Oppression And Discrimination Has Plagued Our Society

Oppression and discrimination has plagued our society since early times. As a collective society one would think that over time oppression and discrimination would turn into acceptance and equality. Conversely, our society has taken sluggish steps towards diversity, acceptance and equality. Our society is focused on labeling people and putting them into limiting boxes. Oppression occurs across various groups of people based on gender, sex, race, religion, and disability. Members of these diverse groups are discriminated among work places, schools, and other places. Work places and schools promote diversity and non-discrimination, however little seems to be practiced. Oppression across generation leaves damaging consequences hindering society in the growth towards a more accepting environment. After years of oppression and little change, internalized oppression is becoming detrimental to the growth of the next generation. Society leaves little room for change as these groups’ b egin the cycle of self-hate and stereotypes that have been placed on them by society. The youth grow up surrounded by a world that is against them from the beginning. Racism, oppression, and discrimination have a negative impact on the health and wellbeing among these people. A study on how racism has affected the Aborigines in Australia, shows that this group experiences a substantial health disadvantage compared to the rest of the Australian population. Aboriginal youth who experience racism are atShow MoreRelatedSummary Of The Case For Reparations 1057 Words   |  5 Pagesmany years. Racial discrimination is still existent today, though people are afraid to talk about it, for fear of admitting ancestral sin and current stereotypes. Ta-Nehisi Coates expresses these ideas in his article â€Å"The Case for Reparations†, and focuses on the issue of home ownership in Chicago. The bottom line of his article is that one must not forget and discard of the past, rather they m ust acknowledge and own what has happened. With Coates focus on American oppression, one doesn’t gleanRead MoreImpact of Media on Diversity in the 21st Century Essay1192 Words   |  5 PagesINTRODUCTION A decade into the 21st century and the United States is still plagued with the prejudice, oppression, and discrimination that have dominated since its founding. Despite the advances in technology and education, there remains an archaic practice of communication and interpersonal relationships. In fact, the prejudice, oppression, and discrimination practiced today is far worse than that of years past because of the advances in technology and education. People have learned to camouflageRead MoreGender Roles Have Plagued Our Society919 Words   |  4 Pageshave plagued our society for centuries. Women have always been expected to cook, clean, and take care of children, while men provided for the family. In the past few decades these stereotypes have supposedly diminished, and women are now supposed to be equal to men. However, this is not the case. Gender roles, and stereotypes still perpetuate our society today, and create an environment suitable solely for men, while women continue t o suffer the consequences of these gender roles society has implicatedRead MoreRichard Wright s Letter From A Birmingham Jail1120 Words   |  5 Pages It is clearly apparent in society that segregation causes unneeded violence and hatred that can be stopped once everyone learns to respect and notice their differences. Although, this transformation does not seem to be as easy as it sounds. In this case, fear impacts equality and when fear prevents equality, people s’ opinions are not able to be heard, leading to discrimination and injustice. The fear of differing ideas and opinions makes it hard to reach independence and freedom because a negativeRead MoreCultural Conformity and Race Essay1549 Words   |  7 PagesFor centuries, racism has become the universal epitome of culture, despite the efforts of various civilizations, such as the Western and European to combat these indifferences among people. A race is specific social group that can be differentiated through various ways, from facial features and hair textures, to social norms and habits that constitutes to that group. These differences contribute to our uniqueness a nd humanity. Because people can be grouped by any number of differences, Man, leadRead MoreHuman Rights Violations to Afghan Women1492 Words   |  6 Pagesto settle disputes, assault and more than a dozen other acts of violence and abuse against women are a common norm in Afghan society. About 87% of women experience physical, psychological or sexual violence. Incidents of violence against women remain largely under-reported because of cultural restraints, social norms and religious beliefs. Because of widespread discrimination, fears of social stigma and threats to their lives, victimized women do not follow up on persecuting their offenders. In additionRead MoreThe End Of The Civil Rights Act973 Words   |  4 Pagesminimum sentencing laws there is a split in the number of Black marriages and Black men in prison (see appendix)(Marriage). Our criminal justice system has set up criminals for recidivism. According to the Bureau of Justice within three years, 7 in 10 non-violent offenders are arrested and at risk for recidivism. The passage of the Civil Rights Act ended discrimination against people based on religion, sex, race or sexual orientation, but not criminal history. Today it is legal for a person toRead MoreThe New Jim Crow : Mass Incarceration On The Age Colorblindness Written By Legal Scholar1197 Words   |  5 Pagescommunities in the United States. According to Alexander, The New Jim Crow laws were created to hinder the growth of black or brown men by using the criminal justice system to enslave them into a vicious cycle of oppression. The Jim Crow laws that relished our nation’s history so many years earlier has resurfaced and consequently lodged many minority men into second class citizenship and allow law enforcement officers to saturate black communities and discriminate against citizens that fit a certain profile—blackRead MoreRacism And Racism1359 Words   |  6 Pageswar or a great depression, but great deal of grim incidences do seem to repeat or they’ve just continued since the beginning. Racism and sexism are two of those instances, this oppression has never stopped, and doubtedly ever will. Even though we’ve resolved these issues the best we could, there is still hate and discrimination everywhere. I can’t begin to understand why someone would believe they are better than others because of their skin color. To me, it’s appalling. The first incident of racismRead MoreThe Case Of Black Civil Rights843 Words   |  4 Pagesand have waited for too long. His argument is highly persuasive because of his sophisticated use of parallelism, especially in paragraph 3, which is used to appeal to the sense of longing that blacks feel. â€Å"We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights...Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, ‘Wait.’ But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at

Reasonable Fear of Imminent Danger Good Social Policy Free Essays

