The article "2 People Shot On Septa's Market-Frankford Line Train" writing by my fox philly is about a arguement about a 76ers game, which soon then lead to a man getting shot. In the article it says, " two teenagers began joking with a 35-year- old man over sports teams, but it soon turned into argument."
While on the train the two teens where having a conversation with a man, but then it turned in an arugument, and when they started to arugue another passenger from the train stepped in to try to calm everything down. In the article it says, " When the teens- described as being about 17- and 19 years- old- started using profanity, the older man told them to watch theor lanuage. Another 30-year-old man chimed in, telling the group to calm down." Things eventually did calm down.
Things calmed down on the train, the shooting didn't occur until after the train stopped. "As the teens exited the train at 46th street, one of them turned around and fired one shot through the still open doors onto the train. the 35-year-old man wearing the jersey was shot in the stomach, the bullet went through his back and hit the other man in the leg." The police weren't called until the train pulled off to continue to 52nd street.
This is a sad thing to talk about. People and children are losing their lives over things that are not irrelavent. The only good thing about talking about this is that no other passengers were harmed and that the men who where shot in the stomach and leg they survived. Now and days people are killing just to kill, they don't have a reason to pull the trigger. The genaration of these children is rediculous. If people not getting shot they getting kidnapped, if not that then they are being jumped or bullied at school. Why should people live there life in fear because the people around them want to act like they live with no sense.
I fear walking outside of my door, or to go to the store because people that are around me or that live in my community make me live in fear. I wish i could sit outside my my little brother or sister and not have to worry about getting shot in a drive-by or taking them to the park and not have to worry about being snatched.
Recently there was to teenagers who were shot while sitting on the porch. Come on now, why are people getting shot while sitting on a porch. There are to many children getting shot and or dying. No mother or father should have to bury their child.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Monday, December 10, 2012
Marijuana law just creates criminals
The article "Marijuana law just creates criminals" by Hakeem Jeffries is about how thousands of people are being arrested for little amounts of marijuana and its costing the government lots of money.
In the article it says, " More than 50,000 people in 2011 were arrested in New York City for possessing small amounts of marijuana-- the majority of whom were black and Latino-- at a considerable judicial and financial cost." About 30 years ago the state decriminalized the marijuana offense. " making private possession of less than 25 grams of Marijuana a violation punishable by a $100 fine.
People in New York City are stopped, questioned, frisked and searched for no reason what so ever." The vast majority of these people live in communities of color, and almost 90% are immediately released without arrest or even a summons." Marijuana possession is now the number 1 arrest in New York.
I don't think marijuana should be illegal. Marijuana does no harm to any one, well depending what's in it. But Marijuana just gives you short term memory lost, it makes you tired and very hungry. I do not smoke but i do know many people who do, so i know some of the side effects after it's smoked. Yes marijuana is illegal and i feel that if anyone is found with it in the pockets and its a small amount they should not be arrested. They should either be let off with a warning, charged a certain a fine of a certain amount or spend up to a day or two in jail. I don't think that having small amounts of Marijuana is harmful.
Cigarettes should be illegal if anything they do more harm to people than marijuana does. Cigarettes may give you lung cancer and the products that are in cigarettes are very harmful. I also feel that in New York City that the arrest of marijuana being mainly black and Latino is a racis thing. Why can't Caucation people be stopped questioned and frisked. That just doesn't seem fair.
Think about it, would you rather smoke something that has a strong chance of killing you or smoke something that just makes you tired hungry and short of memory?
In the article it says, " More than 50,000 people in 2011 were arrested in New York City for possessing small amounts of marijuana-- the majority of whom were black and Latino-- at a considerable judicial and financial cost." About 30 years ago the state decriminalized the marijuana offense. " making private possession of less than 25 grams of Marijuana a violation punishable by a $100 fine.
People in New York City are stopped, questioned, frisked and searched for no reason what so ever." The vast majority of these people live in communities of color, and almost 90% are immediately released without arrest or even a summons." Marijuana possession is now the number 1 arrest in New York.
