Free Movement of Goods Article 34 and 36 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Free Movement of Goods Article 34 and 36 - Essay Example The aspect of measures can also include the inaction of a State to stop private individuals’ acts, which prevent the free movement of goods (The College of Law 2012, p200). The ECJ described the expression of quantitative restriction as measures that amount to partial or total restraint of, based on the circumstances, exports, imports or goods in transit. There are two laws that apply in this category but in this case, the most applicable law is the outright ban enforced by a Member State (Spain) on imports from another Member State (The College of Law 2012, p201). Free Pork Ltd plans to begin selling its products in Spain have been hampered by the law that requires the sale of sausages produced from humanely reared pigs to be checked by Spanish Sausage Checkers (SSC). If the sausages are not checked by SSC, the law prohibits its sales in Spain. However, the process of verifying whether the sausages have those conditions is usually lengthy. Therefore, Free Pork can challenge t his Spanish law. There is also a law that requires the name of the company not to use words that imply health or fitness. Free Pork can also challenge this law because it restricts the importation of goods and can affect the brand image of the company. The SSC is a form of a licencing system, which according to the articles, subjects the import of merchandises to the condition of getting an import licence. Even in situations where the application for an import licence is regarded a mere formality; it is a Quantitative Restriction. This is because is simply a mechanism in which imports can be restricted. In practice, it is very rare for the Member States laws to result to quantitative restrictions. The ban on exports or imports between Member States is only found in unusual circumstances (The College of Law 2012, p201). Therefore, failure by Free Pork Ltd to meet the conditions set by the Spanish laws is an outright ban on exporting sausages to this Member State. As stated earlier, t he ban only happens in unusual circumstances, and thus, Free Pork can challenge the law because an unusual circumstance lacks, which prohibits it from exporting the goods to Spain. The directive was important in developing a brief wording of the Article 34 TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) and it continues to offer guidance on the measures that can constitute a breach of Article 34 TFEU prohibitions. Article 2(1) of the directive describes a class of measures (for instance, national laws) that treat imported goods and domestic goods differently. They are commonly referred to as distinctly applicable measures. Article 3 of the directive describes a class of national laws that apply equally to imported and domestic products. These laws have a restrictive impact and they are commonly referred to as indistinctly applicable (The College of Law 2012, p202). Therefore, the directive classifies both indistinctly and distinctly applicable measures as measures that have a n impact equivalent to restrictions on imports. From the statement, it can be stated that a national law can become MEQR (Measures having Equivalent effect to a Quantitative Restriction) regardless of whether it â€Å"discriminates against imported products or appears to treat them in the same way as domestic products but is in

Causation and Intervening Acts in Criminal Law Essay Example for Free

Causation and Intervening Acts in Criminal Law Essay According to Robin J.A. in Malette v Shulman[1], â€Å"the right of self-determination which underlies the doctrine of informed consent also obviously encompasses the right to refuse medical treatment. A competent adult is generally entitled to reject a specific treatment or all treatment, or to select an alternate form of treatment, even if the decision may entail risks as serious as death†¦The doctrine of informed consent is plainly intended to ensure the freedom of individuals to make choices concerning their medical care. For this freedom to be meaningful, people must have the right to make choices that accord with their own values regardless of how unwise or foolish those choices may appear to others.†[2] R v Blaue[3], a famous causation case in criminal law, brings to foreground a thought-provoking debate about whether an individual’s religious beliefs and other psychological values could be included in the ‘thin skull’ rule and whether the refusal to take lifesaving medical treatment breaks the chain of causation that exists between the defendant’s wrongdoing and the purported outcome of that wrongdoing. The facts of the case are as follows Blaue, the defendant, stabbed a woman numerous times after she refused to have sexual intercourse with him. She was a Jehovah’s Witness and was therefore not in favour of blood transfusions. After the stabbing, she was taken to a hospital and was told that she urgently needed to have a blood transfusion, without which she would die. Owing to her religious beliefs, she refused to consent with the suggested treatment. As a result, she died in the hospital. While giving the judgment, Lawton L.J. stated that â€Å"those who use violence on other people must take their victims as they find them.†[4] This, according to him, not only includes victims’ physical characteristics, but also their emotional, psychological and spiritual values and beliefs. This decision has proved to be extremely controversial and gives rise to various debates. Most understand the rationale behind the court’s judgment and agree that the defendant is , as a matter of fact, criminally liable for causing the injury. After all, the victim was at the receiving end of several stabbings, imposed by the defendant, who clearly had an intention of causing serious bodily harm, if not death. However, some feel that the death was the result of the victim’s refusal to carry out the blood transfusion. They feel that the defendant should not be responsible for the unusual, irrational and unjustified religious beliefs of the victim. In addition, the defendant could not have possibly foreseen her backing out of receiving medical treatment in the hospital. The Blaue case creates many doubts about the doctrine of causation in criminal law. Was Blaue responsible for the victim’s death or was it an act of the victim, since it was her decision to refuse a blood transfusion? If we conclude that Blaue is indeed responsible for her death, another question comes to mind: Why is the victim not responsible for her own death? First and foremost, it is a fact that the victim sustained injuries due to numerous stabbings and it was Blaue who had inflicted them upon her. Her not taking any steps to save herself did not instigate her death. Secondly, there is an application of the ‘thin skull’ rule in this case. An important principle of the law of causation is that defendants must ‘take their victims as they find them.’ This means that if a defendant pushes someone and because they have a thin skull, they crack their head and die, the defendant will be liable for causing their death. The Court of Appeal in Blaue indicated that the decision could be seen as a ‘thin skull’ example. It was established that the ‘thin skull’ rule goes beyond the physical characteristics of individuals, also including a person’s moral and religious beliefs. Thirdly, the victim’s decision to not undergo blood transfusion, which would have clearly saved her life, was based on profound religious views and hence, did not constitute a novus actus interveniens. That is, it was not an intervening act. Nevertheless, the judgment has been critisised on various grounds. Why was the vict im’s decision to refuse medical treatment seen as a subsisting condition rather than an intervening cause? Would it have been the same if the refusal was due to a fear of needles or the fact that she could not bear the pain and thought dying was the only way to end the agony? A decision steered by religious beliefs is a moral choice, that is, a free decision. Why should the defendant endure the responsibility if the victim makes a free choice to kill herself any more than he should if, weakened by the injury, the victim took a controversial choice to end her life with dignity rather than enduring pain and life-long humiliation? Thus, to understand the Blaue case, we not only need to take into account causation in criminal law, but also the two doctrines which apply to the concept of proximate causation; the ‘thin skull’ rule and the principle of novus actus interveniens. Causation In criminal law, individuals that are guilty of a crime are penalised for the harm they cause if both the physical and the mental element of committing an offence is present. There must be a valid connection between an individual’s conduct and the result alleged to constitute an offence. The causation requirement attaches criminal responsibility to those individuals whose conduct is sufficient enough to bring about serious bodily injury or death. In Hallett[5], the accused assaulted a man and left him on a beach. Over the next few hours, the man drowned. The court concluded that Hallett’s contribution to his death was more than minimal to hold him responsible for it. However, in Blaue, the defendant was found to be the substantial and operating cause of the woman’s death. That is, his stabbings is why she was admitted to a hospital in the first place. ‘Thin skull’ rule The defendant must take the victim as he finds him or her and this means ‘the whole man and not just the physical man.’ This rule applies irrespective of whether the defendant is aware of the condition in the victim. On one hand, there are instances where the victim suffers from a pre-existing condition which renders him or her more vulnerable to injuries. On the other hand, there are cases where the victim does not take medical treatment to heal wounds and suffers serious harm as a result. A defendant cannot escape liability for a victim’s death as a result of an abnormality pres ent in the victim or an internal, subsisting belief of the victim. It is his fault that he caused harm in the first place. In R v Hayward[6], a man chased his wife into the street shouting threats and kicked her. She collapsed and died from an unusual thyroid condition which made her susceptible to physical exertion and fear. He was convicted of manslaughter because he aggravated her pre-existing condition by physically assaulting her. This case is a good example of the ‘thin skull’ rule applying to the physical characteristics of an individual. The fact that he could not possibly foresee her dying is not an excuse. However, can a victims religious beliefs constitute a thin skull? With reference to Blaue, according to Hart and Honorà ©: â€Å"The question is not whether it is reasonable to believe that blood transfusion is wrong, but whether a person whose life is in danger can reasonably be expected to abandon a firmly held religious belief. The answer must be surely no.†[7] Religious beliefs and convictions are an internal cha racteristic of individuals, which is deeply rooted in their way of thinking and life. It is intrinsic to every person. Hence, people cannot be held legally accountable for possessing such sentiments. Novus Actus Interveniens The general principle is that an intervention by a third party will break the chain of causation if it is ‘free, deliberate and informed.’ In R v Kennedy[8], Kennedy prepared a syringe for the victim, who injected himself and died due to an overdose. Kennedy was convicted of unlawful manslaughter. The act of the victim, in injecting himself with the drug, was an intentional, free, deliberate and an informed action. Thus, the drug dealer is not guilty of unlawful manslaughter. In contrast, in R v Dear[9], the defendant slashed the victim repeatedly with a knife. The victim died two days later. The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, arguing that the chain of causation had been broken because the victim had committed suicide either by reopening his wounds or because he had failed to take steps to stop the blood flow after the wounds had reopened them selves. The court dismissed the appeal and held that the real question was whether the injuries inflicted by the defendant were a substantial and operating cause of the death. The victims death resulted from excessive bleeding from the artery, which was triggered by the defendant when he attacked the victim. In Blaue, the refusal to get treatment does not break the chain of causation, despite the fact that it was informed and deliberate, because having such a belief is involuntary and requisite. According to Hart and Honorà ©, â€Å"the question to be decided is whether the decision to refuse treatment is not merely deliberate and informed but also a free one. In view of the high value attached in our society to the matters of conscience, the victim, though free to accept any belief she wished, is not thereafter free to abandon her chosen belief merely because she finds herself in a situation in which her life may otherwise be in danger. So it was not her free act to refuse a transfusion.†[10] It was reasonably foreseeable that a Jehovah’s Witness would refuse a blood transfusion. The victim had no choice due to her religion. It was not a free decision because, in a way, she was bound by it. It could be said that she simply let the wound take its natural course. Moreover, the death was caused due to the bleeding arising from the penetration of the lungs, which was brought about by the stabbings. The substantial and operating cause test does not take into account a victim’s distinct characteristic. So long as victim died of internal bleeding due to the wound administered by Blaue, we need not ask further questions. However, if the principle of ‘taking your victims as you find them, including their beliefs’ is applied to more cases, it would have varying results. Let’s assume that X assaults Y. Y ends up committing suicide because she is mentally unstable or because she hopes to get X behind bars. Another example could be that X shoots Y on his left leg. Y could go to the hospital but decides to remove the bullet by himself. Unable to do so and still refusing medical treatment, he dies. Should X ‘take’ Y’s unstable, vengeful or negligent behaviour? Is that justified or is it unfair? [ 1 ]. Malette v Shulman [1991] 2 Med LR 162. [ 2 ]. Jerome Edmund Bickenback, Canadian cases in the philosophy of law, 4th edition, at 160 to 161. [ 3 ]. R v Blaue [1975] 1 WLR 1411. [ 4 ]. Michael T. Molan, Sourcebook on Criminal Law, 2nd edition, at 67. [ 5 ]. Hallett [1969] SASR 141. [ 6 ]. R v Hayward (1908) 21 Cox 692. [ 7 ]. Denis Klimchuk, Causation, Thin Skulls and Equality (1998) at pg. 126. [ 8 ]. R v Kennedy [2007] UKHL 38. [ 9 ]. R v Dear [1996] Crim LR 595. [ 10 ]. Alan Norrie, Crime, Reason and History: A Critical Introduction to Criminal Law, at pg. 143.

