Determination of Adulterants in Honey Using HPLC Method

Determination of Adulterants in Honey Using HPLC Method Determination of adulterants such as hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) in honey using HPLC method 2. Materials and Methods 2.1 Materials Standard of hydroxymethylfurfural was purchased from sigma Aldrich. All the samples and standards were diluted using distilled deionised water. Methanol, sodium hydroxide,diphenyl-1-pikryl, ascorbic acid, 2,2- hydrochloric acid and acetic acid were of analytical reagent grade and purchased from Techno PharmChem, Avonchem and Alpha Chemika Ltd. Most glassware used are stainless steel dish, porcelain crucible, beakers (5, 25, 100 and 250 mL), pipettes (1, 10 and 50 mL), burette (10 and 25 mL), measuring cylinders (10, 100, 250 and 500 mL) and volumetric flasks (10, 100, 200, 1000 mL) were of grade A. All the glasswares were rinsed with distilled deionised water to remove surface contaminants prior to use. Oven, Incubator and furnace used were of make Gallenkamp, Memmert and respectively The absorbance was recorded on a Perlong DNM-9602 Microplate Reader. 2.2 Description of honey sample 13 Honey samples of different brands (Wescobee, Elodie, EL BREZAL, Hosen, Tropic, Lune de miel, Mc Mahon’s, ALSHIFA, Casino, Sunny, Gitto’s, Rodrigues Honey, and Natural Honey) were bought from Intermart Hypermarket, Jumbo Hypermarket and Monoprix Hypermarket. Brief details of different honey analysed, highlighting the manufacturing and expiry date, lot no, country of origin, and ingredients (if specified) are given in table 5. Table 5: Description of honey samples Sample code Sample Brand/ Name Details SP1 (a) Wescobee 100% Pure Honey Manufacturing date: May 2014 Expiry date: May 2017 Lot no:4107A Origin: Australia Ingredient: Pure honey SP9 (b) Elodie Miel Fruità © Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: 28.08.15 Lot no: 4059ID Origin: France Ingredient: NA SP3 (c) EL BREZAL Eucalyptus Honey Manufacturing date: February 2014 Expiry date: February 2017 Lot no: 2247 Origin: Spain Ingredient: 100% pure natural honey SP8 (d) Hosen Pure Honey Manufacturing date: 25.10.13 Expiry date: 24.10.15 Lot no: NA Origin: China Ingredient: 100% honey SP6 (e) Tropic Lychee Honey Manufacturing date: September 2012 Expiry date: August 2014 Lot no: TP-002 Origin: India Ingredient: Pure honey SP10 (f) Lune de miel Miel de fleur Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: 01.05.16 Lot no:L28663A Origin: France Ingredient: 100% pure honey SP5 (g) Mc Mahon’s Pure Honey Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: March 2016 Lot no: B140813 Origin: Australia Ingredient: NA SP7 (h) ALSHIFA Natural Honey Manufacturing date: November 2013 Expiry date: October 2018 Lot no: NA Origin: Saudi Arabia Ingredient: 100% natural SP4 (i) Casino Miel de fleur Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: 10.03.16 Lot no: 206354 Origin: France Ingredient: NA SP12 (j) Sunny Pure Honey Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: 24.01.16 Lot no: NA Origin: Mauritius Ingredient: Honey SP11 (k) Gitto’s Special Honey Manufacturing date: 27.06.14 Expiry date: 26.06.15 Lot no: NA Origin: Mauritius Ingredient: Cane sugar syrup 85%, pure honey 15% SP2 (l) Rodrigues Honey Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: NA Lot no: NA Origin: Rodrigues Ingredient: NA SP13 (m) Natural Honey Manufacturing date: NA Expiry date: NA Lot no: NA Origin: Mauritius Ingredient: NA 2.3 Methods 2.3.1 Sample preparation prior to physicochemical analysis 2.3.1.1 Moisture Moisture was determined according to AOAC method (925.45D) (Appendix I). Stainless steel dish with 25g sand and a glass rod were dried in an oven for 1 hour, cooled in a desiccator then weighed. 1g of homogenised honey sample was added and mixed thoroughly with the sand by means of the rod. The latter was then heated on steam bath for 15 min and dried in an oven for 2 hours at 60 °C, removed, allowed to cool in desiccator and weighed to a constant mass. 2.3.1.2 Ash Ash was determined according to AOAC method (920.181) (Appendix II) such that 5g of homogenized honey samples were added to pre-weighed empty porcelain. The samples were then allowed to dry on a water bath and heated on a hot plate until carbonized. The resulting carbonized samples were place in furnace at 600 °C for 6 hours, removed, allowed to cool in desiccator and weighed. 2.3.1.3 pH pH was measured at 25 °C by preparing a 10% (w/v) solution (dry weight basis) in distilled deionised water by a Delta Ohm HD 8706 pH meter. 2.3.1.4 Total Acidity Free acids, lactones, total acidity and pH were measured using a Mettler Toledo MP 220 pH meter according to the AOAC method 962.19 (Appendix III) as follows: 10g of honey samples were weighed in a 250 mL beaker and dissolved in 75 mL of CO2 free distilled deionised water (obtained by cooling freshly boiled deionised water). The mixtures were stirred using magnetic stirrer and titrated against 0.05M sodium hydroxide at a rate of 5 mL/min until the pH reached 8.50. 10 mL of 0.05M sodium hydroxide was pipetted and back-titrated with 0.05M hydrochloric acid to pH 8.30. A blank titration was also performed using similar procedure. Acidity of honey samples were calculated as follows: 2.3.1.6 Electrical conductivity The electrical conductivity was determined based on a method derived from Apiservices from the ash content of the honey samples according to the equation: 2.3.2 Sample preparation for HMF determination prior to HPLC analysis Aliquots of honey samples were prepared by weighing 1g of honey and were diluted to 10 ml with distilled water, filtered on 0.45 mm filter and injected into an HPLC equipped with a UV detector. The HPLC column was an Agilent, C18, 5 µm, 125 x 4 mm. The HPLC conditions were the following: isocratic mobile phase, 1% of acetic acid and methanol in the ratio (80:20); flow rate, 0.25 ml/min; injection volume, 2  µl, temperature; 30 °C. All the solvents were of HPLC grade. The chromatograms were monitored at 285 nm. All the samples were analysed in triplicates and after every 6 samples, a standard check was analysed. HMF was identified by analysing the peak in honey with a standard HMF, and by comparison of the spectra of the HMF standard with that of one honey samples. The amount of HMF in the honey samples was determined using a calibration curve and by comparing the peak area of the standard and the resulting samples. All honey samples were stored at room temperature (25–30 °C) in a well closed container and the HMF content of each sample was analysed on a monthly basis throughout a period of four months. To determine HMF progress during heat treatment, honey samples were subjected to heat treatment by placing 1g honey sample in a glass container, and heat in a water bath at 40 ºC, 60  ºC, 80 ºC, and 100 ºC for 5 min. The time was calculated when temperature reached the required degree. The honey samples were then cooled rapidly to room temperature (25 °C) and proceed as above to determine the HMF content. 2.3.2.1 Calibration curve for HMF for HPLC analysis A 100 ppm stock solution of HMF standard was prepared by dissolving 0.0101 g of HMF standard in 100 mL of distilled deionised water in a 100 mL volumetric flask. From the 100 ppm stock solution, 10 ppm, 20 ppm, 30 ppm, 40 ppm and 50 ppm standard solution were prepared separately in 10 mL volumetric flasks. The different volumes of the stock solutions which were diluted to 10 mL are given in Table 4. The resulting standards were analysed on a HPLC UV detector at 285 nm and a calibration curve was plotted. Table 6: Volume of 100 ppm stock to prepare different concentration of HMF Concentration/ppm Volume of 100 ppm stock used/mL 10 1.00 20 2.00 30 3.00 40 4.00 50 5.00 A 10 ppm spike sample of HMF was prepared by pipetting 200  µL of 100 ppm stock solution of HMF standard and transferred to the 2 g sample of honey and diluted to 20 mL with distilled deionised water. 