Rebuttal: Human Population Control

Today, I am going to look at Ianna’s Post about controlling the human population. She said that

Instead of going on a rant killing millions of people it would be better to invest in something that would be placed in the body during infancy that would keep the individual from obtaining an accidental pregnancy, like the IUD used for women. This would still allow the individual to have sex they just couldn't get/get someone else pregnant. Which brings up the question that if only physical females can hold a child would men really need this device? I think not, but if the device can prevent STD's or STI's everyone should have one. If the product does prevent STD's and STI's then it would help people live, so it counteracts the purpose of lowering the population-if this is product is used as a drastic measure if not then it would be better to help people live without the hard ship of getting a disease or infection due to sex.

Ianna has a good point, but I am wondering if people have the choice of putting in the contraceptive or not. What if someone wanted to have a child, but they were unable to because the contraceptive prevented them from doing so? Also, what if the contraceptive has problems? What if it causes infertility in people, or is extremely hard to remove from a person and may cause injury from removal?

We talked about contraceptives and STD’s in Anatomy class before, and we discussed how STD’s and STI’s could be passed from skin to skin contact. Something like the IUD would not protect anyone from it, because it offers no physical protection against the STD or STI.

I also want to know if there was an age limit for the contraceptive. If everyone had contraceptives and could not have children, then would the human race not die out? If no one could have children, then we would have no descendants and the human race would cease to exist. It would seem to be like a permanent sterilization technique and it would be required by law to have it. Unless there was an age where you could remove it and have kids, or you had the choice to remove it and have kids, then you would be dooming the entire human to extinction.

FWI, I agree with Ianna totally on what she says on this topic, I just wanted to rebut it because it was such an interesting topic. No offence to you Ianna, your post was nice.

Animal Farm Essay, Prompt 1

I have chosen to analyze Major and Squealer in my mini-essay.

Major seemed to be a person that actually cared about everyone on the farm. He seemed to care about EVERYONE, not just the people who would benefit him the most by befriending them.He even cared about the wild animals who did not have much independent thought and did not have much intelligence. He does not speak in a condescending manner, but treats everyone as equals, even the people who look up to him and revere him. He also tells people to look towards the future, and to follow their hopes, dreams, and aspirations. Major acts like a revolutionary, trying to free the animals from their chains. For example, “And among us let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in this struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades.” (Pg. 31) He actually CARES about the livelihoods of the other animals.

Squealer on the other hand, seems to treat the other animals as if they were second class citizens. He does not seem to give them the respect that they deserve and treats them as if they were stupid animals that did not hope to see the difference between lies and the truth. He also seems to trick the animals. When ever something happens the benefits the pigs but hurts the other animals, he would say that it was for the greater good. He would also threaten them by saying that if they did not shut up and do what they were told, then Farmer Jones would come back and mistreat them worse then they were already mistreated. This was a gesture used to help pacify the animals who thought that they were being treated unfairly and to scare them into doing whatever the other pigs told them to do. This shows that he has no respect for the livelihoods of the other animals and that all he cared about is himself. He also never talks about the animals hopes, dreams, and aspirations. Instead, all he talks about is how “great: if on the farm is and how bad it would be if they were in any other place. He also lies and talks about how Napoleon does so many things, but is instead really trying to rewrite history to put Napoleon in a better light and to make the other animals want to follow Napoleon more. He seems to be the type of person that is sneaky and would do anything to achieve their goals. “Are you certain this not something you have dreamed, comrades? Have you any record of such a resolution? Is it written down anywhere? And since it was certain true that nothing of the kind existed in writing, the animals were satisfied that they were mistaken.” (pg.77) This shows how Squealer tells half-truths and lies to the animal populace.

The Major was very persuasive. He painted a picture of a land of freedom and a land where everyone could do whatever they felt like doing, as long as it was not hurtful or morally wrong. He appealed to the animals long lost sense of hope. “Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labor would be our own. Almost overnight we could become free and rich,” (Pg. 30) It was effective because it awakened long lost desires within the animals and gave them hopes and dreams.
Squeal was also persuasive, but for another reason. Unlike Major, who used the animals hopes and dreams to influence them, Squealer uses the animals fears against them. To influence them, he uses their fear of Farmer Jones coming back and enslaving them again. He says that Jones will come back and enslave them even when it is highly improbably the Jones is even in the area. “One false step, and our enemies would be upon us. Surely comrades, you do not want Jones back?...Certainly, the animals did not want Jones back; if the holding of debates on Sunday mornings was liable to bring him back, then the debates must stop.” (pg.70) It is effective because he preyed on the animals fears, and fear is a strong emotion that influences people enourmously.