string(232) " 2005 was that it was â€Å"necessary to restore absolute rights of law abiding people to protect themselves, their families, and others, and their property from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action\." Reasonable Fear of Imminent Danger: Good Social Policy? BY gotten Reasonable Fear of Imminent Danger: Good Social Policy? Giovanni Mike 4324324 LISTENED 1001 sum 13 Professor James Barney A sobering fact Is that our government has a monopoly on the use of force, but It cannot protect everyone at all times In an Immediate fashion. Joel samara, criminal Law, at 1 55 (1 lath De. 2014). We will write a custom essay sample on Reasonable Fear of Imminent Danger: Good Social Policy or any similar topic only for you Order Now Therefore, citizens are permitted to use proportional force in a â€Å"self-help† fashion as long as 1. The necessity is great 2. The need exists â€Å"right now’ 3. The force is used for prevention only. D. At 155. However, preemptive tribes or retaliation are not justifications for force used in self-defense. ‘d, at 155. There are also four elements of self-defense: unprovoked attack, necessity, proportionality, and reasonable belief. ‘d, at 156. The first three were alluded to earlier and are fairly self-explanatory, but reasonable belief will be the primary focus in this discussion. This element requires that a defender must have the â€Å"reasonable† belief that It’s necessary to use deadly force to neutralize an Imminent deadly attack. D, at 156. However, what Is â€Å"reasonable fear? † How does It play out In the courtroom? Is the burden on the person using force against an aggressor to show that he or she possessed â€Å"reas onable fear? † Does this requirement change whether a person is at should be look into whether the person using deadly force had a â€Å"reasonable† opportunity to retreat and avoid violence? Should we offer civil immunity to those who used deadly force legitimately? Overall, are the recently more aggressive self- defense laws good for public policy? Do they allow those with â€Å"itchy’ trigger fingers to have a virtual license to kill, or do they take an extra necessary step to put the safety f law-abiding citizens ahead of the concerns of violent law-breakers? Newer self- defense laws, such as the one passed by Florida, unnecessarily presume â€Å"reasonable fear† in defending one’s home and fail to adequately consider whether a person using deadly force had a duty to retreat (in public spaces) when violence could have been easily avoided. Citizens should reasonably be expected to show that their deadly use of force was Justified due to their legitimate fear for their safety whether they’re at home or in public; they’re burden of proof shouldn’t be beyond a seasonable doubt since the prosecution could probably cast doubt on this with relative ease since it’s based on the subjective measurement of fear. Subtle wording differences in these laws can sway protections to either the aggressor or defender in these situations?it’s critical to strike a healthy balance. So how did we get to the self-defense laws used today? According to Joel Samara, Criminal Law, at 164 (1 lath De. 2014), since the thirteenth century English common law required that a person had to prove that he’d â€Å"retreated to the wall† before being Justified in killing another errors. The US began to reject this practice in the nineteenth century and replaced it with a â€Å"no duty to retreat† requirement, which holds that a person can be Justified in killing someone in self-defense. ‘d, at 164. This new approach to the use of force by the common man was thought to be more accommodating to the bravery of a â€Å"true man. † ‘d, at 164. This â€Å"true man† was thought to be someone who would do whatever he had to do to protect his wife, kids, and the nation. ‘d, at 165. Legislators and judges carved out the â€Å"stand your ground† rule from these previously mention values, which states that if a man didn’t start the fight they could stand their ground and kill in self-defense without having to retreat from a place they had a legal right to be. ‘d, at 165. Also, the retreat rule was also created that obligates a person to retreat if they â€Å"reasonably’ believe that they’re threatened with death or serious harm and they are able to retreat without continuing to be subject to this danger. D, at 165. Furthermore, the â€Å"castle doctrine† was created as an exception to the retreat rule when the context is within someone’s home, where they have no duty to retreat as Eng as they reasonably believe there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily har m. ‘d, at 165. Since 2005, more than forty states have passed or proposed new â€Å"castle doctrine† legislation intended to expand the right to use deadly force in self-defense. ‘d, at 172. Florida was the first state to pass this type of statute, and it continues to be the model for the rest of the states. D, at 172. Their statute states that a person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm if: (a) The person against whom the defensive force was used as in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle (b) The person who used defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred†¦ Old, at 172. Pennsylvania, they have a right to be in (2) they believe that the use of deadly force is immediately necessary to prevent death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping, or rape (3) the aggressor displays or uses a firearm (or replica) or any other deadly weapon. Joshua Light, The Castle Doctrine?The Lobby is my Dwelling, Volvo 22 Widener Law Journal 236 These types of laws do not exist without controversy, since there are those (2012). That claim that they give citizens a virtual â€Å"license to kill. † Supra, at 174. On one side, people like Marion Hammer, president of the National Rifle Association, contend that these new laws are Just protecting a right that has been around since the asses and that we shouldn’t have a duty to retreat only to get chased down and beaten to death. ‘d, at 174. Indeed, Florist’s intent when they passed their castle-doctrine law n 2005 was that it was â€Å"necessary to restore absolute rights of law abiding people to protect themselves, their families, and others, and their property from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution or civil action. You read "Reasonable Fear of Imminent Danger: Good Social Policy" in category "Papers" Wyatt Holiday, The Answer to Criminal Aggression is Retaliation: Stand-your-Ground Laws and the Liberalizing of Self-Defense, Volvo 43 University of Toledo Law Review 417 (2012). Supporters of the castle doctrine-type laws recognize that there are times when the government’s monopoly on violence must be set aside to allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves when time is limited. Benjamin Levin, A Defensible Defense? : Reexamining Castle Doctrine Statues Volvo 47 Harvard Journal on Legislation 540 (2010). When an aggressor poses an immediate threat, the defender’s preservation of self should take precedence over the aggressor’s culpability. ‘d, at 539. Others like Jim Brady from The Brady Campaign believe that these laws are â€Å"ushering in a violent new era where civilians have more freedom to use deadly force than even the police. † Samara, Criminal Law, at 174 (2014). They also claim that these laws allow those who have an â€Å"itchy trigger finger† to simply claim that they were in fear and therefore justified in using deadly force. ‘d, at 174. To make things even more complex, states have their own versions of the law that are still in flux and fairly open to interpretation by courts?it is not always straightforward when someone is legally entitled to use deadly force to protect themselves. Levin, A Defensible Defense 534-536 (2010). What does â€Å"reasonable fear† even mean? Unfortunately, this is not easy to answer. Ohio’s depiction of reasonable fear is somewhat helpful: the actor using deadly force must have a bona fide belief that he/she was in imminent danger f death or great bodily harm and the only means of escape was to use deadly force in retaliation. Wyatt Holiday, The Answer to Criminal Aggression is Retaliation: Stand- Your-Ground Laws and the Liberalizing of Self-Defense, Volvo 43 University of Toledo Law Review 425 (2012). The â€Å"honest† and â€Å"reasonable† requirements make it seem like a hybrid objective/sub]active requirement, but it’s still a subjective standard as highlighted by the Ohio Supreme Court. ‘d, at 424. This court’s instructions on this standard