Free Essays on Raja Soliman

Miguel LÃ ³pez de Legazpi, the Spanish conqueror of the Philippines, founded Manila as a fortified colony in 1571, after defeating the forces of the Muslim ruler Rajah Soliman. In 1601 a seminary for nobles, the first educational institution in the country, was established at Manila by the Jesuits. From the 16th to early 19th centuries, Manila played an important role in trade as a stopover port for the Manila galleons, huge trading ships that profited greatly from trade between China and Mexico. During this time, Chinese merchants settled in Manila and became middlemen for other trade from China. By the 1590s the Chinese had become an economically important community. Many Chinese, aware of the political and social advantages enjoyed by the Roman Catholics in the colony, converted to Catholicism and married Filipino women. Many of their mixed-blood descendants became important in Manila. The city remained under continuous Spanish colonial rule for about 350 years, except for a brie f period during the Seven Years' War when Britain held the city from 1762 to 1764. Discontent with Spanish rule among urban Filipinos and some of the Filipino clergy became especially significant in Manila during the latter half of the 19th century. Nationalist sentiment erupted in 1872 when three Filipino priests, who had been charged with leading a military mutiny at an arsenal near Manila, were executed by the Spaniards. The last rajah of Manila, noted for his daring and bravery. Nephew of Rajah Lakandola. Of all of the early rulers of Manila, he was feared most by the Spaniards. He was killed on June 3, 1571, in the Battle of Bangkusay.... Free Essays on Raja Soliman Free Essays on Raja Soliman Miguel LÃ ³pez de Legazpi, the Spanish conqueror of the Philippines, founded Manila as a fortified colony in 1571, after defeating the forces of the Muslim ruler Rajah Soliman. In 1601 a seminary for nobles, the first educational institution in the country, was established at Manila by the Jesuits. From the 16th to early 19th centuries, Manila played an important role in trade as a stopover port for the Manila galleons, huge trading ships that profited greatly from trade between China and Mexico. During this time, Chinese merchants settled in Manila and became middlemen for other trade from China. By the 1590s the Chinese had become an economically important community. Many Chinese, aware of the political and social advantages enjoyed by the Roman Catholics in the colony, converted to Catholicism and married Filipino women. Many of their mixed-blood descendants became important in Manila. The city remained under continuous Spanish colonial rule for about 350 years, except for a brie f period during the Seven Years' War when Britain held the city from 1762 to 1764. Discontent with Spanish rule among urban Filipinos and some of the Filipino clergy became especially significant in Manila during the latter half of the 19th century. Nationalist sentiment erupted in 1872 when three Filipino priests, who had been charged with leading a military mutiny at an arsenal near Manila, were executed by the Spaniards. The last rajah of Manila, noted for his daring and bravery. Nephew of Rajah Lakandola. Of all of the early rulers of Manila, he was feared most by the Spaniards. He was killed on June 3, 1571, in the Battle of Bangkusay....

Rise of the Killer Mutants

Rise of the Killer Mutants ers appear to be far from solving this phenomenon In 2005, Wright and his team also discovered many streptomyces strain and species have multiple resistances to various antibiotic drugs including some new synthetic drugs. This makes one to think of possible resistance of these streptomyces strain and species to the currently famous herbal drugs. What caught my attention is that commercial livestock practices as well as use of antibacterial detergents are some of the transfer grounds for these killer antibiotic resistant genes.

Lawrence v. Texas Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Lawrence v. Texas - Essay Example Many other reasons were given for declaring the statute illegal, but the second main issue for doing so was the fact that should the â€Å"deviant sex† be taking place between two consenting adults, and not involving minor children, public conduct, and/or prostitution, then it was not for the Court to â€Å"define the meaning of the relationship or to set its boundaries absent injury to a person or abuse of an institution the law protects† (6). The majority went on to say that, for the most part, adults could be trusted to enter into relationships of their own free will, as well as to consent to the type of sexual activity that would take place in them. Though this was a decidedly main issue, it can be said that it goes back to the first main issue, which was that adults, as adults, had a right to do what they wanted in their own homes, free from fear of punishment.  Central to the majority opinion was a previous case, Bowers v. Hardwick, decided in the opposite manne r of Lawrence v. Texas. In Bowers v. Hardwick, the laws were upheld, and sodomy was declared to be an illegal act. The majority of Lawrence v. Texas declared that the reasoning behind the decision made to be flawed, as the Court did not â€Å"appreciate the extent of the liberty at stake† (6). What the Court failed to consider was that, again, the case was about consensual acts private to a relationship, again taking place in the privacy of a home, and not in public view. They also, again, did not involve minors. Therefore, according to the majority opinion.... Though this was a decidedly main issue, it can be said that it goes back to the first main issue, which was that adults, as adults, had a right to do what they wanted in their own homes, free from fear of punishment. Central to the majority opinion was a previous case, Bowers v. Hardwick, decided in the opposite manner of Lawrence v. Texas. In Bowers v. Hardwick, the laws were upheld, and sodomy was declared to be an illegal act. The majority of Lawrence v. Texas declared that the reasoning behind the decision made to be flawed, as the Court did not â€Å"appreciate the extent of the liberty at stake† (6). What the Court failed to consider was that, again, the case was about consensual acts private to a relationship, again taking place in the privacy of a home, and not in public view. They also, again, did not involve minors. Therefore, according to the majority opinion, Bowers v. Hardwick should not have been allowed to uphold the laws in the first place, as individual libert ies were being infringed upon. From the remarks made, it can be concluded that Lawrence v. Texas was simply correcting a wrong, and doing what Bowers v. Hardwick should have done in the first place, which was to declare sodomy the natural act of a relationship, and not something dirty and illegal. There were those on the Supreme Court that disagreed with the majority opinion, chief among them Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas. Their reasoning was separately made in their dissents, with Justice Scalia having the longer of the two. Justice Thomas kept it brief, mainly stating that while he concurred with the fact that the law was â€Å"uncommonly silly† as it was