I don't think a film that has no effect on people or society is a good film.

As rural people like to maintain a good name in society, they are more honest about repaying loans.

People, for reasons of their own, often fail to do things that would be good for them or good for society.

Society isn't good at dealing with people who have something concrete to feel guilty about or who are dealing with a loss.

I'm intrigued by people who make their modest living doing good things for others. Teachers, nonprofit workers, librarians... those are the heroes in our society.

Schools and libraries are the twin cornerstones of a civilized society. Libraries are only good if people use them, like books only exist when someone reads them.

If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge? We shouldn't marginalise people for this. They must be integrated into society.

The Catholic Church is an enormous footprint in Chicago, doing a lot of good. That aspiration is felt by a lot of people - that the church succeed - because it will be good for society.

People, for reasons of their own, often fail to do things that would be good for them or good for society. Those failures - joined with the similar failures of others - can readily have a substantial effect on interstate commerce.

It's not good enough to announce 'I know my rights' if you aren't prepared to accept that you have responsibilities to society and your fellow citizens as well. And if people don't live up to those responsibilities to our society, they will not be able to hide behind their rights.

No one has done a study on this, as far as I can tell, but I think Facebook might be the first place where a large number of people have come out. We didn't create that - society was generally ready for that. I think this is just part of the general trend that we talked about, about society being more open, and I think that's good.

Share This Page