1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
stich3 [128]
2 years ago
13

Me and my brother looked up why do we need to learn all these subjects but like we looked them up one by one and almost all of t

hem said "so you know" basiclly we only need math.
Law
1 answer:
aliya0001 [1]2 years ago
8 0
Tbh you are true and so is the other person on top
You might be interested in
you may turn right on red light only if you are in the right most lane your turning into the right most lane on the cross road a
cupoosta [38]
Uhm what?????? whhajajahahahahajsjahajjsjajsjjs
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Some oppose the “ticking time bomb" argument as a justification for torture because _____.
Novosadov [1.4K]

Answer: In the post 9/11 environment society has been consumed by the question of whether torture is acceptable under extreme circumstances. The “ticking bomb” metaphor was regularly employed by various figures in the US as an argument to justify the use of torture in interrogations during the term of the Bush Administration. It is an argument that has been used to justify torture in a set of very extreme and detailed circumstances. This paper will argue that the “ticking bomb” metaphor does not provide a convincing argument to justify the use of torture under extreme circumstances. First, definitions of torture and the “ticking bomb” metaphor will be provided. Second, this essay will discuss the use of torture by the US in the War on Terror. Third, the arguments for the use of torture under extreme circumstances, and the flaws of allowing torture under extreme circumstances will be addressed.

Explanation:

any act by which severe pain  suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence  of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity (United Nations 1997).

Torture is prohibited in any circumstance under a variety of international laws, conventions, and norms. It is spelt out in not only the UN Convention against Torture, but also the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the law of armed conflicts, and the Geneva Conventions (Ip 2009: 36). The prohibition of torture is further enshrined in domestic laws of many of the countries who have ratified these treaties. However, the “ticking bomb” metaphor is used to justify torture in certain extreme situations. The concept of the “ticking bomb” was first conceptualised in a fiction novel written by Jean Larteguy in 1960 (Kovarovic 2010: 254). It describes a scenario whereby the torture of a suspect is considered necessary to obtain information to prevent a future catastrophic event from occurring (Kovarovic 2010: 254). The scenario is usually described as one where terrorists have planned an attack that is going to occur very soon and  a large number of people will be killed unless the authorities obtain critical information from the source they have captured (Ip 2009: 40). It is essentially torture that has been sanctioned by the state in exceptional circumstances (Bufacchi and Arrigo 2006: 354). Torture is still considered to be wrong in these circumstances, but it is viewed as a necessary or lesser evil (Ip 2009: 40). Proponents of the “ticking bomb” scenario argue that “torture may be wrong…but mass murder is worse, so the lesser evil must be tolerated to prevent the greater one” (Roth 2005: 197).

7 0
1 year ago
By what year were there laws against abortion in practically every state in the u. S. ?.
KATRIN_1 [288]
Before the Supreme Court of the United States decisions of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decriminalized abortion nationwide in 1973, abortion was already legal in several states, but the decision in the former case imposed a uniform framework for state legislation on the subject.
8 0
2 years ago
The party who files a complaint against another party in a court of law is referred to as ___
muminat

Answer:

plaintiff

Explanation:

8 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What organization contains the Women, Infants, and Children program?
lord [1]

Answer:

d) US Department of Agriculture

Explanation:

it is a WIC program but it is managed by the US department of Agriculture's food and nutrition services

5 0
2 years ago
Other questions:
  • Heyy, Howzit going??
    13·2 answers
  • In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court ruled in William Furman’s favor, saying that Georgia had denied Furman the right
    8·2 answers
  • Buying or selling a vehicle in Florida must always include which of the following? using an automobile dealership trading in an
    9·1 answer
  • Who determines what the Vice President will do?
    9·1 answer
  • What is the purpose of the Vehicle Exception?
    14·1 answer
  • Question 9
    15·2 answers
  • A small cruise ship struck a whale swimming underwater, causing the ship to suddenly lurch sideways. A passenger on the ship who
    10·1 answer
  • what to do if the mother left y'all baby with you and she has a family protection order on you In the person bring the baby you
    5·1 answer
  • Is having a force of law good or bad
    6·2 answers
  • I’m so happy That bots are gone from brainly
    9·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!