aristotle was the student of Plato. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were the three thinkers that formed
the cornerstone of Western philosophy. The physician 's art was a craft that was usually passed from
one generation to another. So, Nicomachus, Aristotle fathers, was

Rights Dbq
[Accessed on 25 August 2015, http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/social–issues–rights–vs–
responsibilities/4750.aspx]
Carrey–Lynn Legge
Grade 8/2
Rights and Responsibilities
Due: 5 September
[Accessed on 25 August 2015,
https://room14ashborough.wikispaces.com/With+Rights+Come+Responsibilities]
Contents
Question 1 3
1.1 What is a Constitution? 3
1.2 Why do we need a constitution for our country? What is the full name of the Constitution of our
country? 3
1.3 Who approved and signed our new Constitution the first time? When did this happen? When did
South Africa's Constitution come into existence? 3
1.4 Which law is the highest in South Africa? Is anyone is South Africa exempt from not obeying
this law? Motivate your answer. 3
1.5 What is the condition under which our Constitution can be changed? 4
1.6 Where can the Bill of Rights be found? 4
1.7 What is the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In order for the Constitution to be changed, at least 60% of the country's voters need to be in
agreement of and approve the changes.
1.6 Where can the Bill of Rights be found?
The Bill of Rights can be found in Chapter Two of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa
1996.
1.7 What is the purpose of our Bill of Rights?
The Bill of Rights lists the rights and responsibilities of South Africans aswell as affirms the values
of dignity, freedom and equality.
1.8 Why is it important to acknowledge the responsibilities for each right?
Every single person is entitled to human rights. In order to protect your rights you have to be aware
of your responsibilities and meet those responsibilities.

All in all, The Constitution of South Africa is extremely important and is used every single day. It is
the foundation for our entire country and the whole of our country would be in complete darkness
without it.
Bibliography – Essay
Accessed on 25 August 2015

Obeying The Leash Law
The leash laws protect the public and their pets from loose dogs. Obeying the leash law when
walking a dog obviously requires your use of a leash. However, when confining your dog to your
property, there are several ways of going about it. Three common methods are tethering your dog,
using an electronic fence, or confining your dog with a physical fence.
Many people don't have the means or desire to install a physical fence. An electronic fence works
well, although it doesn't prevent people such as children from trespassing and being attacked.
In any case, some people are unable or unwilling to spend several hundred dollars on an electronic
fence. They solve the problem by tethering their dog to a tree, pole, or some other stationary anchor.

The Importance Of Obeying The Law
The fine line between obeying the law and not obeying it. Obeying the law kind of makes the world
safer. When you don't obey a law and therefore caught doing the crime; you will be charged and
possibly sentenced to a place where you are no longer free to do as you please. When you obey the
law you get to do as you please with your life as long as you follow the laws. Laws are put into
motion to create a safe environment for everyone to live in. No one should have to be worried about
their lives everyday; but there are accidents everyday in which lives are lost. When people aren't
following the law it doesn't mean that they are doing something that could harm someone; it could
be something that wouldn't have no harm no foul. When you don't follow every law it doesn't make
you a bad person. I don't believe everyone follows every law because there are too many laws that
we don't really know. Breaking a law that has done no harm doesn't make you a bad person. When
we are born their isn't an official or someone working for the government at the hospital with
documents for you to sign saying you're going to follow all the laws and if you don't there shall be
consequences. When we are born we are fully protected within the United States under all its all
laws making it basically not an option that your either going to follow them or not. In general there
is no documents that we need to sign saying we are going to follow every law. Basically we are just
born into it and we

Responsibility To Obey Law
As an American citizen, I believe it is the American people's duty and responsibility to obey the law,
pay taxes, and serve in court. The law provided by our system of government allows for optimum
function and potential required for a nation to thrive. Obeying the law leads to a safe and protected
society which is beneficial to the American people. And remember, the law also makes sure the
leaders of our country to do exploit its citizens. Those who break the law, whether it be local, state
or nation–wide, are promoting danger and chaos within our borders. Secondly, I consider paying
taxes to be another duty the American people must commit to and follow. Taxes keep our society
operating and moving. Taxes help pay for health care, infrastructure,

