The perfect gift for anyone who ever entered law school, it defines the responsibilities of the legal profession from one of law's greatest practitioners.

    This conclusion is reached through a broad examination of the consequences of our not being vegan – both in relation to human health, environmental pollution, the risk of the spread of diseases, and in relation to the beings we exploit and kill. On all these levels the conclusion is clear: We have no good reason to not go vegan, while we have many good reasons to stop our practice of raising, killing and eating non-human animals and things from them. The bottom line: We have a strong ethical obligation to go vegan."Magnus Vinding makes a compelling case for ending the abuse of other sentient beings. What will we tell our grandchildren? ("But I liked the taste?")"— David Pearce, founder of BLTC Research and co-founder of Humanity+, author of The Hedonistic Imperative."An excellent concise statement of the arguments for going vegan."— Peter Singer, Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, author of The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty and Animal Liberation.

    Fuller extends and clarifies his definition of the relation between law and morality put forward in the first (1964) edition of The Morality of Law. His original argument distinguishes between the morality of duty and the morality of aspiration, both of which bear on the design and operation of social institutions: the former by setting the necessary preconditions of any purposive social endeavor, the latter by suggesting the directions for such endeavor.                                                                                                                                                                                   In the revised edition, Fuller takes accurate aim at the school of legal philosophy called the New Analytical Jurists and continues his long-running debate with his major intellectual antagonist, H.L.A. Hart. Although the author calls the new chapter "A Reply to Critics," his expressed reason for undertaking it indicates that it is more than that: "As critical reviews of my book came in, I myself became increasingly aware of the extent to which the debate did indeed depend on 'starting points' - not on what the disputants said, but on what they considered it unnecessary to say, not on articulated principles but on tacit assumptions. What was needed, therefore, it seemed to me, was to bring these tacit assumptions to more adequate expression than either side has so far been able to do." There is no question that Mr. Fuller here gives the assumptions of his side adequate expression.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           “The volume must be regarded as an important contribution of general interest to the study of the nature and function of law…Trenchant comment abounds throughout the book, and there is an immense amount of the most valuable material here, as well as considerable food for the thought…his book deserves to reach a very wide audience.” – Law Times.“The book is a provocative one which is certain to excite much academic comment here and abroad.” – Harvard Law Record.“Although fully intelligible to the undergraduate, this book is likely to receive its warmest reception form advanced students of the philosophy of law, who will welcome the relief provided from the frequently sterile tone of much recent work in the field.” – Choice

    This book provides a practical guidebook for those seeking to understand and defeat the Alinsky tactics used by the Obama Administration, Occupy Wall Street, and other far-Left organizations.

    With controversial ideas and funny stories, it covers topics that readers will recognize from their course and some new but equally important areas to challenge their thinking. Part of a highly popular new series this book will make you better able to question and understand this burgeoning field.

    In modern democratic societies, legislative bodies increasingly usurp functions that were, and should be, exercised by individuals or groups rather than government.Bruno Leoni (1913–1967) was an attorney and Professor of Legal Theory and the Theory of the State at the University of Pavia, Italy.Please note: This title is available as an ebook for purchase on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and iTunes.

    However, in the seventeeth century and during the Enlightenment, it was considered a major defense of the rights of states and private persons to use their power to secure themselves and their property.Book I examines the question of whether any war is just and who may lawfully make war. The causes of war; the implications of contracts, oaths, and promises; and the moral strictures of punishments are the subjects of Book II. The third book discusses what is lawful in war, the various kinds of peace and agreements given, and the treatment and ransoming of prisoners.The Liberty Fund edition is based on the classic English text of 1738, with extensive commentary by Jean  Barbeyrac. It also includes the Prolegomena to the first edition, a document never before translated into English.Hugo Grotius is one of the most important thinkers in the early-modern period. A great humanistic polymath—lawyer and legal theorist, diplomat and political philosopher, ecumenical activist and theologian—his work was seminal for modern natural law and influenced the moral, political, legal, and theological thought of the Enlightenment, from Hobbes, Pufendorf, and Locke to Rousseau and Kant, as well as America’s Founding leaders.Richard Tuck is a Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge, and Professor of Government at Harvard University.Knud Haakonssen is Professor of Intellectual History and Director of the Centre for Intellectual History at the University of Sussex, England.

    Proceeding from the assumption that human beings desire pleasure (and avoid pain), Bentham's unique perspective, known as utilitarianism, is used to construct a fascinating calculus for determining which action to perform when confronted with situations requiring moral decision-makingthe goal of which is to arrive at the "greatest happiness of the greatest number." Toward this end, he endeavors to delineate the sources and kinds of pleasure and pain and how they can be measured when assessing one's moral options. Bentham supports his arguments with discussions of intentionality, consciousness, motives, and dispositions.Bentham concludes this groundbreaking work with an analysis of punishment: its purpose and the proper role that law and jurisprudence should play in its determination and implementation. Here we find Bentham as social reformer seeking to resolve the tension that inevitably exists when the concerns of the many conflict with individual freedom.The Principles of Morals and Legislation offers readers the rare opportunity to experience one of the great works of moral philosophy, a volume that has influenced the course of ethical theory for over a century.

    The reader may sense that Mill is being pulled in opposing directions: steadfastly committed to majority rule with minority rights while at the same time being just enough of an aristocrat to believe that the masses need examplars to emulate.On Representative Government is one of the most compelling political essays of the 19th century.

    Students lashing out at any speaker brave enough to say something they disagree with. Precious snow flakes demanding “Safe Spaces” to protect them from any idea they haven’t heard from their liberal professors. In this book and the accompanying movie, Dennis Prager, Mark Joseph, and Adam Carolla expose the attack on free speech and free thought. It began in the universities, but—fair warning—it’s coming to your neighborhood and your workplace. “No Safe Spaces is a film every American should see. I could barely move when it was over. Powerful, emotional, and a call to action for anyone worried about the intellectual fascism happening in this country. A brave, timely, and important film.” —MEGYN KELLY, former FOX News anchor and host of Megyn Kelly Today “There is no free speech in America for free thinkers! You can have free speech in America but only if you say what everybody else agrees with. It’s not enough to ‘live and let live’ now. The psycho-elite believe ‘silence is violence’ and you must actively promote what THEY want no matter how vile or reprehensible it is to you. George Orwell lives! They should’ve called Orwell ‘Nostradamus’ because his most frightening prophecies have come to pass, as you will witness in No Safe Spaces!” —MANCOW MULLER, radio phenomenon “An excellent film, the best I’ve seen on the subject of free speech. I especially like Dennis’s line, ‘They have to believe we are evil; otherwise they’d have to debate us.’ Perfect!” —CAL THOMAS, America’s #1 syndicated columnist

    non-quantitative approach does not assume or require prior knowledge of economics or mathematics ii. part and chapter organization based on legal, not economic concepts - includes end-of-chapter sections to reinforce and extend learning through problems and suggested further readings This edition highlights a variety of new information, keeping it timely and topical: - the corporations chapter is revised and updated significantly in light of Enron and other corporate scandals; and Congress response in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act - an exciting new field of economics -- organizational economics -- is now included, with particular reference not only to corporations but also to nonprofits, law firms, and the judiciary - the rapidly expanding interest in the legal regulation of national security and foreign affairs (torture issues, executive power, the USA Patriot Act, etc.) requires the addition of the interesting economic issues presented by such regulation - expanded coverage of foreign law, of which there is increased interest, both substantive and institutional, and both national and supranational (e.g., European Union) is included throughout the book - new insights in the chapter on contracts are drawn from the author's recent scholarly work on contractlaw - since intellectual property is perhaps the hottest field in law today, the author incorporates some ideas from a book he recently coauthored with William Landes on the economic structure of intellectual property law - the chapter on finance is revised and updated to reflect the growing importance of behavioral finance. - novel legal-economic issues relating to the Internet are added to several chapters

    The novel starts with the news of theft of an ancient idol of Goddess Saraswati from a Hoysala temple. The journalist visits the place, which incidentally happens to be his ancestral town. The canvas of the novel encompasses almost the whole of India and most of the spheres like education, communal politics, business, political corruption and destruction of traditional moral values. The novel ends with the clamping of the so-called Emergency by Indira Gandhi in 1975.

