Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Extra Credit blog
1.) In this case the judges and lawyers seem to be debating as to whether or not schools have the right to strip search students for any reason. They are also deciding whether or not if a strip search is a violation of the student's 4Th amendment right, which among other things prohibits unlawful/unreasonable searches and seizures. The student was an honour student and had no prior record. The only reason she was suspected was another student, who was apparently a trouble maker, accused her of giving drugs when she was the one caught with them. I feel that the school should not have the right to strip search a student, if they are suspected of carrying drugs. though it is important to keep drugs out of schools, if this type of behavior is allowed by school officials then i fear it may not be worth the trouble it will bring about, and that it may increase the possibility of students being abused.
2.) If I were a school administrator and had to have strip searches done in my school, then i would have a very strict policy. They could only be done if there was some actual evidence that a student was carrying harmful drugs on their person, not just an unfounded accusation. Also the parents would have to be contacted and their permission recieved. If their permission was not recieved when a student was suspected of having drugs then the parent would have to come pick up their child from school or do the search themselves.
3.) If a large quantity of drugs was found in Savana Redding's possession, then it would not change my opinion that strip searches should not be allowed in most cases. She had no prior record and was only suspected because a student who did use drugs accussed her when she herself had just been caught with drugs. In law today if the police illegally obtain evidence then it is suppossed to be throw out, meaning it is not allowed in court, I think the same idea/policy should be applied to school systems.
2.) If I were a school administrator and had to have strip searches done in my school, then i would have a very strict policy. They could only be done if there was some actual evidence that a student was carrying harmful drugs on their person, not just an unfounded accusation. Also the parents would have to be contacted and their permission recieved. If their permission was not recieved when a student was suspected of having drugs then the parent would have to come pick up their child from school or do the search themselves.
3.) If a large quantity of drugs was found in Savana Redding's possession, then it would not change my opinion that strip searches should not be allowed in most cases. She had no prior record and was only suspected because a student who did use drugs accussed her when she herself had just been caught with drugs. In law today if the police illegally obtain evidence then it is suppossed to be throw out, meaning it is not allowed in court, I think the same idea/policy should be applied to school systems.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Blog #12: part 1
My ideal university would not be so different from the University that i attend currently. My ideal University would be a place where students are encouraged to think freely and openly. Where students are in a friendly environment. It would charge way less for tuition, more reasonable rates. It would have many different majors. A variety of different student groups and clubs are also desirable. For an example of a class, lets use a day in a class of psychology. The teacher and students would perform different activities to test theories and hypothesis. There would be actual hands on training, not just wave after wave of notes and data. This would allow students to learn concepts more effectively. This would be a typical day at my ideal University.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Blog #10
1.) I think the shirts may have been made with good intentions, but try to represent one's relationship with Jesus in a manner that some could interpret as a mockery of Christianity.
No, I find both of the shirts somewhat misguided/inappropriate. It is hard to say outright whether or not the images are a parody because in my opinion it depends on the opinion of the person wearing the shirt. If it is some kid who thinks it looks cool, and that it describes his faith in modern terms then I would say that the individual should find a better way to show their faith, such as a cross necklace or a more serious Christian t-shirt. On the other hand if it is some punk who is wearing the t-shirt because they think it makes fun of or mocks Christianity then I would think it was a parody, though of course you don't really know what people are thinking just by looking at their t-shirt. You would have to talk to them or look at the other clothes that they are wearing. I would say my being a Christian effects my response heavily.
2.) If I had to try to refute Paul Mitchell's argument, his statement that Christians have wanted to "make an outward sign of their inner conversion", if taken out of context could contradict his stance against the t-shirts shown in the blog.
3.) Without a picture of Jesus the effect may be diminished to some, because it would not be as graphic. No, the absence of a picture of Jesus would not change my reaction to the t-shirts.