What Are The Arguments For Obeying Laws
When it comes to "the law" most of us see it as a set of rules we must follow and obey. The law has
a lot to do with the understanding that we must stand under legal obligation to one another. The
main argument for obeying laws is: anything that harm people, even indirectly, should not be done if
it could be avoided, people tend to depend on a functioning legal system for protection, successfully
disobeying the laws. No legal system can be perfectly just, but reliable. In the Crito the laws state
that Socrates had to obey the laws because of all that they had done for him. It is said that if the law
was not there then Socrates would have never been born since it is was because of them that his
parents were able to get married, he got his

Government Duty Research Paper
In America, there are five duties required of every citizen. They are obeying the law, paying taxes,
attending school, serving in court, and defending the nation. While defending the nation and serving
in court are important, obeying the law, paying taxes, and attending school are more important as
they make sure that there is even a nation worth defending. Citizens obeying the law is vital to a
country's survival. If a country's citizens didn't obey the same set of laws, then the country would
quickly unravel. Every person in a country adhering to their own set of laws would lead to increased
danger and ability for discrimination. For example, if the speed limit on a highway is 75 mph in a
country where everyone obeys the law, car accidents would be few and far between but in a country
where people don't care about the law, car accidents would happen significantly more due to people
going whatever speed they pleased. Likewise, if a law states that you can't discriminate based on
gender, then in a country where everyone follows the law, there would be no issues, while a country
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Taxes are part of the groundwork for a country as they allow for paved roads, education, payment of
the national debt, and even national security and defense. Consequently, citizens not paying taxes
would lead to a very low quality of life considering the fact that not only would the aforementioned
services be taken away, but many other services that many people don't even think about would be
taken away as well. If a society as a whole decided to stop paying taxes entirely, people who rely on
Medicaid, Medicare, or Social Security would find themselves on the streets if that was their only
source of income or severely struggling. Furthermore, a mass disregarding of taxes means that the
country would fall severely into debt, as the federal government would have notably less money to

Thoreau's Role In Civil Disobedience
Civil Disobedience Civil disobedience is the act of disobeying the law, but in a peaceful or
nonviolent way. There are many ways that this can have an impact on a free society, whether it's in a
positive manner or a negative manner. Civil disobedience has a different impact depending on what,
why, and which law is being resisted. It seems as though that civil disobedience has more of a
positive impact on a free society. In some cases though, there are those few people who view those
actions as childish.
Many people view civil disobedience as an act of resisting the government; not because those who
are involved are dumb or stupid, but because they are usually trying to fight for a better government.
As Henry Thoreau states in his writing "Civil Disobedience," "I ask for, not at once no government,
but at once a better government." Thoreau is saying when those who resist the government, they are
not aiming to show they want no government, but a better or smarter government. There are also
those who see these actions as involuntary. They believe that civil ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Leibman, he rejects any and all civil disobedience by stating, "No society whether free or tyrannical
can give its citizens the "right" to break the law. There can be no law to which obedience is optional,
no command to which the state attaches an "if you please." He believes no society should ever allow
obedience to be optional, and that there should never be a law that states or declares otherwise. He
supports the fact that no society should ever give its citizens any opportunity to break the law, no
loopholes or ways that can support their purpose in any way shape or form. This is true, no one
should ever be allowed to "break" or suspend the law and rights every person has, but when those
who stand out from others and deny obeying the government, aren't trying to show they don't care
about the law, but what they believe the government should change or make better decisions

Socrates Law Beliefs And Society
Law, beliefs and society.
Laws are not standard. They changes from state to state and obviously from country to country.
Athenians judicial system condemned to death a man for having a different belief than theirs and in
this essay I claim that Socrates' acceptance of death under a failing judicial system is unvirtuous
although he tries to make it seem as a virtuous and civic act. Socrates aberration for obeying the law
is pointless. If he wants to be virtuous he must go against the system. He needs to continue fighting
back and convince others to join his cause. Evidence will be shown from Apology and Crito to
prove this claim. Resistance as civic virtue –– isn't death a resistance?
Virtue is found in pointing out the wrong until something is done to make it right. Socrates tells
Crito "whether we must follow the opinion of the many and fear it or instead the opinion of the one
person, if there is someone who has knowledge, whom we must defer to and fear more than all the
others together" (Crito 47d). He is telling us that we must follow the right path, obey the one who is
right and ignore the mob but he is not that by subjugating to asthenias beliefs made laws. I consider
his subjugation an unvirtuous act that shows he has just given up on his cause, he prefers not to fight
back and every fleeing option suggested has already been marked as impossible.
When Socrates accepts death and stops caring for the spread of his beliefs he contradicts himself
from obeying the right and is following mobocracy. By saying "And at the same time, I am not
accustomed to deem myself worthy of anything bad" (Apology 38b) Socrates is expressing that he is
living a rightful examined life and if we evaluate this quotation from the cause – effect point given
by Socrates we can say that an examined life (cause) is worth living (effect) which leads us to the
outcome that If he does not consider himself guilty of the accusations therefore he deserves to live.
In both dialogues Socrates expresses little or no desire for escaping which makes me think that
either he gave up on his cause or he does not want to go through the suffering of being seen as
unvirtuous if he flees.
His life as a fugitive from justice is not the best life a

