It is agreed upon amongst almost everyone that the worst possible crime is raping a child. Not only is it immoral no matter what the victim’s age, but when you think of a helpless, defenseless child it is nothing less than sickening. I agree that "Jessica's Law" is not harsh enough for these rapists, after 15 years they could still be able to continue their crimes when they get out. It is hard to draw the line between what is a suitable punishment and what is not, because normally I would say the death penalty is too extensive but then again keeping these offenders in jail is only wasting our tax dollars. I certainly do not feel as though any money I contribute to the wellness of our state and country should in any way benefit child rapists. So in that respect, I should opt for the death penalty, but it is not that easy. How should they be punished? While I think that 15 years is too little, I think that regardless of how much time they spend in jail, they should to be constantly reminded of the hideous crime(s) they have committed and never be free of it. That child will never be able to be free of it, they will have to live with it all of their lives, so why should the person that did that to them be able to start over? I am not sure what the right sentence would be, or even the most effective, but I do think that they should have a harsher punishment for ruining the life of a child.
Original Post: http://currentgovtissues.blogspot.com/2008/06/should-they-get-death-penalty.html
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Sunday, June 22, 2008
No Child Should Be Forced to Stay Behind
Whenever I ask my 10 year old niece what she has been learning in school, it is always the same response, “Going over TAKS material.” It is no surprise that children have little incentive to go above and beyond in their educational growth when they are never pushed to do anything more than prepare for a standardized test. With the way our educational system works today, high school graduates come out learning nothing more than how to do well on a multiple choice test. It seems like it is about time to reevaluate our present educational system and come up with a better way to push America’s youth to their highest potential.
I noticed the shift in focus of course material my senior year of high school when we were allotted a certain amount of time every school day to just review for TAKS testing. I understand the state’s concern with the test scores, since they will determine the amount of government funding the state will receive each year, but why is it that this is ALL we are pushing for? What happens to the children that already know the material for the standardized tests they have to take at the end of the year, do they just have to sit and listen to things they already know instead of furthering their education? The present system that governs our public school systems does provide opportunities for remedial students to catch up with other classes and be able to pass a standardized test, but it stunts the educational growth of students that are above average. If we are going to continue to run our educational system on the No Child Left Behind Act then we need to come up with a better way to cater to the children being forced to stay behind.
The basic education you receive in the first few years of your life set the stage for how you will continue to learn in the future and how successful you will be at it. If children are never pushed beyond their limits and forced to think for themselves, which should be the real goal, then they will never be able to hold the jobs for highly skilled workers that are becoming more and more important to today’s economy. Thus, I think the NCLB Act needs to be updated and changed so as to cater to all students, and not just students that need that little extra attention, because in the end, every mind needs sculpting and it is dependent on the sculptors to provide it with a good future.
I noticed the shift in focus of course material my senior year of high school when we were allotted a certain amount of time every school day to just review for TAKS testing. I understand the state’s concern with the test scores, since they will determine the amount of government funding the state will receive each year, but why is it that this is ALL we are pushing for? What happens to the children that already know the material for the standardized tests they have to take at the end of the year, do they just have to sit and listen to things they already know instead of furthering their education? The present system that governs our public school systems does provide opportunities for remedial students to catch up with other classes and be able to pass a standardized test, but it stunts the educational growth of students that are above average. If we are going to continue to run our educational system on the No Child Left Behind Act then we need to come up with a better way to cater to the children being forced to stay behind.
The basic education you receive in the first few years of your life set the stage for how you will continue to learn in the future and how successful you will be at it. If children are never pushed beyond their limits and forced to think for themselves, which should be the real goal, then they will never be able to hold the jobs for highly skilled workers that are becoming more and more important to today’s economy. Thus, I think the NCLB Act needs to be updated and changed so as to cater to all students, and not just students that need that little extra attention, because in the end, every mind needs sculpting and it is dependent on the sculptors to provide it with a good future.
Be Optimistic
While many see the exponentially growing price of gas as a burden to American society, it provides an incentive for those of us who would normally drive a block to pick up a coke from a gas station to get out and be active. As Go-Getter for Government stated in his article As Gas Prices Increase, Extra Spendings Decrease, the amount of money being poured into our gas tanks is affecting the way we live our lives. While I agree that car companies need to create more fuel efficient vehicles sometime in the near future, I also believe that this could be the event that makes people more aware of the benefits of mass transportation.
For years subway, bus and train companies have been trying to convince America that it is much more efficient and environmentally friendly to use mass transportation, but with the economy thriving and car ownership soaring, not many paid attention. Now that the price of gas is putting a dent in everybody’s banking accounts, more people are becoming aware of their city buses or subways and how it may not be as convenient as having your own vehicle, but it is much more affordable. I think that if more Americans start to take advantage of mass transportation, that bus, train and subway systems will become increasingly more efficient and refined to meet the needs of their users. With that, it will become a vicious cycle that users will want to use them more and sooner or later it will be just as convenient to ride a subway to work as it would be to take your own car. Thus, this will cut back on our use of gasoline as a country, and in turn protect our environment and possibly alleviate some of the tension with foreign oil companies.
