View Single Post
Old 26-12-2008, 10:23 AM   #8
boots
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: OZ
Posts: 15,676
Likes: 432 (307 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yozhik View Post
Whose honour is being questioned?
Certainly not the judges!
He isn't the one who has been invited to answer an accusation!
So it is 100% about YOUR honour; which when you speak of it, is "my honour".

When you utter the words "your honour", you are externalising it ... you are disassociating from it. Given that a corporate body cannot speak - only a man can - is the man referencing "your honour" on behalf of the dead entity? By acknowledging "your honour", is the man further adjoining to the person by speaking for him?

You speak of respect for the Magistrate; on what basis has this respect been given?
The judge is a man; an equal.
In all that he has shown you, he has no respect for you.
He refers to you by "Mr" or other corporate labels.
He does not see a man standing before him; he sees a fictitious, non-sentient, profit centre for the sham.
Respect is earnt and should be mutual.
Yep I an see the point in that statement.

What about dropping the whole My honour and Your honour statements. Then addressing the judge as Sir?


.
boots is offline   Reply With Quote