AMETHYST enviou o link
de um blog para você:
When men are pure, laws are useless; when men are corrupt, laws are
broken./["Se os homens são puros, as leis são desnecessárias, se os homens
são corruptos, as leis são inúteis"] (Thomas Jefferson)
Blog: BRADO EM UNÍSSONO/THE CRY IN UNISON
Postagem: A lawyer enemy of Brazil - say no to Fachin
Link: http://bradoemunissono.
--
Powered by Blogger
https://www.blogger.com/
de um blog para você:
When men are pure, laws are useless; when men are corrupt, laws are
broken./["Se os homens são puros, as leis são desnecessárias, se os homens
são corruptos, as leis são inúteis"] (Thomas Jefferson)
Blog: BRADO EM UNÍSSONO/THE CRY IN UNISON
Postagem: A lawyer enemy of Brazil - say no to Fachin
Link: http://bradoemunissono.
--
Powered by Blogger
https://www.blogger.com/
SOURCE/LINK:
http://www.cacp.org.br/um-jurista-inimigo-do-brasil-diga-nao-a-fachin/
[ENGLISH VERSION]
A lawyer enemy of Brazil - say no to Fachin
Reinaldo's Magazine blog Azevedo See
on 05/11/2015
DECONSTRUCTING MR. FACHIN IMAGE –
CAUTION, SENATORS! Based on videos, candidate for the Supreme Court
tries to deny his thought and leftwing activism. The question is: cheating
before or now? The opponent of private ownership and the family says defamed. I proved
that it’s not correct!
tries to deny his thought and leftwing activism. The question is: cheating
before or now? The opponent of private ownership and the family says defamed. I proved
that it’s not correct!
Here is a long,
very long text. More than 14 thousand keystrokes.
I hope the senators you have the patience to read it and then visit the links
to which it refers. Something very serious is in dispute. It is the country's
future. Moreover, I am not in this business just to make firula on Facebook,
no. Let's talk seriously. See the “Veja” cover of this week.
very long text. More than 14 thousand keystrokes.
I hope the senators you have the patience to read it and then visit the links
to which it refers. Something very serious is in dispute. It is the country's
future. Moreover, I am not in this business just to make firula on Facebook,
no. Let's talk seriously. See the “Veja” cover of this week.
Yeah ... Luiz Edson Fachin has the right to claim a place in the Supreme
Court. And the people responsible, VERY ESPECIALLY THE SENATORS have a right to
know what he thinks. The lawyer decided to release four videos on Facebook in
trying to treat as mere "rumor" and improper assignments things that
are of his own and that carry his signature, which he never relinquished. The
page is called "FachinYes" launched by a group led by his son in law,
Marcos Rocha Gonçalves, also Professor of Law . What are the reasons for the
decision! A vacancies of the Federal Supreme Court seat now is played in clashes of opinion on social
networks. This simple initiative should lead the Senate to think. Is this the
same way?
Court. And the people responsible, VERY ESPECIALLY THE SENATORS have a right to
know what he thinks. The lawyer decided to release four videos on Facebook in
trying to treat as mere "rumor" and improper assignments things that
are of his own and that carry his signature, which he never relinquished. The
page is called "FachinYes" launched by a group led by his son in law,
Marcos Rocha Gonçalves, also Professor of Law . What are the reasons for the
decision! A vacancies of the Federal Supreme Court seat now is played in clashes of opinion on social
networks. This simple initiative should lead the Senate to think. Is this the
same way?
Private ownership
In the videos,
Fachin answers four questions. One of them is this: "Some say that Fachin is against private property. Will I lose my
land? "The lawyer, of course !, denies. It says that the property is "a fundamental right and as such, we
must surely obedience to this constitutional command. Because the Constitution
is our social contract. [...] None of us can have a constitution to call your
constitution. "
Fachin answers four questions. One of them is this: "Some say that Fachin is against private property. Will I lose my
land? "The lawyer, of course !, denies. It says that the property is "a fundamental right and as such, we
must surely obedience to this constitutional command. Because the Constitution
is our social contract. [...] None of us can have a constitution to call your
constitution. "
That's what he says
in the video. Now let's see what he wrote:
in the video. Now let's see what he wrote:
"The Institute of property was and remains
sore point: in the discussions on the key issues of the country Or:." From
a privatized concept, the Constitution came into force the social function
applied to the right to land ownership. It is a hybrid insufficient hybridity, because it is the middle ground between the property as a
right and the property as a social function. . To move forward, it seems
necessary to understand that property is a social function "They want
more:" If, instead of the farm have a social function, it becomes social
function, will be concluded that there is no proprietary right without
compliance with the requirements of the social function " Slightly more ,". Those
homeowners who are producing (...) would be subject to expropriation for social
interest for agrarian reform purposes. " The full text of
your article is here, between pages 302 and 309. Ah, yes: for
Fachin, landowners are " whitewashed spirits by hatred and violence."
