Reasoned Response to the Article: $120,000 - The Penalty for Good Looks in the Adelaide Advertiser.
The westbound Australian Full Courts decision to award a lessen compensation to Widow, Mrs Teresa de Sales, because of good looks is completely legal. But is it right? This practice of fairness was passed in 1863, when women did not eat much in the counselling of an independent income, when they were dependent on their husbands for food and shelter. This law utter that as beautiful widows had a higher likelihood of acquiring remarried and thereby have a more stable monetary status than plain women, they did not need a full(a) compensation. Back then this was a useful law - load-bearing(a) those women who were not as likely to re marry - but now, creation more independent than in the past, they can choose whether to marry or not. A beautiful woman may not want to get married again, but because of this law, they would have to conk with less compensation than a plain woman who may or may not want to get remarried.
This law, which traveled into the Australian legal system from England, has been repealed from the English Legal dodging since 1971. Australia should repeal the law too.
In a land where everyone is verbalize to be equal, there should not be a law discriminating between one womans face and anothers. Mrs de Sales verbalize ...It shouldnt matter if I had four arms and purple muscae volitantes; a someone should still get 100 per cent of their payout. What Mrs de Sales meant was that every women, plain and beautiful, are equal and they should all, therefore, be compensated the same. To more accurately state her point, Mrs de Sales should have said: ...It shouldnt matter if I was the most beautiful person in...
If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment