Robert Mugabe just shouted "We are not gays" in his UN speech

[Koba]

Nyie watu stop hating gay people,na mjue they didn't chose their homosexuality to be humiliated na homophobic like you,wako hivyo and you guys will never change anything,just think what if your son is gay? it can happened to anybody..stop hating

 

[descarte]

Good bwana

 

[maishapopote]

He is attacking wrong people at a right place.

He would have kept quiet.

Two wrongs...doesn't make it right.....But one wrong....and a right place' gee...he is fucken right....we are not gays...

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

descarte

Judge Hercules is not a tyranny at all because when he judges cases he should has view of law as whole which is consistent to the existing political system.

You are right Dworkin only spoke about Western societies specifically the common law ones: But the question at that time was that "What about the communist societies?"

On the other hand in LAWS EMPIRE,..he was quoted saying "COURTS ARE THE CAPITAL OF LAWS EMPIRE, AND JUDGES ARE ITS PRINCES: JUDGES MUST MAKE SURE THE RULE OUT WHAT OUGHT TO BE THE IN THE BEST FIT AND BEST LIGHT OF THE SOCIETY"

Sasa the quoatation would only work in the old system; but today are courts the only place to resolve disputes???
The answer is NO particularly after the rise of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution).
Some cases are handled even by laymen.

That's why even some America jurists opposed ADR because they thought it was a threat to the independence of the Judiciary.

In case of Dworkin,politicL system was democratic government.

And there is where the problem begins: Are all world governments democratic??
What about the governments under SHARIA LAW??

Changing a stance as an academician is okay, it does not mean that you are inconsistent rather you accept the mistake and that is how learning is.

Word!!! but lawyers are hot heads.

You cannot cling your opinion even of you see the counterargument is so powerful.

Haaahaaa, the irony is. Dworkin and Hart never admitted their mistakes because they touched the hearts of their very theories.

I know Durkheim very well

Good!!!!then you would know he is the one who spoke of about Social Cohesion: And he is not a realist but did a Social Analysis of the law.

Haaaah Hart is quite coherent if you follow his criticism against Austin

He criticized his predecessors too much (BENTHAM & AUSTIN),...Until he reached the point he sounded like a naturalist.
Minimum content of natural law or I'm a soft Positivist!!!Seriously????
If you are a positivist morality to you exists BUT IT IS JUST NOT PART OF THE LAW. Period.

Na jibu swali!!!
First, a human being is not free to do what he wants that will be misunderstanding of the word liberty. They are many things which limit human freedom, law is one of them.

Kumbe unajua eeh??
Then you know why homosexuality is not acceptable in Africa.

As judge I have to make sure that your mental state is okay, we should take you, first to the psychologists and doctors, to affirm you mental status because a reasonable person cannot just end his or her without concrete reasons.

According to Dworkin Jugde Hercules needs no psychologists and doctors. He has an unlimited intellectual capability.
And you believe in him,...can't you see that you are contradicting yourself??

However, If you have strong reasons like pains to the extent that you loose that interest to life, then I as a judge I will let you die in a dignified manner.

Death in a dignified manner??? ARE YOU SERIOUS??
Every death brings Oblivion and that's all my friend....Open your eyes.
Dead man tells no tales

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

Excuse me sir, Are you a Prof?!

That's a great compliment:But NO i'm not even close being one.

 

[Bavaria]

Two wrongs...doesn't make it right.....But one wrong....and a right place' gee...he is fucken right....we are not gays...

Yeah, mtazamo wa Mugabe sio mtazamo wa waafrika wote.

 

[maishapopote]

Yeah, mtazamo wa Mugabe sio mtazamo wa waafrika wote.

Waafrika pekee wenye mtizamo kama wako...ambao ni tofauti na Bob...ni wale wanaoishi nje ya bara la africa....na wale wenye silka za kimagharibi...katika jinsia zao wanaoishi africa

 

[Bavaria]

Waafrika pekee wenye mtizamo kama wako...ambao ni tofauti na Bob...ni wale wanaoishi nje ya bara la africa....na wale wenye silka za kimagharibi...katika jinsia zao wanaoishi africa

Ushoga ulikuwepo hata kabla Yesu hajazaliwa?

Misri ndio ilikuwa chimbuko lake.

 

[maishapopote]

Ushoga ulikuwepo hata kabla Yesu hajazaliwa?

Misri ndio ilikuwa chimbuko lake.

Hilo....siwezi kucomment....unajua ww!

 

[Bavaria]

Hilo....siwezi kucomment....unajua ww!

Basi sawa.

