Huh...Religious Conservatives were right...
Re: Huh...Religious Conservatives were right...
by exploited » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:43 am
What constitutes actual harm?
Is it economic harm? Emotional/mental harm? Or just physical harm?
Is it economic harm? Emotional/mental harm? Or just physical harm?
-
exploited - Vice President
- Posts: 23035
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 2562 times
- Been thanked: 1837 times
Re: Huh...Religious Conservatives were right...
by lil bit » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:47 am
'She couldn't help wondering what use Carl had for a double bed in his bachelor establishment' - Rafferty's Legacy -Jane Corrie
- lil bit
- Senator
- Posts: 1181
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 7:45 am
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 42 times
Re: Huh...Religious Conservatives were right...
by lil bit » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:48 am
'She couldn't help wondering what use Carl had for a double bed in his bachelor establishment' - Rafferty's Legacy -Jane Corrie
- lil bit
- Senator
- Posts: 1181
- Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 7:45 am
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 42 times
Re: Huh...Religious Conservatives were right...
by exploited » Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:49 am
It would have to be judged one case at a time, which would result in some pretty confusing case law.
Wouldn't it just be better to evaluate the potential harm of two outcomes, and enforce the outcome that will generally result in the least amount of harm?
Wouldn't it just be better to evaluate the potential harm of two outcomes, and enforce the outcome that will generally result in the least amount of harm?
Last edited by exploited on Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
exploited - Vice President
- Posts: 23035
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:32 pm
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Gender:
- Has thanked: 2562 times
- Been thanked: 1837 times
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests