1 INTRODUCTION ' ' Secularizao' ' it is nothing more than a metafrico term, however, its meaning semantic passed for changes in elapsing of the centuries. For Marramao (1997) ' ' the impossibility to lead back this notion to a unitria conception does not depend mere, as in the case of other characteristic terms of modernity, of its polissemia or polyvalence semntica.' ' But it still needs before, in Marramao, of one ' ' structural ambivalence of meaning, which of the place the antithetic premises or diametrical inversas' '. The word ' ' secularizao' ' she is deriving of the Latin classic that means ' ' sculo' ' (saeculum), however, it could also be meant as, ' ' idade' ' , ' ' poca' '. With the time, its significao acquired other meanings as ' ' mundo' ' , ' ' the life of mundo' ' ' ' the spirit of mundo' '. For the ecclesiastics, the term was spread out as something mundane, hedonista.
It has divergences in what it refers to the initial use of the term. It is said that the word to secularizar was used first for Longueville, delegated French, in 1646. For it, to secularizar had meant as ' ' the expropriation of the ecclesiastical goods for the princes or of the national Churches reformadas' ' (Marramao, 1997), in this direction, to secularizar was implied in the politician-legal field. Destarte, in the end of the century XVI, this same expression was referenciada of divergent form with the used term for Longueville. In the French canonic disputes it appears, the term ' ' secularizao' ' , as one transitus of regularis canonicus, that is, the ticket of religious ' ' regular' ' to the state ' ' secular' ' , or, in a more general way, as they register other studies, of ' ' reduction to the laica life of who received orders religious or lives according to conventual rule.
One of the great problems with which are the Lawyers when interposing a demand, is to choose the legal figure which there are to doubtless apply to certain case, deciding between exoneration and extinction of the nourishing obligation turns out to them to be something tedious, concepts which frequently they tend to seem to them similar, being totally different, because often they demand a person to have acquired the majority of age or because the state of necessity in her has stopped, but erroneously impetran the extinction of the nourishing obligation, when the correct thing is the exoneration of the nourishing obligation. Before entering this exciting subject, I create advisable to make some appreciations of procedural order, that I consider important and that they will serve as plinth for the present analysis. What characterizes to a process is its aim; the decision of a conflict by means of an agreed failure to the petitionary one of the demand that interposes the litigants, which allows the satisfaction of a public and general interest or to eliminate uncertainty with legal relevance; we do not have to understand to the process like a simple trusteeship of the subjective rights of a natural or legal person, because what it is persecuted it is the respect to the human dignity, the reestablishment of the harmony and social La Paz in justice by means of the intervention of the Jurisdictional Organ 1. With respect to Foods, the clearest definition we found in the text of Louis Josserand 2 in its book of Civil Right, Volume I. volume II, where it defines to foods as to have tax legally to a person to assure the subsistence another person (Legal Institute of Level foods Bejamn Aguilar, Page 18). The foods enjoy the following characteristics: intransferable, cannot be waived, imprescriptible, unindemnifiable, intransigible, unattachable, reciprocal and revisable, whereas the nourishing obligation participates in some of the mentioned characteristics, such as personal, intransferable, imprescriptible, unindemnifiable, intransigible, reciprocal personnel, revisable, and in addition divisible.