Search results

I understand your thought processes but they do seem to be inadvertently obfuscating the real issue. Really isn't it quite simple, it's immaterial what I think or you think or what other people may think; she refused to carry out her job, she refused to authorise her deputies, she refused to...

All very laudable but when their actions have consequences and impact on the lives of others then it isn't that simple, as we know (to take it to an extreme) in the case of one or two Ayatollahs.

Or the as the injunction conflicted with her religious beliefs then she should've allowed one of her deputies to act on her behalf? The court would've realised there was a reasonable alternative approach she could've taken. It's her intransigence that has led to the contempt order.