I don't think marijuana should be illegal. Marijuana does no harm to any one, well depending what's in it. But Marijuana just gives you short term memory lost, it makes you tired and very hungry. I do not smoke but i do know many people who do, so i know some of the side effects after it's smoked. Yes marijuana is illegal and i feel that if anyone is found with it in the pockets and its a small amount they should not be arrested. They should either be let off with a warning, charged a certain a fine of a certain amount or spend up to a day or two in jail. I don't think that having small amounts of Marijuana is harmful.
Cigarettes should be illegal if anything they do more harm to people than marijuana does. Cigarettes may give you lung cancer and the products that are in cigarettes are very harmful. I also feel that in New York City that the arrest of marijuana being mainly black and Latino is a racis thing. Why can't Caucation people be stopped questioned and frisked. That just doesn't seem fair.
Think about it, would you rather smoke something that has a strong chance of killing you or smoke something that just makes you tired hungry and short of memory?
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Should 16-year olds drive?
The article "Should 16-year olds drive?" by Ted Gregory is about people deciding if the age for driving be raised because they feel that being 16 is to young and most teenagers are not responsible.
In the article it says it's a question that could reverberate across the country, wherever a new teen driver is turning a key in an ignition. Is 16 the right age to get a driver's license. Some people feel that it shouldn't matter about the age as long as they have a driving experience. "I don't think it matters what age you are," said Hinsdale Central High School sophomore, "as long as you have the practice and experience." But there are also people tha feel age should matter and 16 is to young to be behind the wheel. "We're still losing a lot of teens on tghe road each year," Lund said. Motor vehicle crashes kill more than 5,000 teenagers every year.
Lund feels that the minimum age shpuld being raised higher than 16. "This is kind of the next logical step," he said of the insurance institute's push to raise the minimum age. "Do these teen need to be driving as early as we are allowin gthem to drive?" New Jersey is the only state with a minimum driver's license age of 17. Reports cited a study from 1992-96 in which the rate of crash-related deaths among 16- and 17-year-olds was 18 per 100,000 in New Jersey. They compared that with 26 per 100,000 in Connectinut, which had a minimum driver's license age of 16 and 4 months.
Ken Biggs, chairman of the driver's education department at Schaumburg High School said, "Idealistically, I think it'd be great" to raise the minimum age. "But practically? No. There's no mass transit to get to work, to get to jobs." Meaning that he feels that the age to drive should be raised higher but at the same time it shouldn't because around the age of 16 most teen start working and they need transportation to get back and fourth to jobs.
I feel that 16 is a good age to drive, but they should only be able to drive if they had a driving experience. Most teens feel excited when they first get behind the wheel of ther own car. Which makes it kind of dangerous for them to drive. But then again some teens are more responsible than others. Teenagers now a days like to drink and drive which also makes it more dangerous for them to drive, because that's putting pedestrians in danger of walking.
Teenagers now a days are not as responsible as they should be. Having a driving experience would lower the cause of wreckless driving.
In the article it says it's a question that could reverberate across the country, wherever a new teen driver is turning a key in an ignition. Is 16 the right age to get a driver's license. Some people feel that it shouldn't matter about the age as long as they have a driving experience. "I don't think it matters what age you are," said Hinsdale Central High School sophomore, "as long as you have the practice and experience." But there are also people tha feel age should matter and 16 is to young to be behind the wheel. "We're still losing a lot of teens on tghe road each year," Lund said. Motor vehicle crashes kill more than 5,000 teenagers every year.
Lund feels that the minimum age shpuld being raised higher than 16. "This is kind of the next logical step," he said of the insurance institute's push to raise the minimum age. "Do these teen need to be driving as early as we are allowin gthem to drive?" New Jersey is the only state with a minimum driver's license age of 17. Reports cited a study from 1992-96 in which the rate of crash-related deaths among 16- and 17-year-olds was 18 per 100,000 in New Jersey. They compared that with 26 per 100,000 in Connectinut, which had a minimum driver's license age of 16 and 4 months.
