What could be more controversial than Abortion?

Considering that not many of the recent topics have been that controversial (no offense), Sylvia and I decided to jump right in. Abortion. I can already hear the groans associated with this topic. *chuckle* Luckily, Sylvia and I are both pro-life. We believe that, abortion should never happen. It is essentially the killing of an innocent baby. It is a simple question, “Should someone be allowed to choose whether someone else lives or not?” It is crazy to think that abortion has become such a controversial issue. Someone shouldn’t be able to end an innocent life just because it is inconvenient to her.

Yes, yes we know, to all those people who say, “Well what if the mother is going to be physically harmed by a pregnancy.” We understand that there are special circumstances where abortion could be used. But in all actuality, a pregnancy being physically harmful to the mother only happens a small percent of the time. We are focusing more on the “irresponsible” pregnancies that are terminated because of one bad night, or some reckless mistake.
How would you feel if your mother, because of one stupid night, decided that she just could not handle a baby?

How would you feel if you had never been born? *scratches head* You know what I mean…There are other alternatives a mother could take besides abortion. There are millions of people in this world who are not able to have a baby. We’re positive they would love the chance to adopt any baby. The scary thought is, “How many doctors…lawyers…or maybe even future presidents have been killed due to abortion?” It is downright despicable.

Second Great Depression?

I felt I should share this with class about our discussion about the financial crisis when I came across it. Do you think this is what our country is coming to?

Personal Responsibility

Almost every post over the last few weeks has hit upon the question of what is personal responsibility? We’ve discussed politics, drinking and smoking, natural disasters, role models, and now violence in video games. They bring up questions like to what extent are voters responsible to learn of the issues and educating themselves? How should the consumption of alcohol be regulated, either it be by the federal government or the individual? We listened to Nick Naylor defend cigarettes on the basis of personal responsibility. Krissy asked the question “What is the responsibility of the individual who chooses not to leave when there are means to evacuate?” Can we blame athletes for being bad role models for kids? And to what extent does violence affect children’s disposition? Most issues can be simplified by focusing on the question of what is personal responsibility? How much should individuals be responsible for rather than placing blame on others?

I’d say that personal responsibility is how this guy defines an adult, “adults take responsibility for themselves.” However, we all know that not all “adults” really take responsibility for what they do. That’s one of the reason we have so many silly complicated laws that need to cover every possible base, because we can’t rely on people taking personal responsibility, we all try and hoist it onto someone else. Personal responsibility requires us to own up to everything we do. To take one example from above, athletes being bad role models for children isn’t necessarily the athletes fault, look at the child himself, the parents, and society for placing athletes on such a high pedestal rather than teachers and doctors. We all read about Paul Farmer this summer, and I bet very few had heard of him before. If anyone took the AP English Composition test, one of the past essays was on the article, I think, by Christopher James “Why the World Needs Nerds,” and to me that pretty well sums up our problem with role models. A lot of issues with liability are because we can’t take personal responsibility. But, I think personal responsibility is too much to ask of someone now adays, when its easier to point a finger.

"It's What You Hear"

I wanted to provide a link to a recent article on the comment I brought up in class about people not listening to be convinced but rather for confirmation. I'm sure this article in no way exhausts the topic, so feel free to search some more. If anyone finds anything contradictory, share it.

In Politics, It's Not What They Say; It's What You Hear

Do violent video games on XBOX, playstation, sega, etc. have a negative influence or no influence at all, or possibly even a positive effect on today’s youth? Is the normal physiological reaction to violent images what it’s supposed to be or is it reduced in the minds of children?
It is a fact that 80% of today’s video games contain violence. It’s considered one of the most ubiquitous parts of today’s world.

It is widely proclaimed that violence in today's gaming world (and even the media and other entertainment) negatively effects youth. It supposedly deadens a person's sense of life and death when you have 3 lives in a game and you can kill indiscriminately with no consequences except that maybe you fail a mission and you just restart.

I’m not a huge video game player, and when I play I stick to Madden, NCAA Football, or FIFA soccer. However, I’ve played Grand Theft Auto a bunch of times in my video gaming days. Carl from our class is a big fan of Hitman, in which you play a silent assassin hired to kill for money. Carl doesn’t look like a violent guy…at least I don’t think so…Now I consider myself a caring, non-violent person as well. I don’t get any sort of high from violent games that makes me want to go out and hurt or kill people for the hell of it. Anyways, the point of this post is to ask the question: Do these violent games actually have the negative effects on children? Or do psych and medicine professionals blow this alleged concern for children out of proportion, without realizing that some kids who play these games have irresponsible parents or are kids who already have mental problems?

