Suchergebnisse

A long letter begun -- Faith as a response to covenant -- Abraham: a father in faith -- Faith and culture: rejection, accommodation, and integration -- Prophetic faith, repentance, and the development of tradition -- Faith facing death: hopes and fears -- Circling around God: the faith of pilgrims -- Naming the God with whom we keep faith -- A long letter ended.

Abstract: This article places the landmark 1986 Supreme Court of Canada decision E. (Mrs.) v. Eve within its avowedly anti-eugenic context. Then it compares the trial record and appellate documents of Eve to the notorious 1927 American case Buck v. Bell . It outlines the legal reasoning of the Eve decision, its reception, and the different trajectories of law in the US, the UK, and Australia. These multiple points of historical comparison expose a series of unresolved eugenic continuities in the politics of youth, sex, and disability. The interpretation challenges more conventional definitions, periodization, and understandings of eugenics, drawing attention to the formation of "liberal" eugenics in the late twentieth century.

This text was delivered as a plenary lecture at the conference Barndom ochungdom i förändring (Childhood and Youth in Transition: Discipline and unrestin the modern welfare state) on October 29, 2010 at Malmo University, Sweden.It offers a diagram for visualizing modern childhood as a product of thediscursive tensions between four dominant figures: the conditioned child, theauthentic child, the developing child, and the political child. The lecture focuseson the creative dynamics between conditioning and authenticity as they appearedin the 17th through the 19th-centuries in Anglo-American discourse. Itargues that a search for the conditions of authenticity through childhood becamemanifest in the disciplinary practices of institutions for children's educationand care. The resulting generative tensions were important for constructingthe landscape of modern childhood as a whole. Finally, it suggests that thetensions between romantic authenticity and rational conditioning continue toprovide a significant discursive framework for contemporary child rights talk.

In August 1919, a settlement house worker in Columbus, Ohio, filed a complaint in juvenile court against a seven-year-old girl whom I will call "Marie." The complaint read, "Marie runs the streets continually. She is very irregular in her attendance at school, and is as dirty as a pig. She has been found in a lumber yard with a negro, and it was alleged by her associates that he raped her there. She goes into stores and begs." According to the surviving records, Marie's "truancies from home" alerted settlement workers to the case. As a young child she reportedly began staying out late at night and loitering in the company of men and boys, and was threatened with being put out of the house when she was found alone with the African American man. By 1928, after Marie became an unwed mother at the age of sixteen, and had spent nine years in and out of child welfare institutions, a summary report contained the interesting typographical error that Marie's young life had strayed a distance of "six blacks from home." As incidental as slipping "blocks" into "blacks" may have been in one sense, it captured a powerful truth. Marie violated key boundaries of sexual, gender, and racial purity that made a woman a candidate for respectable motherhood, and she paid dearly for these transgressions.

On the 24th of Dhu-al-Qa'da in the Islamic year 309, the 26th of March in the Christian year 922, a man was executed for religious crimes in the city of Baghdad in Iraq. Baghdad at that time had been the seat of Muhammad's political successors, the caliphs, since the middle of the eighth century and was the capital of much of die Islamic community. As a political institution, the caliphate was sunni, modeled on the surma, or path, of Muhammad— at least in theory.

CORPORATE LAW IN THE UNITED STATES INVOLVES DUAL REGULATION. ALTHOUGH STATE AND FEDERAL CORPORATE LAW TYPICALLY FUNCTION WITHOUT MUTUAL INTERFERENCE, THE LAST THIRTY YEARS HAVE REVEALED POTENTIAL CONFLICTS CHIEFLY IN TWO SITUATIONS. ONE INVOLVES CIVIL REMEDIES FOR INVESTORS UNDER FEDERAL SECURITIES STATUTES; THE OTHER IS STATE ANTI-TAKEOVER REGULATION AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO THE FEDERAL WILLIAMS ACT. THE AUTHORS ARGUE THAT THE CORE INTERPRETIVE TASK IN FEDERAL SECURITIES LAW IS PRESERVATIN OF BOTH REGIMES TO MAXIMUM EFFECT, BECAUSE THE CONGRESS HAS EXPRESSLY DECLARED THAT STATE AUTHORITY SHOULD CONTINUE ADJACENT TO FEDERAL REGULATION.