Pro Abortion Posters

This week in class we watched a movie on the pro-life movement can “Unborn in America”. In the movie it followed a group of students that were putting up huge boards on college campuses with pictures of aborted babies and the holocaust and connecting the two. I agree they have the right to put the boards up just like the pro-choicers have the right to do the same. Eve though they are graphic and not pretty picture they can still put them up. However, I took huge offence to the fact that the pro-life people were connecting the Holocaust to abortion. They are NOTHING alike or than the fact that they are killing something, which is also debatable.
During the Holocaust Hitler killed everyone and everything that wasn’t like him. He didn’t only kill Jews. He killed black people, the disabled, etc too. His idea was to purify his land. He believed by getting rid of them his land would be perfect and pure. Abortion is nothing like that. People get abortions because htye know they can’t live with or support another living breathing thing in their life. The child wouldn’t have a good life if they were to be born and they don’t want the child to have to go through that. Hitler was able to support the people he killed but thought they weren’t worth it and he was better without them. The two really have nothing to do with each other and it is very offensive that the pro-life people could even consider putting these kinds of things up in college campuses where peoples families have been apart of the horrors of the Holocaust and it is a terrible history for a lot of people.

Abortion is a choice.

Abortion is and should remain a choice. Anything would be way too much control coming from the state. The state should not have control over your body and what you do with it. I find it really interesting that a huge majority of the people that are deciding weather or not it stays a choice and debating the issue are men. I don’t think something like that should be put in a man’s hands to be able to decide that for women. Some people say that even after an abortion the woman usually isn’t happy that she killed her baby. Just because someone couldn’t support the baby, or because she was raped, or for whatever reason they got rid of it doesn’t mean they necessarily wanted to lose their child. I also don’t think that parents should automatically have the right to know if their child is having an abortion. If a girl is having an abortion she usually isn’t proud of it but feel that she needs to get it. She doesn’t want to be told weather or not what she is doing is right or not or be yelled at. It should be her choice and he mistake to fix, not her parents. I also think that it would be stupid to make a law requiring the fathers consent. First of all, they aren’t the ones that have to carry it with them for 9 months and deliver it. Second of all, if a woman was raped, how would she get that consent. Its not like she can go up to the man who raped her and can say will you sign this so I don’t have to have your baby? Therefore, the father should not have to sign a consent form. They also shouldn’t have to be notified that the woman is getting one. If the woman doesn’t want the man to know out of fear, embarrassment, etc. then she shouldn’t be required for him to know. That is a total invasion of privacy on the states part.
After looking at two websites, NARAL- Prochoice America and National Right to Life, I remain prochoice. I found the NARAL website to be very organized and to the point. It had a very direct point it wanted to get across. While it was to the point I found that it had a lot of information and it even gave information on how to prevent a pregnancy in the first place. It also was organized in what it believe was the problem and their solution for the problems. I found the Nation Right to Life website to be a little disorganized and a little unprofessional. It didn’t have both sides to it and it wasn’t necessarily trying to go against pro-choice but was made to inform pro-life people. It is interesting how they had a whole section on “when does life begin?” But that’s not the same for everyone. There isn’t one correct answer for that and this website seemed to only have one answer for everything. That is why I liked the NARAL website better. It was supported or gave information that wasn’t only one answer and supported their points in more than one way.
In Illinois there is a law that a woman is not allowed to have an abortion after 12 weeks. I don’t think that a woman should be able to say last second that they want and abortion. After 12 weeks the baby is pretty far in development and I don’t think they should be able to get rid of it. Getting an abortion like that isn’t only killing a breathing thing but it is also bad for the woman’s health who is getting the abortion. I don’t agree with the law that states that one parent has to be notified if their child that is under 18 is getting an abortion. I don’t think it is really up to them and I don’t think that it is their right to know. Even though it is their child it is her body. If she is old enough to make the mistake than she is old enough to fix it. Also if a young woman is raped and doesn’t want her family to know this law makes her required to which and be misleading and embarrassing.