2.3.2.2 Limit of detection and quantification The limit of detection and quantification of HMF was calculated according to EPA method SW-846 (Appendix V). LOD is defined to be the minimum level at which the analyte can be detected reliably with signal-to noise 3:1. Different standards of HMF was analysed namely 0.1, 0.05 and 0.04ppm such that detection limit of HMF was thus then established by analysing a 0.05ppm HMF standard solution seven times and the standard deviation of the repeats for the analyse was multiplied by a factor 3.14 based on student t-statistics. The limit of quantification with signal-to noise ratio 10:1 was calculated by multiplying the obtained standard deviation by 10. 2.3.3 Anti-oxidative property using DPPH radical scavenging activity 4.5mg of DPPH (1, 1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl) was dissolved in 100 mL methanol and wrapped in aluminium foil to prevent light from entering. For the assay, a 96 wells Elisa plate was used. 100 µL of test sample was placed in the first well using micropipette. 50 µL methanol was added to all other wells and serial dilution was done. 50 µL of sample from the first well was pipette and transferred to the second well previously containing 50 µL methanol and the solution was mixed to ensure homogeneity. The 50 µL of the resulting solution was pipette and transferred to the third well and so on. Each well now contained 100 µL of solution after the dilution. 100 µL DPPH (4.5mg/100ml) solution was then added to every well. The solutions were incubated for 30 minutes at 37 °C in an incubator and the absorbances of the resulting solutions were read at 492nm on a Perlong DNM-9602 Microplate Reader. The % scavenging activity of the samples was calculated as follows: Antioxidative property of the samples; firstly with no heating of the honeys and secondly with a heating temperature of 100 °C for five minutes were performed and proceed similarly to that of control ascorbic acid. Note: A yellowish change in colour indicates the presence of ascorbic acid activity. 1311

Discuss Controversial Figure Thomas Cromwell History Essay

Discuss Controversial Figure Thomas Cromwell History Essay In this paper I would like to discuss Thomas Cromwell which was a controversial figure. Some people called him the ideal statesman of Tudor England, the other people called him most corrupt Chancellor. Cromwell was one of the most outstanding personalities of the English Renaissance era, which had ahead his time. Lets start from the biography of Thomas Cromwell. He was an important political personality in medieval England, he was the first counselor of King Henry VIII in 1532-1540., He was the chief ideologist of the English Reformation, one of the Anglicanism founders. He was born in 1485 in the family of tavern and brewery owner Walter Cromwell. His grandfather was a blacksmith. In addition, the father of Thomas Cromwell hadnt sober and honest behavior. There is evidence that he not only had a violent temper, but was accused of fraud. But Thomas and his older sister, Katherine were quite different people. As a teenager, after a conflict with his father, he left not only his home in the village of Putney (now part of London), but also the country. The thirst for adventure and a desire to see the world made him a French mercenaries in the Italian army from which he soon deserted, leaving the battlefield. After the army he went to live in Florence and employed to work at the banker whose name was Friskabaldi. Such start of young life made him possible to get on his feet quickly and travel to Rome. However, inquisitive Cromwell interested not only in finances. He enthusiastically watched the political life in Florence, where he met with the writings of Machiavelli. Later, he often followed the recommendations of the Emperor author. A few years later he moved to Holland, where he worked as a sales agent of English merchants in Antwerp. Approximately in 1513 Thomas Cromwell returned to England with a sufficient amount of money and began to live in London, at first he traded fabrics and wool, and then became one of the most famous lawyer in England. Such situation gave him the opportunity to meet with Cardinal Thomas Wolsey Lord Chancellor of King Henry VIII, so that he became his secretary and manager of pontifical estates. The most famous act in that capacity à ¢Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚ ¬ was the abolition of the small monasteries. In 1529 he became a member of Parliament, and after the fall of Wolsey succeeded his officials under the kings court. Cromwells career abruptly went up in 1533 when he became Chancellor of the Exchequer, and then in the 1536 he became Lord Privy Seal. However, the real power of Cromwell was given him by the Kings friendship and confidence. Cromwell had undoubted talent for management, some historians regarded him as the founder of the revolution in the governments control scheme. If earlier decisions were made in accordance with the wishes of the King (sometimes ill-advised and inconsistent), then Cromwell had developed a system of departments with used control techniques. Not all researchers agree with this statement, but, no doubt, Thomas Cromwell played a leading role in monasteries destruction. Harshness with which Cromwell enforced the secularization of church property, gave him the nickname the hammer of monks. Widespread closures of monasteries almost cost Thomas Cromwells career. In 1537 in the north of England, began the rebellion of Catholics, called the Pilgrimage of Mercy. The main demand of the rebels was the execution of Cromwell. However, the rebellion was suppressed. All segments of society hated him, they often guided by a completely opposite intentions, there wasnt such segment of society, which support or sympathy he could count on. For ordinary people, he was the organizer of the bloody persecution suppressor action against the new levies, the hardships that had befallen peasants after the closure of the monasteries. For the nobility, he was an upstart a commoner, which did not take rightful place at court. Catholics (especially the clergy) didnt forgiven him the break with Rome and the subordination of church to the king, plundered of church lands and weal th, Lutherans patronage . And those, in turn, accused the minister in the pursuit of new, true faith, and in condescending attitude towards Catholics. The Scots, Irish, inhabitants of Wales had a lot of claims to Cromwell. Cromwell played a leading role in establishing the rule of a monarch over the church, in the empowerment of the royal Privy Council, whose rights were extended to the north of England, Wales and Ireland. Cromwell filled the lower house of parliament by creatures of the yard and turned it into an instrument of the Crown. He was able to dramatically increase revenue of coffers at the expense of confiscation of monastic lands, and taxation of trade, development of which he encouraged by skilled protectionist policies, Thomas Cromwell managed to increase British influence in Scotland, a significant expansion of the British crown estates in Ireland, the final incorporation of Wales. Analyzing the literature I can say that Tomas Cromwell greatly influenced King. What else could King claim from the