Ken Biggs, chairman of the driver's education department at Schaumburg High School said, "Idealistically, I think it'd be great" to raise the minimum age. "But practically? No. There's no mass transit to get to work, to get to jobs." Meaning that he feels that the age to drive should be raised higher but at the same time it shouldn't because around the age of 16 most teen start working and they need transportation to get back and fourth to jobs.
I feel that 16 is a good age to drive, but they should only be able to drive if they had a driving experience. Most teens feel excited when they first get behind the wheel of ther own car. Which makes it kind of dangerous for them to drive. But then again some teens are more responsible than others. Teenagers now a days like to drink and drive which also makes it more dangerous for them to drive, because that's putting pedestrians in danger of walking.
Teenagers now a days are not as responsible as they should be. Having a driving experience would lower the cause of wreckless driving.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Oop is right up their alley
The article "Oop is right up thier alley" by Greg Payne is about the Boston Celetics and how they finally got to use their Rondo to Garnett alley oop. They haven't used the alley opp since 2009 when Kevin Garnett had a knee injury when playing against the Utah Jazz. In the article it says, "The Rondo-to-Garnett alley-oop came through twice in the final three minutes of Monday's victory, with the second one happening with just over 40 seconds to play and the Celtics leading by two.
The play became so effective that head coach Doc Rivers began using it in late game scenarios. The alley oop was usually used when the Celtics needed a quick bucket or wanted to take advantage of a 2 for 1 sistuation. Ronjon Rondo the starting point guard gave Doc Rivers credit for the play's revival. "It's pretty much all Doc's decision," Rondo said. "Doc has great timing when we need to bring that play out and use Kevin with those types of plays, so he's the man behind the [play] as far as the play call and getting Kevin in the right sistuation to make the plays."
Since Kevin Garnett had his kneee injury, Doc Rivers was very hesitate about using the play. But since Garnett was back in a good place, phiscally, Rivers was able to put the alley oop play back on his whiteboard. Sometimes Rondo utilizes Garnett's screen and attacks in to the paint to create the necessary space. Other times he'll go the opposite way, moving away from Garnett and drawing both his man and Garnett' s man with him, leaving Kevin wide open in the lane.
"Each play is different," says Rondo. "I try not to pre-determine whatever i'm doing. It's just taking what the defense gives me." The defense has been giving him is opportunities, as opposing teams have had difficulty predicting and stopping the alley-oop when the Celtics have been determined to use it.Who would have ever knew that the play was back in action.
The Rondo to Garnett alley oop has been a mystery to me. Now i can understand why it's been so obsolete. It's a good thing that they can now use the play again and Rondo and Garnett can show their fans what they really can do. Menaing that most people already know that Ronjon Rondo is the best point guard and that Kevin Garnett plays the best forward position. But on the other hand KG is not the best at shooting 3 pointers. So to express to his fans that he can do more than be the best forward position he can now show off his alley oop.
I'm excited that they can now used the play again because when i watch their games and they are down by like 15 points in the last quater I be so upset. Now they can use the play to catch back up or to just take advantage of the clock timer. Rondo to Garnett alley oop is back in action!
The play became so effective that head coach Doc Rivers began using it in late game scenarios. The alley oop was usually used when the Celtics needed a quick bucket or wanted to take advantage of a 2 for 1 sistuation. Ronjon Rondo the starting point guard gave Doc Rivers credit for the play's revival. "It's pretty much all Doc's decision," Rondo said. "Doc has great timing when we need to bring that play out and use Kevin with those types of plays, so he's the man behind the [play] as far as the play call and getting Kevin in the right sistuation to make the plays."
Since Kevin Garnett had his kneee injury, Doc Rivers was very hesitate about using the play. But since Garnett was back in a good place, phiscally, Rivers was able to put the alley oop play back on his whiteboard. Sometimes Rondo utilizes Garnett's screen and attacks in to the paint to create the necessary space. Other times he'll go the opposite way, moving away from Garnett and drawing both his man and Garnett' s man with him, leaving Kevin wide open in the lane.
