Legal Equality

He is interesting without a doubt to question in this time the political figure of the law from a philosophical aspect and humanist, firstly and now that in view of the political events that have happened in our country, and that to the majority of the Mexicans it seems interests the term to us of the violation, it has made me reflect about this one political figure, and by such reason I am realised the following questionings: 1. In a country with the political structure of a Republic, is necessary the Law? 2. In a country that is in force with a Constitution in which Prohibition of the slavery establishes a Guarantee of Legal Equality//Prohibition of discrimination. The Law only changes of categorical way this guarantee, envistiendo to a few Mexicans of supposed " impunity jurdica" with the famous Law, so it would seem that we were at the time of the Medievo. 3. It is by these questionings that I have reached the conclusion that I do not include this political figure and is for that reason which I make this question Mexican, if your you defend " NOT TO the DESAFUERO" So that you defend to a political figure that citizen does to you of second? 4. In the necessary case that him Law was something inevitable which is the justification that prevails to that they carry the law? When doing to me these questions, I have reflected that in this country some Mexicans live carrying the conception on that: " the laws are made to break them or negociarlas" Of common way some Mexicans their rights do not make merit since to make them merit it get ready with making merit his obligations, and to very few they like to have obligations. Several Mexicans are to the expectation of which them " revolucin&quot makes justice; and they can thus do " merit his derechos" , and I ask which Revolution? , against who? , in favor of whom? and by all means this takes inevitably to the social resentment (it sounds to you well-known).