Minister, which not only handles all the orders of the king, but tried to guess his desires and anticipate the plans to which he had not yet figured out? However, the success of Cromwell jaundiced narcissistic Henry, he got into a huff by his minister intellectual superiority. The influence of Cromwell testified Henrys inability to get out of a painful divorce case, to reorganize the state and church affairs in the spirit of royal absolutism. The minister was a living reminder about the second marriage of King, the infamous process and the execution of Anne Boleyn, which he wanted to bring to eternal oblivion. More than once it seemed to Henry that Cromwell prevented him from appling his public capacity, prevented him to be among the major politicsof his era Charles V and Francis I. Thomas Cromwell made a great contribution to a difficult divorce of Henry VIII. The first wife of Henry VIII was Catherine of Aragon. Henry was still young when he married her, she was a widow of his brother Arthur. Katerina was a Spaniard, she was strict in religion and morals, with calm nature, which didnt correspond to rapid temper of the king. The only thing that spoke in favor of Henry it was his beauty, mind, love to science, amorous, but none of these qualities she did not appreciate. She married him because the marriage was approved by the pope. But the blessing of the pope did not save her from unhappiness. Henry could not long remain faithful to his wife. A great admirer of the female, he was constantly moved from one subject of passion to another, until finally he stopped on the court lady, Anne Boleyn, who didnt want to live together without marriage, and demanded the marriage and Henry chose the divorce with Catherine. However, the king met with resistance! Everybody were against divorce: the Father, and Catherine, and trusted people of the King. But Henry has already managed to learn all the charm of tyranny and said he would not retreat from his decision. Divorce in medieval dynastic tradition was a quite common phenomenon, so Henry was not particularly doubt in his success, but the question of Henrys divorce had been delaying for six years. King has repeatedly tried to make Ekaterina to divorce with him, or retired to a monastery, but she skillfully and firmly reflected his attack. Henry was hoping for the Popes order of invalidity of marriage on the grounds that the King married his brothers wife. Thomas Cromwell proposed Henry divorced Catherine without the Pope permission. Why, he said, the king did not want to follow the example of German princes and with the assistance of Parliament declare himself the head of the national church? This idea seemed very attractive, and soon he returned to persuade himself. Henry, following the advice of Thomas Cromwell, decided to break with the Pope and declared himself as a head of the English Church, asked to help the domestic court. To give the case a legal nature, the council was convened, chaired by Archbishop of Canterbury. Cathedral decided or rather, Henry decided, by means of Archbishop, who blindly did his will that the head of the English Church, will be king. Often, but erroneously stated that Cromwell wanted to make Henry the absolute monarch. Cromwell acted through the House of Commons, that is why the decisive factor was the adoption of the Parliament reform (1529-1536). Thomas Cranmer rightly wrote in 1537 to Strasbourg reformer Wolfgang Kapiton: In all that has hitherto been achieved in the reformation of religion and the clergy, only Cromwell did more than all the others together. Five-year legal reform led the authority of the Pope in England replaced by supremacy of the king over the English church. Cromwells efforts to abolish the legal independence of the church began with the adoption of the Supplication of the Commons Against the Ordinaries, which said about restricting the right of clergy to assert ecclesiastical laws without the consent of the House of Commons, and the arbitrary and abusive acts of ecclesiastical courts were criticized, which were often unfair to the laity. The King complained the Speaker of the House that the prelates during his ordination sweared allegiance to the Pope. On May 15, 1532 council adopted an appeal of the clergy, asking the king the protection from the House of Commons and giving the council control of his legislative activities in return for his patronage of the ecclesiastical courts. The next day, Thomas More resigned from his post as chancellor. By the end of the year the stopping payment of annatto act to Rome was approved , and the Pope, because of the threat, made Thomas Cranmer as Archbishop of Canterbury,. In March 1533 Cromwell prepared statement of overriding Act to limit appeals. The famous preamble to the Act reads: The Kingdom of England is the Empire under the sole rule of the Supreme Head and King, who has the imperial dignity and the imperial throne, and whom society consisting of people of different classes and conditions of various titles and the foundations of spiritual and secular, after God is obliged by natural and humble obedience. Act held that issues relating to the activities of the king, sent for consideration to the Supreme Church Council, the highest legal authority, and no further appeal beyond the Kingdom, for example in Rome were impossible. Resistance to the Henry church upheaval was surprisingly weak, but on the altar of change were two victims: Bishop John Fisher and the layman Sir Thomas More. Fisher and More could not make a compromise with their conscience and to sign the Act of the rule, because it rejected the authority of the Pope. In February 1536 the reformist parliament received from Cromwell inspectors reports about monasteries and approved the first act of elimination. Henry was forced to limit the number of monasteries, due to economic reasons, as well as for religious reasons and because of the anticlerical the House of Commons mood. In adopting the act in 1536, Parliament abolished the small communities with an annual income of less than 200 pounds. Most of the larger monasteries were forced to obey the King. Monastic lands transition to the hands of the nobility contributed to further strengthening of this class and his participation in the governance of the country, while at the level of local governance became dominate the rich esquires. Profits from the land sale and other property were used for the pensions of certain former monks and nuns for the content of the new diocese, new schools and colleges as well as to enrich the royal purse. In 1539, to strike up relations with German Protestants, Cromwell persuaded the king to marry Anne of Cleves the sister of a German duke. Alas, the bride did not like Henry. Circumstances allowed the leaders of the Catholic party at the yard Thomas Duke of Norfolk and Bishop Stephen Gardiner to convince a suspicious king in the unreliability of his most loyal ministers. He was arrested and executed in confidence in the Tower of London in 1540. After that, his head was welded and installed on a stake on London Bridge. Reformer Tomas Cromwell made a great contribution to the formation of the Anglican Church. Renowned British historian Thomas Babington Macaulay called the Anglican Church fruit of unity of government and Protestants, i.e., the result of the consent of both parties in the views of the church. Alliance between the Crown and Protestantism was not easy and was characterized by periods of tension and regression. Obviously, Henry VIII believed in the possibility of destruction the relation with Rome without any changes in church teaching and worship. The king maintained a conservative theology, and in the period from 1532 to 1540 was forced to choose between the radicals, led by Cromwell and the Conservatives, led by the Duke of Norfolk and the Bishop of Winchester by Stephen Gardiner. At first, followed by a period of elevation of radicals, and after the fall of Cromwell in 1540 the Conservatives. Henry tried to act as judge in the competition of the parties, as later in the same century , his daughter Elizabeth maintained her position over the Anglican and Puritan parties. As a consequence, the Reformation in England developed by universal course via media, as nowhere else on the continent, with the possible exception of Sweden. Summing it up I would like to stress that a small portion of society has learned for himself the benefit of the Reformation. These were the new people, the emerging class of capitalists and bureaucrats who have acquired property, without noble birth. As a result of the Reformation there were such large changes in class composition of society, which it hasnt known throughout their history.