Tuwaache mashoga na ujinga wao, tusipoteze muda wetu kuwakemea watu ambao hawajafika kwenye familia zetu.

Ni muda wa kukaa na familia zenu kuwapa elimu juu ya ufirauni huo.

 

[maishapopote]

Basi sawa.

Tuwaache mashoga na ujinga wao, tusipoteze muda wetu kuwakemea watu ambao hawajafika kwenye familia zetu.

Ni muda wa kukaa na familia zenu kuwapa elimu juu ya ufirauni huo.

Wakemewe....popote...ndani na nje ya familia...sio tu hapo....hata nje ya mipaka...kama Bob Alivyofanya

 

[Sitofahamu]

Yupo straight forward na penda mtu wanamna hiyo

 

[Bavaria]

Wakemewe....popote...ndani na nje ya familia...sio tu hapo....hata nje ya mipaka...kama Bob Alivyofanya

Kila mmoja akiwekeza nguvu kwenye familia yake ni rais kuliko kupiga kelele kwa watu wasiojali.

 

[maishapopote]

Kila mmoja akiwekeza nguvu kwenye familia yake ni rais kuliko kupiga kelele kwa watu wasiojali.

Tatizo kubwa kuna watu ambao hawana familia....hao ndio wana matatizo

 

[descarte]

descarte

You are right Dworkin only spoke about Western societies specifically the common law ones: But the question at that time was that "What about the communist societies?"

On the other hand in LAWS EMPIRE,..he was quoted saying "COURTS ARE THE CAPITAL OF LAWS EMPIRE, AND JUDGES ARE ITS PRINCES: JUDGES MUST MAKE SURE THE RULE OUT WHAT OUGHT TO BE THE IN THE BEST FIT AND BEST LIGHT OF THE SOCIETY"

Sasa the quoatation would only work in the old system; but today are courts the only place to resolve disputes???
The answer is NO particularly after the rise of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution).
Some cases are handled even by laymen.

That's why even some America jurists opposed ADR because they thought it was a threat to the independence of the Judiciary.

And there is where the problem begins: Are all world governments democratic??
What about the governments under SHARIA LAW??

Word!!! but lawyers are hot heads.

Haaahaaa, the irony is. Dworkin and Hart never admitted their mistakes because they touched the hearts of their very theories.

Good!!!!then you would know he is the one who spoke of about Social Cohesion: And he is not a realist but did a Social Analysis of the law.

He criticized his predecessors too much (BENTHAM & AUSTIN),...Until he reached the point he sounded like a naturalist.
Minimum content of natural law or I'm a soft Positivist!!!Seriously????
If you are a positivist morality to you exists BUT IT IS JUST NOT PART OF THE LAW. Period.

Kumbe unajua eeh??
Then you know why homosexuality is not acceptable in Africa.

According to Dworkin Jugde Hercules needs no psychologists and doctors. He has an unlimited intellectual capability.
And you believe in him,...can't you see that you are contradicting yourself??

Death in a dignified manner??? ARE YOU SERIOUS??
Every death brings Oblivion and that's all my friend....Open your eyes.
Dead man tells no tales

Your criticism is a wrong one!
If you read Dworkin's works he proposes democracy as the best form of government among the competing forms of government. In that is very coherent. In fact he criticizes any other forms seriously and even some wrong conceptions of Democracy.So this critic doesn't fit well. Dworkin shows to the world that democracy fits well with many ideas he has been defending. These claims are found in his famous book entitled "Is Democracy Possible Here"
"Then you know why homosexuality is not acceptable in Africa"why would you conclude like that
Any concept of liberty which means total freedom is false one and this is not the ground to justify the prohibition of homosexuality. I would like to know why would you say so.
Hercules being a judge of superhuman skills should no the mental status,that is fair. There is no inconsistency there. Right to life what does it signifies? What are rights?
Rights are merely interests;If someone has no interest to life then why would force him or her to live in great pain. Let him die in dignified manner.
I stand for that

 

[descarte]

descarte


Your criticism is a wrong one!
If you read Dworkin's works he proposes democracy as the best form of government among the competing forms of government. In that is very coherent. In fact he criticizes any other forms seriously and even some wrong conceptions of Democracy.So this critic doesn't fit well, the bloke is so coherent. Dworkin shows to the world that democracy fits well with many ideas he has been defending. These claims are found in his famous book entitled "Is Democracy Possible Here"
"Then you know why homosexuality is not acceptable in Africa"why would you conclude like that
Any concept of liberty which means total freedom is false one and this is not ground to justify the prohibition of homosexuality. I would like to know why would you say so.
Hercules being a judge of superhuman skills should no the mental status,that is fair. There is no inconsistency there. Right to life what does it signifies? What are rights?
Rights are merely interests;If someone has no interest to life then why would force him or her to live in great pain and agony . Let him die in dignified manner.
I stand for that

 

[descarte]

descarte

You are right Dworkin only spoke about Western societies specifically the common law ones: But the question at that time was that "What about the communist societies?"