"Each play is different," says Rondo. "I try not to pre-determine whatever i'm doing. It's just taking what the defense gives me." The defense has been giving him is opportunities, as opposing teams have had difficulty predicting and stopping the alley-oop when the Celtics have been determined to use it.Who would have ever knew that the play was back in action.
The Rondo to Garnett alley oop has been a mystery to me. Now i can understand why it's been so obsolete. It's a good thing that they can now use the play again and Rondo and Garnett can show their fans what they really can do. Menaing that most people already know that Ronjon Rondo is the best point guard and that Kevin Garnett plays the best forward position. But on the other hand KG is not the best at shooting 3 pointers. So to express to his fans that he can do more than be the best forward position he can now show off his alley oop.
I'm excited that they can now used the play again because when i watch their games and they are down by like 15 points in the last quater I be so upset. Now they can use the play to catch back up or to just take advantage of the clock timer. Rondo to Garnett alley oop is back in action!
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Yay! Boo! So? Reactions to Obama win vary
The article "Yay! Boo! So? Reactions to Obama win vary" is about how people faelt about the election and how they felt about Barack Obama being re-elected. In the article it says, "Im thrilled to death," said Barbara Drucker, a Collingswood flight attendant. " I would never have voted for Romney on women's issues alone." Marty Brenna a boilermaker from Laurel Springs says, "I'm a little bit disappointed. I wasn't really happy with either candidate."
Some people felt that Obama is not a responsible man to be in the White House and to be the president of the United States. Burkhardt said that he would have preferred to have a businessman like Romney in the White House. He says,"Obama is not as fiscally smart or fiscally responsible." Some people even feel that Barack Obama will not take care of the people like he say he is. "I am physically ill," said Linda Halpern, " I am worried.... I'm worried about Obamacare. I'm worried about my stocks. I'm worried about unloading three of my properties."
Lisa Peirce a medical researcher coordinator from Conshocken feels different about the candidates. She says,"I;m pretty indifferent.... Either way, they need to get their act together." She said politicians are out of touch with "real-life, real-world" issues, and expects the next for years to bring "more gridlock...not much of anything." Mary Szybist of the media says, "Very Happy" decribing her reactions. Szybist says,"I didn't feel like i got a sense of who Romney was and that i could trust anything he said." "I knew Barack was going to win," said Jackie Harrison of Coastville. " I think he's more trushworthy. He seems more of a people person."
I can honestly says that between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama it was a tight race. They both had their faults during the Presidential race. They both ignored questions and they both answered questions with the best of their ability. But on the other hand Barack Obama brung out the big guns. Even with his election being on the line because of his statment in his interveiw about how he felt about Same-Sex Marriage. He still did what he had to do and resumed being the president people had known him to be. People felt that if he was going to be a president he shouldn't condole in Same-Sexes being married. But Barack Obama felt other wise, meaning he felt that Same Sexes should love one another and be able to get married.
Now Mitt Romney was doing what he had to do. He also was being a good candidate, he supported the people in need and he did the best he could do. In 1996 a 14 year old girl was missing. Her father Bob Gay told Mitt Romney and Mitt's reaction was instant. He told the man that he didn't care how long it took to find his daughter, but that he was going to help find her. These are somethings that we don't get to hear about, about Mitt Romney. He's not as bad as people put him out to be but he's not perfect,nobody is.
All i can say is better luck next time Romney, Barack Obama keep doing what you are doing and let's keep this world in peace and not jealousy, anger and hate.
2012 PRESIDENTAL ELECTION !
Some people felt that Obama is not a responsible man to be in the White House and to be the president of the United States. Burkhardt said that he would have preferred to have a businessman like Romney in the White House. He says,"Obama is not as fiscally smart or fiscally responsible." Some people even feel that Barack Obama will not take care of the people like he say he is. "I am physically ill," said Linda Halpern, " I am worried.... I'm worried about Obamacare. I'm worried about my stocks. I'm worried about unloading three of my properties."