Robert Frost?s ?The Road Not Taken Essay example -- essays research pa

Robert Frost’s â€Å"The Road Not Taken,† can be understood in various ways. The mood, attitude, and mindset of the reader predispose their thoughts towards the poem’s true meaning. The title of the Frost’s poem suggests that it is about decisions and obstacles in life and how people should handle them. Frost is voicing his opinion, saying that whatever path or decision making we make or do, one day, will be the key factor in your future tomorrow and thereafter. Almost every human being experiences life’s bumpy road journey and Frost indicates in his poem that there are never just one single path to take; instead it is like a complex maze. A traveler comes upon "two roads diversified in a yellow wood" (Frost 719 ). Frost indicates that it is a cross road in his life and he must chose one way or another. The option of choosing both roads is not there because it is not possible, so the traveler must decide how he wants to live the remainder of his life and choose that path. The traveler, still deciding on what path to take, states regretfully "...Sorry I could not travel both paths" (Frost 719). This is a prime example of everyday life. It is nearly impossible to look into the future and see the end result of which path to take, and therefore makes it even more difficult of which life path to strive towards. By not seeing the future result in picking one road over another, the traveler wonders what he will be missing out. Frost is e...

The Health Insurance Crisis in America Essay -- Public Policiy Issues

Health insurance comes as second nature to many of us. We grab that blue and white card and put it in our wallet and forget about it until we are sick or injured. When this happens, there it is, cushioning our fall like the extra padding it provided to cushion our wallets. This is not the case with everyone, however. Many Americans have no cushion to fall back on, no blue and white card to show the emergency room when they have an unexpected health concern. No HMO with a convenient co-pay amount when their son or daughter develops an ear infection. Medicine and other health services are expensive without these important conveniences that many people lack. These people have been â€Å"falling through the cracks† in U.S. health care system for years, leaving many citizens wondering: why would our country do this to us? Our great and powerful nation, the United States, a country that much of the world views as the most highly developed nation in the world, is the only industrialized country that does not provide its citizens with universal health care, according to a report by the National Rural Health Association (NRHA 1). Being that we are a capitalist economy, perhaps the government feels it is the duty of the people to make sure they are taken care of. This makes sense, doesn’t it? We are all smart individuals; we can make decisions and take action for ourselves. But what can the individuals do when the cost of insurance and health care is too high for them to handle? In the United States, the answer is nothing. A 2002 census published by the Public Information office showed that there are 41.2 million Americans who do not have health insurance (Bergman). That amounts to a startling 14.6 percent of the population, up from... ...ently, without expensive health insurance, Americans are in a bind. If they cannot afford health insurance, they surely cannot afford the medical bills that will fall upon them should they need to be hospitalized. Every other country in the world that is on the same level as America industrially and developmentally offers universal health care to its citizens. Some Americans are worried about the rise in taxes if the government offers guaranteed care to everyone. The insurance companies will suffer, as well. But the sacrifice is more than worth it. America was founded on the basis of freedom for all. Shouldn’t we all, regardless of income, be free to enjoy as many years of health as we deserve? Sources Cited National Rural Health Association http://www.apa.org/rural/report99.html Lardie, Diane Universal Healthcare Action Network http://www.uhcan.org/

The Argument on the Legalization of Same Sex Marriages Essay -- Papers

The Argument on the Legalization of Same Sex Marriages The argument over the legalization of same sex marriages is rapidly becoming one of the most vigorously advocated reform subjects in recent law review. Being gay and loving someone is not illegal, but uniting that couple in a legal marriage is rejected by most of society in this country. Each state has had to deal with legal issues concerning same sex marriages to some extent. Most supporters of the ban on gay marriages believe that it would be a strong cause of immorality and corruption of the American family. People who do not support same sex marriages believe that it would create an unhealthy family, and could cause serious harm to children in that family, while supporters of same sex marriages believe that they are being denied the benefits such as establishing a right of survivorship, co-partner medical and retirement benefits. It is felt by most homosexuals that these benefits would help create a stronger stability in a long-term relationship. Most of the volunteer and financial support against gay marriage comes from religious groups or churches. ?Catholics, Mormons, and evangelists make up more than 40 percent of California?s population, and raised millions of dollars to pass the amendment.? Same sex marriages are both mentally and physically wrong in the minds of most parishioners. They find the concept immoral because according to the Bible, sex between members of the same sex is strictly prohibited, much less marriage. Proposition 22 was one of many campaigns led by religious conservatives, which prohibits California from allowing marital rights to gay couples who married in another state, and it only recognizes marriages between man and a woman. ... ...iages will also someday in the future be legalized. Bibliography: California Protection of Marriage Initiative. Feb.2000 Online Posting. 11 Nov. 2000 (http://doma.org/purpose.html) Defense of Marriage Act. May 1996 Online Posting. 28 Nov. 2000 (http://reagan.com/HotTopics.main/HotMike/document-5.15.1996.1.html) Lesbian and Gay Marriage Resource Site. April 2000 Online Posting 10 Oct. 2000 (http://grasshopperdesign.com/gay_marriage/news/vt4.htm) DodgeGlobe: The Dodge City Daily Globe-Court grants April. 2000 Online Posting. 8 Oct. 2000 (http://www.dodgegloble.com/stories.122199/nat_rights.shtml) California Bars Gay Marriage Mar. 2000 Online Posting 11 Nov. 2000 (http://abcnews.go.com/onair/CloserLook/wnt_000307_Prop22_feature.html) Stiers, Gretchen A. From This Day Forward St. Martins Press, New York, NY, 1998