A1 Steak Sauce Case Study

A1 Steak Sauce Case Study Chef Brookes of England originally created A1 Steak Sauce in 1824. He was chef to King George IV of England with his partner Chef Henderson Brand. Legend has it the king was so delighted with the sauce that he declared it A1 and thus the name was born (Kerin Peterson, 2010). In 1830, Chef Brand stole the recipe from Chef Brookes and began commercial production under the Brand Co. label in 1831 (Wikipedia, 2011). Today, A1 Steak Sauce is owned and manufactured by Kraft Foods (Kerin Peterson). It is the leader in the steak sauce category with a 54 percent dollar share and 46 percent volume share (Kerin Peterson, 2010). It has high brand awareness and asserts, Nine out of ten steak houses serve A1 (Kerin Peterson, 2010). This case will provide a summary and analysis of A1 Steak Sauce with an emphasis on pricing strategies as well as an assessment of the companys strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Problem Identification Summer holidays such as Memorial Day and Forth of July are essential for steak sauce brands because this is when a significant percentage of products are sold. Approximately 10 percent of A1 Steak Sauce volume is sold during each holiday week (Kein Peterson, 2010). During these holidays, advertising competition is intense because retailers support only one brand in a particular category during a promotional week (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Lawrys, a direct competitor to A1, is promoting a new steak sauce product beginning April 2003 (Kerin Peterson, 2010). They want to aggressively advertise the new product with Publix on Memorial Day (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Publix is the largest grocery store chain in the United States (Kerin Peterson, 2010). A1 usually advertises with Publix on Memorial Day because this results in a majority of product sale. If Lawrys is allowed to advertise with Publix, then A1 will not meet its 2003 fiscal profit target. Chuck Smith, senior brand manager for A1, scheduled a meeting with his business team to assess the situation and formulate a plan (Kerin Peterson, 2010). They will discuss marketing and pricing strategies in response to Lawrys new product introduction. A1 wants to retain position as market leader in the steak sauce category. Case Analysis Kraft Foods is the largest food company in the United States and the second largest food company in the world (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Kraft Foods has a portfolio of 67 major brands, each with over $100 million in annual sales (Kerin Peterson). Their portfolio includes categories such as coffee, frozen pizza, cheese, candy, cereal, mayonnaise, and barbecue sauce (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Kraft Foods direct competitors include Unilever, General Mills, PepsiCo, and Nestle (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Unilever is the largest consumer product company in the world, which owns and manufactures Lawrys (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Kraft Foods and Unilever aggressively compete in several food categories such as salad dressings, mayonnaise, and marinades (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Unilever has $50 billion in sales annually (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The company portfolio includes products such as Dove, Slim-Fast, Vaseline, Close-Up, Breyers, and Axe (Unilever, 2011). The companys financial goal is for 200 of their brands to have $1 billion in annual sales (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Although Unilevers revenue is $18,547 million more than Kraft Foods, their income after taxes is $957 million less than Kraft Foods (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Kraft Foods spends 15 percent of operating revenue on advertising (Kerin Peterson, 2010). A1 advertising focuses on television spots running throughout the year (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Customer promotions make up five percent of operating revenue (Kerin Peterson, 2010). In addition, A1 supports a partnership with beef producers (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Retail margins are 30 percent for all A1 flavors (Kerin Peterson, 2010). A1 has increased its price over the years and has a gross profit margin of 83 percent (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Ten percent of revenue goes towards in-store promotional efforts and trade promotions (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The retail price for A1 Steak Sauce is $4.99 for a 10-ounce bottle (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The A1 line includes a number of flavors, which are original, sweet tangy, bold spicy, thick hearty, and smoky mesquite (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The majority of sales are made of A1 original flavor (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The retail price for Lawrys Steak