I think your analysis is solid. I agree that upon Peter’s death, Martin is the sole property owner. I like how you pointed out that the gesture to transfer Peter’s property to Andrew “contradicts the legal agreement of joint tenancy.” I think there is validity to your assertions that Otis is a trespasser and for Martin to start the eviction process. I also like the suggestion of pursuing a lease with Otis.
Hi Kelly, I truly enjoyed your informative presentation. It is obvious that the APA provides effective standards for evaluator to adopt and initiate on their professional life when working on organization program and socially acquainting with individuals interested with the program. The evaluation must be done well with no notions involving negative thought, tricking, or manipulating with intent to override the investigation or miscommunicate with others. Consecutive communicative interaction with stakeholders informing them of the evaluation progress would enhance their motivation and contribution to a long life program. It is true that the evaluator has the duty to salvage participants’ safety and protect them from any harms, and protecting
Lynn uses the rulings of appellate courts to disprove the myth among pit bull advocates, that pit bulls are unidentifiable. The author begins the article by addressing the case of Ohio v. Anderson, and that it was decided that a dog owner of ordinary intelligence can determine if they own a dog commonly known as a pit bull. Moreover she addresses that pit bull advocates state that pit bulls are unidentifiable and that there is no such thing as a pit bull, and why this argument is not only invalid but misleading and harmful to society. Lynn states that adoption agencies have tried to create different names to signify variating subgenres of the breed in hopes to get pit bulls adopted.
When arguing that emancipatory movements have been plagued by an antinomy between a politics of ‘redistribution’ and a politics of ‘recognition’, Nancy Fraser is specifically referring to the manner by which cultural recognition displaces socioeconomic redistribution as a remedy for injustice and the goal for political struggle. In order to thoroughly investigate this dilemma Fraser analytically distinguishes the different logics behind ‘redistribution’ and ‘recognition’, while situating them into current political predicaments. From her extensive analysis Fraser proposes two broad remedies that can cut across the redistribution-reconstruction divide.
Barbara Grutter, a white woman applied to the Law School in 1996. She received a 161 LSAT score and obtained an undergraduate GPA of 3.8. Grutter was not admitted at first but placed on a waiting list but ultimately rejected. In 1997, Grutter, similar to Bakke, filed a suit against the Regents of the University of Michigan claiming the she was discriminated against based on her race which violated her Fourteenth Amendment, more specifically the Equal Protection Clause, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Grutter’s main arguments against the Law School included the fact that she was rejected because the usage of race was a “predominant” factor, allowing racial minority groups “a significantly greater chance of admission than students
I do think that how civilians are viewed and treated in war can be indicative of whether one side or both are pursuing total war. However, Bell’s argument is fairly weak on this point, which is an issue as he spends so much time defending it. As he notes, during the ancien régime generals wanted to avoid battles and fight them with well-trained forces. If well trained forces existed, and they obviously did, it stands to reason there was already some civilian/military divide in European society. While I can’t speak for Bell, he seems to be trying to make the argument that a clear distinction first needed to be made in society and it needed to hold some relevance.
BJ Miller’s first view point is that we all need a reason to wake up, however, I do not completely agree with this idea. God is the reason why we wake up or do not wake up, but we do have things to do when we wake up, so this point is somewhat valid. BJ raises a good point about all of us being patients for all humans have aliments that bothers them in life whether medical or psychological. I do believe the speakers concept that the American health care system is flawed for I have witnessed this myself while being a patient. Consequently, many American do not have access to the health care they need for they are uninsured or do not have enough money for the co-payments.
America was founded on multiple principles, one of them being that America is supposed to be a country where people can say what they want and believe what they want without being punished. Over the past couple years however, more and more people who are standing up for their beliefs, are being punished, specifically 17 NFL players who have decided not to stand during the national anthem. Many news outlets have had opinions from NFL owners, players, and fans about the protest, but not a lot of media has had opinions from military veterans. I wanted to get a true military perspective from a veteran who wouldn’t hold anything back. Richard Carter has served in the military under the Air Force for 8 years and in the reserve for two years.
During the late nineteenth century, the role of the government in the economy , money, and corporations in politics have been the subjects of some of the most important and pungent constitutional struggles in American history. Today, economic inequality is at its highest level since the early twentieth century. Concerns continue to grow towards the rising inequality that has become incompatible with a functioning and sustainable democracy. The comparison between today and the Lochner Era of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries continues to arise from many political and legal commenters. The Court has previously protected the political and economic interests of many corporations and wealthy individuals during periods of economic inequality.