Thanks Giving=Food... But why?

Thanks Giving is a time when families come together and eat turkey and other food that is bad for you until you just can’t eat anymore. But no one really knows why. I found this out while watching WDHS at school. It is interesting because when I thought about it I knew I had been told only 100 times when I was younger in social studies class. But apparently I didn’t care and/or I wasn’t listening. After WDHS showed a bunch of students trying to tell them what Thanks Giving is and why we celebrate it they showed a historian that proceeded to tell us why we celebrate it. Funny thing is I and all my friends still don’t know. For some reason we can remember everything else in our crazy lives and the stories behind a lot of the holidays but we just can’t remember Thanks Giving. I wonder if it is because we just don’t care or something else. It’s probably because all we know is there is food and lots of it and that’s about all we care about.

Death Penalty Justly Banned

I do think the abolishment of the death penalty was just. To begin with I was never in favor of the death penalty. I see that as the easy way out and there is no real consequence for the person that committed the crime. I also believe there is a lot of discrimination that could be going on in our system and that our system is very flawed and when someone’s’ life is on the line we cant afford to have a flawed system. The problem is that in this case no one can make everyone happy. But isn’t that true for almost any major political decision? In Governor Ryan’s speech when he is getting ready to abolish the death penalty he says, “I suppose the reason the death penalty has been the toughest is because it is so final- the only public policy that determines who lives and who dies... I know any decision that I make will not be accepted by on side or the other.” When he says this policy decides who lives and who dies, it really bothered me. Why should a country that is free, fair, and just even have a policy that should decide that? And just like any policy that is being debated there is always two sides of the policy, those for it and those against. Every policy has them and no one can ever make everyone happy on any policy. Therefore, that really shouldn’t be a factor in anyone decision on any policy.
In his speech Governor Ryan mentions something that Nelson Mandela, former President of South Africa, told him. He said, “United States sets the example for justice and fairness for the rest of the world.” How can the United States be the example of justice and fairness when we kill people like that? We sometimes kill innocent people. I see no justice or fairness in that. I believe that killing someone because the killed someone is a crazy look on justice and really makes no sense to me. I think if the committed the ultimate crime they should have to sit and rot in a room barred from everything and live with themselves for the rest of their lives. Killing them would be unjust, unfair, and would make it a lot easier on them. Governor Ryan also says in his speech, “… The United States is not in league with most of our major allies… These countries reject the death penalty. We are partners in death with several third world countries.” America is supposed to be a developing country. Yet, America is separate from the major other developing countries in this issue. Instead, we are put in a category long with several third world countries that don’t even have a stable government or justice system. As a developing country we should be developing, not using old punishments. In Trop v. Dulles the Court decided that, “the Eighth Amendment contained an evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society.” The eight amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” In this case, and this society, the death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment. This punishment, in this maturing society is no longer ideal and there is no need for it. The standards of our society has changed so our punishments should too.
Another problem in this issue is the public. The public makes it, “… Easier and more comfortable for politicians to be tough on crime and support the death penalty. It wins votes.” (Ryan, Jan. 12, 2003) Although the politicians might not believe America should have a death penalty the majority of the public believed so. The politicians just want votes. They need them to be in power and if being for the death penalty gets them votes, then they will be for it. Even though the supported the death penalty, “Few, however, seem prepared to address the tough questions that arise when the system fails.” (Ryan, Jan. 12, 2003) Many people in the public don’t understand that our system is anything but flawless. For instance Anthony Porter sat on Death Row for 15 years and about 50 hours before his execution he was let go free. He was accused “beyond a reasonable doubt” of committing a murder. Yet, he was innocent. If our system were perfect Porter would have been found innocent quickly and wouldn’t have gone through multiple courts and multiple trials being found guilty when he was really innocent. In a case that I studied in class, the case of Lesley Gosch, I read about a man that was killed by the death penalty because he was found guilty of the murder of Rebecca Patton. However, I believe this man was innocent. “Gosch lost one of his eyes and his eyesight was so poor in the other eye that he was legally blind… Gosch had lost the distal phalanges of four of his fingers of his right hand as well as the thumb on his left hand, as well as portions of the thumb and index finger on his right hand.” (Death Penalty Information Center, 2000) Supposedly a man that has those disabilities was “beyond a reasonable doubt” able to tie up a grown woman and shoot her by himself. The other problem with this case was that no one came forth to talk until after a $100,000 reward was offered. Even then, only two people with sketchy pasts came forward. I don’t think that Gosch was guilty and he shouldn’t have been killed. Also in a study that I read it said, “In January 2000,…Illinois had released 13 innocent inmates from death row.” (Constitutionality of the Death Penalty in American) If our justice system were so great and flawless we wouldn’t have had to release 13 people. For death row that is a lot of people. Those people had gone through multiple trials and courtrooms and found guilty by multiple people. Then, later, after they had been rotting in jail about to be killed for a crime they didn’t commit they get let free. 13 people are a lot of people to make a “mistake” on. “How many more cases of wrongful conviction have to occur before we can all agree that the system is broken?” (Ryan, 2003)
Another main argument people have is that killing the killers is retribution for the family that they killed. However, killing the person or people that killed their loved ones isn’t going to make them come back. In a video we watched in class about the killer, Clifford Boggess, they interviewed the families of the people that he had killed. After his execution no one said they felt at ease or better that he was dead. They knew it didn’t change anything, he still ruined their lives, and he still haunts them. I don’t think that killing someone would change anything. There are also multiple cases where families had said that the killer being killed didn’t help them and it still bothers them.
Getting rid of the death penalty was a very good idea and just.