recommended that to determine whether a defendant had reasonable fear of imminent danger: †¦ U must put yourself in the position of the Defendant, with her characteristics, knowledge, or lack of knowledge, and under the same circumstances and conditions that surrounded the Defendant at the time. You must consider the conduct of [the victim] and determine if such acts and words caused the Defendant to reasonably and honestly believe that she was about to be killed or â€Å"reasonable fear† is so subjective, because of t he wide range of situations people find themselves in; it doesn’t seem feasible to create an objective test that measures such a subjective and virtually immeasurable emotion such as fear. Keep in mind how the law mentions that the only means of escape is the use of deadly force. Even though â€Å"reasonable fear† is such a subjective concept, it still has an impact in the courtroom compared to how self-defense laws used to be written. Before Stand- Your-Ground laws came about, defendants had the burden to show that their life and limb was actually in danger. Light at 234 (2012). Now, in certain Jurisdictions, citizens have to only prove that they had a â€Å"reasonable fear† that their life and limb were at jeopardy, and that they believed that deadly force was immediately necessary to peel this threat. D, at 234. This amounts to a smaller burden of proof on the defendant, which is more challenging for the prosecution because disproving facts is a lot easier than disproving perceptions. ‘d, at 234. Is this a fair balance? The â€Å"reasonable fear† requirement is fair since it allows the state to make an inquiry into whether deadly force was used in a legitimate fashion without putting an excessive burden on citizens to Justify their use of force that can be easily defeated by prosecuting attorneys. What about the â€Å"duty to retreat? Should it still play a part n today’s laws? Eric Del Bozo, Retreat Does Not Equal Surrender: Defensive Deadly Force in Dwellings After People v. Keen, Volvo 82 SST. John’s Law Review 360-381 (2008) points out that the duty to retreat should still play a part in these self-defense laws, especially when retreat is a safe and reasonable option that could save a lot of violence. He concedes, however, that â€Å"one need not calmly evaluate exit strategies when faced with a pressing danger, for detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife. ‘d, at 364. Also, it isn’t reasonable to focus in midnight at whether the defendant could have safely retreated, which is a reason why â€Å"reasonable fear† is appropriate in order to focu s on what the person knew at the time. ‘d, at 364. The way retreat is treated as an option and the thoughts of the person using force varies among states and even Jurisdictions within those states; some deemphasize the need to retreat while others focus more on the Justification of force and options for retreat. ‘d, at 363-364. In 2006 alone though, between 10 and 15 states repealed their laws that required persons to consider retreat before using defensive deadly force. D, at 377. This might not bode well in a case where a person shoots his neighbor over an argument over trash bins; Del Bozo suggests that stories making headlines tend to be neighbors and acquaintances freely assaulting each other rather than repelling home invasions. ‘d, at 377. However, he doesn’t offer any statistics or empirical evidence that there is a trend in unjustifiable killings due to these laws. Nonetheless, the duty to retreat still has merit to allow the whole situation to be analyzed in court, and hold people accountable who may engage in â€Å"senseless† killings. ‘d, at 378. The prosecution should be able to show that retreat was indeed a viable option out of a respect for human life; there must be a balance between protecting the safety of both the assailant and the victim, but retreat should be looked at with the burden being on the non-aggressor. ‘d, at 380. There are five different concerns that law enforcement authorities have concerning these new and more aggressive self-defense laws. One unintended consequence could be police officers since citizens Just have to claim that they have â€Å"reasonable fear† in order to use deadly force. ‘d, at 175. On the other hand, Florist’s statute contains a revision which holds that citizens are not Justified in using deadly force against law enforcement officers as long as they are acting in an official capacity, have identified themselves as a police officer, or the person using force should have â€Å"reasonably’ known it was a law enforcement officer. D, at 173. Indiana struggled with this unintended consequence, but actually ended up ruling that citizens cannot reasonably use deadly force against law enforcement officers. Jon Laramie, Indiana Constitutional Development: Debtors, Placements, and the Castle Doctrine, Volvo. 45 Indiana Law Review, 1049-1051 (2012). In Barnes v. Tate, 946 N. E. Ad 572 (2011), the Indiana Supreme Court stated that â€Å"public policy disavows recognizing a common l aw right to forcibly resist unlawful police entry into one’s home. ‘d, at 1050. They also recognized that it isn’t easy for citizens to recognize when a given police entry is lawful or not, that injury is high due to upgrades in police equipment, and citizens have other remedies for unlawful entries (civil litigation, police disciplinary hearings, exclusionary rule, etc. ) ‘d, at 1050. The court did concede that a person has the right to â€Å"reasonably resist† an unlawful entry, but this doesn’t amount to a defense of eatery or other violent acts against law enforcement. D, at 1051. The court also claimed that most other states have followed suite in this decision in the interest of law enforcement safety. ‘d, at 1050. Another concern is that the interpretation of these castle-type laws is in its infancy. Some believe that law enforcement training will constantly have to adapt to changing views on these laws, and that it will be almost impossible for police officers to determine whether these new laws are being invoked [applied properly. Supra, at 176. The next concern is that instead of Just avian to determine whether danger was imminent or there was a duty to retreat in a public place, police officers will now have to anticipate more â€Å"self-defense† claims. ‘d, at 176. This will increase the investigative burdens on officers, and proving a negative is difficult when the evidence is â€Å"in the hands of the defendant. † ‘d, at 176. This concern is exacerbated by the fact that law enforcement agencies are often understaffed and are already overworked. ‘d, at 176. Furthermore, police authorities are worried that these new laws will lead to a sort of apathy and degradation of vigilance among officers. D, at 176. They may get used to seeing â€Å"self- defense† claims and may dig deep enough into every claim as these new castle-type laws call for, especially if both parties have criminal records. ‘d, at 176. The last concern of law enforcement on castle-type laws are that citizens (a) will not be adequately aware of their right to use force in self-defense and (b) will be considered a deterrence by criminals who may now view them as more able to defend themselves. D, at 176. Overall, people might feel safer because they are given more latitude to protect themselves, but they may not since they might be worried about there with â€Å"itchy trigger fingers. † ‘d, at 177. Also, there is a lack of empirical evidence that shows that the positive impacts outweigh the positive negative impacts. ‘d, at 177. However, the i ronic part is that we will not know if these types of laws will â€Å"work† unless we employ them uniformly on a generalize sample size (many states/ jurisdictions) and then evaluate them over time using sound research methods. Ensure that citizens are able to defend themselves when they legitimately need to. Nobody said it would