November 30, 2012

Defended 101, 2004). As the society suffers destradicionalizaes daily, as effect, autonomy to the citizens is guaranteed to filter the information that receive. The current society understands that the search for preserving the past without reflection is inconceivable. The defended tradition of traditional form is seen as irrefletido fundamentalismo, and as such, unhealthy. Soon, reflectivity also is synonymous of a bigger human development (GIDDENS, 1994). As> internal world external world then is abolished (BERGER; LUCKMANN, 1995; VIGOTSKI, 1999; WALNUT, 2001). The human being, as to be gregrio that it is, alone must be thought> is the proper condition of our thought, at the same time where is half to represent the reality (IBEZ, 2004, P. 46). Being a vehicle surely notable of expression of the significant contents of the citizens, also of the o agreement necessary to understand its circles of interaction. The speech passes to be understood thus, as the linguistic set that supports and stimulates these social relations. The language and the speech pass to be seen, not only a form of disarticulated and untied expression, but as an interchange where the joints of the power and knowing if reveal (IIGUEZ, 2004; FOULCAULT, 1977). This also is one of the reasons for which social construcionismo includes in its studies> questioning the estimated ones of the essencialismo, the social construcionista theory dislocated the focus of the attention of the person for the social domain (WALNUT, 2001, P. 146). This means that, differently of other theories that naturalize the phenomena created by the proper man, the Construcionismo criticizes the traditional models, problematizando them with inquiries in its partner-historical roots (BOCK, 2004; CURED, 2008). The social phenomena then are problematizados ...
Old Rome As result, we will come back to catacumbas of Old Rome. Before opposing in them to the law that will the same allow marriage between people of sex, we want to leave since already consigned that we do not have nothing against the homossexualidade, therefore, even so confronts to the natural laws of God, this exactly God in them endowed with the free will and each one that alive of the skill that to understand well. The choice is of each one and each one will answer for its choice. ' ' To each one, according to its obras' '. If two people of the same sex to desire to live the same under ceiling as if husband and woman were, that they live, but do not spread this form of living as if it was a behavior of most normal of world, not! If it was, would not have necessity to fight for this right. This right already would be consecrated since that the humanity exists. It would be a natural law, as well as the right to breathe, to constitute a family in the meaning of the word. In addition, nobody has the right in entering in my house nor in the house of nobody through news articles, protests, profane walks, parties, everything televised, pra to demand a new order and to place in doubt a great mass of young with age in formation. If somebody to want to commit sins against the meat; against the chastity, behaviors vehemently condemned by the great majority of the religions and countries, that commit, but they commit in the recondite one of its homes and its consciences, but never they are forgotten: ' ' The sowing is free, but the harvest will be obrigatria' '. This law confronts the fundamental principles of our constitution, in special to its art. 226, 5 - ' ' The referring rights and duties to the conjugal society are exerted equally by man for mulher' '.