On the other hand in LAWS EMPIRE,..he was quoted saying "COURTS ARE THE CAPITAL OF LAWS EMPIRE, AND JUDGES ARE ITS PRINCES: JUDGES MUST MAKE SURE THE RULE OUT WHAT OUGHT TO BE THE IN THE BEST FIT AND BEST LIGHT OF THE SOCIETY"

Sasa the quoatation would only work in the old system; but today are courts the only place to resolve disputes???
The answer is NO particularly after the rise of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution).
Some cases are handled even by laymen.

That's why even some America jurists opposed ADR because they thought it was a threat to the independence of the Judiciary.

And there is where the problem begins: Are all world governments democratic??
What about the governments under SHARIA LAW??

Word!!! but lawyers are hot heads.

Haaahaaa, the irony is. Dworkin and Hart never admitted their mistakes because they touched the hearts of their very theories.

Good!!!!then you would know he is the one who spoke of about Social Cohesion: And he is not a realist but did a Social Analysis of the law.

He criticized his predecessors too much (BENTHAM & AUSTIN),...Until he reached the point he sounded like a naturalist.
Minimum content of natural law or I'm a soft Positivist!!!Seriously????
If you are a positivist morality to you exists BUT IT IS JUST NOT PART OF THE LAW. Period.

Kumbe unajua eeh??
Then you know why homosexuality is not acceptable in Africa.

According to Dworkin Jugde Hercules needs no psychologists and doctors. He has an unlimited intellectual capability.
And you believe in him,...can't you see that you are contradicting yourself??

Death in a dignified manner??? ARE YOU SERIOUS??
Every death brings Oblivion and that's all my friend....Open your eyes.
Dead man tells no tales

Your criticism is a wrong one!
If you read Dworkin's works he proposes democracy as the best form of government among the competing forms of government.In fact he criticizes any other forms seriously and even some wrong conceptions of Democracy.So this critic doesn't fit well, the bloke is so coherent. Dworkin shows to the world that democracy fits well with many ideas he has been defending. These claims are found in his famous book entitled "Is Democracy Possible Here" Then you know why homosexuality is not acceptable in Africa"why would you conclude like that. Any concept of liberty which means total freedom is false one and this is not ground to justify the prohibition of homosexuality. I would like to know why would you say so. Hercules being a judge of superhuman skills should no the mental status,that is fair. There is no inconsistency there. Right to life what does it signifies? What are rights? Rights are merely interests;If someone has no interest to life then why would force him or her to live in great pain and agony. Let him die in dignified manner.
I stand for that

 

[analaizi]

Katika mambo ya Taifa teule la Mungu Israel Mugabe aache manemo yake.Wayahudi wapoIsrael/Jerusalem toka miaka 4000 iliyopita

 

[Anonymous101]

I just love how this guy isn't afraid to speak up about this issue. Too many people are embracing the white man's culture and forgetting their own. Homosexuality isn't part of the African culture. People should just accept that and move on. We are not gays!

 

[Justinejm]

I don't use the term natural rights because it is very ambiguous and controversial.
Homosexuality is an issue concerning human rights because anti-homosexuals campaigns are advocating for criminalization of such act yet human dignity holds that everyone should be treated equally no matter who you are or whom you love.
This conviction is at the heart of human rights concept.

Kweli mnatangulia kuwa wajinga kwanza kabla hamjaanza kufunuliana mavi yenu wanaume kwa wanaume, maana naona hata reasoning yako ambayo wote mnaipenda kuitumia kutetea upuuzi wenu bado ni ya kitoto kabisa; unashindwa kuelewa kuwa haki zina mipaka yake, huwezi kufanya upuuzi halafu unataka equal treatment hapo tayari unakuwa umejiexclude nadhani inabidi wataalam wa law waje wazifafanue vizuri maana mnavyofasili nyie ngedere hata mtoto hawezi kuelewa kihivyo ndio mfano mwingine mnadai mtu akiua yeye asiuliwe eti haki ya kuishi, yaani mnakwenda kinyume nyume tofauti na maana halisi, we umeua yule uliemuua hukujua kuwa umemnyima haki yake ya kuishi! Laana ngedere wajinga nyie!