Dating Your Best Friend Essay

I ask myself sometimes why now and not then, I think this was how it was meant to be the whole time. We met in first grade and became real good friends right from the start. I remember playing a lot together with our friends. We also lived just across the street from each other so imagine, seeing each other at school and after school play even more outside after our homework was done, it was a great way of spending time together. Unfortunately after first grade, we somehow had to go to different schools, but we still got together after school and played together. It wasn’t until after 4th grade that I moved to a new neighborhood and didn’t see him again until 8th grade. We saw each other and recognized one another and again we became inseparable. We had a few classes together and we were always partners whenever we were assigned to grab a partner. Also that same school year, all the rumors started; that we liked each other, we were going to end up going out, we were always together and so on. I did think about it but we were just fourteen year olds who had no age and no intention of dating. We were the best of friends in middle school and kept going strong. Our high school years came real quick as we kept on growing up together and watching each other blossom into young adults. We were still the best friends ever, and the same rumors still kept going around. We somehow managed to have classes together which were very good for the both of us because we never wanted to be apart. We still had no intention of going out, because we didn’t want to break that wonderful friendship we had made and kept for so long. It wasn’t until Valentine’s Day of freshman year when I started feeling a little something for him. He sent me a valentine with the following message â€Å"Happy Valentine’s Day! Thanks for being an awesome friend! † I thought at that moment â€Å"Oh, friend† but I let it slide because I felt it was not a big deal. Sophomore year rolled around, we were still the best friends ever, and the rumors and gossip continued. We had classes together again, nothing special happened until the very end of that school year. We were saying goodbye to each other and we hugged, but we hugged each other for a while. I honestly felt that â€Å"spark† between us. I thought he felt the same (he told me later on that he did). We parted ways and kept in touch a bit in the summer, and didn’t see each other again until next year, junior year. That year I couldn’t hide what I felt for him, I was actually becoming more and more in love with him. I can tell he was also falling for me as well. It’s one of those things a girl can tell without being told anything. We were still the best of friends, and the rumors were still going (I was very surprised, yet a bit amused). This year was different because we’re now sixteen/ seventeen and had grown up more. Yes we were inseparable, but those feelings were becoming more noticeable to everyone except to one another. Yet nothing happened and we were still the best of friends. Senior year was a big year for us; it was the last year that we might be together. My feelings for him were now stronger than ever, I wanted to be more that friends, but for some reason he always seemed to avoid me and not talk at all. I don’t know why, I was hoping for him to say something to me, since I had heard from many that he actually did love me. But nothing happened, so I gave up on him in that aspect of us. I had revealed to one of my good friends that I did love Isaac and wanted more. He revealed to that same person that he loved me too. I found out from her and I went to talk to him, he immediately got upset and denied everything. With that being said I also denied everything because I thought to myself that was his chance and he blew it. We got really mad at each other and said â€Å"we are friends and that is it†. We didn’t stay mad for that long; we got back to talking again. I decided to date a guy that year; it was going well until I saw Isaac. He saw us holding hands, I saw his face turn red with anger, and just walked away upset. I knew it upset him but I had no idea why, we had settled on being best friends. We still enjoyed all the senior activities like prom, boat trip, and finally graduation. We both graduated and saw each other for what could be the last time. He was going off to college and I was staying home. After those four years in high school we proved everyone wrong about going out with each other, or at least that’s what we thought. Time passed and I had broken up with my high school boyfriend and I started dating another guy here at ECC for a few months. I never heard from Isaac once during that time, I was a bit upset but I didn’t pay attention to it. It wasn’t until February 12 that I was on Facebook and I got talking with Isaac again via chat that night. We were talking and asked about my boyfriend, I told him I didn’t have one and that I had given up on guys for the moment. We kept talking and talking and then I asked him â€Å"For April Fool’s we should put as our status that we’re going out†. It took him a few minutes to say â€Å"Why not actually make it a reality? † I was shocked! I swear at that moment I had an instant flashback of our childhood all the way through high school. I had waited for so long for that moment that I said yes, it also took me a while to respond back. At that moment he confessed that he had loved me since the end of sophomore year when we said goodbye to each other. I was so happy that everything went the way it did. Unfortunately he was away at school and I wouldn’t see him until our one month anniversary when he came home. I didn’t mind, I did not wait all that time in high school for us to finally be together as a couple and not have the relationship work. We changed our Facebook status that we were officially a couple. It was an explosion of â€Å"It’s about time! †, â€Å"I knew it! †, and â€Å"I told you it would happen eventually! † We didn’t care though because we were just happy that our dream had finally come true. A month passed and it was our one month anniversary. We went out to dinner and had an amazing time together. That same night he took me to his home and I met his entire family. Since then me and his family have gotten along very well and we are practically like family. We definitely enjoyed that week together but he had to go back and I wouldn’t see him until May. My birthday came along and it happened to fall on a Saturday, which was nice because I planned to have a party. Isaac drove all the way home just for my birthday and surprised me. He called me before and said that he had sent a present. Then at around five in the afternoon he called and said that my gift has arrived and I had to open the door, sure enough it was him with a bouquet of flowers. I cried of joy, no one had ever done something like that for me. It was an awesome way to celebrate my birthday. The relationship has been going very well, and I’m positive that it will continue to stay like that. It just comes to show that that myth about how dating your best friend is bad isn’t always true. It can happen to anyone, and yes it doesn’t work out for some people, but in my case it worked out for the better. As I said before, I don’t think we were meant to be best friends, just something more.

