On Thursday, Katie and I presented our debate on Adoption, being a topic in which you can't really know the feelings of both birth parents and adopted children, it was hard to find the information needed to answer our question.
In my eyes our presentation would've went better if there wasn't SO much information that we decided to report on. It seemed like tooo much and caused people to become bored with the topic fast.
The debate portion didn't go as I good as I thought it would. It started off kinda slow, but when we reached the questions about adopting and smae sex couples as well as what age should u tell a child they were adopted, it became a full on war between Jordan and Willow, that in my eyes didnt really pertain to our topic.
All in all our presentation could've been better if we cut out some of the information and stayed on topic with regards to the debate.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
School uniforms
On Monday, we had an interesting debate on school uniforms and whether they are good or bad. In my opinion school uniforms should not be mandatory.
School uniforms will do nothing but cut down on a students individuality. A uniform is not the way to cut down on school violence. The only thing that will cut down on school violence is if parents would pay attention to their children and keep their children out of trouble and give them consequences when they disobey and not to let them run wild.
School is also the place where the next actors, writers, artists, politicians, inventors, designers and musicians are trained. School uniforms send a clear early-life message to students that conformity is important and creativity is not, that authority is allowed to abuse it's power and constrain our right to free speech and expression. Students learn from uniforms that their individuality, political opinions and religious rights are unimportant, as is their education, students are regularly suspended for non compliance to the uniform code even if their school work is excellent.
School Uniforms are expensive and have no use in and out side of school plain and simple.
School uniforms will do nothing but cut down on a students individuality. A uniform is not the way to cut down on school violence. The only thing that will cut down on school violence is if parents would pay attention to their children and keep their children out of trouble and give them consequences when they disobey and not to let them run wild.
School is also the place where the next actors, writers, artists, politicians, inventors, designers and musicians are trained. School uniforms send a clear early-life message to students that conformity is important and creativity is not, that authority is allowed to abuse it's power and constrain our right to free speech and expression. Students learn from uniforms that their individuality, political opinions and religious rights are unimportant, as is their education, students are regularly suspended for non compliance to the uniform code even if their school work is excellent.
School Uniforms are expensive and have no use in and out side of school plain and simple.
Age Majority
Today we had a debate on whether we should lower the age majority and the answer is no.
I agree consistency's important - but I don't think driving a car's proof that you're an adult. It means you have basic motor skills.
Across Canada, 16 year olds are minors. You can't buy a house if you're 16. You can't get married if you're 16. You can't buy a beer. Your parents can't kick you out of the house if you're 16.You're held to a different legal standard if you're 16.
So, if we're going to give 16 year-olds the vote then lower the age of majority to 16 and throw them into the world of adulthood. I don't feel comfortable with that idea.
I do think the age of majority should be standardized and then ALL rights of citizenship should be bestowed on a Canadian at that age (ie. being a legal adult at 18 in Ontario but legally prohibited from drinking is BS) and they should have all the protections until that age (being able to sign up for military service while you're legally a minor is crazy)
I agree consistency's important - but I don't think driving a car's proof that you're an adult. It means you have basic motor skills.
Across Canada, 16 year olds are minors. You can't buy a house if you're 16. You can't get married if you're 16. You can't buy a beer. Your parents can't kick you out of the house if you're 16.You're held to a different legal standard if you're 16.
So, if we're going to give 16 year-olds the vote then lower the age of majority to 16 and throw them into the world of adulthood. I don't feel comfortable with that idea.
I do think the age of majority should be standardized and then ALL rights of citizenship should be bestowed on a Canadian at that age (ie. being a legal adult at 18 in Ontario but legally prohibited from drinking is BS) and they should have all the protections until that age (being able to sign up for military service while you're legally a minor is crazy)
Sicko
After watching this movie, I decided to live in France.
Sicko is a 2007 documentary film by film maker Michael Moore. The film investigates the American health care system, focussing on its health insurance and pharmaceutical industry. The film compares the for-profit, non universal U.S. system with those of universal and nonprofit systems of Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Cuba.
I find the American health care system is a complete joke. When the health care system is turning away people who are in need of medical care because they cannot afford it, is a low blow in order to get a quick dollar. Even the insurance companies are more into getting a paycheck than allowing for the survival of the ill.