come without any consequences at all. A legal issue with hose castle doctrine-type laws according to Elizabeth Mega, Deadly Combinations: How Self-Defense Laws Pairing Immunity with a Presumption of Fear Allows Criminals to â€Å"Get Away with Murder,† Volvo 34 American Journal of Trial Advocacy 105-134 (2010), is that reasonable fear and immunity can combine to create a virtual bar on prosecution for self-defense cases involving an individual’s â€Å"castle. The state of Florida provides both a presumptive reasonable fear clause and an immunity clause; reasonable fear by itself can be rebutted by the prosecution at a later time, but i mmunity won’t ever allow that to happen. D, at 108. Mega contends that such an â€Å"irrefutable conclusion† is unconstitutional and puts law enforcement in an awkward position to determine immunity. ‘d, at 108. Also, once immunity is granted it cannot be withdrawn and someone who was entitled to immunity cannot fight for it later on. ‘d, at 109. However, if someone is outside of their home they have to prove the reasonableness of their use of force before being qualified for immunity?this is presumed in cases involving the home and motor vehicles though. ‘d, at 113.. Furthermore, at least in situations located at the defender’s home, Florist’s law sakes it impossible to make the determination that the defender’s use of force was unlawful. ‘d, at 118. The law contains a provision that states that reasonable fear can be â€Å"presumed† when a person uses deadly force in the protection of their home?the police cannot make a probable cause determination. D, at 119. Florist’s law puts law enforcement in a situation where they have to make determinations on the spot that prosecutors would normally make: they have to make determinations of immunity and attempt to disprove a presumption rather than establish a case. ‘d, at 120. Law enforcement normally investigate â€Å"unlawfulà ¢â‚¬  acts, but Florist’s law tells officers to presume that acts of violence within the home are â€Å"lawful. † ‘d, at 121 . As for how to fix these statutory issues, Mega contends that they are beyond fixing with Just guidelines and require rewording. Police could become so dependent on the guidelines that they may fail to see the big picture, defendants could end up in Jail trying to assert immunity, law enforcement may not understand the guidelines, and law enforcement have to engage in prosecutorial duties that they were not trained to do. D, at 130. Although â€Å"immunity’ certain presents more problems, what about â€Å"reasonable fear† itself? Mega claims that the previous duty to retreat laws still allowed someone to use force, but only when there is no safe method of retreat. ‘d, at 115. In this way, common law held the respect for life on a higher level than the right to possess and use a gun. ‘d, at 115. However, with the new castle-type laws individuals can now react violently with little incentive to try and diffuse the situation by safely retreating. ‘d, at 115. The duty to retreat makes someone think twice about sing force instead of harming someone before considering whether an actual threat exists. ‘d, at 116. With these new Stand Your Ground and castle-type laws, individuals are authorized to act violently in the face of a â€Å"perceived† threat, which is very subjective and open to interpretation. D, at 129. In Florida, however, the law allows the state to prosecute individuals when probable cause is established that the force used was unlawful, at least outside of one’s home. ‘d, at 130. This type of provision who use deadly force in a senseless or reckless manner without giving reasonable Hough into whether they†™re really facing impending danger. As mentioned earlier though, in the heat of the moment people’s perceptions and their ability amount to think clearly in these intense situations will vary. How does â€Å"reasonable fear† play out in the context of a Jury trial? Stay Lee Burns, Demonstrating â€Å"Reasonable Fear† at Trial: Is it Science or Junk Science? Department of Sociology, Loyola Martyrdom University, Los Angles, CA 107-131 (2008) examined one murder trial in depth that involved reasonable fear. In this case, the Maddened brothers were charged and invoiced of first degree murder for shot-gunning their parents in their own home in August 1989. ‘d, at 109. During the trial, they confessed to parricide but claimed they held reasonable fear because of their prior sexual abuse by their father and acted in self-defense Justification defense). D, at 110. The Jury deadlocked at the first trial, which indicates the ambiguousness that reasonable fear can have at trial. ‘d, at 129. The defense proposed expert testimony that would show that the abuse the defendants underwent altered their mental state at the time of the killings because heir susceptibility to fear and perception of imminent danger were heightened. ‘d, at 1 12. U Timely, the Judge did not allow expert testimony pertaining to what happened in the Maddened brothers’ situation, but could attempt to generalize prior research on fear perception. Although there has been research on the limbic system, the part of the brain that processes fear, for the lastly years the results are far from conclusive and there is no test available that can show what the Maddened brothers’ fear levels were at the time of the killing or whether their susceptibility had indeed been heightened because of trauma. ‘d, at 118- 127. Social science is only able to provide statistics and the likelihood that the Maddened brothers would act a certain way in a given situation. ‘d, at 122. There is a blood test available that can give insight into what a person’s level of fear is, but the sample would have to be taken right at the moment of the crime (not feasible). ‘d, at 124. This case illustrates the tension between social science and the Judicial system that requires facts to relate to the particular case at hand. ‘d, at 128. It came down to what the Jury felt was â€Å"reasonable fear,† and how much they thought the expert testimony applied to the Maddened ease?it’s no surprise that the Jury ended up deadlocked. D, at 128-129. In conclusion, the â€Å"reasonable fear† requirement is fair since it allows the state to make an inquiry into whether deadly force was used in a legitimate fashion without putting an excessive burden on citizens and giving too much of an advantage to prosecuting attorneys. Although â€Å"duty to retreat† shouldn’t be strictly imposed or evaluated in hindsight, it is still applicable in situations where violence could have been easily avoided by practically walking away. While there are legitimate concerns such as Alice safety in no-knock searches with these more aggressive self-defense laws, the sad fact remains that little empirical evidence is out to date that shows any negative or positive trends associated with these laws. In addition, these laws and their interpretation are still in their infancy and are written differently among the states and their Jurisdictions. A legal issue that may not be empirically measurable, however, is how reasonable fear can be paired with immunity to create a bar on prosecution of those defending their home perhaps too readily. These people should burden of proof that can easily be discredited. Additionally, this presumption would leave police officers with the difficult task of making determinations on the spot that would normally be left to prosecuting attorneys. As for immunity, citizens should be granted immunity from civil litigation if their use of deadly force was Justified; they shouldn’t have to be mired with legal action from the aggressor after they’ve already been in court. The Maddened case illustrates the limitations of science to prove reasonable fear in a court setting, and can only offer potential generalizations and statistics. Bottom line, â€Å"reasonable fear† ends up getting determined by Juries, which