Also, as I stated before, Americans are already pushing for healthier lifestyles so why not look at this gas crisis as an opportunity to become more physically active and walk or ride your bike if you are going short distances. I understand that not all of us are marathon runners or competitors in the Tour de France, but you can save a lot of money annually if you cut your driving back a little bit here and there.
So instead of looking to car manufacturers to hurry up the process of more fuel efficient vehicles, why not take advantage of other modes of transportation that we already have available to us? In the end, you WILL save money.
For years subway, bus and train companies have been trying to convince America that it is much more efficient and environmentally friendly to use mass transportation, but with the economy thriving and car ownership soaring, not many paid attention. Now that the price of gas is putting a dent in everybody’s banking accounts, more people are becoming aware of their city buses or subways and how it may not be as convenient as having your own vehicle, but it is much more affordable. I think that if more Americans start to take advantage of mass transportation, that bus, train and subway systems will become increasingly more efficient and refined to meet the needs of their users. With that, it will become a vicious cycle that users will want to use them more and sooner or later it will be just as convenient to ride a subway to work as it would be to take your own car. Thus, this will cut back on our use of gasoline as a country, and in turn protect our environment and possibly alleviate some of the tension with foreign oil companies.
Also, as I stated before, Americans are already pushing for healthier lifestyles so why not look at this gas crisis as an opportunity to become more physically active and walk or ride your bike if you are going short distances. I understand that not all of us are marathon runners or competitors in the Tour de France, but you can save a lot of money annually if you cut your driving back a little bit here and there.
So instead of looking to car manufacturers to hurry up the process of more fuel efficient vehicles, why not take advantage of other modes of transportation that we already have available to us? In the end, you WILL save money.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage
June 17th, 2008 was one of the most memorable days in history for many same-sex couples in California as it was the first full day that courthouses opened their doors to administer marriage licenses. The ban against same-sex marriage was overturned by the California Supreme Court and many couples and partners raced to obtain the licenses they had long awaited. However, same-sex marriage is not approved of in almost every state but California. Why is it okay to prevent two people who want to be together for the rest of their lives from legalizing their devotion to each other?
This is the core of a very controversial topic; separation of church and state. For many Americans, it is a fundamental rule they have always known to follow from their religious beliefs that members of the same sex should never be allowed to be married. In fact, it goes even further than that and has made homosexual relationships shunned upon. But if our nation really does have a separation between its religious beliefs and its laws, then why is it necessary to prevent members of the same sex from being married through their state?
For many Americans this legalization of same-sex marriages will provide hope for the future that their state will someday make the same decision. With California setting the precedent, hopefully the rest of the United States will realize that there is no need to forbid couples from marrying one another because of their gender. It takes away the very freedom that our nation is founded upon and only displays the influence that the dominating religions of our nation have on the way our laws are made.
For now, many couples in California can finally make their bonds to one another official and above all, legal.
This is the core of a very controversial topic; separation of church and state. For many Americans, it is a fundamental rule they have always known to follow from their religious beliefs that members of the same sex should never be allowed to be married. In fact, it goes even further than that and has made homosexual relationships shunned upon. But if our nation really does have a separation between its religious beliefs and its laws, then why is it necessary to prevent members of the same sex from being married through their state?
For many Americans this legalization of same-sex marriages will provide hope for the future that their state will someday make the same decision. With California setting the precedent, hopefully the rest of the United States will realize that there is no need to forbid couples from marrying one another because of their gender. It takes away the very freedom that our nation is founded upon and only displays the influence that the dominating religions of our nation have on the way our laws are made.
For now, many couples in California can finally make their bonds to one another official and above all, legal.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Immigration Detention System
When we came to America in pursuit of a better life, we were immigrants and not the natural inhabitants were we not? So then why is it that we show no sympathy for other immigrants that come over to America looking for the exact same freedom? Yes, illegal immigration is a very heated topic of debate and that is not what I am focusing on, but whether detainees in prison are immigrants, illegal or not, they should be treated in a humane way.
This article brought to my attention the fact that the immigration detention system is inadequate and neglectful. Not only are there cases of detainees dying because of lack of care, but the system has no set standards of operations. Just because they are not Americans by birth does not mean that they are not human and do not deserve to be treated like human beings. If prison systems where citizens were being held were run the way that these immigration detention systems are run, it would be unacceptable and all over the news. However, the article points out the connection of the careless treatment of immigrants and the Bush administration being behind it. Whether this is the only reason why news and information about the “alarming evidence of shoddy care, inadequate staffing, lax standards, secrecy and chronic ineptitude” is being kept quiet or not, changes need to be made.
Thus I back the Detainee Basic Medical Care Act which will provide better rules and regulations for the care of immigrants in the immigration detention system. If you were an American in a foreign country’s prison system would not you expect to be treated humanely? As Americans we should try to be more accepting and less ignorant of the situation of immigration; everyone deserves to be treated respectfully whether they are from the United States or not.