During this movie we saw insurance companies deny claims for vital medical procedures saying that it was unnecessary or experimental, when really that "unnecessary" procedure could’ve saved that individuals life.
The heroes that helped with the 9/11 tragedy are even not covered for the problems that occurred due to them serving their country. An individual who needed an inhaler to help breathe was paying a minimum of $135 per inhaler, whereas in Cuba (America’s enemy, and they pay five cents!
Why should citizens have to pay for something that should be free? We are trying to prolong live and sustain our race but how can we when we cannot afford health care and therefore are turned down for the care they need and should be provided.
Sicko is a 2007 documentary film by film maker Michael Moore. The film investigates the American health care system, focussing on its health insurance and pharmaceutical industry. The film compares the for-profit, non universal U.S. system with those of universal and nonprofit systems of Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Cuba.
I find the American health care system is a complete joke. When the health care system is turning away people who are in need of medical care because they cannot afford it, is a low blow in order to get a quick dollar. Even the insurance companies are more into getting a paycheck than allowing for the survival of the ill.
During this movie we saw insurance companies deny claims for vital medical procedures saying that it was unnecessary or experimental, when really that "unnecessary" procedure could’ve saved that individuals life.
The heroes that helped with the 9/11 tragedy are even not covered for the problems that occurred due to them serving their country. An individual who needed an inhaler to help breathe was paying a minimum of $135 per inhaler, whereas in Cuba (America’s enemy, and they pay five cents!
Why should citizens have to pay for something that should be free? We are trying to prolong live and sustain our race but how can we when we cannot afford health care and therefore are turned down for the care they need and should be provided.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Is abortion really Immoral?
Last Friday, we had a debate on Abortion and whether we believe it to be immoral. At the end of the discussion the class decided that only under certain conditions should a person be allowed to have an abortion. In my opinion, I believe that abortion is not immoral due to the fact that an abortion in way "kills" the baby before it is really, in my sense alive. Some people may counteract that the baby is alive at conception, but it is only my opinion.
I do agree that there should be certain conditions a women must take before getting and abortion because that will stay with her for all her life. We discussed that our tax dollars go to providing this procedure and some argued that the women should have to pay for this herself. I wonder if someone was not able to pay for this procedure (which is around $800) if they will be able to support a child?
Yes, the individual could place the baby for adoption, but when you carry the child, inside you for nine months you tend to feel a bond with that baby. I am not saying that we should just do abortions for anybody and for people to think of it as being "an easy way out", I am saying that for people who wish to have an abortion that there will be certain guidelines and steps that a person must go through in order to obtain and abortion.
In conclusion, it is ultimately the women's decision if she wants to go along with an abortion. It may not be the best way, but for some women it is the only way to be able to live their lives and create their dreams without having to support a child or knowing that your child is out there living with another family.
I do agree that there should be certain conditions a women must take before getting and abortion because that will stay with her for all her life. We discussed that our tax dollars go to providing this procedure and some argued that the women should have to pay for this herself. I wonder if someone was not able to pay for this procedure (which is around $800) if they will be able to support a child?
Yes, the individual could place the baby for adoption, but when you carry the child, inside you for nine months you tend to feel a bond with that baby. I am not saying that we should just do abortions for anybody and for people to think of it as being "an easy way out", I am saying that for people who wish to have an abortion that there will be certain guidelines and steps that a person must go through in order to obtain and abortion.
In conclusion, it is ultimately the women's decision if she wants to go along with an abortion. It may not be the best way, but for some women it is the only way to be able to live their lives and create their dreams without having to support a child or knowing that your child is out there living with another family.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Should People be Compensated for Past Injustices
During Friday’s debate "Should people be compensated for past actions" I had no response during the actual debate, but as the day went on and I thought about it more I came to the conclusion that no they shouldn’t.
Even though horrible things have happened to people in the past, I do not believe that they should be compensated (money wise) for what happened. These events took place in the past, what is done is done and people shouldn’t dwell in the past to much.
If we decide to compensate one injustice we are being discriminatory to the others who have also experienced injustices in the past and therefore have started the process all over again. I understand that these actions have caused these people so much grieve and pain along with psychological and emotional problems, but money is not the way to solve this. If anything the government should provide counsellors and therapists to help these people deal with their pain and help them move on with there lives.
