Describe the circumstances that caused police to pull Wayne Williams over? The police were staking out the bridges because the last victim was dumped in the river, and he was in his car driving slowly across the bridge after the police heard a splash that sounded like a body. Why does he think he was convicted?
Carl Williams: the non-ideal victim: HEATHER JONES 214139974 Carl Williams; convicted drug trafficker and murderer, was serving a life sentence in Barwon Prison’s Acacia unit when he was beaten over the head with the stem from an exercise bike and killed by Matthew Johnson in 2010. The first link that is listed when his name is searched in Google is the Wikipedia page titled “Carl Williams (criminal).” The initial impression is that he is not regarded as a victim of murder, but largely still as the killer he was. This is understandable. Williams is responsible for ordering the deaths of and killing members of Melbourne’s underworld, all of whom have left behind families and loved ones.
He points out that the Bible cannot be taken literally because sometimes it can be interpreted in different ways. The Bible was written for the common people and illiterate to understand, and to prove his point he mentions that the Bible gives God a body like ours while theologies believe God has no such features. He moves to his main point about who has the authority to determine what is true and untrue. He argues that what is scientifically proven will to understand the Bible true meaning.
“I wanna be like Christ go savin' life instead of taking' life and that's the reason I take up medicine" said by Desmond Thomas Doss, a faithful medic during World War II, who fought on the American side for several years. Doss was a medic during World War II except he did not carry a gun with him at all while fighting. Doss received many awards and badges due to his bravery while enlisted in the army, and was also seen as one of the best and bravest soldiers, despite the rough times he encountered at the beginning of his enlistment. Doss went through many trials in life, but by the work of God, everything fell into place.
I will outline the argument put forth by father Luis Jayme for support being sent from the Franciscian church to aid both neothytes (Indian converts to Christianity) and gentiles (non-converted Indians), who are allegedly subject to rape from the Portuguese soldiers. Father Jayme Is sympathetic towards the native Indians who he believes act in a better nature than that of the Portuguese soldiers. In summary, Jayme notes of his own Spanish Christians, he writes "I burst into tears to see how these neophytes were setting an example for us Christians"1. The outrageous acts of rape performed by the soldiers referencing personal accounts given to him by the native Americans as his main source of evidence. "some soldiers went their and raped their women .....
The law has dictated what is allowable within the realm of euthanasia. Dr. Jack Kevorkian is the most infamous physician associated with euthanasia. MacKinnon and Fiala state “For eight years, starting in 1990, Kevorkian assisted more than 100 suicides” (Physician-Assisted Suicide). His role was active though and he used a variety of methods.
In his argument for the establishment of a public school system, Benjamin Rush does not waste any time addressing the obvious issue of taxpayer burden. While acknowledging this would warrant an initial investment, he insists that by establishing a system of public education in America would overtime cut taxes, and taxpayers would see a return on their initial investment [JEH1] [Rush, pg.678]. Rush maintains a position that as we acknowledge the benefits of learning spoken languages of the world, our youth would benefit as much learning the languages of finance and markets. To properly defend our liberties against the throes of tyranny, we must be aware of defending ourselves from economic tyranny. He establishes the potential merits of educating the youth in the matters of economics, arguing it provides “the best security
While the choice of whether to remain loyal to the crown or join the revolution became popular in the late eighteenth century, two men, Jonathan Boucher and Thomas Paine, decided to voice their beliefs and later became well known for their arguments. Though Boucher stated strong points about why remaining loyal to Great Britain was the correct choice, Paine’s argument was more appealing because he clarified that America would offer various inviting benefits that Britain was not able to provide. Paine compelled people because of the clarity in his argument. He avoided utilizing language that people were incapable of understanding, and he made his points sound appealing by using “a new style of political writing” (#31, p.95). Paine informed
In 1993, Scott Russell Sanders responds to an essay written by Salman Rushdie, to counteract the idea of “people who transplant themselves in ideas rather than places.” Sanders provides the American public with acknowledgements of counter-arguments, historical references, and patriotic appeals to convey his message that “movement is inherently good” isn’t as it seems from Rushdie’s point of view. Sanders respects Rushdie’s views on migration and uses them to strengthen his argument through countering Rushdie’s views. Sanders cites Rushdie’s claim that “migrants must, of necessity, make a new imaginative relationship with the world, because of the loss of familiar habitats” (47-50). Sanders acknowledges Rushdie’s view on migrants opening up to new ideas due to them leaving their homelands.
Norcross believe that one should not eat meat that is raised in a factory. He uses an argument about torturing puppies and eating their brains. Although his argument about Fred and his extreme cruelty to feel the sensation of eating chocolate is cruel, it puts one in a state of mind to pay close attention to his point. What is his point? Eating animals that are raised in factories are just is cruel as torturing puppies for one’s own pleasure.
So my issue with Peter Singer's argument is it's infallible to tell someone that they should not be spending money on luxuries, when they themselves are buying tickets to see a movie. I believe in "practice what you preach" and "actions speak louder than words". Which really puts me off about what Singer was trying to communicate. Now I understand his thoughts of trying to challenge people to not be selfish and think inwardly. But in that process, he himself fell prey to his own vices.
Terry Tempest Williams constructs a convincing argument for why the US government should be honest with its citizens. She stresses the importance of this “transparency” in the government with particular reference to the deadly repercussions of nuclear testing. The US government conducted these nuclear tests because the United States wanted to remain superior in nuclear weaponry around the globe. After World War II ended, the Cold War began, and the United States needed to defend itself and its citizens from the threat of communism from the Soviet Union. “The Korean War was raging.
Why College Matters to God In the introductory chapter of Why College Matters to God, the author focused on what a worldview is and why it is important in a Christian college setting. According to the author, “A worldview is a framework of ideas, values, and beliefs about the basic makeup of the world.” One point made was that worldviews are more about actions, not just beliefs.
To have Integrity a person must adhere to certain morals and standards that they can build themselves off of. Say a vegetarian who finds themselves in a restaurant with no vegetarian options, they would have the integrity to refuse to eat at this establishment and not give up there morals. Integrity however plays a large role in Bernard Williams’ article Against Utilitarianism, he elaborates on the idea that Utilitarianism is in direct violation with one’s integrity. It is violated by something called “negative responsibility” which is the notion that the outcome of an event is on the hands of anyone who could have participated. To display this fault in Utilitarianism Williams brings two examples to the table, one involving George and another
Bernard Williams’ essay, A Critique of Utilitarianism, launches a rather scathing criticism of J. J. C. Smart’s, An Outline of a System of Utilitarian ethics. Even though Williams claims his essay is not a direct response to Smart’s paper, the manner in which he constantly refers to Smart’s work indicates that Smart’s version of Utilitarianism, referred to as act-Utilitarianism, is the main focus of Williams’ critique. Smart illustrates the distinction between act-Utilitarianism and rule-Utilitarianism early on in his work. He says that act-Utilitarianism is the idea that the rightness of an action depends on the total goodness of an action’s consequences.