Athletes As Role Models

In today's society, professional athletes are treated more like royalty than regular citizens. They earn some of the largest salaries with the least amount of education, and some might say morals. If you think about it, little kids and young adolescents look up to these athletes like they are gods among mortals. They want to dress like them, act like them, and eventually become someone just like them. But what happens when these role models don't use sound judgement or their influence over the youth in a positive way?

Twenty years ago, children hoped to become firefighters or doctors, but nowadays, they hope to become the next Kobe Bryant. Think about how many professional and college-level athletes have encountered trouble with the law. Just to name a few, O.J. Simpson, Michael Vick, Tony Allen, Terrell Owens, Ricky Williams, and a large portion of the Duke LaCrosse team have all faced legal trouble. 

It really says a lot about our society when children aspire to be like criminals instead of honest, hard-working individuals. I think we all agree that someday we want our children to go to college, instead of relying on athletic ability alone. Sure, the ability to run fast and throw a football will earn you millions of dollars for a short time, but eventually the gravy train will end. What happens when these athletes who have received no real education can no longer perform as well as the younger generation? Not only is their lack of education hurting themselves, it sends out a negative message to America's youth. Kids don't think they need to go to college anymore, or even follow the law. 

Over the past few years, there have been numerous NFL, NBA, and collegiate athletes who have committed severe crimes. Among the most famous and heinous would have to be murder charges, animal cruelty, rape, theft, drug use, and violence. Is this who we want our children's heroes to be? How do you think we can change our children's views of success?

Hurricane Ike

The costliest natural disaster in United States' history was Hurricane Katrina. Not only did the economy take a hit with an estimated $81.2 billion in damages, the death toll reached 1,836. The government issued a series of voluntary and mandatory evacuation orders; however, there were certain rural and coastline areas which did receive proper warning. Not only were these people left in the dark, there was a huge number of people who were already trapped because they did not have the means or the time to leave. 

Because there were so many people hurt by this tragedy, the U.S. government has put into place a free evacuation plan for Hurricane Ike that was instituted by President Bush. At first, Texas officials were following the example of Louisiana in that they only called for mandatory or voluntary evacuations, but did not provide help to those who were financially unable to leave. This is when the federal government declared Texas as being in a national state of emergency before the hurricane hit.   

To avoid substantial losses, Texas officials have offered free transportation to help the people in their state evacuate before Hurricane Ike hits. Many of the current residents in Texas were among those who had to flee New Orleans when Katrina devastated the city. Our question is, what's the level of the government's responsibility in assisting you with the affects of natural disasters?

During Hurricane Katrina, the government was placed largely at fault for the significant losses endured by this tragedy. This time, U.S. officials have offered free bussing and other aid to the people of Texas, both before and after Hurricane Ike hits. What is the responsibility of the individual who chooses not to leave when there are means to evacuate? What is the responsibility of the government in terms of assisting the people who will refuse to leave?  

Thank You for Smoking

Feel free to use this thread to discuss anything related to the film or issues that you think it raises. But here are a few potential topics:

• Nick Naylor tells his son, "If you know how to argue, you're never wrong." What does he mean by this? Do you agree?
• Does the film itself make an argument? If so, what for or against? If not, what does the film say or suggest about argument?
• Should cigarettes carry a skull-and-crossbones label? Should Vermont cheddar?
• Who was your favorite character in the film, and why?
• Do you want to be a lobbyist when you grow up?

Than you for commenting!

OMG i was soooooo drunk

College! Parties! No parents! Beer! Sleeping in until 1 p.m.! In college, there is almost an expectation that students drink. There is a lot of debate about the problem of underage drinking, which seems to be growing exponentially with each generation. We, Laura Wallace and Mike Pekel, the authors of this post, would like to write about our different backgrounds and experiences in order to explore the reasons for underage drinking. (This post isn’t meant to preach or persuade, but rather to encourage open discussion)

Laura’s stance on drinking: I don’t care if others drink, but I choose sobriety.