ay not be that easy or uniform. Overall, the new and more aggressive self-defense laws are good for public policy with the exception of the presumption of reasonable fear in situations involving defending one’s home. These laws necessarily give citizens more latitude in defending themselves without an undue burden of having to sit there and think about whether they should retreat or fear of future civil litigation. However, those who are inclined to resort to violence in the face of any perceived threat need to justify their actions in order to prevent senseless killings. They should only have to how that they had reasonable fear without a heavy burden of proof that prosecutors can easily defeat, which could be the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. An understandable concern is that these new laws will put a further burden on an already stressed and backlogged criminal Justice system, but we cannot put police officers in a position to try to make these determinations on the spot. We also cannot allow potential senseless killings to go unchallenged. Omitting the presumption clause and putting a little more emphasis on retreat options can better balance the defender’s right of safety and the aggressor’s culpability. How to cite Reasonable Fear of Imminent Danger: Good Social Policy, Papers

Qualitative Research In Business And Management

Questions: 1. Are the Financial Statements prepared by PMI correct in accordance with GAAP? 2. What are the differences in the financial statements for six months to end of year provided by PMI for 2011? 3. Consider the contract provisions signed by Dr. Jones with PMI are there ethical and/or accounting concerns from a management perspective? 4. As a manager, what would you advise Dr. Jones in regards to understanding financial statements, cash flows, etc.? 5. As a manager, what would be the course of action you would advise Dr. Jones as to PMIs services provided and/or future services provided? Answers: 1. From the following case study it can be understood that the Jackson and Associates along with the PMI uses a different mode of accounting methodology for professional judgement in order to prepare the financial statement. According to the Jackson and Associates and PMI it should be reviewed that the financial statement prepared by the PMI are in not in accordance with the GAAP rules as the methods adopted are based on cash and accrual basis and therefore they are not in compatible with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principle (Gollenia, 2016). Therefore, it can be concluded that both the revenues and the receivables will be inflated in the financial statement of PMIs financial statement. 2. At the beginning of the year 2012 it was noticed that PMI released the Sunset Medical financial statements for the financial year of 2011. It was evident from the financial statement that revenue of Sunset increased from 1,167,041 in the financial year of to 1,601,050 for the year ended 2011. Even though with such an additional increase in the revenue it was can be understood that the there was dramatic fall in the operations for the Sunset. Thus, Dr Jones had was left with no other option but to borrow a sum of $200,000 during the year. The borrowed sum consisted of $100,000, which was to be specifically used for the purchase of X-ray machine. 3. At the initial stages, the goal of the sunset business is to add into the agreement to ascertain that the PMI should estimate the data of Return on Assets, Return on Equity etc (Hatten, 2015). Furthermore the contract should be reasonably equal to right and liability. Under the given case study PMI is authorised with the rights to perform supervision and manage the daily operations of the business as manager which is accountable for the company. PMI should be held accountable for any possibilities of business failures. On the other hand, if PMI failed to execute the managerial practice PMI should be liable for business compensatory losses. Along with this, Dr Jonas should keep the power to supervise the business operations of PMI instead of completely authorising PMI to make complete use of power without any control. 4. In order to improve the cash flow of the organisation the best possible advise for Dr Jones is that, he shall ensure proper management of the business which includes the day to day operations of the accounting practice of the company (Myers, 2013). It is further recommended that instead of using the cash vs. Accrual mode of accounting Dr Jones should follows the GAAP mode of accounting. Adopting such mode of accounting would enable Dr Jones to improve the cash flow of the business. 5. As the manager of the practice it is advised that PMI in the future course of action shall assist the company with the recruitment, hiring and supervision. Furthermore, Dr Jones should ensure that PMI should report to the company in order to consult and confer any implementation of business management of services. Reference List: Gollenia, L.A., (2016).Business Transformation Management Methodology. Routledge. Hatten, T. S. (2015).Small business management: Entrepreneurship and beyond. Nelson Education. Myers, M. D. (2013).Qualitative research in business and management. Sage. Slack, N. (2015).Operations strategy. John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

John mackey free essay sample

John Mackey (born August 15, 1953) is an American businessman. He is the current co-CEO of Whole Foods Market, which he co-founded in 1980. Named the Ernst Young Entrepreneur of the Year in 2003, Mackey is a strong supporter of free market economics. He is one of the most influential advocates in the movement for organic food. Early life and education John Mackey was born in Houston, Texas, in 1953 to Bill and Margaret Mackey. He has a sister and a brother. Mackey was a student of philosophy and religion at the University of Texas at Austin and Trinity University in the 1970s, and worked at a vegetarian co-op. [3] Mackey, who was a vegetarian for 30 years, now identifies as a vegan. [4] Career Mackey co-founded his first health food store, SaferWay, with his girlfriend Renee Lawson (Hardy) in Austin in 1978. They met while living in a vegetarian housing co-op. [3] They dropped out of college. They borrowed $10,000 and raised $35,000 more to start a vegetarian grocery store which they named SaferWay. We will write a custom essay sample on John mackey or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page At the time, Austin had several small health food stores. The two ran the market on the first floor, a health food restaurant on the second, and, for a short time, lived in the third story of their building. In two years, they merged SaferWay with Clarksville Natural Grocery run by Mark Skiles and Craig Weller and renamed the business Whole Foods Market. All four (Mackey, Hardy-Lawson, Skiles and Weller) are considered co-founders of the business. [3] Mackey built Whole Foods into an international organization, with outlets in major markets across the country, as well as Canada and the United Kingdom. Along the way he bought out smaller competitors. In 2007 Whole Foods purchased a major natural foods supermarket competitor, Wild Oats Markets, Inc. Animal welfare Whole Foods was the first grocery chain to set standards for humane animal treatment. [2] Mackey was influenced by animal rights activist, Lauren Ornelas, who criticized Whole Foods animal standards regarding ducks at a shareholder meeting in 2003. Mackey gave Ornelas his email address and they corresponded on the issue. He studied issues related to factory farming and decided to switch to a primarily vegan diet that included only eggs from his own chickens. Since 2006, he has followed an entirely plant-based diet. He advocates tougher animal standards. Despite Whole Foods welfare standards, Mackey has been criticized by abolitionist vegans such as Gary