Lisa Peirce a medical researcher coordinator from Conshocken feels different about the candidates. She says,"I;m pretty indifferent.... Either way, they need to get their act together." She said politicians are out of touch with "real-life, real-world" issues, and expects the next for years to bring "more gridlock...not much of anything." Mary Szybist of the media says, "Very Happy" decribing her reactions. Szybist says,"I didn't feel like i got a sense of who Romney was and that i could trust anything he said." "I knew Barack was going to win," said Jackie Harrison of Coastville. " I think he's more trushworthy. He seems more of a people person."
I can honestly says that between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama it was a tight race. They both had their faults during the Presidential race. They both ignored questions and they both answered questions with the best of their ability. But on the other hand Barack Obama brung out the big guns. Even with his election being on the line because of his statment in his interveiw about how he felt about Same-Sex Marriage. He still did what he had to do and resumed being the president people had known him to be. People felt that if he was going to be a president he shouldn't condole in Same-Sexes being married. But Barack Obama felt other wise, meaning he felt that Same Sexes should love one another and be able to get married.
Now Mitt Romney was doing what he had to do. He also was being a good candidate, he supported the people in need and he did the best he could do. In 1996 a 14 year old girl was missing. Her father Bob Gay told Mitt Romney and Mitt's reaction was instant. He told the man that he didn't care how long it took to find his daughter, but that he was going to help find her. These are somethings that we don't get to hear about, about Mitt Romney. He's not as bad as people put him out to be but he's not perfect,nobody is.
All i can say is better luck next time Romney, Barack Obama keep doing what you are doing and let's keep this world in peace and not jealousy, anger and hate.
2012 PRESIDENTAL ELECTION !
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Will Climate Change Get Some Respect Now?
The article "Will Climate Change Get Some Respect Now?" by Nicholas D. Kristof was about the climate change. In the article it says, "It's true, of course, that no single storm or drought can be credited to climate change." William Solecki says, "You can't say any one single event is reflective of climate change. But it's illustrative of the conditions and events and scenarios that we can expect with climate change." Which is saying that people can't just blame one storm or hurricane is a cause of climate change. In the article it says, "In that sense, whatever it's cause, Sandy offers a window into the way ahead."
"Of the 10 warmest summers on record for the contiguous United States, seven have occurred since 2000," says Jake Crouch of the National Climatic Data Center. People say that due to the recent hot weather we have been having can only be an explanation of climate change. James E. Hansen says, " For the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change." People feel that there is no easy way of trying to change the climate. In the article it states, "There are no easy solutions, but we may need to invest in cleaner energy, impose a carbon tax or other curbs on greenhouse gases, and above all rethink how we can reduce the toll of changing climate."
I am kind of confused about this article, but when i constantly re-read it i can kind of comprehend what it's about. I feel that there is no way to climate change. People with still drive cars, litter, and do other things that will mess with the climate. Like in the article it said that there will be no easy solution, and i totally agree with that because there is no easy way. Mother nature will be mother nature we can't predict what type of weather she will give us each day.
But there is something in this article that i don't agree with and that is when William Solecki said that "You can't say any one single event is reflective of climate change." I don't agree with that because i feel that anything is a cause of climate change. Like for example if it was to be 76 degrees on Wednesday, but there it's suppose to be a snow storm on Tuesday. And on Wednesday instead of it being 76 degrees it wind up being 55 degrees. I feel that because of the snow storm that following day it changed the weather for Wednesday.
I don't really understand climate change, but yes it is very confusing. But that is why it's called climate change, because at anytime of any hour, day or time the climate could change.
"Of the 10 warmest summers on record for the contiguous United States, seven have occurred since 2000," says Jake Crouch of the National Climatic Data Center. People say that due to the recent hot weather we have been having can only be an explanation of climate change. James E. Hansen says, " For the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change." People feel that there is no easy way of trying to change the climate. In the article it states, "There are no easy solutions, but we may need to invest in cleaner energy, impose a carbon tax or other curbs on greenhouse gases, and above all rethink how we can reduce the toll of changing climate."
