Swollen Cuticle Green

to Iran: Another journalist arrested

Here's an excerpt of the last article written by Mohammad Ghouchani on "Etemad Melli and" before being arrested Saturday morning in Tehran. In Iran, a journalist, that is to defend freedom of expression, it can cost you everything.

The entire article can be read on the website of the Italian Cultural Centre in Switzerland

http:/ / centroculturalelugano.blogspot.com /

(...)

be journalists these days has become difficult. To some, this job is a point of arrival and other tool, an intermediate stop for some and for others the last house. But with these cages, these complaints, these starvation wages, now, you can still remain journalists? We

third generation Iranian, we are more aware of death, we are the most maligned. We are witnessing people who can not predict the next minute of their lives. On our future government nor reason nor feeling nor compassion. No one knows the future, but anyone can predict or plan for the near future. Everyone, except us. Every day we go to the office do not know if there will be a tomorrow. And if tomorrow was Wednesday? Every Wednesday is meeting the press at the ministry. And if tomorrow was a Monday or a Tuesday, a Thursday or Saturday or a Wednesday one of those Sundays when the courts ordered the closure of our newspaper? Thank God Friday is a holiday!

We decorate our sheets of bright colors for the holidays but then wear the dark suit for the newspapers forced to close its doors. Do not look at our laughs, our hearts are grieving. You know maybe a trade in which the smallest of errors all employees to be hanged? Or that because of one employee all be fired? O where for a charge of 10 years before, and after 10 years in prison, you are condemned to another 10 years for the same offense? Become a journalist for our generation was easy, but it's really hard to remain such. For us it is an unattainable desire to grow old doing this job. May we grow old. Maybe we could die in our preparation.

How To Add Cheats To Gpsphone Without A Computer

Marx against the economy State

is called as the father of communism, but he rails against the economy of the state. But says the Church "is called to remove the unjust structures of society." Says the Archbishop of Monaco and Freising

of Vito Punzi on "Time"

Always attentive to economic issues and social justice, Reinhard Marx, Archbishop of Monaco and Freising (formerly Bishop of Trier from 2001 to 2007), has not remained indifferent to the attempts of interpretation of the new capital, the fundamental work of Karl Marx, and published last year in Germany a powerful provocative reflection that takes its cue from the key text of his namesake century to look for new responses to the effects of globalization and the dramatic economic and financial crisis in its solid international presence and social doctrine of the Catholic Church. The book, having raised a lively debate in the country, recently published in the Italian version (the capital. A critical reason for the Christian market, Rizzoli, Milano 2009, 324 pages, € 19.50). No attempt to "repair", with respect to the doctrine of Karl. Nor are there signs of "nostalgia". And the point is made clear already opened, where the archbishop thought specifically dedicated to the father of communism. Of his work, which affects the central topics of the forthcoming social encyclical of Benedict XVI, Ratzinger's successor on the throne of Monaco has agreed to speak with the Times.

Excellence, she introduces her book a thought to his namesake Karl. What would you tell him if he could meet him today? What's fault?
course I can not blame the terrible crimes that Stalin and others have committed in his name. However, I would say that with its totalitarian conception of society was very close to them. The dictatorship of the proletariat, the contrast between certain classes of men, and others, all these ideas for me Christian, are intolerable, because I see the man as the image of God I should attribute to Karl Marx the correct analysis of the evils of capitalism in the nineteenth century, the commodification of labor and reduction of all walks of life to the economy.

