Answer:
Different recommendations and conclusion can be drawn on human rights violation in government and communities.
Explanation:
1-Foremost thing that government can do is the legislation to control the human rights violation and this law should be applicable on all the people belong to any community. Government also make human rights violation issue a part of their policy so that every government could understand before hand.
2-Communities should run campaign so that people understand their human rights and can complain against such violations.
Human right violations happens all over the world but individuals and government need to work together to stop and eradicate such violations
Answer:
Drinking alcohol is bad habit .People drink alcohol in fun and entertainment .It can damage our body parts .
Answer:
We used them as an hourly shift justification - where we were what we were doing (computers and GPS do it now). If there was an arrest, traffic stop or incident, it was recorded on the call sheet and a small description with any number assigned. The totals were recorded and turned into the shift supervisor - who would take the report, arrest information and any other paperwork necessary.
The paperwork had to match the dispatcher call sheet and could be used by the union to complain about breaks and lunches being missed. The stats from each call sheet was used in reporting to the FBI crime statistics reports and for state and local reporting - ie number of calls, traffic incidents and violent calls.
Explanation:
Hope this will helps
Answer:
Well, Holism is the idea that various systems should be viewed as wholes, consequentialism does not specify the desired outcome, while utilitarianism specifies good as the desired outcome. including Deontology which focuses on the rules, or the universal norms. Virtue ethics you can say someone is morally right only if his actions express a certain virtue.
Explanation:
What is Holism? How is it different from utilitarianism, consequentialism, Deontology, and virtue ethics?
That a government action violates the Establishment Clause of the United States' constitution if it lacks a secular purpose, has its primary effect as promoting or inhibiting religion, or fosters an excessive entanglement of government with religion.
Used to assess whether a law violates the Establishment Clause. The "Establishment Clause" was intended to prevent any governmental endorsement or support of religion.