    Starting a war 'to promote freedom and democracy' could in certain though rare circumstances be a justified act; but in the case of the Second Gulf War that began in 2003, which involved reacting to criminals hiding in one country (Al Qaeda in Afghanistan or Pakistan) by invading another country (Iraq), one of the main fronts has, dismayingly, been the home front, where the War on Terror takes the form of a War on Civil Liberties in the spurious name of security. To defend 'freedom and democracy', Western governments attack and diminish freedom and democracy in their own country. By this logic, someone will eventually have to invade the US and UK to restore freedom and democracy to them.'In this lucid and timely book, Grayling sets out what's at risk, engages with the arguments for and against examining the cases made by Isaiah Berlin and Ronald Dworkin on the one hand, and Roger Scruton and John Gray on the other, and finally proposes a different way to respond that makes defending the civil liberties on which western society is founded the cornerstone for defeating terrorism.

    Yet such theories, addressing the world and its problems, must respond to the real and changing dilemmas of the day. A brilliant work of practical philosophy, Frontiers of Justice is dedicated to this proposition. Taking up three urgent problems of social justice neglected by current theories and thus harder to tackle in practical terms and everyday life, Martha Nussbaum seeks a theory of social justice that can guide us to a richer, more responsive approach to social cooperation.The idea of the social contract--especially as developed in the work of John Rawls--is one of the most powerful approaches to social justice in the Western tradition. But as Nussbaum demonstrates, even Rawls's theory, suggesting a contract for mutual advantage among approximate equals, cannot address questions of social justice posed by unequal parties. How, for instance, can we extend the equal rights of citizenship--education, health care, political rights and liberties--to those with physical and mental disabilities? How can we extend justice and dignified life conditions to all citizens of the world? And how, finally, can we bring our treatment of nonhuman animals into our notions of social justice? Exploring the limitations of the social contract in these three areas, Nussbaum devises an alternative theory based on the idea of capabilities. She helps us to think more clearly about the purposes of political cooperation and the nature of political principles--and to look to a future of greater justice for all.

    Based on exclusive interviews and never-before-published material, Leading from Behind investigates the secret world of the West Wing and the combative personalities that shape historic events.Contrary to the White House narrative, which aims to define Obama as a visionary leader, Leading from Behind reveals a president who is indecisive, moody, and often paralyzed by competing political considerations. Many victories—as well as several significant failures—during the Obama presidency are revealed to be the work of strong women, who led when the president did not: then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton; and Valerie Jarrett, his closest adviser and an Obama family confidante, whose unusual degree of influence has been a source of conflict with veteran political insiders.In Leading from Behind, you will learn:· Why Obama's relationship with Israel was poisoned years before he met Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu· The real reason for Valerie Jarrett's strong hold over both Barack and Michelle Obama· ObamaCare wasn't Obama's idea. It was House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's. And the real reason he danced to her tune.· Obama delayed and canceled the mission to kill Osama bin Laden three times and then committed an intelligence blunder that allowed dozens of high-level members of al Qaeda to escape.· Why Obama destroyed a secret budget deal with House Speaker John Boehner that would have reformed entitlements, slashed spending, and reduced the national debt—without raising taxes· Why Obama is determined to save Attorney General Eric Holder, even though he has mislead and stonewalled Congress about "Operation: Fast and Furious"· Why Obama decided to defy the Tea Party and ditch his plans to end earmarksIn Leading from Behind, Richard Miniter's provocative research offers a dramatic, thoroughly sourced account of President Obama's White House during a time of intense domestic controversy and international turmoil.