Opening Statement: Wikileaks

Hello everybody, today, I am going to debate about Wikileaks. Wikileaks is a website where people put documents about things that the government does not put out for the public to see. I believe that Wikileaks if doing something that should be done in society. Wikileaks keeps the government in check by preventing it from doing whatever they want and hiding the truth from the public (society). If the government tries to hide secrets from society, then they have to have reason to hide it from society. This might mean that the secrets that they are hiding are harmful to society or are ethically wrong. If the government is doing something that might harm society or is ethically wrong, everyone has aright to know what they are doing. If society just blindly followed or did whatever the government told them to do, then society wold just be a bunch of blindly sheep, they would have no idea how to do things themselves. The government may then proceed to become a totalitarian government. They may be slowly corrupted by the power that they hold within the government and the lack of risks, repercussions and people blocking their way. Eventually, the people within the government, the society, will lose many or all of their rights because the people in control of the government will not have any opposition from the people in their society, the blindly following sheep. For example, in George Orwell's Book "Animal Farm" "Somehow, it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making any of the animals richer-except of course, the pigs and the dogs." (Pg. 129) The "farm" represents the government, and the dogs and pigs represent the upper and ruling class of a "government". The upper and ruling class covers things up from the public, and lets them believe things that may not necessarily be true. 

Society also has the job of telling the government when they are going too far. If the government keeps secrets from society then society can not tell them when they are going too far. The government will then be able to do anything they want. We do not want a government to do whatever they want, because we know what happens when the government has complete and utter control of the country. History has proved time and time again that totalitarian governments end up being overthrown by restless, mistreated, and extremely pissed off citizens of the same government. If a government gets overthrown, then there is now law and order within the country and lawlessness will break out. Also in "Animal Farm" "the rebellion had been successfully carried through: Jones was expelled, Manor Farm was theirs." This is an example of an oppressed society overthrowing their oppressors. Jones represented all of the tyrants that oppressed society, in this case, the farm animals. You can find proof of this by looking at the times between stable governments in countries were created, such as the times before and after the creation and fall of Rome.  

Response to "Political Power"

In my opinion, I feel that political power will corrupt the people that attain it. Even if people who have good intentions try and attain political power, sooner or later, they will become at least a little bit corrupted and start abusing their power/s. At first people may be trying to do things righteously, but then they will become big headed bigots, the amount of power that they might have will gt to their heads and they will start abusing their powers. If a person has to power to do anything that they want with out any repercussions, then it is just human nature that they do everything that they can to help themselves. A person will usually try to get the best for themselves, and they will try to hoard all the best things for themselves and only themselves.

George Orwell will probably have the same opinion as me on this subject. The message that he is trying to convey throughout his book “Animal Farm” is that people will become corrupt over time, even if they start out as nice and righteous people. In his book, when he uses the pigs, he uses them as ordinary animals that somehow had better qualities then other people and rose to the top of their society. They helped the animals lead a revolution, (which is similar to oppressed people rebelling against their oppressors) and they manage to win it. (“And So, almost before they knew what had happened, the Rebellion had been carried out.” Pg. 39) The pigs soon become the leaders of their new government. However, as time goes by, the pigs seem to get more and more privileges on the farm (an analogy for the government) while the other animals get less and less privileges. Eventually the pigs run the farm with an absolute fist, and they control everything that happens on the farm, just like the totalitarian governments the suppress the rights of their people. (the lower animals in Animal Farm did more work and received less food than any other animal in the country.” Pg.136) 

They also make the animals work more and more, while decreasing the amount of food and privileges they have. He uses the book to satire the governments that were around in his time, and he used it to bring people’s attentions to those types of governments and how they came into existence.