4.) Again, for me to determine the message of the t-shirt, I would have to know the beliefs of the person wearing it, the t-shirt itself in my opinion is not enough to relay a definite message, because again it could be a message of one's faith in Jesus described in modern terms that youth commonly use or it could be meant to be a mockery of Christianity by portraying Jesus in an inappropriate manner. The shirt on the left is more acceptable than the one on the right, in fact, the way Jesus is portrayed is fine, in an acceptable manner, the only issue with the shirt on the left is the text, the message on the shirt. If it had a more appropriate message then it would be a cool t-shirt. The shirt on the right is wholly inappropriate, the message is inappropriate and so is the way Jesus is depicted, his wearing of a hoodie and making a peace gesture. Overall, if Jesus is to be shown and/or referenced on a t-shirt then it should only be of him in a serious or respectful manner, and the message on the shirt, if there is one, should again be respectful and appropriate, such as quoting Jesus and/or other biblical texts/scripture.
No, I find both of the shirts somewhat misguided/inappropriate. It is hard to say outright whether or not the images are a parody because in my opinion it depends on the opinion of the person wearing the shirt. If it is some kid who thinks it looks cool, and that it describes his faith in modern terms then I would say that the individual should find a better way to show their faith, such as a cross necklace or a more serious Christian t-shirt. On the other hand if it is some punk who is wearing the t-shirt because they think it makes fun of or mocks Christianity then I would think it was a parody, though of course you don't really know what people are thinking just by looking at their t-shirt. You would have to talk to them or look at the other clothes that they are wearing. I would say my being a Christian effects my response heavily.
2.) If I had to try to refute Paul Mitchell's argument, his statement that Christians have wanted to "make an outward sign of their inner conversion", if taken out of context could contradict his stance against the t-shirts shown in the blog.
3.) Without a picture of Jesus the effect may be diminished to some, because it would not be as graphic. No, the absence of a picture of Jesus would not change my reaction to the t-shirts.
4.) Again, for me to determine the message of the t-shirt, I would have to know the beliefs of the person wearing it, the t-shirt itself in my opinion is not enough to relay a definite message, because again it could be a message of one's faith in Jesus described in modern terms that youth commonly use or it could be meant to be a mockery of Christianity by portraying Jesus in an inappropriate manner. The shirt on the left is more acceptable than the one on the right, in fact, the way Jesus is portrayed is fine, in an acceptable manner, the only issue with the shirt on the left is the text, the message on the shirt. If it had a more appropriate message then it would be a cool t-shirt. The shirt on the right is wholly inappropriate, the message is inappropriate and so is the way Jesus is depicted, his wearing of a hoodie and making a peace gesture. Overall, if Jesus is to be shown and/or referenced on a t-shirt then it should only be of him in a serious or respectful manner, and the message on the shirt, if there is one, should again be respectful and appropriate, such as quoting Jesus and/or other biblical texts/scripture.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Blog #8
Song #1: A person's right to kill?
Genre: Country
Description: This song talks about how abortion is a negative thing and that people don't have the right to "abort" or kill their babies. It also disscusses ways that this situation can be avoided. It also describes the great loss of life that abortions cause.
Song#2: Drugs are bad!
Genre: Rock
Description: This song describes how many youth have a wrong view on the usage of illegal drugs. How many youth think it is ok, and ignore all the facts that show using drugs is bad and harmful. The songs also plays on common reasons kids use drugs.
Song#3: Right to Arm Bears?!?!
Genre: Rock
This song makes fun of the reasons anti-gun advocates use to try to get guns banned. This is a somewhat commical pro-gun song.
Song#4: Marriage is Holy
Genre: Country
Description: This song is a serious country song, that talks about how marriage is holy and that traditional marriage is the way to go.
Song#5: Keep on Working
Genre: Country
Description: Talks about how a Good Work Ethic is one of the things that is fundamental to America's success.