Speech Codes

Speech codes are very hard to make and be constitutional. At Indiana University, Bloomington has very precise and good speech codes. Most of the codes aren’t too vague and tell people exactly what they are not allowed to do and where they are not allowed to do it. Their speech codes have no new impact on how I see the school. I still really like the school and am excited to be a part of it. I think in some cases the speech codes are a little too vague and could be fought against if the time came. However, for the most part the codes are solid codes that straight out tell you what would not be acceptable.
I recently read about cases from other schools that had an issue with parties at the fraternities making racist actions. They would dress up in KKK outfits and wear black face paint and act out lynchings or joke around about. “Whites pretended to be black-mocking the physical appearance, speech, gait, and behavior of African Americans” (Jim Crow on Fraternity Row). The school shut down the two fraternities temporarily, and was investigating shutting them down permanently. The school said they were investigating apparent violations of the university’s harassment and discrimination Policies” (Jim Crow on Fraternity Row) Based on the speech codes at Indiana they would not be able to do anything. There was nothing that they really violated, other than one code that could be interpreted in a way that could get the in trouble. The code is, “[W]e will not tolerate any form of bigotry, harassment, intimidation, threat, or abuse, whether verbal or written, physical or psychological, direct or implied. ... We will respond to such behavior in an appropriate manner, recognizing that education is our most powerful tool.” They could make the actions of the fraternities as a psychological intimidation and harassment. However, they wouldn’t have much of a case. I don’t think I would mind that they wouldn’t be able to do anything. The brothers were just exercising their rights to free speech. There isn’t much a public school can do about that since they are bound to the constitution since they are part of government.
The way that FIRE defines a “speech code” is, “any university regulation or policy that prohibits expression that would be protected by the First Amendment in society at large. Any policy—such as a harassment policy, a student conduct code, or a posting policy—can be a speech code if it prohibits protected speech or expression.” I agree with FIRE on their definition on speech codes. Although they are there to protect people it also limits the rights given to everyone in the First Amendment of our Constitution. I do agree on their mission statement, “to protect the unprotected and to educate the public and communities of concerned Americans about the threats to these rights on our campuses and about the means to preserve them.” But sometimes the speech codes need to be put in place so everyone can feel safe and get an equal education, which is also a right. So I agree with them to certain extent.
Speech codes aren’t easy to make or understand but they are important for everyone to be able to have fun and learn at their university.