L. Francione, who believes the Whole Foods company policies betray the animal rightsposition. [6] By other accounts, Mackey is the driving force behind significant changes in animal welfare. For instance, he started a non-profit foundation, the Animal Compassion Foundation, to address making animal welfare more economically viable. [7] The Animal Compassion Foundation folded in 2008 with the formation of the Global Animal Partnership, a non-profit organization that is independent of Whole Foods Market. Mackey is on the Board of Directors of Global Animal Partnership. He has been a member of the Board of Directors for the Humane Society of the United States since 2009. Letter to employees In 2006, Mackey announced he was reducing his salary to $1 a year, would donate his stock portfolio to charity, and set up a $100,000 emergency fund for staff facing personal problems. He wrote: I am now 53 years old and I have reached a place in my life where I no longer want to work for money, but simply for the joy of the work itself and to better answer the call to service that I feel so clearly in my own heart. He has instituted caps on executive pay at the company. Political views Libertarianism In a debate in Reason magazine among Mackey, economist Milton Friedman, and entrepreneur T. J. Rodgers, Mackey said that he is a free market libertarian. [12] He said that he used to be ademocratic socialist in college. As a beginning businessman he was challenged by workers for not paying adequate wages and by customers for overcharging, during a time when he was hardly breaking even. He began to take a more capitalistic worldview, and discovered the works of Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman. [13] Mackey is an admirer of some of authorAyn Rands novels. [14] Mackey co-founded the organization, Freedom Lights Our World (FLOW), to combine his commitments to economic and political freedom as well as personal growth, social responsibility, and environmental stewardship. [15] He supports such changes as green tax shifts, environmental trusts, world legal systems to allow the poor to create legal businesses, and a citizens dividend to help the poor in the developed world. [16] The name and focus of FLOW have since become Conscious Capitalism, Inc. , which was initially created as a program of FLOW and evolved to the point at which it became the organizations principal focus. In 2010 the name of the organization was formally changed. The Conscious Capitalism Institute was chartered in 2009. In 2010 the original FLOW group merged with the Institute group to become one unified organization. [17] In 2013 Mackey was interviewed in Harvard Business Reviews Ideacast podcast about his views on Conscious Capitalism. [18] Mackey said, If you want to be competitive in the long term, your business needs to have discovered its higher purpose and it needs to adopt a stakeholder philosophy. He eschewed the conventional thinking that business has to be sort of ruthless and heartless to be successful. [19] Healthcare reform Mackey opposed the public health insurance option that ultimately did not become part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Mackey thinks a better plan would be allowing consumers to purchase health insurance across state lines and use a combination of health savings accounts and catastrophic insurance, as Whole Foods does. [20] Mackeys statement that Americans do not have an intrinsic right to healthcare led to calls for a boycott of Whole Foods Market from the Progressive Review and from numerous groups on Facebook. [21] Alternatively, Tea Party movement advocates organized a number of buycotts in support of Mackeys suggestions [22] In an NPR interview in 2013, Mackey compared the Obama administrations healthcare law to fascism instead of socialism, stating, [t]echnically speaking, it’s more like fascism. Socialism is where the government owns the means of production. In fascism, the government doesn’t own the means of production, but they do control it — and that’s what’s happening with our health care programs and these reforms. [23][24] The day following the interview, Mackey wrote in a blog post that he regretted having made the remark, stating that he made a poor word choice to describe [the U. S. ] healthcare system. [24][25] Instead, he called it government-controlled health care. Unions Mackey is known for his strong anti-union views, having once compared unions to herpes in that it wont kill you, but its very unpleasant and will make a lot of people not want to be your lover. [4]Whole Foods Market, along with Costco and Starbucks, teamed up in 2008 to create an alternative to the Employee Free Choice Act. The three companies invited other corporations, unions and public interest groups to join them, proposing instead that unions be given more access to meet with workers, stricter penalties for labor violations and a guaranteed right to request secret ballots in all circumstances. [26] Mackey commented in 2005: Its illegal in the United States for there to be company unions — special unions which are formed and controlled by the employees and managers of the company to represent their interests and collectively bargain on their behalf. These type of unions are legal in many countries such as Japan, but are illegal in the United States. Instead the law requires that all unions be outside unions. I believe this law should be repealed and that company unions should be as legal as any other kind of voluntary association. † Environment Mackey does not identify as a skeptic of scientific opinion on climate change; rather, he believes that climate change is perfectly natural and not necessarily bad. [28] In a 2010 discussion of books on his reading stack with journalist Nick Paumgarten, Mackey explained his views on human-caused climate change were similar to those of author Ian Plimer: Mackey told me that he agrees with the book [ Heaven and Earth ]s assertion that, as he put it, no scientific consensus exists regarding the causes of climate change; he added, with a candor you could call bold or reckless, that it would be a pity to allow hysteria about global warming to cause us to raise taxes and increase regulation, and in turn lower our standard of living and lead to an increase in poverty. † Yahoo! Finance postings On July 20, 2007, The Wall Street Journal[30] revealed that Mackey was, for at least seven years, using the pseudonym Rahodeb (an anagram of his wifes name, Deborah) to post to Yahoo Finance forums. He referred to himself in the third person and criticized rival supermarket chain Wild Oats Markets. [31] The Federal Trade Commission[32] approved a complaint challenging Whole Foods Market’s approximately $670 million acquisition of its chief rival, Wild Oats Markets, Inc. It authorized the FTC staff to seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction in federal district court to halt the deal, pending an administrative trial on the merits. After an extensive regulatory battle with the FTC, a federal appeals court consented to the deal. Whole Foods officially completed their buyout of Wild Oats on August 27, 2007. In May 2008, after an SEC investigation cleared him, Mackey started blogging again. In a 2,037 word post, he wrote about why he began blogging in the first place and how his upbringing drove him to defend himself and Whole Foods. He admitted he made a mistake in judgment, but not in ethics. Resignation as Whole Foods Market Chairman On December 24, 2009, Mackey resigned from the position of Chairman of the Board of Whole Foods Market, a position he held since 1978. On his blog he said, John Elstrott will now take the title of Chairman of the Board, which will accurately reflect the authority and the responsibilities that he has had for many years. Mackey remains a member of the Board of Directors. [34] Legacy and honors 2003, Ernst and Young Entrepreneur of the