I am kind of confused about this article, but when i constantly re-read it i can kind of comprehend what it's about. I feel that there is no way to climate change. People with still drive cars, litter, and do other things that will mess with the climate. Like in the article it said that there will be no easy solution, and i totally agree with that because there is no easy way. Mother nature will be mother nature we can't predict what type of weather she will give us each day.
But there is something in this article that i don't agree with and that is when William Solecki said that "You can't say any one single event is reflective of climate change." I don't agree with that because i feel that anything is a cause of climate change. Like for example if it was to be 76 degrees on Wednesday, but there it's suppose to be a snow storm on Tuesday. And on Wednesday instead of it being 76 degrees it wind up being 55 degrees. I feel that because of the snow storm that following day it changed the weather for Wednesday.
I don't really understand climate change, but yes it is very confusing. But that is why it's called climate change, because at anytime of any hour, day or time the climate could change.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Attention Disorder or Not, Pills to Help in School n
In the article “Attention Disorder or Not, Pills to Help in School” by Alan Schwartz is about pills that are giving to children who have A.D.H.D (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). In the article it states “When Dr. Michael Anderson hears about one of his low-income patients struggling in elementary school, he usually gives them a taste of some powerful medicine: Adderall.” Dr. Michael says that children that are diagnosed with A.D.H.D use it as an excuse to not pay attention and/or focused in school. In the article it says “Although A.D.H.D is the diagnosis Dr. Anderson makes, he calls the disorder ‘made up’ and ‘and excuse’ to prescribe the pills to treat what he considers the children’s true problem – poor academic performance in inadequate schools.”
Dr. Michael feels that the pills that he prescribes for children to take will not help them with their A.D.H.D problem but with their academic performance. “They are prescribing stimulants to struggling students in schools starved of extra money – not to treat A.D.H.D., necessarily, but to boost their academic performance” says Dr. Michael. “We as a society have been unwilling to invest in very effective non-pharmaceutical interventions for these children and their families,” said Dr.Ramesh Raghavan, a child mental-health services researcher at Washington University in St. Louis and an expert in prescription drug use among low-income children.
Dr. Nancy Rappaport, a child psychiatrist in Cambridge, Mass., who works mostly with lower-income children and their schools says, “We are seeing this more and more. We are using a chemical instead of doing things that are just as important to also do, sometimes more.”
This article makes want to ask questions. Questions like, why do these doctors feel that being diagnosed with A.D.H.D is an excuse for these children, why do they feel the need that giving these children this pill will help them focused better. I feel that these children are gifted with what they have; there is no trying to make this better. Giving these children these pills have a short term long run, meaning for this short amount of time these doctors think that this pill will help these children focused better, but they do not know the side-effects of this pill in the long run.
These children do not need a pill to help them focused better. They just need a parents or someone with patients to help them sit, focused, and understand what they are being taut. Children nowadays don’t like taking medicine that is prescribed by doctors for helping them get rid of colds or anything, so why do you think these children want to take pills to help them try to fix something that they have been “gifted” with. Having A.D.H.D may be an excuse that parents use to get their children out of anything, but for the time being you cannot blame these children for having something that they didn’t want to be diagnosed with. These pills are not a good idea.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Same-Sex Marriage
The article “Obama Backs Same-Sex Marriage” is about Barack Obama stating how he feels about same-sex marriages. In the article it says Obama said his position on same-sex marriage evolved over several years as he spoke with friends, family, and neighbors about it. He cited the influence of members of his staff “who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together,” and the gay soldiers, airmen, Marines, and sailors “who are out there fighting on my behalf” but not allowed to marry.
Barack Obama feels that same sexes should be able to get married but he also feels that a lot of people use the word “marriage” is something that evokes powerful tradition and religious beliefs. The article also states Obama said he has “stood on the side of broader equality” for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community. He also states “and I’d hesitated on gay marriage in part because I thought civil unions would be sufficient. Obama’s position on same-sex marriage has changed over time. He endorsed gay marriage during a 1996 run in Illinois for The Illinois Senate. Then he opposed it when he ran for US Senate in 2004 and again for president in 2008. Obama’s sudden declaration departs from his longstanding public statements supporting equal rights for gay couples that stopped just short of marriage.