Within the German Bishops' Conference she is considered the "expert" of social issues. On the other hand it is difficult to find in his text elements that distinguish it significantly from the long tradition of social teaching as it is born and developed within the Catholic Church (there are, for example, frequent quotations from the writings of "social Pope John Paul II). In that sense this book is intended and be read as the result of the whole social doctrine of the Church?
course, as the Church, we re-established the great tradition of Catholic social teaching. The Church's mission is also to make clear the fact that the world should be organized according to law and justice, to love mercy. I committed Christians are called to change the unjust structures of society. The charitable commitment alone is not enough, you also need consolidation through Catholic social teaching, is therefore a work applied to political reforms.

respect to the current economic and financial crisis is spreading a willingness, or necessity, to strengthen state power. There is no shortage of nostalgia toward collectivism and interventionism. How do you evaluate?
In this respect I can only warn! Collectivism and the economy of the State are not the solution to our problem. The disintegration of the communist states of Central and Eastern Europe has already demonstrated what the outcome would lead us. At this time the state must establish new rules of the game, especially in finance, and the market can not do this alone. Then very quickly we should redeploy the powers between the state and economy. In Germany we have always been justifiably proud of our social market economy model, based on the liability the individual, but at the same time it contains a form of speculative capitalism wild and primitive, and requires a legal framework for competition. The market economy and competition are "products of civilization, culture and assume that the rule of law.

Beyond the social models, in game there is always the person with responsibility. It can be said in this sense that the current is primarily a moral crisis? What does "be moral" issues concerning the finance and the economy? With
moral judgments have to be careful. Only as a personal confessor can judge how a man living in the sight of God, how someone really is morally justified in his actions. Again there is no collective guilt, then there are bad managers, bad business and bad bankers. Everyone should feel responsible for their actions before God what was his intention? What was his motivation? It is really wrong? However, there is something that looks like real structures of sin, that is, systems that promote and reward the wrong man. Among these is a primitive capitalism that is governed by its nature is unlimited and unbridled greed of one man. It is aimed against man. That greed is a grave sin and can not be accepted structures that reward sin.

This crisis has perhaps something to do with the "de-Christianization of Europe"?
I see no de-Christianization of Europe, but compared to what has been done in past centuries, in the presence of a pluralistic world, must be strengthened in the energy evangelizing. In this sense, the priests and faithful of my diocese remember the words of Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger: Christianity in Europe is still hidden in the shoes of children. We face a great time! Europe continues to be shaped by Christianity. But we all are called to support more vigorously our witness and bring a dowry of our Christian image of man in society, economy and politics.

In his book, the subject of unemployment, which is the most dramatic aspect of the crisis is dealt with in relation to the problem of justice. In that sense, unemployment is an issue that has to do with justice?
who work contributes to the configuration of the company. The work in this sense is a human right. Every man should have the opportunity to contribute to building society. "No one is superfluous," says Benedict XVI. It is not just to meet the basic existential needs, but also raise the issue of employment and unemployment in the context of recognition and the appreciation of self, as it has been admirably described by John Paul II in Laborem Exercens.

She says she felt an urgent need, for the Church and for man, one focus of the social issue today in light of the crisis, but also the overall size of the economy. According to her like you need to reset the social question in the light of the problems of globalization?
I fear that the economic and financial crisis may help deepen social divisions in our world. I am concerned that perhaps, when the crisis to the end product will have its effects in poor countries will increase the number of men in poverty, victims of hunger. The burning social issue of our time on more than ever the way we produce a legal framework for the global economy is such as to allow for an equitable sharing of every man.

Excellence at international level in the hope that emerges from his book is that in the near future will produce further growth of the organization of international trade, or the same IMF, "until you get to a robust world economic order '. As if it imagines a new sort of solidarity of the world?
We as humans can not create an ideal world. However, we can mobilize all our forces to be removed unjust structures. Nutrition, health, education. This is simply to give to the poor and disadvantaged of this world can really have a chance. It will certainly be possible if progress is being made to take this crisis as an opportunity to change our way of thinking.