sore point: in the discussions on the key issues of the country Or:." From
a privatized concept, the Constitution came into force the social function
applied to the right to land ownership. It is a hybrid insufficient hybridity, because it is the middle ground between the property as a
right and the property as a social function. . To move forward, it seems
necessary to understand that property is a social function "They want
more:" If, instead of the farm have a social function, it becomes social
function, will be concluded that there is no proprietary right without
compliance with the requirements of the social function " Slightly more ,". Those
homeowners who are producing (...) would be subject to expropriation for social
interest for agrarian reform purposes. " The full text of
your article is here, between pages 302 and 309. Ah, yes: for
Fachin, landowners are " whitewashed spirits by hatred and violence."
When the Federal
Supreme Court discusses matters involving landless people, maroon, indigenous
areas, which Mr. Fachin will prevail?
Supreme Court discusses matters involving landless people, maroon, indigenous
areas, which Mr. Fachin will prevail?
The family
Another video seeks
to respond to Mr. Fachin is even "against the traditional family
formation" and in favor of polygamy. For all who wrote and supported, it
is, yes! But now, in the Facebook, he says no. And it is not pretty. The lawyer
wrote the foreword to a book that flirts openly with polygamy (read here) and that the traditional family is treated as "yoke".
to respond to Mr. Fachin is even "against the traditional family
formation" and in favor of polygamy. For all who wrote and supported, it
is, yes! But now, in the Facebook, he says no. And it is not pretty. The lawyer
wrote the foreword to a book that flirts openly with polygamy (read here) and that the traditional family is treated as "yoke".
And how he sees the
right to effective family in Brazil? He says, as a " gullible and enthusiastic chorus of creeping manualistic". When
Fachin tried to deceive us? When he
wrote the preface or when he recorded the video? Before, convenham, the
enticement was unnecessary because he did not earn anything from it. Now, the
prize would be great: a seat in the Federal Supreme Court.
right to effective family in Brazil? He says, as a " gullible and enthusiastic chorus of creeping manualistic". When
Fachin tried to deceive us? When he
wrote the preface or when he recorded the video? Before, convenham, the
enticement was unnecessary because he did not earn anything from it. Now, the
prize would be great: a seat in the Federal Supreme Court.
It's amazing that you try to deny the obvious. The
Fourth Day of Civil Law in Brasilia, he proposed the concept of
"simultaneous Families" (the rights of lovers) when he
refused. The statement was this:
Fourth Day of Civil Law in Brasilia, he proposed the concept of
"simultaneous Families" (the rights of lovers) when he
refused. The statement was this:
"The determination of non-establishment of
stable relationships when one partner is married to third should contain
exception in the case of the simultaneous existence of families, investigated
the conditions of its formation, addition to the cases already provided of fact
and legal separation."
stable relationships when one partner is married to third should contain
exception in the case of the simultaneous existence of families, investigated
the conditions of its formation, addition to the cases already provided of fact
and legal separation."
I can prove what I
say. The text is here, starting on page 708. I prepare for the debate. I do not try to break
the tie things with low proselytizing videos.
say. The text is here, starting on page 708. I prepare for the debate. I do not try to break
the tie things with low proselytizing videos.
You think it
settled? In 2013, less than two years, he returned to the charge, then the VI
Journey of Civil Law, and made three proposals housing the concept of plural
family, not monogamous. All were rejected. Read:
settled? In 2013, less than two years, he returned to the charge, then the VI
Journey of Civil Law, and made three proposals housing the concept of plural
family, not monogamous. All were rejected. Read:
Statement 1
"A parallel marital relationship to a marriage
or a stable relationship, being in public, continuous and lasting, with the aim
of starting a family, take effect in the law field of Family and Succession,
since all graduates households express acceptance or implicit tolerance for
maintaining marital concurrency, making cohabitation and not mere adulterous
relationship. "
or a stable relationship, being in public, continuous and lasting, with the aim
of starting a family, take effect in the law field of Family and Succession,
since all graduates households express acceptance or implicit tolerance for
maintaining marital concurrency, making cohabitation and not mere adulterous
relationship. "
Statement 2
"It is legally possible to setup simultaneous
families, being unconstitutional paragraph 1 of article 1727 of the Civil
Code."
families, being unconstitutional paragraph 1 of article 1727 of the Civil
Code."
