Suchergebnisse

Articles include, Defeat reaction - unite of democract, Repeal the emergency provisions act,Tyrone news and Catholic anti- discrimination association.

A review essay on books by (1) John D. Skrentny, The Ironies of Affirmative Action (IL: U Chicago Press, 1996); & (2) Desmond King, Separate and Unequal (England: Oxford U Press, 1995). These works focus on African American civil rights in the context of employment policy outside & inside the federal government. Both are described as interdisciplinary, informative works that present a more complete picture of affirmative action than previous studies. Skrentny points out the contradictions of the aims of government policies, assesses the color blindness of US society, & documents resistance to affirmative action. Institutional structures are discussed, & an effort is made to link cultural factors to political decisions. King gives a history of federal employment of blacks & shows how government hiring practices actually encouraged segregation. Discrimination in federal prisons, employment, & housing is compared, & a history of segregation, particularly in the military, is presented. Both works are criticized for not justifying or explaining which topics were covered or why, facing the reader with the dilemma of deciding whether the selections are representative. Skrentny's work also lacks any kind of quantitative analysis. Follow-up research on affirmative action is called for. T. Arnold

This issue of the New York Times includes articles detailing the March on Washington, foreign affairs during the early 1960s, and other stories surrounding the Civil Rights Movement.

Catholic teaching must be the basis of any Catholic commitment to civil rights. The right to life is the first and utmost right, and, consequently, respect for freedom and personal responsibility play an important role in society. In fact, when the freedom and the dignity of a person are violated in any way, the entire human family is devalued.Its imperative that Christians respect civil rights, demostrated through their actions to establish a lasting national and international peace. Cardinal Bernardin underlines that peace engendered by arms races proves to be a illusion. Security at the expense of another country's insecurity is unacceptable. Moreover, security is not a reality for the world if people still suffer from hunger, children die every minute, exorbitant military expenditures are continually planned, and racism, segregation, poverty, hopelessness and despair are still so prevalent. In light of this, Joseph Bernardin invites all Christians to act upon their convictions as people of faith. Abortion, he asserts, must not be included among civic rights, but rather the right to life must be considered as the first and foremost among fundamental human rights.Among other civil right violations, apartheid has not yet been eliminated in South Africa. In countless nations violent civic wars have diminished human dignity, providing examples of social injustice. Immigration has been charged with creating problems; however, immigrating people move from one country to another in search of a better life and most times find themselves, once again, in poverty. When nations, in a desperate attempt to solve immigration problems, try to build a protective wall around their borders to keep other people out, they forget we are all members of a single human family in which every individual's rights must he respected.

Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1991 primarily to modify numerous Supreme Court opinions of the 1988 Term that jeopardized the rights of minorities and women. Particularly striking about those Supreme Court cases was the number which involved procedural questions and process values. These included the timing of litigation, both when employment discrimination victims must commence actions and when non-parties can reopen civil rights cases resolved through consent decrees; litigant responsibility for the expense of lawsuits; and proof requirements. Most of the procedural developments in civil rights and employment discrimination litigation of the 1988 Term, however, were only recent manifestations of judicial decisionmaking that has disadvantaged civil rights and employment discrimination plaintiffs over the past fifteen years. Moreover, the determinations encompass restrictive interpretations by the Supreme Court and lower federal courts of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, fee-shifting legislation, and procedural provisions in civil rights and employment discrimination statutes. In short, the whole picture for civil rights and employment discrimination litigation has been more than the sum of the procedural parts. The federal judiciary's decisionmaking has adversely affected civil rights and employment discrimination plaintiffs, who Congress intended to serve as private attorneys general, but whose lack of resources for litigating often makes them risk averse. Because these judicial determinations threatened the progress that minorities and women have achieved through litigation, Congress enacted the new civil rights and employment discrimination legislation which rectifies or ameliorates certain procedural difficulties faced by civil rights and employment discrimination plaintiffs. Unfortunately, Congress did not treat a number of important procedural problems that significantly disadvantage civil rights plaintiffs. This essay addresses those omissions. The article initially examines procedural developments that have detrimentally affected civil rights plaintiffs over the last decade and a half. The piece then analyzes the Civil Rights Act of 1991, emphasizing how that measure fails to remedy numerous procedural complications which confront these plaintiffs. Accordingly, the essay affords suggestions for additional change that would respond to the procedural difficulties which remain.

For a variety of reasons, Australians possess a curious lack of understanding about the gaining of civil rights by indigenous people. These reasons include the lack of a clear civil rights "moment" in Australian history & the negative connotations now associated with civil rights when compared to the more radical indigenous rights. This article explores the reasons for Australia's public amnesia about indigenous people's acquisition of civil rights & makes a case for repositioning this occurrence as a key time in Australian political history. Adapted from the source document.