Pokemon Shiny Gold Full Verion

THE WAR OF THE CRUCIFIX. A view from the Constitution

I am not a lawyer nor a lawyer, but I think the removal of crucifixes can not only rely on the Constitution but, in my humble opinion, undermines it.
First, all part of that many confuse the following:
"state religion" (the state is neutral in religious matters, not taking sides in favor of any belief or disbelief),
"secular state" (take sides by disbelief-tolerated but respected faiths and beliefs),
"secular state" (militantly atheist attacks religious beliefs).
I am sure that Spain, under the Constitution is a secular state ("No religion shall have a state character" but it works with the beliefs of the English), non-secular or less secular. Therefore, the removal of crucifixes can not rely on the Constitution and anti-constitutional.
Secondly, if we have a system based on the concept of popular will expressed in the idea of \u200b\u200bdominance of the majority opinion (and respect for minorities) do not understand how a law can remove annoying symbols that a minority when most (believers) accept them. I do not understand how a minority can impose on the majority in a democratic system. That neither bolsters our Constitution.
Third, and collecting the two previous arguments, we can estimate that believers
1) remove the crucifix is \u200b\u200ba State Party making a choice in matters of religion (in this case for non-belief) forbidden by the Constitution.
2) remove the crucifixes can be considered a hostile act against religion (anti-constitutional: see first story).
3) remove the crucifixes can be considered an act offensive to most believers, as well as to present the crucifix could offend non-believers, as the majority view should prevail (see second story).

Wüldenmar

By Gabriel Ortiz

Teacher And Her Student Kissing

"SOLIDARITY IS CRIME"

When I read this statement on a street sign, with regard to how we treat immigrants in this system and this society, I good note. I did not expect is that within months would experience in my own flesh. The thing was that I accompanied a dear neighbor, African immigrant (honest and hardworking family man), a Malaga magistrate who had said (at the end so nothing serious). The summons did not say that he report to a lawyer but as my friend only speaks very little English and can not read or write (only name), I went to lend a hand with the language. When before the officer asked him what it was, asked me who I was hostility. When I said I was a friend of his told me that I did not have to tell me nothing, leave me and my friend handed him a paper claiming that sign. Naturally, my friend wanted to know what was going to sign - is a perfectly logical right - but because he could not read the paper and handed me I was reading, when the official, visibly angry I wanted to stop to read it. As I pretended to continue reading and asked for "a moment, please," he shouted to call security. Another officer was confronted me and told me to leave or have to call "the security forces."

I, not worse, and because, I confess, I felt intimidated, I left like a coward. There my friend was just in perfect helplessness, not knowing what happened or what I was signing. And I was wondering if this is justice, if love of neighbor, friendship and solidarity are crime and the "prosperous" Europe of the "freedoms."

Wüldenmar

By Gabriel Ortiz

Hollywood Rules Hogan Clothing

THREATENED PLANET AND THE POWERFUL

Many people, groups and people put their hopes on the Copenhagen Summit (December 2009) would achieve an agreement as good as necessary to curb ecological destruction of our world. Their hopes were disappointed. After the summit of politicians and rulers is apparent inability of the "leaders" global capitalism to respond to the ecological problem. These "leaders" demonstrate, to disappoint the expectations of mankind once again, that does not represent anybody, except by the powers in the shade in this system: large firms and corporations who support and finance, and not going to solve the environmental problem or the hunger and inequality, because these powers are responsible for these problems.

If citizens do not represent or work for the common interest, and only know how to spend and pollute more, and to support the powerful responsible for these threats Overall, logically should be removed from office, tried and imprisoned for a crime against humanity before the International Criminal Court. Instead, those jailed for the minions of power and their puppet judges were a group of peaceful demonstrators at the prestigious Greenpeace. They committed the terrible crime to sneak into the party of the rich and powerful with an incisive but friendly banner ("Politicians talk, the leaders decide") inconveniently appeared before the cameras. For having troubled and the Empire of the Beast, were treated in a "disproportionate and unnecessarily cruel" in the Danish prisons. They were released with charges after 21 days incommunicado without access to letters or emails or to make a simple phone call, as if they were "dangerous terrorists", which is what is said now to control independent thinking. If world leaders are working for global business mafia worsening the fate of humanity, nothing happens, if peaceful demonstrators teach a banner, are imprisoned and abused. They are dangerous because they reported the truth that no one wants to hear.

This is a capitalist democracy, which does nothing if you go into a party or palace of the powerful, but if you do it imprisons you to say some uncomfortable truth. Many understood well, and stopped buying Danish products, sent letters or e-mail of protest to the embassies and consulates in Denmark, and to support Greenpeace. But the best thing is confirmed once again that capitalism is incompatible with the solution of ecological problems (as well as hunger, child slavery, injustice and unemployment) and the survival of humanity.

Wüldenmar

By Gabriel Ortiz