CONDEMNATIONS ON ACTS AGAINST WOMEN

It is surprising to know that in this modern time of our civilization there are still nations that remained so naïve, so ignorant, so mean, so violent, so arrogant and so evil against our women. Those arrogant minds must now be awake that gender classification is not the same as discrimination; by this circumstance, I vehemently utter my condemnation against all nations whose standards, cultures and laws failed to recognize women as a human living specie with rights and existence equal with anybody else.

 

I CONDEMNED the nation who treated women as an inferior organism;

 

I CONDEMNED the nation   who tolerated the disrespect towards women;

 

I CONDEMNED the cultures and laws that sell their women for marriage;

 

I CONDEMNED the religion which allows the maltreatment of women;

 

I CONDEMNED the community whose practice is to send their helpless little women to a violent person who could afford the dowry;

 

I CONDEMNED the mentality and belief that men are authorized to strike/beat women;

 

I CONDEMNED the judicial systems who afford lesser rights on women;

 

I CONDEMNED all systems which based its entire classifications on gender;

 

I CONDEMNED all acts that are deliberately done against women; and

 

I VEHEMENTLY CONDEMNED those who think that a society could survive without women.

 

                    

                     IN HONOR OF AND DEDICATION TO

                     THEO VAN GOGH, a filmaker who was murdered by an Islamic extremist in Amsterdam in 2004 after he made a short film exposing Islam’s treatment of women.

Business Lessons 4: Questions on Capital

One of the first concern in any business is the thing called “capital”. In business, the term “capital” is understood as the prime operational expenses in the commencement of the business.

There are questions, however, which may help eradicating the myths pertaining with capital.

 

Question 1: Is it necessary to have a big capital to commence a business?

Answer:      No. It is enough that a capital may cover the necessary business expenses.

 

Question 2: Should there be a capital to every business?

Answer:      Yes. A business without a capital is no business at all.

 

Question 3: What is included in capital?

Answer:      Capital includes the expenses in the operation of the business, and all its losses. Meaning, capital shall also cover for the losses while the business is on the process of negotiating the mortal stage of its operation.

 

Question 4: When shall the capital terminate?

Answer:      Capital may be terminated after all operational expenses are replenished by gains or the profits of business. The subsequent expenses shall not be considered capital because it may be answered by the gains obtained. Gains is considered only after the recovery of the capital

 

Question 5: Is it necessary to have an actual capital?

Answer:      No. An actual capital is the capital at hand. Business may still commence by using a collateral capital or any other commercial devices and instruments, like checks, mortgages, loans, credits, et.c.

It is not necessary that a capital should always be in cash.

 

Question 6: Should capital always be in money?

Answer:      No. There are substitutes to money which may be used as a capital, like negotiable instruments. An asset, like oratorical skills, may also be utilized as a capital in any religious business.

 

Question 7: Is there a business without capital?

Answer:      No. Capital is essential before the commencement of a business.

 

DEATH OF A PERSON AFTER SEXUAL AFFAIRS: Questions

Hypothetical facts:

In June 15, 2000, Boniface Paraz, a 60 year-old gentleman of a sound mind, asked the services of young lady. The lady goes with Boniface to a particular place for a secret and temporary sexual affair. After the encounter with the lady in a secret place and on a secret sexual transaction, Boniface’s blood pressure went up which caused his untimely expiration. The widow and the children were seeking for a legal remedy on the shameful death of Boniface Paraz

Question 1: Will the young lady be liable on the death of Boniface Paraz?

Answer: NO. Except when a sexual act is previously designed to commit a murder. Boniface is not deceived and neither a minor. His discerning capability brings the entire event to a case of VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA.

Question 2: In the situation that Boniface is already on an advanced age and probably suffering from a heart failure, will the young lady be liable on this score?

Answer: NO. It is not the function and duty of the young lady to make assumptions on the age and health status of her partner. The negotiation is all about rendering some sexual services, nothing else beyond the agreement.

Question 3: Is the young lady not the PROXIMATE CAUSE of Boniface death such that would make her liable?

Answer: NO. Sexual encounter is not the proximate cause on this incident because death is not a necessary result of sexual affairs. Boniface’s death is a result of his own “excitement” and cannot be credited to anybody else’s contribution. Proof of certainty shall be provided on the event that an exterior contribution shall be brought out in the allegations.

Question 4: Supposing the young lady took the gold ring, gold neck lace and any other wearing apparels of Boniface, will the young lady be prosecuted for theft by the children and the widow of the deceased?

Answer: NO. All artificial materials found in the body of Boniface are considered to be objects purely personal to the owner. The prosecution for theft shall only be instituted by the owner of the property. Since those wearing apparels were personal, any other party are not authorized to bring action in behalf of the owner. Also. the owner cannot bring action by reason of impossibility.

Question 5: What about the heirs’ right to inherit the property of the deceased?

Answer: The righ to inherit is under successional right which is defined by civil law; meaning, the ownership by succession will not automatically grant the successor the right to institute criminal actions because the crime of theft is committed directly by a thief upon the taking of the property from its owner. Try to note that there is no such crime as an “indirect theft” which shall be instituted by the heirs of the stolen property.

 My other observation: When the property was taken from the deceased while he was still breathing [or alive], the right of the heirs to inherit is immaterial because there is no such right exists. The right to inheret may only be asserted when the heirs can prove the existence of such right, meaning, the heirs should prove that the property was taken during or after the death of Boniface; this is essential because only at the time of death may an heir obtain a right to inherit the property of his/her ascendant.

Question 6: If an heir cannot prosecute in behalf of the deceased for the stolen jewelries, can he/she substitute?

Answer: NO. Substitution can only be applied when there was already a case instituted by the deceased prior to his death.