Sauce is $3.99 for an 11-ounce bottle (Kerin Peterson, 2010). However, Lawrys is not A1s biggest competitor. The retail price for A1s biggest competitor, Heinz 57, is $4.79 for a 10-ounce bottle but the product is different in taste and appearance (Appendix A). Heinz does not market directly against A1; instead, they advertise a multifaceted brand message (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Lawrys Steak Sauce will place enormous marketing weight to promote its new product (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The company will allocate $20 million on advertising during the summer months (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Although Lawrys shelf pricing is significantly lower than A1 and Heinz, loyalty in steak sauce brand is high with limited competition (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Identifying the Root Problem Components A1 Steak Sauce has several issues that will affect marketing and pricing strategies. The issues are brand awareness, pricing strategies, product promotions, financial allocation for advertising, and fiscal profit margins. First, A1 Steak Sauce is the best selling brand in the category. It is the original steak sauce in the industry, which is dominated by a few competitors. The company holds 54 percent of the steak sauce in dollars (Kerin Peterson, 2010). The remaining competitors make up 46 percent of steak sauce dollars divided between them. Introduction of Lawrys may reduce A1s percentage instead of the remaining competitors percentage. Second, Publix may let Lawrys advertise on Memorial Day. Lawrys will offer a two-for-$5 promotional price point (Kerin Peterson, 2010). If Lawrys enters into an alliance with Publix, then revenue of A1 Steak sauce will significantly decrease. A1 sells about 10 percent of volume on Memorial Day weekend (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Third, it is standard practice that manufacturers cover the cost of in-store price reductions in order for retailers to keep their margins constant on a percentage basis (Kerin Peterson, 2010). Price matching is an option but will significantly decrease profit margins. In addition, existing customers may hold out purchasing A1 until the price drops again. Evaluation of Alternatives A1 Steak Sauce has several alternatives to evaluate, which are categorized as offensive or defensive strategies. Offensive strategies include encirclement, flanking maneuver, or frontal assault. Defensive strategies include decreasing the incentive for attack or increasing structural barriers. In addition, the company can formulate a novel marketing concept in reply to Lawrys. First, encirclement may immerse Lawrys with product availability, strategic pricing, and variety of flavors. Second, a flanking maneuver will attack Lawrys weakest area and capitalize from the strategy. Third, a frontal assault will cause A1 to price match and copy the promotions of Lawrys. A risky maneuver is to decrease the incentive for attack. A1 Steak Sauce will considerably drop its prices, which will slash Lawrys prospects of future revenue. However, it will decrease A1s prospects of future revenue as well. Increasing structural barriers will retard Lawrys marketing and advertising strategies. A1 Steak Sauce can enter into formal agreements with distributers and suppliers or be involved in backward vertical integration. A1 will try to decrease costs by increasing scale economies. The company can introduce new products into the market, which will arrest entry by competitors. A1 Steak Sauce can negotiate ideal shelf placement and sustain a greater percentage of space in the steak sauce category. The company can procure end cap displays, specifically near the meat and beef aisles. In addition, the company can collaborate with major restaurant chains to place A1 on every table and include it in the ingredients list. Consumers who are indifferent to steak sauce brand may purchase based on price alone. Acquiring new consumers will be financially advantageous because of loyalty to their brand. A1 Steak Sauce can offer samples of steak sauce in supermarket kiosks. Capturing the palate of new consumers through samples can result in longitudinal sales. SWOT Analysis (S)trengths A1 Steak Sauces high quality and brand awareness distinguishes it from the competition, which is limited to Heinz 57, Lawrys, and various private label brands. The company enjoys the largest percentage of market share in the steak sauce industry. A1 holds the title of being the original steak sauce in the industry. Consumers highly associate A1 with barbeque foods such as steak. Nine out of ten steak houses serve A1 (Kerin Peterson, 2010). (W)eaknesses A1 Steak Sauce is strongly associated with steak and not other meats. This makes brand extension difficult. Past efforts in brand extension were unsuccessful. A1 is used during meals that include hamburger and steak, which is infrequent. Combined with a small serving size, a bottle of A1 