Blog Paying For Community Service Hours

Il Sole 24 Ore

What to expect from the G-8 then? The recent report by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) 'The financial and economic crisis: response to decent work' provides some impressive data on unemployment. Among the unemployed, many belong to the most vulnerable groups (migrant workers, women, unskilled workers, young people seeking their first employment) that often have no access to any form of social protection. Without Social Security, losing a job means for these people slip below the poverty line is estimated that between 40 and 50% of the world will fail in 2009, to overcome the line of two dollars a day per capita. afresh from the "priority of labor" and the subject labor, to use a typical expression of the social doctrine of the Church, offers a viable prospect for boosting economic development. In this regard, the slogan "People First" should not remain a formal message. Instead, it must summarize the availability of the G-8 countries to develop policies that recognize the priority of society over the "state" and the "market" understood abstractly, emphasizing the subjectivity of personal and communal. People and communities are in fact carriers of needs, but also of real resources, individual and community (where, as in France, has developed a more adequate family policy on the fall in GDP was smaller). They are, More specifically, carriers say that all strategic resources. We could talk about human and social capital, but rather to clarify that it is the unique ability of human beings to "give a name to things and to continue the work of creation. The Church's social doctrine uses the term "work" (and not capital!) To express these capabilities and unique vocation.

The Sleep of Reason Produces crisis Angelo Scola

all men. Both sides of the current crisis, the emergency that has originated in developed markets and the chronic inadequacy of resources to support the actual development, raise an unavoidable moral issue. To do no moralizing, which typically takes aim at the behaviors of others, but tends to autoassolvere those who preach him, just remind us honestly that the current crisis occurred after a decade marked by the flowering of speeches on the ethics of business and finance and adoption of ethical codes of practice. This tells us that the ethical dimension of economics and finance is not something incidental and formal, but essential. It is born from within that framework. Ethics in fact always expresses a culture and anthropology. In other words, to set a specific area of \u200b\u200bsociety need to field the question about man and his being in relationship. Speaking to an "arm" of weeks ago, the Holy Father identified nell'avarizia idolizes fundamental error that led to the crisis. He was referring to the experience of human frailty that reason is "obscured" and will "curve" from their self-interest, so you do not see the dangers of the route you are following and, in time of crisis, no one knows find the way out. The crisis has thus precise anthropological and cultural roots.

So, work and above all, the subject of work continues to really be the "key social issue." All find that they are negative, because the financial crisis has erased many jobs and never ceases to put them in danger, but they are primarily positive, because the work and the subject labor express man's being "for" and "with" the others, who alone can achieve sustainable exit from poverty and insecurity. Perhaps few are willing to believe that, even under strenuous circumstances of the present, the crucial issue is the meaning of work for a single person. In particular, the fact that the work is "for" and "with" others. Proves this, albeit negative, the financial crisis. It is "lent" and "borrowed" within a framework of anonymous transactions were seen as temporary, trusting in the market as an escape route, they were their own business "in freedom", in the absence of stable ties. Well, now we have the proof that the "freedom" financial risks of buying and selling on markets anonymous, unattached, it was really fatal: not having chosen who to trust, one is at the mercy of a mechanism is inherently unstable. To overcome the crisis, therefore, we need to rebuild ties, "real" and financial, to mobilize the energy and dynamism of human labor. We need jobs and finance "creative", but in the sense of the word: who look to the future, which are expressed in terms tend to be durable, capable of withstanding the uncertainty of tomorrow, who can see opportunities that actually generate wealth and welfare . In this daily work of those individuals and communities, the G-8 governments and international institutions can provide important support: support interventions temporary return to the people the opportunity to share, and social reforms that are not enemies of freedom, but helping to foster the building from the bottom of ties "good" and "right". In the construction of renewed ties remain strong and progressive in their institution (businesses, government, market) all will necessarily be provisional. For this reason, it should give a decisive importance to the educational work to make progress, to innovate must be taught, there will be no innovation without education will not be left to the center of the concerns of persons, families, intermediate associations, civil society as a whole, then the State itself and all the supranational institutions. No strategy, in fact, can never be enough by itself to generate a radical and definitive solution to the problems of the crisis. But no one - particularly the governments of major countries - will pull back from work to find solutions at least temporarily. Why it is essential immediately invest adequate resources to promote a virtuous circle of innovation, culture and education. The author is Patriarch of Venice Best Dvd Upconvert Blu Ray Player Cardinal Carlo Caffarra: The ethical crisis in the West

