How does Elizabeth Kingdom "Legal recognition of a woman's right to choose relate to criminology?
362943
Little more information?
392874
The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy.
535780
Under the common law, many crimes were not set out in statutes.  \nSex with animals, a crime against nature, was such a common law crime, and would pre-date Columbus.  \n\nMale homosexual sex was, probably, also a common law "crime against nature" but was specifically prohibited by a statute passed during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, also predating Columbus.  The English colonies in America were, of course, subject to this law.\n\nInterestingly, Female homosexual sex was not prohibited by the Elizabeth I law.  I have seen published accounts which state that when she read the proposed statute (which did include a prohibition of female homosexual acts) the queen stated something like "ladies do not do such things" and required that those provisions be taken out of the statute.\n\nIf you need more information than this, the best place would be a law school library which may have early books of statutes from the 1780s through 1800s.
578426
Charlotte E. Ray\n\nIn February, 1872 she received her law degree and passed the bar examination for the District of Columbia on April 23, 1872. She was the third women and the first black women to receive this honor of becoming a lawyer. She is an inspiration to all woman who have goals.
1069169
Check Megans Law website.
502079
What do you mean, legally entitled to commit theft? We men just have to be, more strict and controlling now days, to keep women from deciving, betrayi8ng and stealing. It would help to catch them red handed, too.
955909
Depends who is giving/assessing the justification.  Many people of both genders consider that their offending behaviour is to some extent justified ("I had to do it", "I didn't have any choice", "there was no other way", "you'd have done the same thing", etc, are commonly expressed views).\n\nOffences which might be viewed by a court as in some measure justified are those involving self-defence.  There are cases of women who kill a violent partner after years of physical, psychological and sexual abuse receiving more lenient sentences than murder would otherwise warrant because the extreme provocation and the need for her to protect herself and/or her children is such a potent mitigating factor.
139121
yes, it is elizabeth blackwell...and thank you for standing up for women with careers.  I'm a police officer and love it!  A women can do any man's job just as good, if not better
428796
She commited a crime.
533639
Elizabeth Cady Stanton (November 12, 1815 – October 26, 1902) was a social activist, and a leading figure of the early women's rights movement in the United States. With her husband, Henry Stanton and cousin, Gerrit Smith, Elizabeth Cady Stanton was also active in the anti-slavery Abolitionist movement. Stanton had a strong friendship with abolitionist and former slave Frederick Douglass.\n\nStanton was an outspoken supporter, and speech writer, of the 19th century temperance movement. She and Susan B. Anthony were instrumental in founding the short-lived Woman's State Temperance Society (1852-53). During her presidency of the organization, she scandalized many supporters by suggesting that drunkenness be made sufficient cause for divorce. She was a strong critic of religion in general and Christianity in particular, which distanced her from the religiously oriented Woman's Christian Temperance Union. She also addressed other issues including the guardianship of children, reformation of divorce laws, and the economic health of the family.\n\nIn a view different from many modern activists, Stanton believed that abortion was infanticide (The Revolution, I, No. 5 (February 5, 1868), 1). She addressed the issue in an 1873 letter to Julia Ward Howe, recorded in Howe's diary at Harvard University Library, and in editions of the newsletter The Revolution. Stanton wrote, "When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." She suggested that solutions to abortion would be found, at least in part, in the elevation and enfranchisement of women.\n\nalso the mother of of a daughter named harriot.
1138963
Under the common law of England, an unmarried woman could own property, make a contract, or sue and be sued. But a married woman, defined as being one with her husband, gave up her name, and virtually all her property came under her husband's control.\n\nIs this what you're asking about?
239878
A 'right' to live is something granted by society to those choosing to live in that society BY THE RULES OF THAT SOCIETY. If they choose to break those rules, then society should have the right to take away the right to live in that society (basically what prison does). I favor the old British Empire means of 'transportation', except child molesters should be 'transported' to the bottom of the ocean without a submarine.
1023722
Unfortunately men are perceived as more aggressive, even brutal sometimes when it comes to sexual gratification. Some really sick men even have sex with the dead. Women on the other hand are seen as 'weaker' vessels? So they are given the benefit of the doubt ...maybe she was 'over powered' ! The circumstances of each case differs of course . I doubt whether such molestations from women were ever envisaged. But I agree with you its disgusting whoever does it. As the frequency of arrests mounts for women the existing laws that do not adequately address the issue would definitely have to be amended. I know there are no separate laws for men and women. But by the judges shed their personal prejudices and be bold enough to apply punishment across board evenly.
169031
if you break the law in the middle east there are very harsh punishments. for example cutting of your hand or leaking a red hot spoon or sometimes death. women are treated differently because their culture does not recognize womens rights.