will last a considerable amount of time. (O)pportunities A1 Steak Sauce can strategically market and advertise during television cooking programs. There are dozens of cooking shows in addition to a television network. Forming partnerships with television shows will be paramount in successful brand awareness. A1 is available worldwide. The company can market and advertise in other countries and languages. This will guarantee brand awareness at an international level. (T)hreats A1 Steak Sauces most immediate threat is the introduction of Lawrys. A1 does not want to be runner-up on Memorial Day advertising. Lawrys offers an 11-ounce bottle of steak sauce for $3.99 compared to A1s 10-ounce bottle for $4.99. If beef prices continue to rise, consumers will be price-conscious on related condiments. Recommendation A1 Steak Sauce has a competitive advantage due to large profit margins, brand awareness, and availability at retail stores and restaurants. The large profit margin allows A1 to adjust their pricing strategies during the summer holidays. However, price matching can be sabotaging because existing consumers may hold out to purchase until the prices drop. Effective pricing strategies are essential for attracting new consumers to the A1 Steak Sauce brand. The company should advertise to new consumers because these individuals are more likely to purchase other brands. Offering a bundled package with meats will keep profit margins high and add to the appeal of a premier product. A core competency is A1s ability to have a recognized and distinguished brand position. Existing consumers are not likely to switch brands on one of the biggest grilling days of the year. Existing consumers enjoy the flavor of A1 and, therefore, will be skeptical experimenting with other brands. New consumers may purchase a steak sauce brand based solely on the lowest price. Capturing the palate of new consumers will be possible by offering samples of A1 Steak Sauce prior to the summer holidays. A1 has strong sustained relationships with retail stores and restaurants. This gives A1 priority in advertising during the summer holidays. In addition, if Lawrys advertises on Memorial Day but does not have expected sales, then retail stores will lose revenue as well. A1 Steak Sauce is the leading brand in the industry. The company can price it higher than its competitors due to its high quality and brand awareness. Decreasing the price will reduce the perception of quality, which is paramount to the brand.

Boss Mustang :: essays research papers

1997 329 BOSS Coupe The 1997 329 BOSS Coupe is great. It has excellent ratings from consumer magazines. The BOSS can go from 0-60 in 3.2 seconds. 0-60 in 3.2 seconds is outstanding compared to many sport ¡Ã‚ ¦s cars. This car was just released to customers like ourselves 2 weeks ago. One-thousand of these have already been sold around the United States.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Consumer Magazine rated this car so high that people were calling the publisher of the magazine and asking if it was a joke. The editor said it was no joke, and I ¡Ã‚ ¦ll tell you the same. The BOSS comes with a V-10 engine which was tested and tested at the BOSS plant to be top of the line. This great car also comes with a 6-speed manual transmission.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I would like to hear from you what you think of the 329 BOSS Coupe. Here ¡Ã‚ ¦s some statistics on the 329 BOSS. „h V-10 Engine „h 425 horsepower „h 0-60 in 3.2 seconds „h 6-speed manual transmission „h composite body „h much, much more   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The 329 BOSS is not a big car at all. In fact the BOSS is short. The reason the car is so short and arrow-dynamic is so the car can get more speed when flying down the road. The BOSS is a 4-seater with comfortable space for children. I myself have been privileged enough to drive this car. The first thing I noticed when driving the car was the smoothness it had. This car was extremely light, 2164 pounds. Motor World has examined this car from front to back and give it a perfect 10. Every magazine I ¡Ã‚ ¦ve looked at has rated this car no lower than a 8.5 which is still extremely high. This car itself has the looks, drive, and speed to out perform any major sports car on the market.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I would ask any of my readers to go to their local BOSS dealer and get a test drive on this car. I know you ¡Ã‚ ¦ll love it as much as me and more. I ¡Ã‚ ¦m encouraging you to tell your friends about this car. and how great it is.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Oops! I haven ¡Ã‚ ¦t told you the top speed for this car. It can top 270 and has even been known to get in the 280 ¡Ã‚ ¦s.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Have I given you the impression that this is the best car of the year? If not then please write me a letter telling me what you don ¡Ã‚ ¦t understand or believe.

