logically makes no sense...

idk what source you are taking this from

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/

None. If we share the river with Mexico, no country can claim it to be their own. Technically, since it is an international watercourse, under international law it is both the U.S and Mexico's river.

."Watercourse States shall in their respective territories utilize an international watercourse in an

equitable and reasonable manner. "

"Watercourse States shall cooperate on the basis of sovereign equality, territorial integrity,

mutual benefit and good faith in order to attain optimal utilization and adequate protection of an

international watercourse."

These statements pretty much show that it is the role for sovereign states to share their international watercourse.

I TALK ABOUT THIS MORE HERE:

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/

ESPECIALLY HERE:

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/2017/03/opinionanalysis-annotations-on-icj.html

The quotes above came from this source.

http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8 31997.pdf

check this out:

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/2017/03/opinionanalysis-annotations-on-icj.html

None. If we share the river with Mexico, no country can claim it to be their own. Technically, since it is an international watercourse, under international law it is both the U.S and Mexico's river.

."Watercourse States shall in their respective territories utilize an international watercourse in an

equitable and reasonable manner. "

"Watercourse States shall cooperate on the basis of sovereign equality, territorial integrity,

mutual benefit and good faith in order to attain optimal utilization and adequate protection of an

international watercourse."

These statements pretty much show that it is the role for sovereign states to share their international watercourse.

I TALK ABOUT THIS MORE HERE:

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/

ESPECIALLY HERE:

http://internationalawunderstanding.blogspot.com/2017/03/opinionanalysis-annotations-on-icj.html

Is the person healthy? Then yes, the women should be able to show off her body however she likes. If she is not, then no. Modeling serves as an example to others on beauty standards. If this person is unhealthy, she is giving off the message that it is ok to be unhealthy.

To end someone's life is more humanitarian? If someone is being tortured physically they suffer greatly. However, if someone were to be killed their life has ended,finished,concluded. This is something worse than torture, having human life being taken away. This affects family members and others as well. No matter how "aggressive" the person is they do not deserve to be killed. The definition of "humanitarian" is essentially promoting human welfare. In what way are you doing that by ending human life? What are you promoting by killing others?

I completely agree. A pressing issue that definitely has a big impact on whether an abortion is right or wrong is rape.