Search results

You forgot the mooting clique -- baby-barristers who march around advocating :P I wouldn't say powerful. Large and annoying, yes. But powerful?

No, you can't. The law library is now on lower campus, in the new law building.

I think the current laws are perfectly fine. The suggestions by the ACF are rather naive and impractical. Parents need to be able to discipline their kids, or else they'll have little control over their behaviour. Parents need to have the ability to raise children in line with appropriate...

Campus aesthetics - Having attended both universities, the external campus aesthetics at USyd would be my preference. Whether it be enjoying the sun while overlooking the lawn or sitting under an arch in the quadrangle, the environment is very pleasant. Although, it takes forever to get from one...

Why must people who disagree with you be ALP/Greens voters? Not only is it a poor attempt to, again, attack the person, but it is very simplistic. Most people look at the policies on the table and vote for whoever they think will do a good job, notwithstanding the fact they belong to a...

But it is not relevant to the truth of the assertions, which is the issue. I'm not interested in Greer's motives, I'm interested in whether what she's saying is true or not. What you're saying falls into the trap of attacking the person. I stopped reading after that. I'm not going to bother...

Someone had the guts to say it:

As you know, the Commonwealth government can only make laws that it has been given the power to make under s 51 of the constitution. Sometimes an individual, business or State will challenge a Commonwealth law, claiming that the Federal Parliament did not have the power to pass it, since it is...

Re: Best rep out of the following? The teaching quality is similar among the top law schools, but it is very difficult to evaluate without having studied law at each place. Having studied at UNSW I can tell you the quality is excellent there. As for reputation, USyd and UNSW are widely regarded...

Her motives aren't really relevant. The real issue is whether there is any merit in the content of her assertions. Again, it is not a reaction merely to Irwin, but the placing of him on a pedestal to typify him as the ideal Australian. Hence it is the public sentiment which she is reacting to...

Because she is reacting to the completely over-the-top public reaction. It is largely the events that have transpired after his death (namely people painting him as some sort of quintessential Aussie icon or hero) which have irritated her, and some others.

Personally, I thought Germaine Greer's article was warranted and I agree with it. I don't think it was appropriate releasing it so soon after Irwin's death though, because the family is still going through very recent grief.

The problem with that idea is that the trial itself is punishment. Litigation is often extremely lengthy, costly and life-draining.

No problem :)

No-one's perfect :P

I'm okay with the proposal, but only: (a) in very limited circumstances where cogent fresh evidence is available; and (b) the evidence is highly probative of guilt; and (c) where a court decides on the strength of such a case, and whether to allow it.

Einstein: "I do not believe in the immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it."

1. It's irrational. 2. It causes widespread detrimental conflict. 3. It destroys the potential for self-actualisation in the only likely life we have and inhibits people from living their life properly by placing emphasis on the "next" (non-existent) life.

I wonder why.

Hardly surprising. Very sad for his family though.