I don’t see anything wrong with same-sex marriages. They are human just like us, and we are all the same. The only thing different from each other is DNA and Genes. We all have ears, a mouth, eyes, and a nose, all things that completes us as human beings. People who like their same sexes are not out of the ordinary, their just ‘different’. I went online and looked up same-sex marriages on the article “Understanding and Presenting the Case for Same-Sex Marriage” it says “This sends a message, not only to the gay and lesbian community but to our nation as a whole, that heterosexuality is more valued and valuable than homosexuality, that the heterosexual is more natural, moral than the homosexual. It is unjust, and it is time for change.” I feel that this statement is not fair. I feel that we are all equal, notice how I call the heterosexual’s people. They are not aliens, nor robots, they are like us. I asked my grandmother what she thought that statement meant. She said “It’s just saying god mad man for women, not man for man and woman for woman.” Now I can respect that response and understand what she’s saying, but like I stated before I feel that we are all the same. So if a woman wants to love a woman and a man wants to love a man and they feel that their love is strong enough to get married, then they should be able to.
There is nothing wrong with same-sex marriage. If I where the president or a judge that was involved in this debate and/or situation I would try my best to fight for same-sexes to get married. One question I would like to be answered and explained is, why is same sexes that love each other and want to be together such an abomination for them to be married?
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Texting May Be Taking A Toll
The article "Texting May Be Taking A Toll" by Katie Hafner is about how texting is now affecting teenagers in their everyday life. The article says American teenagers sent and received an average of 2,272 text messages per month in the fourth quarter of 2008, almost 80 messages a day more than double the average of a year earlier.
Sherry Turkle,a psychologist who is a director at Massachusetts Institute Technology says it might be causing a shift in adolescents develop."Among the jobs of adolescence are to separate from your parents, and to find the peace and quiet to become the person you decide you want to be," she said. "Texting hits directly at both those jobs."
Texting also leads to damage in people's thumbs. Peter W. Johnson, an associate professor of environmental and occupational health sciences at the University of Washington, said " Based on our experiences with computer users, we know intensive repetitive use of the upper extremities can lead to musculoskeletal disorder, so we gave some reason to be concerned that too much texting could lead to temporary or permanent damage to the thumbs."
Precipitous falls in grades are also problems from texting. Greg Hardesty, a reporter in Lake Forest, Calif., said that late last year his 13-year-old daughter, Reina, racked up 14,528 texts in one month.Her grades then began to fall precipitously. After her parents confiscated her phone, Reina's grades have since improved,and the phone is back in her hands but because of the down fall from having her phone the first time, her text messages where limited.
I think that texting has its rights and wrongs. Teenagers texting is not always a bad thing, i think limiting texting for teens is not such as bad thing. I can admit that texting does keep teens from sleeping and concentrating. But one of my rights from texting is, one day when leaving school to go home i noticed that i left my packet in my locker, which meant if i didn't have my packet i couldn't do my English home work. So then I texted one of my friend's from school that had their packet to ask them could they give me the words off of the paper. She then called me and told me what each word was, with her telling me the words i could do my do my homework. If i didn't have a phone or didn't have anyway to contact her i would have gotten a 0 for my homework.
A wrong for texting is lacking of sleep. Last week on Thursday i was up very late texting and on the phone and knew i had school the next day. But i decided to stay up, but i did eventually go to sleep. Getting up the next day for school was so hasty. I was very tired and sleepy, but i had to face the consequences of my actions from the night before and go to school. Yes, i was very tired in class but i fought my sleep and got my work done. But fighting my sleep gave me a headache, so when i got home i went straight to sleep. But if I didn't stay up the night before i would've avoided getting that headache and being to sleepy.
But like i stated before texting does have its rights and wrongs, but texting does not always have a bad outcome on teens.
Sherry Turkle,a psychologist who is a director at Massachusetts Institute Technology says it might be causing a shift in adolescents develop."Among the jobs of adolescence are to separate from your parents, and to find the peace and quiet to become the person you decide you want to be," she said. "Texting hits directly at both those jobs."