Lucretia Mott on Women’s Rights

Lucretia Mott’s Discourse on Women Speech Bibliographical Entry: â€Å"Lucretia Mott Speech. † Lucretia Mott Speech. N. p. , n. d. Web. 13 Mar. 2013. Synopsis of Argument: The general argument made by Lucretia Mott in her speech Discourse on Women, on December 17, 1849, is that women are hidden from certain parts of society. More specifically, she argues that women let their guards down when approached with a decisive man. She writes, â€Å"she needs all the encouragement she can receive. † In this passage, Mott suggests that women need the encouragement to stand up for themselves against men.In conclusion, Mott’s belief is that women should fully be a part of society and should not be afraid of the men to do so. Claims supporting his purpose: * In her speech declaring women in society, Lucretia Mott argues that women need to stand against men. Mott asserts women that men are not the only rulers, women can be too. The women need to â€Å"take a stand,â₠¬  and fight to stay on society and get the freedom they want. Mott used the power of God to motivate the women and get the attention of men, Lucretia Mott Background- Research Bibliographical Entry: â€Å"Lucretia Mott. † History. com.A&E Television Networks, 1996. Web. 13 Mar. 2013. How relevant to the speech: Mott was raised in a Quaker community that provided strong role models for her. Mott advocated antislavery and boycotted all products of slave labor. She helped found the Philadelphia Female Anti-Slavery Society in 1833 and served as its president. This sort of activity in reform groups was immediate departure for women of her era. When denied a seat in 1840 at the World Anti-Slavery Convention in London on account of her sex, Mott preached her feelings of female equality outside the conference hall.During her London visit, she befriended Elizabeth Cady Stanton. During the summer of 1848 she and Stanton organized the meeting at Seneca Falls, New York, where the Ameri can women's rights movement was launched. Mott was elected president of the group in 1852. Mott's feminist philosophy was outlined in her Discourse on Women (1850). She believed women's roles within society reflected limited education rather than innate inferiority. She advocated equal economic opportunity and supported women's equal political status, including suffrage.

Humanism During the Rennaissan essays

Humanism During the Rennaissan essays The Renaissance was an incredibly important turning point in Western Intellectual and Cultural Tradition. All of these changes centered on the idea of Humanism in which, people became less God Centered and more Human-centered. I have narrowed down these changes, and will discuss in detail, these changes in three major categories: Political, Education, and the Humanism of Arts. The major political changes of the Renaissance were from the old Feudal System of the Middle Ages into a more flexible and liberal class system. This was most noticeable in Italy (particularly in Florence), where the divisions consisted of the old rich, the new rich nobles, the middle class, and the lower middle class (The poor didn't count). This created great conflict between these social divisions. The new rich consisted of successful merchants, capitalists, and bankers innovators of new systems of making money. The Humanism philosophy was also a very popular with the people and many political leaders rose to high positions with support of these ideals. Three humanists even became chancellors of Florence they used their rhetorical skills to strongly rally the people of Florence against their enemies. The great changes in Education of the Renaissance were inspired at first, by the desire of Humanists to be wise and to speak eloquently. The idea of useful education for the people, and very "well rounded" schooling in many different fields of learning were the new defined goals of Renaissance education. People all over (Especially in Florence) revived the Ancient Greek studies of Plato, Aristotle, and many others. People began seriously questioning what these people said and re-developed the "Scientific Theory" in which you didn't just accept whatever was said to you, but you tested the truth of it. In the area of Humanism and the Arts, Renaissance Artists no longer were subordinate to the interests and the values of ...