Statement 3
"In the competition between the spouse and
other heirs (descendants or ascendants), with duplication of stable unions, the
assets of the deceased should be amassed in concurrence of two
relationships."
other heirs (descendants or ascendants), with duplication of stable unions, the
assets of the deceased should be amassed in concurrence of two
relationships."
Dear Lawer, you did
or did not do these proposals for less than two years? I mean that in the
Supreme, have different ideas? Or you want to change your belief just to get
the job? If so, suits: not deserve it.
or did not do these proposals for less than two years? I mean that in the
Supreme, have different ideas? Or you want to change your belief just to get
the job? If so, suits: not deserve it.
He is a militant
cause. Senators want to know more? Read the article he wrote for the
"Journal of Law Family and Inheritance / Issues / 6 - Oct / Nov
2008". The full text is here. I highlight
excerpts:
cause. Senators want to know more? Read the article he wrote for the
"Journal of Law Family and Inheritance / Issues / 6 - Oct / Nov
2008". The full text is here. I highlight
excerpts:
"(...)
Understanding the current Brazilian Constitution
will make room for the family, this contemporary conception of law, be included
as open and plural one.
will make room for the family, this contemporary conception of law, be included
as open and plural one.
It is this step of effective citizenship claiming
the constitutional plurality of the family, not only matrimony, diárquica,
eudaimonistic and egalitarian.
the constitutional plurality of the family, not only matrimony, diárquica,
eudaimonistic and egalitarian.
(...) Is held to a plural and open design of family
that, somehow, comfort, dress warmly and take shelter during transit of the
journey of each and all collectively.
that, somehow, comfort, dress warmly and take shelter during transit of the
journey of each and all collectively.
(...) However, the new Civil Code is born out of
date and exclusionary, as as the debate on the biogenetic, stable unions in the
broad sense, fraternal family (between brothers or sisters), socio-affective
affiliation, to name a few.
date and exclusionary, as as the debate on the biogenetic, stable unions in the
broad sense, fraternal family (between brothers or sisters), socio-affective
affiliation, to name a few.
(...)
The end of wedding
The Layer Mr.
Fachin is director of a section called IBDFAM (Brazilian Institute of Family
Law). In a speech at the IX Brazilian Congress on Family Law, he approached the
end of the formal marriage contract. The advice of the NGO itself, of which he
is boss, summed up his thoughts:
Fachin is director of a section called IBDFAM (Brazilian Institute of Family
Law). In a speech at the IX Brazilian Congress on Family Law, he approached the
end of the formal marriage contract. The advice of the NGO itself, of which he
is boss, summed up his thoughts:
"Show that marriage as it has been framed as a
contract, it has no place in contemporary family law. It is with this focus
that the Lawyer Luiz Edson Fachin, national director of IBDFAM, led his lecture
on the last day 22, during the IX Brazilian Congress on Family Law, in Araxá /
MG.
contract, it has no place in contemporary family law. It is with this focus
that the Lawyer Luiz Edson Fachin, national director of IBDFAM, led his lecture
on the last day 22, during the IX Brazilian Congress on Family Law, in Araxá /
MG.
Marriage as a formal contract, a heritage which
Brazilian law received the so-called classical law, established in some formal
and rigid assumptions, no longer exists. And there are several reasons for this
change, according to Fachin, like calling 'transubjetivação the contract', according
to which those who hire does not hire only those who hire, so marriage is not
just about those who are formally members of the wedding. "
Brazilian law received the so-called classical law, established in some formal
and rigid assumptions, no longer exists. And there are several reasons for this
change, according to Fachin, like calling 'transubjetivação the contract', according
to which those who hire does not hire only those who hire, so marriage is not
just about those who are formally members of the wedding. "
The text then
prepare for your advice here. Mr. Fachin says he is the victim of defamation
campaign. Really?
prepare for your advice here. Mr. Fachin says he is the victim of defamation
campaign. Really?