Human Rights Essay

tender Rights argon those comelys that ar deemed to belong to resolely told individuals by virtue of their charit adequateity 1. Previously, these rights were referred to as the rights of man or natural rights. Because of this, gracious rights argon ascribed to all told homoeeity disregardless of their citizenship or nationality. The human rights doctrine sack, in this respect, come into call for conflict with opposite doctrines of the sovereignty of an early(a)(prenominal) establishments in the ball, and the law, because of the catholicity that has led to the pursuit of the agenda of human rights at stages of international co-op durationtion in the era of post war2.The serviceman Rights strike has construct a lot of divided opinion. final payment has risen in Britain as whether to annihilate the human strain Rights specify believe, (herein aft(prenominal) referred to as the HRA), address it or whether it should be replaced altogether with the British human beings Rights (Hereinafter referred to BHR)3. Repealing the HRA refers to abolishing or evoking the act altogether bit extending it entrust imply that, this displace could full point on longer with forbidden being lifted or lavatorycelled by the British disposal.In Britain, whatever fundamental individual licenses ar today cheered by the adult male Rights trifle of 1998 which requires all the Britain law to accomp all the European formula of 1950 on charit equal to(p) Rights (hereinafter The ECHR) and which alike grades it possible for the concourse to be practiceable in all the British royal courts and put ons it mandatory for the Judiciary to interpret the topical anaesthetic law so that it complies with the convention4. The act came into population all over ten years and it seeks to cheer the individual rights of wad and has had a haunting impact in m some(prenominal) field of their private and in the public eye(predicate) lives.The HR coordi nated the ECHR into the British law and and soce make it unlawful for whatsoever Public carcass or officer to act or be get down in stylus which is discordant with the convention5. The 1998 HRA made the ECHR to be part and dowry of the British National truth. Before that, the courts were simply allowed to take the ECHR in very unornamented circumstances during domestic proceedings6. just, section 19 of the exploit made it mandatory for all future polity to contain compatibility with the ECHR.The benignant Rights motion was in 1998 hailed to be a landmark statute and has raise a lot of controversy and misconception. The HRA of 1998 has brought some certain elements into the movemented system of Britain close the world Rights of the European convention. In this round, the British Courts be required to uphold and drill the ECHR in each and every stopping point that they make. This convention was bumped to safeguard against the greening of Nazism and the vi ndication of the rights it sought to shelter after the Second World contend7.The holds which be contained in the world Rights Convention make kn testify among differents the right to emotional state which is contained in hold 2, bar of extort of human beings which is contained in Article 3, the prohibition of constrained fag and slavery which is contained in Article 4, the right to security and license which is contained in Article 5, the right to a fair and just trial which is contained in obligate six, the prohibiting of extra legal punishment which is contained in denomination s in time, the right to respect of the private family life of individuals which is contained in Article eight and the exemption of conscience, thought and religion which is contained in name nine. The convention as advantageously as spells fall forth the liberty of self expression that is found in Article 10 and the freedom of tie beam and assembly that is all the mien depicted in ar ticle el stock-still. The right to marriage and the prohibition of discrimination be contained in articles xii and fourteen respectively 8.The legal ripe approach of human rights that binds the brasss to this minute arose from the join Nations Declaration on valet de chambre rights in 1948 which internationally developed a unconsecrated agreement on the rights of the human kind to provide the means through with(predicate) which the want of the governments of the world could be able to clog the recurrence of atrocities which were root forted in WWII through setting of a special K timeworn for all heap and states 9. Should we get up the HRA? The military man Rights process should be repealed because it undermines the sovereignty of Britain as an independent state and on that pointfore it should non be governed by laws from external sources. assumption the fact that Britain is an independent coun drive having its suffer laws and constitution to guide it in whatever undertakings that concerns it, there is no withdraw for it to collective the ECHR since its laws piss articles concerning the human rights. There is pick discover to repeal the humankind Rights coiffure because the kind-hearted Rights can well be cover under the British shoot down of Rights 10..The military personnel Rights make should be repealed because it has undermined the authority of fantan and given the judge the ability to complete any declarations of incompatibility except these judges live no empowerment to decrease down any laws which ar clashing scarce quite, it is the government which must make a determination as to how to resolve to any declaration. By repealing the HRA, the British government could sacrifice been empowered to make decisions touch Britain to solely remain in Britain and by so doing, a culture of self independence entrust be created and this go away enable the British citizens to bang their rights alongside the rights of th e ordinary citizens in Britain 11.There are those who argue that the HRA should not be repealed simply instead, it should be directly incorporated into the British law. This is because, given the fact that there is overlook of a codified constitution which sets out the citizens rights, the British doctrine for the sovereignty of parliament cannot provide enough security measure for the rights of individuals from a government which is intrusive. The HRA can thusly ensure that all these are achieved12. Repealing of the HRA would make the laws under it to be under the inhibit of the Judges in Britain. By so doing, a complicated legal bit could be created and this could lead to threatening of the protection that is currently provided in the European Law on human beings Rights.The humankind Rights be should thus neer be repealed or replaced with the British accounting of Rights notwithstanding instead, it should be all-encompassing. This is because the British Courts are a catcher of preventing the infringement of the fundamental rights and as much(prenominal), they educational activity a great respect from the planetary public 13. Should we extend the HRA? The HRA should not be prolonged because it forces the government of Britain to obey the ECHR yet it has its own laws which it is supposed to protect to defend its sovereignty. Forcing an independent country to obey outside rules is like colonization and therefore it should not be broaden because it infringes on the freedom of Britain as an independent country.The HRA should not be blanket(a) by the British regime because it does not guide with big issues of discrimination, torture or slavery and early(a) things which are restricted largely to another(prenominal) countries and of which it is also responsible for the very down to reason principles of the right to privacy, food, housing, equality, health and freedom of speech. The HRA does not reaffirm these obligations in a liveently way that individuals can be able to forget and seek to set them in history and in st wizard14. The Human rights typify should be extended because it is a very important piece of economy which has so elevatemost been issued by the British Government 15. The