The crisis of ethics in the West Rome, Palazzo Colonna, May 26 2009

A perceptive ethicist, R. Poole, wrote: "The modern world does not provide good reasons to believe in his own principles and values \u200b\u200b[...]. Modernity has built up a conception of knowledge that excludes the possibility of moral knowledge [...]. Given the agent's conceptions human reason and the prevailing in the modern world, a rational individual will reject the demands of morality "[cit. S. Abba What approach to moral philosophy? , LAS, Roma 1996. p. 265]. The condition of ethics in the West Here is photographed properly. We can accept this situation? We can do without ethics? We can not answer these questions before they have answered the following questions: of what we talk when we talk about ethics ? My reflection starts from the response to this question. 1. Of course we speak of human action, what depends on the exercise of their freedom: the our choices. That's what we talk about when we talk about ethics. Since the choice by its very nature presupposes and implies a case whereby the choice of A rather than B, we can not ask the question on what basis the choice justice is done. These elementary observations are enough to formulate a basic question about the freedom and ability of choice: there are criteria for judging, so why do not the choice of A and B are valid not only for those who are choosing but for any reasonable person? It would be useful first to answer this question, to say which properties should have these "reasons for action", if any. It seems to me that are at least five. (1) reasons are valid before any interest, desire, preference: apply to themselves. (2) are not valid reasons why and not as a plan courses of action deemed capable of satisfying their desires. (3) are reasons to be shared by any reasonable person: specific to each and every one. (4) are reasons that may apply to adjust their interests, desires and preferences while surrendering. (5) are reasons that require unconditional respect for the freedom, not admitting that it ever violated on the grounds of infringement of their interest, their desire, their own preferences or those of the social group you belong to. The hypothesis of the existence of these reasons it is helpful to have a better understanding of 'homo agens , the acting person. immediate experience is a fact that each has of itself when it acts, being inclined toward a goal to reach with his choice. Who does that, always acts to an end. The strength of motivation to act is what drives it, the end, it is believed to be able to satisfy our "wants". Each character has always offered us a view of property it is able to [have felt able to] respond to Our desire is to quell our movement or inclination. Considering these data elements, we must ask: logic, logos intimate inclinations of man [eg sexual inclination, the inclination to live in society] is a radical selfishness? The inclinations are directed exclusively to the satisfaction of the individual good? They carry only a utilitarian logic? Or live in a vocation to the natural human inclination to be governed by a reasonableness that we introduce a form of goodness that does not coincide coll'utilità own? In short, there are only "goods for me" or are "property in and of itself? Our reflection, even starting from elementary data, has come now to the crux of the matter. It can be shown in two fundamental ways. First way: the reason is purely instrumental, is simply the power given to us to design and implement a satisfactory response to the needs of the individual but it is also the faculty that is able to detect and propose courses of action that make the man as man, courses of action which frees man from his "particular" and elevate it to an eternal order and has its own beauty? Second way: there are only property [now prefers to say: values] individuals or there are goods that are common, each person's own words and all the people? The two formulations are at the bottom of the concave and convex of the same figure. That's what we talk about today when we talk about ethics. Let's talk about that is, what is the good of mankind. More specifically speaking of measure of our reason, what it really means to live reasonably. In a word we speak of man in search of himself, and his true good. 2. However, I was asked to reflect on the crisis of ethics. Means of ethical reflection. I have to say first what I mean by "crisis." Ethical reflection may be faced with difficult questions and unpublished, and serious difficulties in finding an answer. It may be in a conflict of answers to these questions. This situation, however, perhaps in two radically different contexts. The conflict of the responses from within the acceptance of such meta-ethical assumptions, and takes the form of argumentative discord. Or the conflict from within against meta-ethical assumptions, and is configured as conflict between the premises of the argument as such. If you switch from first to the second situation, there is in that I call the crisis of ethical reflection. My thesis is that this is the condition in which ethical reflection in the West today. The most serious symptom is fatigue, I would say the West's inability to develop a public ethics. But let us proceed with order. We are in a conflict of conditions, or that match. the conflict is at the level of fundamentals. In what sense? The debate took place in the first paragraph has given us the tools to build the answer to this question. The crisis in the sense that, for the notion of reason of freedom, and therefore the relationship between truth and freedom . In the end, about man's vision: it is a conflict of Anthropology. 