This article brought to my attention the fact that the immigration detention system is inadequate and neglectful. Not only are there cases of detainees dying because of lack of care, but the system has no set standards of operations. Just because they are not Americans by birth does not mean that they are not human and do not deserve to be treated like human beings. If prison systems where citizens were being held were run the way that these immigration detention systems are run, it would be unacceptable and all over the news. However, the article points out the connection of the careless treatment of immigrants and the Bush administration being behind it. Whether this is the only reason why news and information about the “alarming evidence of shoddy care, inadequate staffing, lax standards, secrecy and chronic ineptitude” is being kept quiet or not, changes need to be made.
Thus I back the Detainee Basic Medical Care Act which will provide better rules and regulations for the care of immigrants in the immigration detention system. If you were an American in a foreign country’s prison system would not you expect to be treated humanely? As Americans we should try to be more accepting and less ignorant of the situation of immigration; everyone deserves to be treated respectfully whether they are from the United States or not.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Editorial Criticism #1
In an article talking about the negative effects of limiting the visas for skilled foreign professionals, The Washington Post persuades it’s readers that this new policy is irrational. The article is geared towards readers who are pro-immigration and unaware of the complete facts about foreigners to the United States.
First of all, in the very first paragraph the skilled foreigners the article speaks of are noted as being “promising, intelligent, ambitious and highly skilled foreign professionals,” which there is no evidence to say they are not all of these things, but the author obviously has a biased opinion and does not stay neutral. The author continues to make Americans look like the bad guys with too much patriotism and pride to accept the brainpower from foreigners. In many respects the article may be true in that Americans are a very proud people who believe that their skills should be exploited before the skills of foreigners. However, the article talks about how the United States is contradicting itself by accepting and unlimited amount of foreign students to it’s universities and subsidizing their education in technical fields but then makes it impossible for them to obtain jobs, but does not address the fact that for many of the most competitive universities in the United States, foreign students are given priority for admittance. Does this not show our appreciation of the brainpower and work ethic of foreign students?
The article lacks substantial evidence to support its argument. The number of applicants for H-1B work visas for the last year is stated but there is no reference to where the information came from and if it is reliable at all. The same goes for the information about the number of applicants that received visas compared to in the past; the information is just stated and not accounted for.
The article concludes that the United States is harming itself because of its lack of acknowledgement of the need of foreign workers to keep our economy thriving, which I can agree with, but I do not agree with the arguments that support this accusation. The article is written for a specific audience, one that would be against those that are anti-immigration and does little to analyze the other end of the situation, that the United States has to maintain a certain amount of jobs for Americans that were born in the United States in order to provide a place in the economy for it’s own citizens.
First of all, in the very first paragraph the skilled foreigners the article speaks of are noted as being “promising, intelligent, ambitious and highly skilled foreign professionals,” which there is no evidence to say they are not all of these things, but the author obviously has a biased opinion and does not stay neutral. The author continues to make Americans look like the bad guys with too much patriotism and pride to accept the brainpower from foreigners. In many respects the article may be true in that Americans are a very proud people who believe that their skills should be exploited before the skills of foreigners. However, the article talks about how the United States is contradicting itself by accepting and unlimited amount of foreign students to it’s universities and subsidizing their education in technical fields but then makes it impossible for them to obtain jobs, but does not address the fact that for many of the most competitive universities in the United States, foreign students are given priority for admittance. Does this not show our appreciation of the brainpower and work ethic of foreign students?
The article lacks substantial evidence to support its argument. The number of applicants for H-1B work visas for the last year is stated but there is no reference to where the information came from and if it is reliable at all. The same goes for the information about the number of applicants that received visas compared to in the past; the information is just stated and not accounted for.
The article concludes that the United States is harming itself because of its lack of acknowledgement of the need of foreign workers to keep our economy thriving, which I can agree with, but I do not agree with the arguments that support this accusation. The article is written for a specific audience, one that would be against those that are anti-immigration and does little to analyze the other end of the situation, that the United States has to maintain a certain amount of jobs for Americans that were born in the United States in order to provide a place in the economy for it’s own citizens.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Visa Restrictions
As reported on the BBC NEWS website on June 3rd, 2008, the United States government is planning on starting a program called the US Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) which will begin to take affect on January 12, 2009. The program is designed to help control possible terrorist threats from entering the United States. Visitors to the United States who are not required to have a visa will be required to register with the government online three days before their arrival.
A program like this is extremely important for the protection of the United States and its citizens, since there have been so many terrorist threats in the last few years. Not only are we concerned with monitoring the arrivals and departures of visitors from countries that are required to have a visa to enter the United States but now we are also taking into consideration visitors from all other countries outside of the United States. Although some countries in Western Europe may find these new restrictions to be superfluous it is necessary in order to ensure the safety of our nation. This program seems like a step in the right direction and a smart move by our government to eliminate the threat of terrorists.
A program like this is extremely important for the protection of the United States and its citizens, since there have been so many terrorist threats in the last few years. Not only are we concerned with monitoring the arrivals and departures of visitors from countries that are required to have a visa to enter the United States but now we are also taking into consideration visitors from all other countries outside of the United States. Although some countries in Western Europe may find these new restrictions to be superfluous it is necessary in order to ensure the safety of our nation. This program seems like a step in the right direction and a smart move by our government to eliminate the threat of terrorists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)