bend bequeath make all the British People to be beginner with the fact that all batch are born with obligations which require them to treat other human beings with dignity and in a way which they also expect to be treated. This dignity is therefore not well-nigh philosophy or religion just a matter of consideration for other people and common decency.For Britain to redress the balance, consequently it depart not be roaring for it alone, but for the society and a world which bases itself on the respect of human rights to put in so that the continued struggle aimed at adjusting the current attitudes and explaining to other individuals why there is requirement to respect other people can be achieved. The Human Rights function should therefore be extended so that these ideals are realized16. But contrary to this, the HRA should be extended because it does not go outlying(prenominal) enough and therefore gives numerous states chances in the Human Rights Convention for the governments to opt out of some certain readinesss for the sake of their national security.On the contrary, the human Rights stage should not be extended because it could subject matter some poor citizens of Britain to punishment as a allow of having to travel far in search of justice in a foreign court other than pursuance justice inwardly the topical anaesthetic courts available in their resident country. The further extension of the Human Rights dally in Britain is therefore a blow to the common citizens of Britain 17. The HRA should not be replaced by the British heyday of Rights so that the British parliament cannot be able to abolish the HRA in the same way they do to the other laws. Currently, the HRA has got no privileged send in the British Law and therefore, it can easy be changed in the constitution without the need for special procedures 18. If it is incorporated into the British turn on of Rights (hereinafter the BBR), it go forth become touchy for anyone to slowly change it to suit his or her circumstances.The HRA should never be replaced with the British metre of Rights as suggested by some of the conservatives like David Cameron but it should instead be extended so that that a culture of impunity cannot be created by the government. Calls by the democrats that the Human Rights sham should never be repealed should therefore be never be supported. Instead, the Human Rights feat should be replaced by the British notation of Rights so that the people of Britain can be able to reaffirm their independence by having their own domestic laws to govern them other than relying on international laws. 19. On the other hand, swapping the HRA with the BBR can be a sure way of restoring the responsibility for the balancing act to politicians in Britain which the normal public can substantially elect or boot out according to their preferences.Indeed, the establishment of the BBR will make the British government to have domineering power as a result of the rediscovered freedom which will positively develop democracy in and justice in the country. Should we replace the HRA with the BBR? The Human Rights subprogram should be replaced with a Bill of Rights because this Act is a means through which some part of Human Rights contained in the European Convention are brought into the British Law books. The HRA clearly sets out the responsibilities of the people of Britain as a society since with any form of legislation different people would often try to seek interpreting of its content to take on their own selfish ends.In essence, such people will popularly blow up shouting about the trampling and encroachment of human rights in any campaign the other channels ar e played out but funnily enough, this is possible because of the real principle which is enacted in the Human Rights Act itself20. Some people argue that the HRA should not be replaced with the British Bill of Rights so that rogue politicians are tamed by laws which are universally established and recognized. addicted the fact that the decisions will remain in the country and not subject to laws from outside, it will create more room for graft to exist and develop roots since people who make major decisions about human rights are located in one specific county. Attempts to replace the HRA with the British Bill of Rights should be discarded because it could be pernicious to the British people.People are authorise towards voicing their opinions if they feel there is rapine of their human rights. The Act therefore, remains the scoop for delivering justice to all people without any fear or favor 21. The HRA should be extended because it gives the British people the legal rights to stand up and be counted and should not be discounted like any other politically correct set of legislation. For the British people to unwrap clear the Human Rights Act at its infancy, so they have to be aware that they have rights to agnise what their law makers do on their behalf and not solely rely on the media for the recital of the law decisions since they can easily be outraged by head melodic phrases which are alike sensational.Since all the British people are members of their respective societies, then they have to tally with them responsibilities along with the rights because it is their responsibility to know that as much as they may be incensed with the headlines, they are the same laws which protect them as individuals and as a federation 22 The British government should therefore not diminish the Human Rights Act but instead better look and appreciate it. There should be no retreat over the Human Rights Act and its critics should be brought on board to understa nd the benefits it fetchs the country. The Human Rights Act should be extended because the creation of the British Bill of Rights will not make it possible for the internalisation and signifiers on the British obligations which are incorporated in the ECHR. This is because once the laws are enshrined in the British Law, then all the Human Rights Act could have totally been overhauled and replaced by the British Bill of Rights.Rather than the British government seeks to diminish or repeal the Human Rights Act, it should instead extend it and commit itself full to the ECHR23. The British government should also be aware that by seeking to swap the HRA with the BBR, then they could have undecided up room for the creation of probatory legal problems which would arise as a result of reduction of any of the protections which are guaranteed and contained under the ECHR. The HRA should not be repealed because in any case it was to be repealed, and then it will not make any major differe nce because even if the parliament repeals it, the Courts can, by themselves, decide to carry out it anyway. check to the President of the Supreme Court in Britain, no great impact could be achieved if parliament chose to repeal the Human Rights Act because to him, the Act has already achieved the Constitutional Statutes which shew them very impossible to repeal24. The Human Rights Act 1998 should be upheld and even be extended because it has changed the constitutional role of the British Courts as far as domestic legislation is concerned since all legislation in Britain must now be fully interpreted in accordance with the rights contained in the European convention. The implementation of the Human Rights Act has therefore changed the way the constitution has evolved and also changed the roles of the judiciary.This is because the judiciary has adapted so as to incorporate the HRA25. The Human Rights Act should be repealed or replaced by the British Bill of Rights since it is clear that in circumstances where it is difficult to interpret legislation in line with the European Community on Human Rights convention, then the British law will be given prevalence over the contravention. The Human Rights Act should be re-branded into the British Bill of Rights because it can n change the publics perception26. This is true up because it is Acts text that critics of the Human Rights are