's about the reason. More specifically, the practical reason. It is self-limited to practice only as "serve the interests of the individual, the individual's wishes. So says one of the fathers of modernity: "We do not ever go a step beyond themselves" [D. Hume, The Philosophical Works , Treatise of human nature , Laterza, Bari - Rome 2002, p.. 80]. The reduction of the practical reason why a small car has changed everything. All the ethical discourse, while continuing to unfold and articles using the same vocabulary [freedom, good, evil, conscience, law morality] has totally changed direction. They are the same signs on the staff, but the key is changed to read: the music is another. is the radical ethic of autonomy, understood as a mere statement of his own desire, which is absent from any reasonableness that references to a "step beyond himself." 's about freedom. It affirmed the primacy of absolute freedom, freedom is a primum which is in itself and for itself, its meaning. That there might be a good in and of itself to which the person is naturally inclined and oriented, that free choice can accept or reject, is denied. Freedom in his background is pure indifference, it is pure neutrality. The consequence is that the good can not take on the face of that office: bonum quia jussum ; evil that can not be presented with the face of the forbidden: malum quia prohibitum . And there is no reason inherent in the freedom to do the first and avoid the latter. There is no question of truth / falsity about the project and the person makes of himself with his own freedom. A discussion of ethical discourse, therefore, that should perform as universally valid, it is impossible, and contrary to the affirmation of freedom. Many autobiographies are only possible as there are ethical people, moral strangers to each other. We'll see how this speech should be taken in social terms, in terms of public ethics. And we are to take decisive question for the crisis of ethics: the relationship truth-freedom. We start again from the observation of what happens in us when we make a choice, when we make a decision. The choice and decision is not determined by the object chosen, the action figure that I planned to do. Freedom is self-reliance, freedom is to be determined by himself, is self-determination. But for this to be possible, simply because it is possible to choose decide freely and it is necessary that the person gives an opinion about the subject to choose from, the decision to make. It is by virtue of this view on the value or goodness of the object, that the will is not moved by the object itself, and that the person moves itself. The reference to the truth, known by the opinion, belongs to the essence of free will. is in this light that reveals the true nature of moral evil. It is the evil of their freedom, as well as the error is just the wrong reason. It is precisely in the fact that freedom denied by his choice that the reason stated in his opinion. But if deny that there is a truth about the good of [the reasons I talked about the five characteristics] and affirm that the good / evil is in close analysis by the decision of freedom [here is secondary, if the individual or social consensus], where the choice and the decision did not contain within themselves the "moment of truth", and it is done without reference to the truth that is rooted in an objective order of being, moral common sense of the term would be simply unthinkable. It is perhaps still continues to talk about morality, but it comes in fact totally different. It is the present condition. "In short, the contrast between good and evil, so essential to morality, presupposes that the will of any object is realized in human action based on the truth about the good that these objects are "[K. Wojtyla, Person and Act , Rusconi Libri, Milano 1999, p.. 339] . If not, the man would simply be an unnecessary experiment, and his life, as the poet says, a tale told by an idiot with no sense. 