John Locke, Mill, And Rousseau
The state is a political consortium consisting of citizens that establish a community with a purpose
or objective in the concern of it's affiliates. In many cases, the government requires us to adhere to
certain edicts and mandates according to their adjudication. Should we in fact comply with these
ordinances? Why must we obey the state? Is there are a reason compelling enough to do what others
say is best? I will be looking at the beliefs of Locke, Mill, and Rousseau to help answer the inquiry.
I believe that we should not have to submit to an authority under any circumstances. What is a life
worth living if you do not have the entitlement to disenthrallment? There is no rationale in duress.
Citizens are independent people regardless of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There is also very good opportunity for corruption of the government if they have the power to
persuade their followers that their ill intentioned requests are God's word. Blindly following the herd
because of your devotion to faith is, quite frankly, one of the most uninformed decisions you could
possibly make. John Stuart Mill was an enormously influential philosopher in nineteenth century
Britain. Unlike Locke, he was to a greater extent focused on utilitarianism and harm reduction.
(Heydt, 2006) Utilitarianism, or the doctrine that actions are right and moral if they benefit the
majority, should compel the person to do the "right thing". When an action is right, it promotes
positive reaction among the individuals and if it is wrong, it will do the opposite. (Encyclopædia
Britannica, 2015) Everything considered, Mill opined following the state was the morally right thing
to do. But realistically, how many people would consider giving up their own personal gain for the
gain of others? Humans are fairly gluttonous beings and to expect them to give up what matters to
them in the interest of others is not a viable option. Not only is this an issue, but if something is
detrimental to one or more persons in the group, would it not be ruinous to the community as a
whole by upsetting the balance and tenor of an area within the community? What

Examples Of Civil Disobedience
Why we do obey the law? According to philosopher Peter Singer, there are good reasons for obeying
the law. But, he also argues, there are times when it acceptable to disobey law. Law are made to be
obey, but in some cases people beliefs that there are exception where unjust laws sometimes can be
disobey. Singer gives two arguments in favor of obeying laws. First, he argues that is necessary to
obey the laws so people avoid to hurting others. Second, Singer argues that to maintain or create
order it is necessary to have laws. We all need laws to keep things on order, in most of the cases
laws can be change depending on the place and time. In the other hand, civil disobedience can also
be viewed as necessary in some cases. Singer argues civil ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
In our history, there are cases where civil disobedience was necessary to made change in our justice
system. One example of disobey the law was Martin Luther King on civil right moments. In the
letter of Martin Luther king letter to Birmingham Jail. He wrote all his and others African–
Americans feeling during the civil right movement. How in peace there were fighting for their rights
and how their get tried. They have years fighting to be reconciled as a human being and not a
property, fighting in peace didn't' help them. According to Martin Luther King, "throughout
Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters,
and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population,
not a single Negro is registered." (King, 1963) How unjust laws were use to justify bad actions in
our society. Luther King also says that "how can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying
others? That lies can be the answer in two types of legal laws (just and unjust)." (King, 1963) In his
letter, he talk about the holocaust in Germany and how killing thousands of people where acceptable
by the law, even though killing other human being is see as unjustified by