Year May 2008, he received an honorary bachelors degree from Bentley College. [5] In your new book, â€Å"Conscious Capitalism,† you write thatWhole Foods sees its customers as its â€Å"most important stakeholders† and that the company is obsessed with their happiness. The biggest complaint I hear about Whole Foods is how expensive it is. Why not drop prices to make your customers happier? People always complain about prices being too high. Whole Foods prices have dropped every year as we get to be larger and we have economies of scale. Also, people are not historically well informed about food prices. We’re only spending about 7 percent of our disposable personal income on food. Fifty years ago, it was nearly 16 percent. Matthew Mahon for The New York Times John Mackey A paper from Stanford last year concluded that there is little evidence of greater health benefits from eating organic. If it were ever definitively proved that organic foods offered no health benefits, would you still be a proponent? Oh, absolutely. I’ve always thought the main argument for organic was more environmental than a health argument. I just don’t think spraying a lot of pesticides into the environment on a routine basis is a good thing. As I understand it, you’re on an organic vegan diet, and you don’t eat vegetable oil, sugar or processed food. That is certainly the goal. I travel a lot, so can I always avoid oil and sugar and salt? Not to the degree I would like. Oh, man. Salt too? I don’t completely avoid salt, I’m just trying to minimize it. In America, we’re addicted to sugar, fat and salt, and restaurants put all three of those in in abundance. I’m having a hard time imagining your diet being tasty. Give me an example of a delicious meal. What did I cook for dinner last night? A salad, with my own walnut-cashew-based dressing, a stir-fry that I made without any oil, because you can do that with just water. It had kale and chard, onions, mushrooms and tomatoes in it, and mashed potatoes without salt or dairy, but I added some almond milk. Considering your health consciousness, would you prefer Whole Foods not hire overweight people or smokers? In some cases we don’t hire smokers, but it’s hard not to hire people in America who are overweight, because 69 percent of adults are. We’re not discriminating against workers, but we are incentivizing them. Healthier team members get a bigger food discount. We give our sickest team members an option to go through what we call the Total Health Immersion, where we take them off for a week, and we do intensive diet-and-lifestyle education. Our regional president in the Southwest, Mark Dixon, was overweight. I got Mark to go. One year later he’s lost 95 pounds, and he’s biking over 180 miles a week. How did you get him to go? I nagged him. He didn’t have to go. Any thoughts about those stories in 2007 that you were active on a finance message board, anonymously saying negative things about a Whole Foods’ competitor? People make a big deal that I was hiding my identity. But message boards are like going to a Halloween masquerade party. Everybody has a screen name. I had a screen name too. So what? Now I have to be much more careful in what I say. In 2009, some Whole Foods customers organized boycotts after you wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal expressing opposition to Obama’s health care proposals. Do you wish you hadn’t written it? No, I don’t. I regret that a lot of people didn’t actually read it and it got taken out of context. President Obama asked for ideas about health care reform, and I put my ideas out there. Whole Foods has a good health care plan. It’s not a solution to America’s health care problems, but it’s part of the solution. So did you vote for Romney? I did. I imagine a certain percentage of Whole Foods customers will also boycott because of this. I don’t know what to say except that I’m a capitalist, first. There are many things I don’t like about Romney, but more things I don’t like about Obama. This is America, and people disagree on things.

A Helpful and Concise Summary of Othello Act 1

A Helpful and Concise Summary of 'Othello' Act 1 Hold tight and delve into William Shakespeares tragedy Othello with this summary of Act 1.  This analysis covers  the entire play, starting from the opening scene in which the prolific playwright wastes no time  establishing Iagos hatred of Othello. Better understand  this beautifully written drama  with this  scene-by-scene guide. Act 1, Scene 1 In Venice Iago and Roderigo discuss Othello. Roderigo immediately addresses  Iago’s disdain for Othello; â€Å"Thou told’st me thou didst hold him in thy hate,† he says. Iago complains that instead of employing him as his lieutenant, Othello employed Michael Cassio who has no experience for the job. Iago was employed as a mere ensign to Othello. Roderigo responds; â€Å"By heaven, I rather would have been his hangman.† Iago tells Roderigo that he will stay in Othello’s service only to exact revenge upon him when the time is right. Iago and Roderigo do not refer to Othello by name in this scene but rather by his race; calling him the moor or the thick lips. The pair plot to inform Brabanzio, Desdemona’s father, that his daughter has run off with Othello and married him and that he is an unsuitable match, citing his race and impulsivity. The audience discovers that Roderigo is in love with Desdemona, as Brabanzio points out he has already warned him off her; â€Å"In honest plainness thou hast heard me say my daughter is not for thee.† This explains Roderigo’s hatred of Othello. The pair goad Brabanzio, and Iago says, â€Å"I am the one sir, that comes to tell you your daughter and the Moor are now making the beast with two backs.† Brabanzio checks Desdemona’s room and discovers she is missing. He launches a full-scale search for his daughter and regretfully tells Roderigo that he would prefer him to be his daughters husband and not Othello; â€Å"O would you had had her.† Iago resolves to leave, as he does not want his master to know he has double-crossed him. Brabanzio promises Roderigo that he will reward him for his efforts. â€Å"Oh, good Roderigo. I will deserve your pains,† he says. Act 1, Scene 2 Iago tells Othello that Desdemona’s father and Roderigo are pursuing him. Iago lies, telling Othello that he challenged them.  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Nay, but he prated, and spoke such scurvy and provoking terms against your honor that with the little godliness I have, I did full hard forbear him,† he says. Othello answers that his honor and services to the state speak for themselves, and he will convince Brabanzio that he is a good match for his daughter. He tells Iago that he loves Desdemona. Cassio and his officers enter, and Iago tries to convince Othello that it is his enemy, and he should hide. But Othello shows strength of character by staying. â€Å"I must be found. My parts, my title, and my perfect soul shall manifest me rightly,† he says. Cassio explains that the Duke needs to speak to Othello about the conflict in Cyprus. Iago tells Cassio about Othello’s marriage. Brabanzio arrives with swords drawn. Iago draws his sword on Roderigo knowing that they have the same intention and that Roderigo will not kill him but will collude with the pretense. Brabanzio is angry that Othello has eloped with his daughter and again uses his race to put him down, saying that it is ridiculous to think she turned down wealthy and worthy gentleman to run off with him. â€Å"She shunned the wealthy curled darlings of our nation, †¦t’incur a general mock, run from her guardage to the sooty bosom of such a thing as thou,† he says. Brabanzio also accuses Othello of drugging his daughter. Brabanzio wants to put Othello in prison, but Othello says that the Duke requires his services and will also need to speak to him, so they decide to go to the Duke together to decide Othello’s fate.