Before I begin, let me make it clear that I don’t have a problem with other people drinking, as long as they do it responsibly. In my mind, whether a person drinks or not doesn’t define who she is and I do not judge people on their decision.

So why don’t I drink? I suppose I have just never found the appeal. (I am interested to hear what attracts those of you who do drink.) Firstly, my parents have let me try sips of their alcoholic beverages on several occasions, and I have always found the taste disgusting. In addition, in my relationships with others, I crave intimacy; I would much rather have several really close friends than a lot of companions. As a part of that, I find that intimacy comes with authenticity. Having a meaningful conversation with a drunk person is nearly impossible. In addition, I just don’t care for the party scene. I would rather grab coffee with a couple of friends than go out with a bunch of people. Also, I like to remember the fun times that I have. I would feel so offended if I had a wonderful time with someone and then the next day they couldn’t remember any of it. Finally, I like to have my brain unimpaired. I heard a story about a freshman girl this year who got really drunk her first night here and cheated on her boyfriend. She left the next day because she felt so bad. I wouldn’t want that to happen to me. For me, sobriety is not about being underage, but rather making decisions that will allow me to live the fullest life possible. I am not saying that I will never drink, but I might not. All I know is that right now I don’t find alcohol to be a necessary part of my life.

Mike’s stance on drinking: I hesitantly take part in the party scene.

There was a time when I was a pretty committed non-drinker. There were personal reasons, the kind you hear from most kids who consciously choose not to: “I don’t need to drink to have fun. I’d rather just be myself.” I also had the support of a group of friends that outwardly made fun of the heavy drinking crowd pretty often. But over the years in high school, each one of these friends of mine slowly gave in to drinking, until I could easily try it without any feeling that I was really, with finality, giving up my moral standing. And I did.

I didn’t quite have the ridiculously fun and crazy experience that was promised, though. Maybe it was the attitude I approached it with. Yeah, I got “drunk” on a few occasions, but at no point was I able to really let go and have the fun that everyone else seemed to be having. I was never able to let myself use being drunk as an excuse to go crazy and do and say things I wouldn’t have let myself do or say before. My conscience was always sternly sitting in the back of my mind watching every move I made.

Regardless, I have had some good times with my friends. I understand when teenagers talk about how they use drinking as a friendly, social thing, and how they don’t drink specifically for the purpose of getting drunk. But these sorts of explanations often give way to a huge number of rationalizations regarding why there’s nothing wrong with what they’re doing, even if much of their lives come to revolve around planning for the weekend. “I’m just having a good time.” “I’m not hurting anyone.” “I’m bonding with my friends.” “I’m loosening up and meeting people.”

To an extent, I understand these rationalizations, because I do still drink. I try to keep it reasonable. I’m not using it as a complete escape from reality in which I can do whatever the hell I want. I see a whole lot of people doing exactly that on the weekends, however. So now, I’m at a very uneasy peace with alcohol, just as I’ve always been. I can’t shake the feeling that a lot of people my age might just be unknowingly self-medicating for an inner discomfort.

What are your thoughts on underage drinking? Is it as widespread or serious a problem as it is made out to be, or is it largely misunderstood by adults?

Rivalries and Reason:Election 2008

It feels too cliché to start off this post by talking about the election season ‘heating up’ and making broad statements about the ever-present political rivalries being brought once again to the foreground of public interest. But these things are nearly impossible to get away from, especially now. We are going to take a different approach though. For once, rather than taking a side, it may be better to take a step back and examine the current political climate in which ideas are clashing. Despite the wealth of information and massive communicative opportunities presented to us in this digital era, many people remain unable to open their minds to views and outlooks foreign to their own. Conservatives are rich, white, gun-toting, arrogant, xenophobic Evangelists. Liberals are drugged-out, tree-hugging, immoral, homosexual, baby-killing hippies.

At least that’s what we like to say about each other. How many of us take the time to truly understand other people before condemning them because of their views? Are we using the resources around us to learn and grow or simply to affirm our own opinions? When Obama and McCain announced their vice presidential running mates, how many people sought up damaging information on the candidate of the opposite party? How many people took time to research their own candidate’s running mate? How many people read an attack their candidate’s running mate and immediately began rationalizing it away?

The question we pose to you is how and why did it come to be this way? Is change possible? If so, how might it be brought about?