HAY GUYS

**RacinReaver** · Local time: Jul 9, 2007, 06:59 AM

The fact of the matter is - we wouldn't have lawyers at all if its wasn't for the fact that people disagree on things. Thats as common as grass in this day and age - and why should he have to answer a question that is against his personal beliefs? We don't ask the Amish to climb into ambulances for that very same reason.

Should we modify the legal responsibilities of EMTs because an Amish person couldn't be one without violating his religious beliefs?

Should a fundamentalist Muslim that believes all women should wear veils over their faces be allowed to bring up a similar lawsuit because the test asked about a man recognizing a woman's face?

Quote:

Stop trying to villianize someone over a disagreement if you're not going to read the fucking article.

Originally Posted by LeHah

Anything less and we'll have the Red Choir of Russia singing as the likes of you march us all off to some utopian ideal.

...

You're being the stupid one here, because your tepid, uninformed morality has been offended by... a news article.

I'd be more sympathetic towards your point if you had an intelligent one to make.

How ya doing, buddy?

**RacinReaver** · Local time: Jul 11, 2007, 07:34 AM

“Yesterday, Pat got drunk and hit Pat with a baseball bat, breaking Pat's leg, when Pat learned that Pat was having an affair with Pat,” the bar exam question stated. “As a result, Pat decided to end the marriage with Pat in order to live in the house with Pat, Pat, and Pat. What are the rights of Pat and Pat?”

Most amazing jew boots

**RacinReaver** · Local time: Jul 12, 2007, 07:45 AM

Well, if he feels the person he is representing is lying to him or if they really broke the law, then wouldn't the right thing be to not represent them?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

**RacinReaver** · Local time: Jul 12, 2007, 11:59 AM

I think comparing the defense of the soldiers of the Boston Massacre to the likes of Charles Manson or Lucky Luciano is a little bit of a stretch.

Most amazing jew boots

**RacinReaver** · Local time: Aug 15, 2007, 09:17 AM

I guess it is unethical for the people administrating the bar exam to test people about the law. =\/

I was speaking idiomatically.

**RacinReaver** · 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by LeHah

It is when it violates the seperation of church and state.

If you're taking that stance, then why should any marriage be recognized by the government?

Edit:

Originally Posted by Lehah

It was against his religious belief to answer the question.

Does that mean if a lawyer was to come from Iran he should be able to answer "All the women in the story should be stoned to death for leaving the house without a man's accompaniment." and be correct?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

**RacinReaver** · Local time: Aug 15, 2007, 10:07 AM

And I think having to wait for a pedestrian to completely cross the street, even the other side I'm not driving on, before going is bullshit, but I'm still able to suck it up and answer the correct response on my driving test because I know I'm being evaluated on my knowledge of the law, not my agreement with it.

FELIPE NO