Fine Arts and Athletics Should Only Be Privately Funded?

The other day when we arrived in band our band director sat on his chair and began to read us an article from our school paper. It was an editorial written by one of the juniors at our school. His idea was that the fine arts and the athletics should only be funded by outside sources. He doesn’t believe the school should fund them at all because “they don’t help prepare you for the future.” The author believed that the school should be spending more money on core class books and updates than the fine arts and athletics.
I personally am very active in both fine arts and athletics. Therefore, it hit me hard, and this is a very opinionated post. I have been able to connect to people that I never thought I would even meet if it weren’t for the arts and athletics. The athletics has helped me get confidence in myself and learn how to work with and trust other people. It has helped me stay in shape and battle some health issues. It is also very fun and stimulating. It teaches you team work and how to think strategically about certain things. In math, a core class, everyone always asks, “Why do we need to know this? When will we ever use it?” The teacher always says, it’s not the actual information that you will need in the future; it’s the way of thinking about it and problem solving. This way of thinking is also brought into sports. You learn to work with other people, which is very helpful in the future, you learn self-control and self-awareness, which is helpful both in the work place and in social situations, and you also learn how to think of things strategically and be aware of everything around you. You learn things that you really can’t learn in a class room or anywhere else. Athletics are just as important to be a part of as any core class that we have. It helps us grow and develop in ways the class room can’t. Therefore, it is still teaching us and teaching us very important skills and should be funded by the school so we can get the best out of them and learn all we can from them.
The fine arts make you think differently than anything you do throughout your day. It gives you the ability to be creative and look at the world in a different way. I know that since I have started being very involved in the fine arts community I have learned to look at everyone and everything differently. I have learned to problem solve in ways I would never think of otherwise. In band we use multiple parts of our brain just to play our instrument and read music at the same time. It takes fundamentals from every core class and puts them together. We use math for counting and notes, we use history to learn about what we play, and we use English to read. The fine arts really pull everything together into one class and teach us things nothing else can. If we don’t get funding from the school we wouldn’t be able to learn as much and reach our full potential
The fine arts and athletics teach us things we can’t learn anywhere else. They should continue to be funded by the school so we can learn all we can from both of them and reach our full potential.

Anti-Party Assembly for Seniors Worth it?

The other day before Homecoming at my high school we had an assembly that the seniors and sophomores were required to go to. This assembly was about not going to parties with drinking and drugs, not driving with people under the influence, and not doing drugs and drinking in general. So is the assembly worth having for seniors?
In my opinion no. As seniors we have gone through about 4 years of health and countless assemblies about drugs and alcohol and not doing it. Just because they bring in a new person won’t change the senior’s minds that are still drinking and doing drugs after all the classes and assemblies. They have heard the same thing come from every person that has come to visit and in every class we have taken. Yet, they still choose to drink and do drugs. What makes the school think that will change? Especially as seniors. It would make more sense to make the freshman go to the assembly and possibly still the sophomores but not seniors. The school has shown and taught us about all they can about illegal drugs and drinking and their effects on us. If that doesn’t go through to everyone I don’t know what will. But, I guarantee making them sit through yet another assembly will not make them stop. Seniors should not have to go to the assemblies like that. But, I believe they should make the freshman and sophomores go. They haven’t gone through it all yet and haven’t learned all the school has to teach them. The earlier they learn it the better, and more likely they won’t make the bad decision in the first place.