Oh, it can be
almost poetic to address the issue. Read what he said at the meeting, in your
own words:
almost poetic to address the issue. Read what he said at the meeting, in your
own words:
"This contract model [of marriage] died. It is
born, however, keeping the important wedding idea as one of the possible
organization of families, not only a new concept of marriage contract. Killed
the old man is born a new one that is the so-called substantial coexistence
pact. Marriage can not be a mere contract where there subject, object, form and
legality. Marriage is a pact of coexistence that often overcomes the issues of
strict legality, reaching a set of open and plural indeterminacies that
obviously the classic wedding template no longer incorporated, so to speak of
the rigor of marriage death means the renewal of noise marriage as an expression
of the affection of possibilities, among several others that an inclusive law,
an inclusive system have to admit. "
born, however, keeping the important wedding idea as one of the possible
organization of families, not only a new concept of marriage contract. Killed
the old man is born a new one that is the so-called substantial coexistence
pact. Marriage can not be a mere contract where there subject, object, form and
legality. Marriage is a pact of coexistence that often overcomes the issues of
strict legality, reaching a set of open and plural indeterminacies that
obviously the classic wedding template no longer incorporated, so to speak of
the rigor of marriage death means the renewal of noise marriage as an expression
of the affection of possibilities, among several others that an inclusive law,
an inclusive system have to admit. "
Now, in one of the videos, he says the opposite:
"The Brazilian family structure is a
monogamous structure, and any interpretation that was made of something that
might have come from some academic debate is a misunderstanding, does not
correspond to my point of view. I have understood that family is basically a
sharing of life at the center of the family, matrimony union not only as a
formal contract, but as a life project which is explained in a story for four
hands. "
monogamous structure, and any interpretation that was made of something that
might have come from some academic debate is a misunderstanding, does not
correspond to my point of view. I have understood that family is basically a
sharing of life at the center of the family, matrimony union not only as a
formal contract, but as a life project which is explained in a story for four
hands. "
To say what? Second
hand embarassment , dear Lawyer!
hand embarassment , dear Lawyer!
Who more? For
there!
there!
"The
spatiality and temporality crumbled contemporary classic contract [of marriage]
and demonstrate that the concept is incompatible with the existential plurissubjetivos
pacts. The finitude of the arrangements gave birth families, far beyond mere freedom of contract, a renewed meaning of
responsibility and even of freedom. Freedom ceases to be merely formal or
negative, demanding a practice of substantial freedom, that is, freedom for
personal development, with its own limits nonexistent in contractual relations.
The agreement, therefore, to deal with these wedding reinterpretation, no
longer serves. (...) "
spatiality and temporality crumbled contemporary classic contract [of marriage]
and demonstrate that the concept is incompatible with the existential plurissubjetivos
pacts. The finitude of the arrangements gave birth families, far beyond mere freedom of contract, a renewed meaning of
responsibility and even of freedom. Freedom ceases to be merely formal or
negative, demanding a practice of substantial freedom, that is, freedom for
personal development, with its own limits nonexistent in contractual relations.
The agreement, therefore, to deal with these wedding reinterpretation, no
longer serves. (...) "
And the Lawyer is
not to say that flirts with polygamy and the end of the traditional family?
Let's be clear? Flirt there! It is adherence to the same two causes.
not to say that flirts with polygamy and the end of the traditional family?
Let's be clear? Flirt there! It is adherence to the same two causes.
To end this
chapter, remember that IBDFAM of Fachin made the following proposals contained
in the PLS 470/2013 - YES, 2013 -, which the Statute of the Family
chapter, remember that IBDFAM of Fachin made the following proposals contained
in the PLS 470/2013 - YES, 2013 -, which the Statute of the Family
(full):
a) Expansion of family entities, with inclusion of
extramarital affairs;
extramarital affairs;
b) pluriparental family;
c) multiparentalidade;
d) presumption of paternity.
Lawyer Mr. Fachin
has two ways out: to say that he was wrong in all these theses to the year
before and now changed his mind. And the senators evaluate its seriousness. Or
say who thinks this and wants to reach the Supreme anyway. ONLY CAN NOT FOOL
TRY THE SENATORS AND SILENCE CRITICS WITH YOUR INTERNET VIDEOZINHOS that belie
YOUR TEXTS AND ITS MILITANCY.
has two ways out: to say that he was wrong in all these theses to the year
before and now changed his mind. And the senators evaluate its seriousness. Or
say who thinks this and wants to reach the Supreme anyway. ONLY CAN NOT FOOL
TRY THE SENATORS AND SILENCE CRITICS WITH YOUR INTERNET VIDEOZINHOS that belie
YOUR TEXTS AND ITS MILITANCY.
