It is made even more disturbing upon recognizing that these biases are not, as is often believed, seen only in consciously racist individuals, but even in people who believe themselves to be neutral and objective. It would be simplistic to pin police brutality and racial violence on racist actors - that would imply that institutional racism could be remedied by removing such officials from the system. However, acknowledging these ingrained biases and understanding their impact is crucial to recognizing that the system is itself inherently biased, and that a neutral and objective institution of law enforcement can only be created when the emphasis is placed not on racists, but on the construct of racism
The film is about 14 minutes trailer titled Innocence of Muslims, the movie depicts the Prophet Muhammad in what Muslims say is a derogatory manner. Lots of Muslim countries in Middle East and others protested to some diplomatic mission and caused US Ambassador, Chris Stevens and three embassy officials are killed in US Consulate in Libya . These kind of thing lead the anti-Americanism into deeply hatred over US. Overall, the main cause of anti-Americanism arise in Arab world is because the US policy that assessed much harm Arab surrounding and Muslims, only for its own interest. The other factor that based on religion appears are not solely about religion or kin relationship, yet it truly affected by the US
Thinking that it’ll get him out of the room the fastest. Even though he changes his vote into what would be considered the right side, he does it for the wrong reason. Something juror 11 takes umbrage with. This is someone who has a lot of pride in the American legal system. According to him the actions of juror number 7 degrades the legal system as a hole.
The con to the argument presented by supporters of shaming penalties is that though they give numerous points to support their arguments these points are not evidenced based. The pro of the argument presented by opponents of shaming penalties is that they spoke of restoration for offenders and not to label them which may ruin their lives. The con of the argument presented by opponents of shaming penalties is that they like the supporters of shaming penalties lack empirical evidence to support their argument. I however support the shaming penalties though there are not enough evidence to prove its efficacy neither are there enough evidence to prove it is ineffective. Shame and embarrass is not an emotion many want to experience and to avoid shame people will not commit criminal activity as they do not want to be humiliated.
These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3. Juror Ten announces his intentions very early in the play. He speaks loudly and forcefully from the beginning, clearly showing his racism and prejudice towards the boy. Juror 10 quickly votes guilty and asserts that the defendant cannot be believed because “they’re born liars”. Additionally, he claims that the “kids who crawl outa those places are real trash.” With selfish attitudes like this, it was unlikely that Juror 10 would be interested in the truth behind the evidence and the case itself.
If torture has a chance of being unreliable then how can people be sure the information that is being acquired is accurate. When it comes down to torture people are willing to do and say anything in order for the pain to stop. According to The Economist, critics who have used and witnessed torture say that you cannot always rely on it: “Many critics of torture claim that it is ineffective as well as repugnant. Since people will say anything, just to stop the pain, the information gleaned may not be reliable” (Is Torture Ever Justified? 2007).
This can lead to some discord and animosity, such as brawls, intense arguments, and in some cases war. One may call me fatuous for making these points, because one may think I agree to the existence of good and evil because I stated it is artificial. Well, be prepared to be debunked, as when one references good and evil, they use no scientific evidence of its existence. It’s typically based off of one’s moral compass, law, and literature, but is never genuinely based on a highly accredited scientific source. However, one may argue that you can use people with mental issues who do crimes are evil.
When asked Saumya said “It’s abuse of free speech, since you’re just bashing someone else.” Using your freedom of speech to hit on theirs is a abuse of free speech. In reality, though what is actually being accomplished, besides trying to deteriorate others soul and being in such a provisional way. Hurting others because you think how they are is not right is a ridiculous way of thinking in this day and age. Using hate has not resolved any issues and sure is not making anyone believe that they are any more wrong in their
In cases of unjust laws, by obeying them, the country is put in harm and not in benefit. In Gandhi’s Satyagraha it is stated “An oppressor’s efforts will be put in vain if we refuse to submit to his tyranny,” (page 38). This means to make a change in the law, it is the responsibility of citizens to stand up for the wrong of the country. This act is what giving back to the country means, not, obeying unjust laws. As mentioned before, unjust laws don't seem unjust to everyone, there are some people benefitting from it in the wrong way which is why it is unjust.
They are unnecessary, if you are fighting then you should just fight not talk. The main reason for curse word is to hurt individuals feelings. They are used because you know it wounds you deep inside but is not visible that is why we never really know how much damage they really caused and sometimes it is easier than having to slap someone but can hurt more. When they are said to you you feel aggravated and depending on the word it might lower your self esteem. If we were smart we would not say them at all.