10 years later... 9/11

In social issue class we talked a lot about 9/11 right around the time of it. We also watched a documentary from the view of the firefighters. It followed them all throughout the tragedy, before, and after. I think the movie was very touching and gave me a whole new perspective on 9/11. I had never really understood what happened that day and the amount of confusion and the thoughts that went through every one's head. I didn't know that at first everyone thought it was a mistake that they ran into the towers and that the fire fighters really didn't know what was going on outside. I also didn't know the amount of people that thought there was no way out so they just jumped from the towers. The video really showed how terrible and unexpected everything was. It also showed the amount of people that really put their lives on the line for other people. It was inspiring that these people did everything and spent countless hours helping and searching for others. It also made me take a step back and re live what had really happened that day but from an older perspective. I really got to understand the event and how terrible and tragic it really was and how people really felt.
The article "The Years Since 9/11: A Lost Decade" from the Nation really put into perspective the amount of lives and money lost because of 9/11. I was really surprised to see that 4,442 soldiers had dies, 415 law enforcements and firefighters, and 2,977 people from the towers and planes were killed, and$1.25 trillion has been spent to try to rebuild the countries that we have been fighting for years all because of 9/11. this article really showed how enormous we have made this event and how big it really is. It also makes a good point, "To salvage something from this lost decade, we should at least try to draw the right lessons from it."(Editors) In order for the war and 9/11 to mean something and for those people not to die in vein we need to learn lessons from it instead of just hate to hate and cause more destruction, like we have.
Personally I have lost a lot of people from the War that was caused by 9/11 both physically and mentally. I have many friends that have gone the Afghanistan and fought for our country and for what they thought our freedom. However, from what they tell me they really don't know why they are there anymore. They are all sick and tired of being there trying to recreate a country that doesn't want to be recreated in the way we want them to be. Most of the people over there fighting believe we are causing more problems than helping them. I also have friends that have come and never beent the same because of what they have seen and done. I actually lost a friend because of it. I think 9/11 was a huge tragedy but we need to move on and try to recreate our country and make our country better because we need it. We need to stop trying to help people that don't want our help and bring our family and friends home.

Do Students Really Have Freedom of Speech?

In social issues class we have recently been talking a lot about students rights and freemdom of speech in school. I quickly noticed that we really don't have that much freedom of speech in school as i thought we did. Sure, we can talk about our personal veiws and what we believe in which is a lot more freedom than a lot of other places. However, we really can't always express ourselves in a lot of ways people want to. For instance, in the Tinker vs. Des Moines case, "as a part of a group against American involvment in the Vietnam War, they decided to publicize their opposition by wearing black armbands to school." (Hudson Jr., David L.)The children were punished and suspended from school if they wore the bands until they agreed not to wear them. Although the court found the innocent and that they should be able to wear them, they were still punished in the first place. The court said, "it can hardly be argued that either student or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the school house gate." The court believes that but we still have a very good amount of restrictions on what we can say and wear. School take away a lot of things that could be found offensive to people. However, anyone can be offended by almost anything. Therefore, there are a good amount of restrictions on what we can and can't wear, and what we can and can't say. The problem is.. where do we draw the line? when do we know if we have to put a restriction on something? the problem is we don't know. There will always be someone with a problem with a rule or what someone says or wears. But what amount of people makes that okay to put a restriction on it? and when does it really become an issue? There lies the problem of schools trying to solve the problem before it even happens, like in Tinker vs. Des Moines, when the school put the restrictions on the armbands before they even wore them. It also causes he schools to create more restrictions that don't really need to be made and just takes away more of our freedom.

Computer Camps

Some people might say that people that go to computer camps (like me) are geeks. Well..., They are right! but we are proud to be. This summer I attended two computer science camps along with about 40 other kids in each camp. They were at major universities and there weren't very many girls. One of the camps I went to there were only 3 girls out of 40 kids. However, the girls knew what we were doing more than most of the guys. But we were all very close. We all had a lot in common and always had something to talk about. It was so fun and we were all able to be our geeky selves. So yeah we are geeks but we are all geeks together. Having fun and doing what we love to do. And one day maybe we could all rule the world together. :)