against and they are against the public bodies the decisions by the courts that people do not like.We should therefore, repeal or even substitute the HRA with the BBR before it even survives the stage of adolescence because the politicians who are very well known for permitting internment on a yearly basis cannot be trusted to build on the existing freedoms and rights but instead, they will aim at destroying the same27. The Human Rights Acts of 1998 which incorporated the ECHR into British law should not be repealed or even be replaced by the BBR because it gives the citizens statut ory rights to enable them enforce their Human Rights in any Court in Britain 28. These rights were brought home by the consolidation of the ECHR, and therefore, made it easier for British Citizens to access them locally in their national courts. The incorporation of these conventions into the British laws therefore, not only provided a detonating device but also a storey for human rights.The Human Rights Act should be extended because it gives parliament the freedom to produce the rights for instance by a freedom of information Act which is contained in article 40. The British citizens were very privileged after the full implementation of the Human Rights Act in the year 2000 because they were able to ask their rights under legislation in a British Court rather than in Strasbourg where the final arbiter on interpretation of the convention of the ECHR is located. It should therefore, be noted that the sole reason of introducing the HRA in Britain was actually to bring the righ ts home to the people of Britain29. The Human Rights Act should not be extended because it does not in any way create young human rights or take away any existing human rights.Instead, the HRA deliver the advantageouslysed the devastation that was caused by the World War II and aimed at protecting the primary freedoms and rights of the British people. The HRA seeks to enable the British Citizens to enforce their human rights locally in the courts in the UK without necessarily taking their cases to Strasbourg through provision of easier and better access to rights which currently exist. On the hand, extending the Human Rights Act is beneficial for the British people because those people who are against it have been known to have moral remissness and ignorance of the law. This is because the Human Rights Act empowers people to bring forward their interests.The human Rights Act should be upheld and extended because it belongs to all the human kind on account of their humanities an d not base on the membership of the narrower patternifications like ethnicity, class or citizenship. Unlike the British Bill of Rights which may tend to exclude by definition the non-citizens of a country from its protection, the Human Rights Act seeks to protect every human being regardless of where one comes from, the tegument color, age or gender. Individuals like the undocumented employees, a single mum who loses all her benefits and the inmates in Guantanamo Bay actually overlook the state or law which can protect them. For such people to enjoy the benefits of humanity and the rights associated with it, passing of a new British Bill of rights or care the initial Human Rights Act adds zip to their lives30.The HRA should not be extended because it does not enlarge the remedies or rights of people in the United dry land whose rights in the convention have been violated but instead it enables those remedies and rights to be enforced and asserted by the domestic courts in Bri tain and not by recourse in Strasbourg. The Act should be extended because since its implementation, it has had a great deal of positive influence on the British Courts and therefore led to substantial proceeds on the quality of public memorial tablet by the Executive, the public bodies, the Judges and the parliament in general. The replacement of the Human Rights Act by the British Bill of Rights will compromise the quality of these public governing body institutions31.The Human Rights Act should not be repealed because it could lead to the prevention of the United Kingdom citizens from exercising their fundamental rights in the UK Courts and therefore leading to prolonged delays for the citizens who would be forced to present their appeals to the European Community on Human Rights in Strasbourg in put in to assert their rights. The HRA should be replaced by the BBR as suggested by the British government which pointed out that they may build on the HRA to build a British Bill o f Duties and rights. However such an attempt by the government is prone to bring success because of questions that have been elevated in relation with these proposals. Among the questions that have been raised are whether there exist things like the rights for the British people or the British rights and how such rights can in effect operate within the framework of decadence to Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.Questions have also been raised as to whether there should be any inclusion of the economic and social rights within the British Bill of rights. The Human Rights Act should therefore be left the way it is and never be replaced by the British Bill of Rights because it could lead to so many another(prenominal) legal complications in Britain32. The Human Rights Act should not be replaced into British Human Rights because the Bill of Rights could bring in ideas of fashioning some of the additional rights in the Bill of Rights to be justifiable and therefore devising the j udiciary to further expand its ground of influence on issues which could be better handled by the parliamentarians.The HRA should not be replaced by the British Bill of Rights because there is a lot of confusion which has continued to reign as to whether the New Bill of Rights would comfortably sit alongside the Human Rights Act or it would be a direct replacement of the Human Rights Act. Instead of having ii documents which would be unhelpful to the people it will be preferable to have a single document (the Human Rights Act) which adds to the ECHR33. The Human Rights Act should be repealed or even be replaced by the British Bill of Rights depending on the public good because it was enacted by parliament in 1998 and should therefore be fully discussed to determine whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The British government should therefore place its decoct on the human rights as a way of justifying and improving the official decision make rather than automaticall y making it to become a legal issue.In cases where the public authorities feel the need to tamper with the individual human rights, then must have genuine motives and follow fair and just procedures. In addition, the Act should not be repealed or be replaced by the British Bill of Rights because it is good for the British people. What needs to be do is to improve education about the Human Rights Act among the public to ensure that it occupies a more strategic position in schools and colleges. This is the right time to sell the true values of the Human Rights Act to the general public, something that has never been done after the Act became effective. By so doing, the public would be in a better position to be informed as to whether to repeal the Human Rights Act, repeal it or extend it34.People who support the HRA rgue that it should be extended because it is the safe and sure channel of swelled protection to the marginalized and most vulnerable members of any society. They claim that anyone who is in Britain for any reason is entitled towards fundamental human rights which the public and the government are duly and legally obliged to obey and respect. This is because the Human Rights Act of 1998 made them to become law. Similarly, the Act should be extended because the rights contained in the convention not only deals with matters of death and life but also affects the rights possesses by people in their everyday life reflected in what they do, secernate and their beliefs.