Les Miserables Movie Analysis
Les Miserables is a prime example of two individuals conflicted by the "letter of the law" and the
"spirit of the law". The two main characters, Jean Valjean and and Javert, have two different views
on morality. There is a difference between the "letter of the law" and the "spirit of the law". Obeying
the what the laws specifically says defines the "letter of the law" and obeying the overall message of
the law defines the "spirit of the law". In the beginning of the movie, Jean Valjean is in prison for 19
years, however Javert releases him and tells him not to forget what the law has said. When Valjean is
released, he struggles to find warmth and food. A Bishop stumbles upon Jean and offers him that
warmth and food. He allows Valjean to stay at the church able overnight, but seeing all the silver
and someone who needs money, Jean steals but shortly is caught by Javert for stealing and brings
him forth to the Bishop. The Bishop demonstrates the "spirit of the law" by saying Jean did not steal
any of this silver, but he gave it to him. Seeing how the Bishop was so generous to Jean, he decides
that he will become an honest man and uses the silver to start a new identity and become mayor of
his new town.
This one event demonstrates the relationship of Valjean and Javert throughout the movie. Valjean
stealing and not obeying the law puts a bad impression on Javert because he is the one obeying what
the law says. Javert is unsatisfied with Valjean being able to walk away as a

Trippett Essay: The Importance Of Minor Laws
As trippett mentions, "You're a fool if you obey the rules," this really is the belief of most of the
Americans nowaday. People do not feel bad for breaking laws besides criminal laws. There are few
of people ever consider the importance, as Trippett conclues, of those "minor" laws. However, I, as
one of the "foolish" people in others' eyes, totally agree with Trippett's claim. "Minor" laws are just
as important as criminal laws to a society. Although a "minor" law violation does not get the same
level of penalty as a criminal committee, violating "minor" laws can also cause serious harm. For
instance a murder kills an innocent people while a speeder may cause more injuries or deaths. Even
though they have different motive, planned and accident,

Stanley Milgram's In The Perils Of Obedience
According to the Oxford dictionary Obedience is defined as a compliance with an order, request, or
law or submission to another's authority. In many situations authority demonstrates the ability to
control man to go against their beliefs in what is morally right. Due to fear and the insecurities of
man, authority may push the limits of society to a point where the individual may temporarily give
up their identity. This is proven by The Stanford Prison experiment "The combination of realism and
symbolism in this experiment had fused to create a vivid illusion of imprisonment. The illusion
merged inextricably with reality for at least some of the time for every individual in the situation. It
was remarkable how readily we all slipped into our roles, temporarily gave up our identities, and
allowed these assigned roles and social forces in the situation to guide, shape, and eventually ...
Each time the question asked was answered incorrectly the voltage of shock would be increased.
The "student" had been an actor hired to react to each shock, as the shock was to increase so did
their reactions to appeal to the "teacher's" empathy. When the "teachers" had reached a dangerous
high voltage and continued to do so it demonstrated a form of blind authority. Blind authority is
obeying the law only because it is a law, convinced your actions are okay because one is obeying
orders of an authority greater than man. It is apparent that this is blind authority due to the
"teachers" questioning if they should continue the experiment and demonstrating feeling guilt or
discomfort in their task given. Although the "teachers" may have felt their task given was wrong
they continued to do so because a figure of authority assured them it was okay, they were following
the rules

Obeying The Constitution
The most important trait of being an effective citizen is respecting others and obeying the
Constitution because it creates our three branches of government and is able for amending.
Everyone as a citizen of the US should obey the Constitution. Obeying the Constitution can avoid
consequences. By not obeying the Constitution and respecting people we are not obeying our
unalienable rights. Our unalienable rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and by
disrespecting others you are not letting other people have their pursuit of happiness as well. We are
living in a civilized world where people should cooperate with each other. Respecting people is a
silent way to express your feeling toward them. Respect is an unspoken way of communication,

Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s...
Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Justification of Defying Unjust Laws
In his famous essay, "Letter from Birmingham Jail,'' Martin Luther King, Jr. cites conscience as a
guide to obeying just laws and defying unjust laws. In the same way, Henry David Thoreau wrote in
his famous essay, "Civil Disobedience," that people should do what their conscience tells them and
not obey unjust laws. The positions of the two writers are very close; they use a common theme of
conscience, and they use a similar rhetorical appeal of ethos. In "Civil Disobedience" Thoreau
claims that men should act from their conscience. Thoreau believed it was the duty of a person to
disobey the law if his conscience says that the law is unjust. He ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
He disagreed with other American people who believed the majority should change the law first
because it is a worse thing to disobey the law than to do what an unjust law says to do. Thoreau
wrote that breaking the unjust laws is better: "Break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to
stop the machine" (Thoreau, P. 18). However, Thoreau did not think people should be criminals. He
thinks a criminal is a person who disobeys the law but will not be responsible for that. If a person
disobeys an unjust law, Thoreau thinks that the person must do that, so all people can see he is
disobeying the law because it is unjust. Then the person must accept what happens to him for
disobeying the law.
Thoreau wrote that people must be willing to go to jail if they want to change a law by disobeying
the law. Thoreau went to jail instead of paying for his taxes because he believed the government
used the money for unjust things. This is how Henry Thoreau thinks people can change unjust laws.
He thought that if people willingly would to go to jail and quit their jobs, then the revolution will
take a place and reform will come. Thoreau was willing to go to jail to change unjust laws because
of his conscience.
King's position on unjust laws was very close to Thoreau's position on unjust laws. In his famous
letter written when he was in jail, "Letter from Birmingham Jail," King wrote to the ministers who
did not like his protests to desegregate the city of

Why Animals Should Laws Obeying Animals And Animals
How often do you eat meat, eggs, or any dairy product? Do you ever think about the animal or the
animal's feelings? When you look at the biology food chain you find that wildlife are predators–
preying among each other. Plants are eaten by small rodents and insects which are eaten by frogs.
Snakes eat frogs and foxes eat rabbits which are consumed by humans. Mushrooms feed off of dead
animals and plants and such is the cycle of food. Even though Animals should be safe, there should
not be laws protecting animals on farms and in the wildlife. Animals are needed for important
research and Humans should not be expected to follow laws animals won't obey. There should not
be laws protecting animals on farms and in wildlife. Animals provide many great sources, and
without them we wouldn't have the majority of the things we have. Animals provide meat, milk, fur,
and sources of protein. Without animals there would not be insulin for the regulation of diabetes,
valves for human heart surgery, or suede for shoes. I believe pets should be protected, but not farm
animals or wild animals who are used for important by–product. Animals are used to make parts
such as water filters, insulation, rubber, and anti–freeze. Laws humans are expected to comply with
cannot be regulated in the wilderness. Humans should not be expected to follow laws animals won't
obey. One law that humans are expected to follow that cannot be regulated in the wild is " The right
of animals to be free from

Political Goals Of Public Education Chapter 1 Summary
In Chapter 1 of Spring, the author discusses the goals of public education and whether or not those
goals have been met. The chapter is divided into sections. These sections include Political Goals of
Schooling, Censorship & American Political Values, Courts & Political Values, and Political Values
& State & National Curriculum Standards. Each section the author makes a claim about public
education. In the section Political Goals of Schooling, the author made two claims that stood out to
me. The author stated that one of the political goals of public education is to learn to obey the law by
obeying school rules. Another goal was to educate patriotic citizens. I agree with the claim that
obeying laws starts in obeying school rules. Rules have been apart of the schooling system since I
can remember. Starting at a young age, you learn that there are consequences when you do not
follow the rules. This leads to the knowledge of that there will be consequences to not obeying the
law like there is with school rules. A claim that shocked me was a political goal was to educate
patriotic citizens. In order to do so, they would teach students song's, history, and literature. What ...
It's your decision to agree with those events or not therefore forming your political values. The
author included a quote said by Peggy Venable, director of the Texas chapter of Citizens for a Sound
Economy that, "I don't mean that we should sweep things under the rug. But the children should see
the hope and the good things about America." This statement shocked me. We study history to learn
from our mistakes, avoid past mistakes, and for inspiration. If we cover things up then we won't be
able to do that. This is why I am shocked by this