Texting also leads to damage in people's thumbs. Peter W. Johnson, an associate professor of environmental and occupational health sciences at the University of Washington, said " Based on our experiences with computer users, we know intensive repetitive use of the upper extremities can lead to musculoskeletal disorder, so we gave some reason to be concerned that too much texting could lead to temporary or permanent damage to the thumbs."
Precipitous falls in grades are also problems from texting. Greg Hardesty, a reporter in Lake Forest, Calif., said that late last year his 13-year-old daughter, Reina, racked up 14,528 texts in one month.Her grades then began to fall precipitously. After her parents confiscated her phone, Reina's grades have since improved,and the phone is back in her hands but because of the down fall from having her phone the first time, her text messages where limited.
I think that texting has its rights and wrongs. Teenagers texting is not always a bad thing, i think limiting texting for teens is not such as bad thing. I can admit that texting does keep teens from sleeping and concentrating. But one of my rights from texting is, one day when leaving school to go home i noticed that i left my packet in my locker, which meant if i didn't have my packet i couldn't do my English home work. So then I texted one of my friend's from school that had their packet to ask them could they give me the words off of the paper. She then called me and told me what each word was, with her telling me the words i could do my do my homework. If i didn't have a phone or didn't have anyway to contact her i would have gotten a 0 for my homework.
A wrong for texting is lacking of sleep. Last week on Thursday i was up very late texting and on the phone and knew i had school the next day. But i decided to stay up, but i did eventually go to sleep. Getting up the next day for school was so hasty. I was very tired and sleepy, but i had to face the consequences of my actions from the night before and go to school. Yes, i was very tired in class but i fought my sleep and got my work done. But fighting my sleep gave me a headache, so when i got home i went straight to sleep. But if I didn't stay up the night before i would've avoided getting that headache and being to sleepy.
But like i stated before texting does have its rights and wrongs, but texting does not always have a bad outcome on teens.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
"Studies Find More Students Cheating, With High Achievers No Exception"
In the article "Studies Find More Students Cheating, With High Achievers No Exception" by Richard Pérez-Pena large scale cheating has been uncovered in the nation's most competitive schools. Majority of students violate standards of academics integrity to some degree.
Cheating has become easier and more widely tolerated. Donald L. McCabe a professor at the Rutgers University Business School, and a leading researcher on cheating states" I don’t think there's any question that students have become more competitive, under more pressure, and as a result, tend to excuse more from themselves and other students, and that's allowed by the adults around them".
"Students are surprisingly unclear about plagiarism and cheating" said Mr.Wasieleski, an associate professor of management. A recent study by Jeffrey A.Roberts and David M.Wasieleski at Duquesne University found that the college students who used more online tools for work in class where more likely to copy the work of other students. The Internet has changed attitudes, as a world of instant downloading, searching, copy and pasting has loosened some ideas of ownership and authoring.
I don't think students cheat because their classmates and teachers let them. I think they cheat because they think that it will get them to pass and moved on in life. Teachers, parents, and students cannot hold child/and or classmates hand through life, so I think they allow them to cheat so they can learn a lesson that cheating only hurts yourself.
When I’m in school I may sometimes let my classmates copy off of my papers for homework or for classwork. But in all reality I do it because I know that if we were to have a test on anything that we had to do for homework or classwork that they will soon to begin that copy my work is hurting their grades, not mine. Now I can say that letting them copy off of my work may also be a bad thing. I say this because; like I said before if we were to have a test on work they would actually depend on me giving them the answer because I let them do it when we are doing ordinary class work. But one question no one will ever be able to answer is why students cheat. I do want to know why is it that when students realize that cheating will not help them in life, why do they still continue to do it?
This article really makes me wonder why most students in school including the top schools cheat. It doesn’t help you get anywhere, and when your asked questions about something you know you cheated on all you can really do is think to yourself, What was on his/her paper again? Cheating has its good and wrong doing. But it mainly has wrong doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)