871445
This is exactly the area of law which a senior policeman in Wales is now questioning, and the pressure groups and tabloids will have a field-day over it.\n\nCasting aside law for a moment, there are other aspects which are highly relevant. The first is the biological clock, which now moves faster than it used to do. Once children reach a certain age, which we recognise as puberty, their physical shape and appearance changes......widening hips and enlarged breasts in the female, and muscles and a bulging groin with boys. That age has dropped dramatically in the western world, due to medical care and adequate supplies of good food.\n\nTHOSE are the very things which trigger a response; usually in the opposite sex, but not always, by any means. Thus, even girls as young as 14 may appear very adult and become sexually very attractive; often looking much older than they really are.\n\nBoys mature more slowly, but by 15, they are rapidly becoming adults, and quite a few boys at this age are magnificently attractive creatures ........and by attractive, I mean "hot."\n\nAs human beings, unless there is something wrong with us, that basic attraction "turns us on" (for lack of a better term), and that is exactly as it should be if we are truly animal/human beings.\n\nIn fact, in the animal world, the older males would fight over the right to mate with the youngest possible female capable of giving birth, and our own responses derive from that same animal background.\n\nSo, in effect, the most basic law is the law of the jungle, and we cannot escape that.\n\nReturning to the area of law, then the business of actually creating law is influenced by the type of society in which we live, and at the moment, both America and England have a bit of an obsession with paedophilia; even if they constantly misuderstand the term.\n\nHowever, other cultures and societies do not conform to the same values, and often have quite different laws.\n\nEven in europe, the age of consent varies between 12 and 18, depending on the actual nature of the sexual act and the ages of the individuals concerned. Holland may seem liberal, but the very low age of 12 is set ONLY for those who are under the age of 16, which is a very sophisticated way of protecting children from older, predatory people. Thus, the questioner would have been breaking the law even in Holland to-day, but no-one would probably have batted an eyelid about it, in reality.\n\nIn the Czech Republic, I believe the age of consent is still 15, but sex is not something they seem to worry about too much, even at that young age.\n\nThe only countries I can personally think of, where the questioner would have been guiltless, would have been Albania perhaps 5 to 10 years ago, where the age of consent was 14, possibly in Japan, where I believe the age of consent is 13 (it may have changed) and in China. It may be the case that 14 is also to be found in certain South America  countries. Also, one hears of gypsy weddings, where a girl may be as young as 12.\n\nIt doesn't matter about the exact details, because what these various laws show, right across the world, is that people hold very different views, have quite different criminal codes and different sets of moral values, and the Anglo/American tendency to label people is quite alien to most of these cultures. \n\nSo to answer the critical question as to whether the questioner is/was a paedophile, it can safely be answered as "yes" in much of the world, but "no" in the majority of it; assuming that China and South America add up to a very large part of the global population.\n\nHowever, there is another type of law, which unfortunately finds little expression in statute, and that is the morality of true love, which as Shakespeare pointed out, "knows no laws." \n\nOn this basis, if the questioner is speaking the truth, then he passes the "true love" test with flying colours, no matter what anyo
938083
It would be really helpful in answering to know where the woman is, as the world is a big and varied place.\n\nThe International convention on human rights enshrines freedom of religion - which means that all countries should allow people freedom to worship or not worship as they please, including changing their religion. Enforcing it is left up to individual governments though.\n\nPersecution for changing your religion is grounds for claiming asylum in Europe or North America, among othrs - the problem is getting the immigration authorities to believe that someone would really be at risk, that the authorities of the home country wouldn't protect the convert, and that they hadn't just made up the story in order to get asylum. In UK at least, the authorities seem programmed to disbelieve any claim not backed by strong evidence.\n\nEven in the West, a woman can be at risk from her family and community for changing religion or otherwise "disrespecting" and "dishonouring" her family. This does not only apply to Muslims. \n\nPeople in this situation need sensitive help, rather than people using them to score points against a religion. \n\nIn Islam, people can be killed for turning away from Islam. In practice, even in Iran, what people do privately is up to them, but converting publicly and evangelising would get you into serious problems; and if a woman's family chose to take their own measures, even if that was against the law, it's unlikely that the authorities would help he at all.\n\nMuslims are often criticised unjustly, but this aspect of it is hard to defend; in fact many Muslims do not agree with killing "apostates", even though the rulings on it seem unambiguous.\n\nBest wishes to the woman concerned, she needs to be careful and given understanding and all support.
1128811
At the moment we can't, however on the news this morning they said that someone in government was going to go to America to look at how Megan's Law works over there and see if it can work in the UK under Sarahs Law.\n\nMegans Law is a national list of sex offenders throughout the US named after a 7 year old girl that was raped and murdered.