Thomas Hobbes' Social Contract Theory Essay
Thomas Hobbes creates a clear idea of the social contract theory in which the social contract is a
collective agreement where everyone in the state of nature comes together and sacrifices all their
liberty in return to security. "In return, the State promises to exercise its absolute power to maintain
a state of peace (by punishing deviants, etc.)" So are the power and the ability of the state making
people obey to the laws or is there a wider context to this? I am going to look at the different factors
to this argument including a wide range of critiques about Hobbes' theory to see whether or not his
theory is convincing reason for constantly obeying the law. Hobbes wrote the Leviathan during the
civil war where he had experienced ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Hobbes is also eager on the fact that law is depended on power. "A law without a credible and
powerful authority behind it is just simply not a law in any meaningful sense." By reading Hobbes,
it was undoubtedly seen that his biggest trepidation was ending up living in a state of nature. For
this reason he beliefs that the best way of avoiding state of nature is by not rebelling and obeying to
the law. He described it the state of nature as "no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear,
and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short" . He goes
on saying that anyone's property is the common wealth's property. It belongs to the sovereign state.
He says "That every private man has an absolute Propriety in his Goods; such, as excludeth the
Right of the Soveraign. Every man has indeed a Propriety that excludes the Right of every other
Subject: And he has it onely from the Soveraign Power; without the protection whereof, every other
man should have equall Right to the same. But if the Right of the Soveraign also be excluded, he
cannot performe the office they have put him into; which is, to defend them both from forraign
enemies, and from the injuries of one another; and consequently there is no longer a Common–
wealth." He claims that the State owns everything in the country and citizens are only legitimate to
own as long the State finds it

Scripture In Kinder's Essay
This psalm begins by promising blessings to all those who choose to keep God's law; while the
ungodly, who reject it, will ultimately perish. As Kinder (1973) concludes, "But 'the Day will
disclose' the man of straw as surely as the works of straw" (p. 65).
The company a man keeps testifies of his character. People of the same sort or with the same tastes
and interests will be found together. As the old proverb states, "birds of a feather flock together".
The psalmist tells us that those who "delight in the law of the Lord" (Ps. 1:2), will not be found
taking advice from or keeping company with the ungodly. As the New Testament Scripture instructs,
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness ...
So many chapters in the writings of Moses are given to presenting the precise and tedious laws of
God, but not one of those are as long as the one the psalmist penned praising those same laws. This
author seems to have been in love with the law of God and well acquainted with the benefits of
obeying it. As some have speculated that being written as an acrostic poem, with each letter of the
Hebrew alphabet being represented by beginning one of the 22 stanzas, could it not be concluded as
being symbolic of complete devotion to the Law of God?
As I have told my Sunday school classes through the years, the Bible is God's heart on paper. You
cannot know or please him without knowing and obeying his

According to Socrates, Should you Obey an Unjust Law?
Convicted For Living? Do we have an obligation to obey any law, no matter how unjust or evil,
provided only that it is in fact a valid rule of the legal system in which we happen to be physically
located? In the following composition, I am going to examine the answer to this question in
accordance to what Socrates believes. The best way to understand this almost "WWSD" (What
Would Socrates Do) approach is by looking at Socrates' actions in the three Platonic dialogues we
have read. These dialogues bring forth three possible bases for why Socrates believes one should
obey the law. First, that there is a distinction between the the "justness" of a law and how that law is
applied. Second, that if one willingly accepts living in a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
At no point during the proceedings did Socrates deny that corrupting the youth was a criminal act
punishable by death. Socrates in fact believes that it is noble to prosecute those who corrupt the
minds of the youth. Moreover, in the Euthyphro Dialogue, Socrates even praises Meletus saying
that, "He [Meletus] is the only one who begins at the right point in his political reforms; for his first
care is to make the young men as good as possible" (2). Therefore, while Socrates may not have
necessarily agreed with the verdict of his trial, he did agree with the essence and/or idea of what the
law that he "broke" was founded on. Socrates was accused of corrupting the young through the ideas
he taught and the manner in which he taught them, ergo his acts were inseparable from the crime of
which he was accused of. Consequently, and quite frankly rather humorously, the sheer enormity of
Socrates' crime could have hardly been outdone by that of any other of its time. Whereas it meant
that everything Socrates had done in his life was illegal, since practically his entire life stood for the
proposition that he ought to teach his philosophy to anyone who would listen. Socrates believed that
"the life unexamined is one not worth living.". The depth of that belief made the accusation of
corrupting the young almost equivalent to being charged with the crime of having lived. If Socrates'
pupils were not harmed, who

The Consequences Of Patriotism In A Civilized Society

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Tiffany Graham

More from Tiffany Graham (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Consequences Of Patriotism In A Civilized Society