With regards to the law suits being taken regarding the African American slavery, I completely disagree with what they are doing. They were not the ones to experience this injustice and therefore have no right to be compensated. They claim that these actions have caused them emotional scaring and relationship problems, but this injustice happened before they were even born and before the world changed.
They are now living in a country with freedom and where there is no slavery and should be grateful for what they now have. Yes what happened to those people were horrible but that is the past and society has evolved to become a better safer place, where people don’t have to be afraid that people will take them from their homes and make them slaves for wealthy people.
Even though horrible things have happened to people in the past, I do not believe that they should be compensated (money wise) for what happened. These events took place in the past, what is done is done and people shouldn’t dwell in the past to much.
If we decide to compensate one injustice we are being discriminatory to the others who have also experienced injustices in the past and therefore have started the process all over again. I understand that these actions have caused these people so much grieve and pain along with psychological and emotional problems, but money is not the way to solve this. If anything the government should provide counsellors and therapists to help these people deal with their pain and help them move on with there lives.
With regards to the law suits being taken regarding the African American slavery, I completely disagree with what they are doing. They were not the ones to experience this injustice and therefore have no right to be compensated. They claim that these actions have caused them emotional scaring and relationship problems, but this injustice happened before they were even born and before the world changed.
They are now living in a country with freedom and where there is no slavery and should be grateful for what they now have. Yes what happened to those people were horrible but that is the past and society has evolved to become a better safer place, where people don’t have to be afraid that people will take them from their homes and make them slaves for wealthy people.
Baby Boomers
On Thursday we were given a couple articles regarding the Baby Boomers and the changes that our society will face as the Boomers begin to retire. These changes will be both positive and negative depending on how you look at it.
As this generation retires a new expense is laid upon us; how will we support all these people? Will our society have to accommodate to this generation and will we have enough money to support these accommodations?
These questions are just a few that we will ask ourselves in the next couple of years and the answer is yes. Yes, we will have to accommodate to this growing population and yes our tax dollars will go into taking care of this generation, just as our grand children’s tax dollars will go into supporting us when we grow old and retire. Most people think of the Baby Boomers retiring as a negative thing, but I believe that there will be positive aspects. As the baby Boomers retire there will become more job openings for people and more room for promotion. When I did a cooperative education credit at the hospital and expressed my interest as a pediatric nurse, a nurse told me that nursing spots in pediatrics are all full because of the Baby Boomers and she said that I would have to wait until they "retired or died before I was able to go into that nursing division" her words, not mine.
My generation today is far more educated than the people of the past and therefore are able to get the jobs required to look after these Baby Boomers, when they retire not only jobs that were there before will become available, but jobs that will help accommodate the boomers will be in high demand. Instead of making toys or sugary snacks for children, we will be creating exercise equipment that is suitable for elderly people and liquids that will contain all the necessary vitamins and minerals needed for the elderly.
Our society will alter schools into retirement homes and water parks will be changed into sewing clubs. Whatever happens, we know that one thing is for sure. Our society is in for a big change in the next 10 years.
As this generation retires a new expense is laid upon us; how will we support all these people? Will our society have to accommodate to this generation and will we have enough money to support these accommodations?
These questions are just a few that we will ask ourselves in the next couple of years and the answer is yes. Yes, we will have to accommodate to this growing population and yes our tax dollars will go into taking care of this generation, just as our grand children’s tax dollars will go into supporting us when we grow old and retire. Most people think of the Baby Boomers retiring as a negative thing, but I believe that there will be positive aspects. As the baby Boomers retire there will become more job openings for people and more room for promotion. When I did a cooperative education credit at the hospital and expressed my interest as a pediatric nurse, a nurse told me that nursing spots in pediatrics are all full because of the Baby Boomers and she said that I would have to wait until they "retired or died before I was able to go into that nursing division" her words, not mine.
My generation today is far more educated than the people of the past and therefore are able to get the jobs required to look after these Baby Boomers, when they retire not only jobs that were there before will become available, but jobs that will help accommodate the boomers will be in high demand. Instead of making toys or sugary snacks for children, we will be creating exercise equipment that is suitable for elderly people and liquids that will contain all the necessary vitamins and minerals needed for the elderly.
Our society will alter schools into retirement homes and water parks will be changed into sewing clubs. Whatever happens, we know that one thing is for sure. Our society is in for a big change in the next 10 years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