"Elite" Colleges

After hearing the seven points of views, arguments, etc. I found that the argument titled “Merit and Race” seemed to be the least convincing. It seemed to be the least convincing because the beginning of the argument seems to be bsed and seems to be made up as he went along. He seems to be rambling on as he goes along. Also, the whole argument of his seems to be strange. Being a different race that Caucasian or African-American can increase your chances

This is the concern, largely unexpressed yet often at the forefront of our consciousness, of being a racial minority at a predominantly white institution. This point raises the question of who is a racial minority worthy of special consideration. For example, fewer and fewer historically disadvantaged African-American students are being admitted to elite colleges. Increasingly, elite colleges are admitting biracial students and first- or second-generation black students from the Caribbean and from Africa.

While this does seem kind of convincing, that schools would want to accept biracial students to seem to be more “liberal” and “open-minded”, it also seems to be confusing.

The argument that was written in “What you do Vs. Where you go”  The key to success in college and beyond has more to do with what students do with their time during college than where they choose to attend.

A long-term study of 6,335 college graduates published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that graduating from a college where entering students have higher SAT scores -- one marker of elite colleges -- didn't pay off in higher post-graduation income. Researchers found that students who applied to several elite schools but didn't attend them -- either because of rejection or by their own choice -- are more likely to earn high incomes later than students who actually attended elite schools.

This would seem to be contrary to “common sense”. that entering a elite college would make you seem to be a more “prestigious and intelligent person”. However, if this is true, then this would mean that your life would be based on personal effort, not how “smart” you seem. This seems more convincing because America is based on the fact that the more effort you put into something, the farther you go.

Response to Alyssa's Post: Cussing

This is something interesting that I found on Alyssa's Blog.

I agree with Vic when he states that people eventually become immune to cuss words after hearing the phrases being directed towards them or used to describe someone or something else after certain periods of time. People begin to adapt and they may even pick up and begin using these words.

It is also true that cussing would eventually become a bad habit (personally, I have a habit of using such words everyday and I do not plan to stop using them anytime soon).

Personally, I believe with what both Alyssa and Vic are saying. After a while of using cuss words, I feel as if they are just a simple part of my vocabulary and it is a habitual thing to cuss whenever something bad happens. However, whenever someone that is not used to using cuss words hears me using them, they seem extremely shocked that I would use those words and they immediately reproach me for using them. However, I see nothing wrong with using them and I wonder why they are so affected by my use of cuss words. I also have no idea how to stop using them because they have become so routine and so habitual in my life.

...because people can be restricted from these additions by not allowing them to get near whatever the individuals are addicted to but no one can restrict people from using cuss words - people can still think cuss words even if they cannot or do not speak them aloud. This is because words are part of human society; they are a part of communication - a way to express ourselves.

I also think that cuss words are a part of communication and should not be restricted. Communication cannot be restricted, and even cuss words may seem obscene and immoral, restricting cuss words would be similar to restricting our right to communicate in whatever way we want using whatever language we want. It would also be a violation of our amendments as freedom of speech is one of those rights, and that is a foundation of our government.

Response to Vincent's Post "The Road That I Have Chosen..."

This is something interesting that I found on Vincent's Blog.

In life, there are many roads to choose from and each one of these roads can either lead to disaster or glory. But these rodes are not visible until you make a path for it yourself. When I was little, I always wanted to become a professional DJ. The idea of listening and remixing music for others to hear as a job seemed pretty awesome to me. That was a road that I have created for myself when I was young, but as I grew older, another rode soon begin to form. My dream of becoming a DJ slowly disappeared and something much more important appeared in front of me.

I have to agree with Vincent on some of the points in his beginning paragraph. When you are a little kid, you do have a lot of ideas of what you want to be when you are an adult. When you are a little kid, you have the feeling that you can be anything that you want. You have no idea that you have limitations in life and you feel like you can even “fly” (Which technically we can due to airplanes,  helicopters, etc.)  However, as you get older and older and go through your life, your hopes and dreams get crushed and you realize that there are a lot of barriers in the world that prevent you from achieving a lot of your dreams and hopes.

Our dreams can be shape in many ways, and there many things that can influence on the type of road that a person want to venture into. What I learned from that day was that a particular experience is able to change a person's life forever. That particular experience had already came for me, and it had forever marked me onto the rode of becoming a lawyer...

Our dreams and hopes can also be affected by a major event that happened in our life. For example, if there was someone that suddenly appeared in your life, and you admired them very much, then you would want to do a lot of the things that they did.