Scholarly Research Writing Assignment on Nursing Paper

Scholarly Writing Assignment on Nursing - Research Paper Example Health and Illness Health, illness, psychosocial aspects of health and their interrelations are an area that receives much debate among medical practitioners, psychologists and other stakeholders besides being accompanied by confusion among the public. Questions abound about the difference between health and illness and whether the absence of one translates to presence of the other, whether they are absolute or relative terms and particularly whether health means absence of all diseases in an individual’s body. The role of personal attitudes in disease causation and development in relation to the known psychosocial aspects of health and illness also elicits discussion. This calls for studies into the existing evidence on the entire concept of health, illness and the psychological influences on the two. 1. Health and Illness Before the two concepts can be compared and contrasted, it is important to understand why there is a need to define each of them. Data on morbidity is an i mportant aspect in healthcare systems around the world, and the views of individuals or societies on what health is and what it means to be ill is crucial to epidemiology. Different sections of the society seem to have different perspectives on the two concepts; lay people have their own views not necessarily based on biomedical tenets while even expert opinion appears unresolved. Moreover, illness and health perspectives or traditions impact the decisions of individuals to seek medical care or other alternatives. The patients’ views on health also may have an interesting comparison to what a medical practitioner diagnoses (Unden and Elofsson, 2001). Health is usually defined as a state, meaning that it is absolute rather than relative. In the state of health, one is completely well in terms of physical, social and psychological aspects. This description of health means that absence of diagnosable disease is not the only qualifier to determine whether a person is healthy or n ot. The other aspect that can be derived from this definition is that health is a positive concept. Illness on the other hand is defined as a state of not being well as self-reported by a patient. It is based on the physical or psychological symptoms that the patient reports and can vary from minor problems to serious ones. Illness is thus a negative concept. However, the health and illness concepts have been understood in several different perspectives. Most people’s understanding is that the two terms have an inverse relationship in that the more there is of one, the less there is of the other. This creates a scenario where health is not viewed as an absolute state and rather much of a relative state. Further perspectives are that health is an entirely different concept unrelated to illness hence definitions such as the capacity of action towards goals that are vital or the possibility of living meaningfully (Wikman, Marklund and Alexanderson, 2004). Van Dalen, Williams and Gudex (1994) explored the views of lay people on the concepts of health and illness. They found that the two concepts were closely related to such individuals, with health being termed as the absence of illness. Other individuals stated that health is the functional capacity of an individual, while other groups related it to fitness. Their study found out that personal health was less related to the

The Divine Command Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

The Divine Command Theory - Essay Example Too many words and arguments have been expended on this topic, but let me draw my reason from this simple passage to why this theory should be endorsed: " God is love." [1 John 4:8]. If we believe that God does not declare what is good, and simply commands us to do it, just because he is the stronger and he is therefore the authority, isn't it hard to obey The human nature is stubborn, that I believe. But if we are to think that there are these existing commandments, from an authority who knows our inmost being, Someone who provides our needs even before we ask for it, the One who loves us unconditionally (these I learned from Sunday schools), isn't it true that it will be easier to follow I deem that the same God I got to know on Sunday schools is the same God being talked about in the Divine Command Theory. Therefore, to endorse the theory will mean no harm; instead this will lead people to do good, embrace what is good, and to obey His commandments. One main objection to the Divine Command theory is the so-called Euthyphro Dilemma, proposed by Plato. The dilemma goes like this: "are morally good acts good because God commands it, or God commands it because God Himself is good" From this, at least three problems for a Divine Command Theory arise: The problem of emptiness, whereby "God commands what is good"; the problem of independence, whereby God only commands things because they are already morally good, thus making God irrelevant to the moral rightness of action; and thirdly the problem of horrendous commands, whereby God could, if DCT is true, command acts that we find horrendous The independence problem: how can the notion of "goodness" be objectively separate from God How can one judge God to be good if God is the source of what we call goodness (Peoples). I chose to cite the implication that morality is arbitrary as another standard objection to the theory aside from the well famous Euthyphro Dilemma. It implies that if the theory is true, morality is based only on God's whim. Therefore if God commands cruelty then, it would be only right to obey him and commit cruelty as well. One reply to this objection denies that God, the familiar omnipotent, omniscience, and omnibenevolent theistic deity (Miller), would have commanded such things because, He necessarily does not command evil. Whether God is red in tooth and claw (Kevin Kim), or whether He is the God of love I came to know on Sunday schools, it only means that all of us, from time to time, reflects on that Being to whom goodness emanates, may it be absolute or not depending on your beliefs. Works Cited Wheeler. http://www.philosophy.uconn.edu/department/wheeler/divine.pdf Glenn Andrew Peoples http://www.berettaonline.com/articles/philosophy/echo.html Miller, Christian. "Divine Theory and Obligation". New Waves in Philosophy of Religion. Ed. Y. Nagasawa and E. Wielenberg. Palgrave Macmillan, 105-124.. http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5230U.pdf Kim, Kevin. http://bighominid.blogspot.com/2005/05/divine-command-theory.html Cultural Relativism Cultural relativism is the philosophical principle which says that an individual's beliefs and activities is to be understood by his culture. It holds