Lyrics of Song#2
"The teacher tells you, drugs are bad, your parents tell you drugs are bad, But they don't know whats up, cause drugs are fun cool. During the day teens go to school, though after some of them who are "cool" do drugs to stay chill. Teen's parents say Drugs are bad, some agree and only use natural "WEED"."
The video of the song would portray Teens who do regular things and are in general good kids, making bad decisions and choices.
CD Title: Values and Ethics of America.
The cover of my CD would be a picture of an America flag, with a shadow covering part of it.
Genre: Country
Description: This song talks about how abortion is a negative thing and that people don't have the right to "abort" or kill their babies. It also disscusses ways that this situation can be avoided. It also describes the great loss of life that abortions cause.
Song#2: Drugs are bad!
Genre: Rock
Description: This song describes how many youth have a wrong view on the usage of illegal drugs. How many youth think it is ok, and ignore all the facts that show using drugs is bad and harmful. The songs also plays on common reasons kids use drugs.
Song#3: Right to Arm Bears?!?!
Genre: Rock
This song makes fun of the reasons anti-gun advocates use to try to get guns banned. This is a somewhat commical pro-gun song.
Song#4: Marriage is Holy
Genre: Country
Description: This song is a serious country song, that talks about how marriage is holy and that traditional marriage is the way to go.
Song#5: Keep on Working
Genre: Country
Description: Talks about how a Good Work Ethic is one of the things that is fundamental to America's success.
Lyrics of Song#2
"The teacher tells you, drugs are bad, your parents tell you drugs are bad, But they don't know whats up, cause drugs are fun cool. During the day teens go to school, though after some of them who are "cool" do drugs to stay chill. Teen's parents say Drugs are bad, some agree and only use natural "WEED"."
The video of the song would portray Teens who do regular things and are in general good kids, making bad decisions and choices.
CD Title: Values and Ethics of America.
The cover of my CD would be a picture of an America flag, with a shadow covering part of it.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Response to Blog #5
1.) My reaction to this video was that I was somewhat surprised by what i saw. I had thought steroid use was more widespread, according to the video, there is more hype about steroid use and abuse than there actually are cases of it. This video fails to mention or give actual statistics on steroid abuse and on the percent of abusers.users who develop or experience negative/harmful side effects. A weak argument that could result would be thats teroid use is widespread. As with almost anything steroids "can" be used responsibily, but there is almost no practical way to have responsible use enforced. If laws were passed to require doctors to only prescribe steroids in limited amounts then people who wanted more would simply get them illegally, which apparently isn't that hard to do.
2.) Steroid use in undesirable, and should not be allowed for either highschool or proffesional athletes. In this area the standards for both should be the same. All sports should have the same standard on steroid use, which should be that no steroid use is acceptable. I feel that steroid use is not expected in our culture. It is encouraged only in some indivual situations. Such as when coaches or parents push their children/athletes to use them. I feel that by discouraging steroid use we can avoid creating a double standard for athletes. If all athletes simply do their best then the best athlete should win. Testing for steroids can be the right thing to do in certain situations, random testing should only be implemented if an outbreak of steroid use is suspected in a certain area, meaning a certain proffessional team or a local highschool sports team, ect. By discouraging use of steroids and when neccessary, testing for steroid use, society can effectively combat steroid use and reduce its occurence.
2.) Steroid use in undesirable, and should not be allowed for either highschool or proffesional athletes. In this area the standards for both should be the same. All sports should have the same standard on steroid use, which should be that no steroid use is acceptable. I feel that steroid use is not expected in our culture. It is encouraged only in some indivual situations. Such as when coaches or parents push their children/athletes to use them. I feel that by discouraging steroid use we can avoid creating a double standard for athletes. If all athletes simply do their best then the best athlete should win. Testing for steroids can be the right thing to do in certain situations, random testing should only be implemented if an outbreak of steroid use is suspected in a certain area, meaning a certain proffessional team or a local highschool sports team, ect. By discouraging use of steroids and when neccessary, testing for steroid use, society can effectively combat steroid use and reduce its occurence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)