3. Let me think a little about what I believe to be the most severe symptom, the most dramatic crisis of morality in the West: the growing difficulty that Western societies try drafting a public ethics. I mean public ethics for the set of rules which removed the social life is no longer possible. The public ethics simply does not coincide with the ethics tout court: the offense is distinct from sin. Let the fundamental question whether the consent obtained by the public use of practical reason, ie through the comparison of free and open to all on equal terms, is the fons essendi sufficient public ethics. If you can propose an ethics based solely on public consent. from a text by Leopardi. "If the idea of \u200b\u200bright and wrong, good and bad morality does not exist or does not come by itself, the intellect of man, no law of no legislator can make an act or omission that is just or unjust, good or bad. For, there can be no account for what is right or wrong, good nor bad, ubbedire any law, and no principle on which there can be funds that any one has the right to control who is that "[Zibaldone 3349-3350]. Send Leopardi poses the basic question: there is something unjust in itself and can never be justified by any legitimate public procedure? In other words, there is a truth about the good of mankind regardless of the results of the argument, debate and public deliberation? When I say that the democratic process is the only fons essendi the legitimacy of the rule, one of two things. Or I think this procedure as a clash of opposing interests whose only solution is the imposition of stronger or I think this procedure as a way worthy of man to find the solution that can recognize the reasonableness of each. In the first case simply deny that there is equality in dignity among men and the norm is always and only the domain of one another. In the second case is assumed and affirmed, and the equal dignity of every person and the possession by each of the same reason or rational nature. That's the idea tommasiana law and natural law. Only building a consensus that it is oriented to the search for truth about the good, is an authority that is not man's dominion over man. Even J. Habermas has been forced to come to these conclusions, arguing that the legitimacy of a constitution by the people can not be limited to the calculation of arithmetical majorities-minorities. It should have a reasonable argument "with sensitivity to the truth." Always Habermas in his work The future of human nature. The risks of genetic liberal [Einaudi (original 2001), Torino 2002] mean that issues of human genetics can be resolved through democratic procedures. The root of social breakdown we see is a kind of censure against each instance that keep alive the "sensitivity to the truth." Think of the treatment receiving the Church's moral teaching. Education to a full use of reason is one of the most pressing challenges for the future. The project to build a legal system, and therefore a public ethos, without truth, puts a burden on the shoulders of the law that is not capable of carrying. You the burden of creating a human community, to produce an identity. The Romans did not say ubi jus ibi societas but Ubi Societas ibi jus. As this is an impossible dream, it opens the next two serious risks. Or make the law itself imposed a vehicle of values: is the risk of clerical fundamentalism. O "privatize" legally any content of human experience: the risk of secularism is exclusive. It is believed that the category of fundamental human rights can serve as the connective tissue of the human social. however, denied that there is a truth about the good of man, or - which matches - that there is a reasonable human nature, basic human rights are likely to be conceived and practiced as what the individual prefers for himself, et de gustibus non est disputandum. This has a devastating consequence on the idea of \u200b\u200bcivil law and the role of the legislature. The new idea is that the State and the law should not prohibit what the individual prefers. And with that social cohesion is threatened to its very origin. The solution of the problem is not recourse to the principle "if you do not want, why can not I?", Ie with the launch of law, nor impositive nor coercive, but permissive. Not wanting to fill the gap ethics, criticize the question of truth in the name of a supposed tolerance, is leading to the disintegration of our western societies. The practical reason to have replaced glue communicative reason he walked around the ethical discourse on a public street that has no exit. In conclusion. It can not seriously build a public ethics if you deny that there is a universally valid truth about good. But this denial is to be held today, bringing a tear to the human social unsustainable. 4. I want to conclude with the thought of Heraclitus who said "for those who are awake there is a single, common world, and instead each of them that sleep in their own world again "[The Presocratics , Bompiani, Milano 2006, p.. 326, 89]. D. This is what Hume denied : that man can escape from your world, make a step beyond Ourselves . Those who have awakened from the sleep of reason, has a light that is the same for every man, and that helps us see the good as what is common to all. It is this light that lays the foundation for human community.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom) Blog Archive ►  2011 (26) ►  March (4) ►  February (15) ►  January (7) ►  2010 (28) ►  December (1) ►  November (2) ►  October (1) ►  July (2) ►  June (9) ►  May (9) ►  April (2) ►  February (2) ▼  2009 (20) ►  December (2) ►  November (1) ►  October (4) ▼  June (4) Swollen Cuticle Green How To Add Cheats To Gpsphone Without A Computer Blog Paying For Community Service Hours Best Dvd Upconvert Blu Ray Player ►  February (6) ►  January (3) ►  2008 (21) ►  December (7) ►  November (14) Powered by Blogger.