The duo illegal
militancy
militancy
Finally, he tries
to deny it has illegally exercised the double militancy, ie acted as a private
lawyer and as state attorney. The question has been properly answered by a
study of the Senate Legal Counsel.
to deny it has illegally exercised the double militancy, ie acted as a private
lawyer and as state attorney. The question has been properly answered by a
study of the Senate Legal Counsel.
The argument gets
to be childish for anyone wishing to reach the Federal Supreme Court. He says
he acted regularly for three reasons:
to be childish for anyone wishing to reach the Federal Supreme Court. He says
he acted regularly for three reasons:
1st: the
competition notice in which it was approved open space for double duty, and was
based on that announcement he took office as attorney;
competition notice in which it was approved open space for double duty, and was
based on that announcement he took office as attorney;
IT IS WRONG - The
announcement was made in the law of force that was made void by the State
Constitution promulgated on October 5, 1989 and Complementary Law of 18 January
1990. Both forbade the double militancy. Mr. Fachin was only appointed attorney
on 12 February 1990. It means that by simply passing a contest already felt
attorney? It’s almost ridiculous!
announcement was made in the law of force that was made void by the State
Constitution promulgated on October 5, 1989 and Complementary Law of 18 January
1990. Both forbade the double militancy. Mr. Fachin was only appointed attorney
on 12 February 1990. It means that by simply passing a contest already felt
attorney? It’s almost ridiculous!
2nd: La says that the OAB, consulted by it
authorized the Law;
authorized the Law;
IT IS WRONG - the
OAB has no power or authority to change the content of the Constitution of the
State and of Complementary Law.
OAB has no power or authority to change the content of the Constitution of the
State and of Complementary Law.
3rd: finally, he argues, an amendment to the
Constitution of Paraná, in 2000, established "the right acquired
concomitant exercise" dual activity.
Constitution of Paraná, in 2000, established "the right acquired
concomitant exercise" dual activity.
IT IS WRONG - Even so, he is admitting to have had
a double agency illegally between 1990 and 2000?
a double agency illegally between 1990 and 2000?
I conclude
Until yesterday, I thought that Mr. Fachin could
not be a minister of the Supreme for three reasons:
not be a minister of the Supreme for three reasons:
To
a: because I think
that feeds real hatred to private property and to farmers;
that feeds real hatred to private property and to farmers;
b: because it is an
explicit opponent of family organization like the democratic world to know;
explicit opponent of family organization like the democratic world to know;
c: for illegally
exercised the dual professional militancy: lawyer and state prosecutor.
exercised the dual professional militancy: lawyer and state prosecutor.
Now, I have a
fourth reason, equally or more serious of the others:
fourth reason, equally or more serious of the others:
d) I think he's
trying to deceive and evade us, in order
to gain time.
trying to deceive and evade us, in order
to gain time.
What he thought is
written, it became militancy and proposed.
At the time, its exotic ideas surrendered his progressive fame of modern,
cool, attuned ... And he was not gentle with those
who disagreed with him. He called the opponent thought valueless.
written, it became militancy and proposed.
At the time, its exotic ideas surrendered his progressive fame of modern,
cool, attuned ... And he was not gentle with those
who disagreed with him. He called the opponent thought valueless.
Now, with a wave of
the Federal Supreme Court ahead, trying
to hide the Senate what he thinks and invests in confusion. It Will be cheated who
wants to. The facts are well presented . The texts are exposed. The links are
there.
the Federal Supreme Court ahead, trying
to hide the Senate what he thinks and invests in confusion. It Will be cheated who
wants to. The facts are well presented . The texts are exposed. The links are
there.
Moreover, the
Federal Supreme Court is too serious to become little war cause on Facebook,
dispute, its better when best led by the young people . The fact his son in law to
coordinate the page is enough for me to see Mr. Fachin as a family friend ...
That, at most befriends his own family.
Federal Supreme Court is too serious to become little war cause on Facebook,
dispute, its better when best led by the young people . The fact his son in law to
coordinate the page is enough for me to see Mr. Fachin as a family friend ...
That, at most befriends his own family.
Mr. Fachin must
have the boldness to take their thinking. He has the right to be against
private property, against the family and against the law. It is not correct to
try to fool the senators and other Brazilians.
have the boldness to take their thinking. He has the right to be against
private property, against the family and against the law. It is not correct to
try to fool the senators and other Brazilians.
text 5pm
Reinaldo's Magazine blog Azevedo See
on 05/11/2015
on 05/11/2015
==//==
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário