Religious commitments

1) I was very surprised, to hear that Kelly was disqualified for a violation of dress codes. This doesn't seem fair since she has gone with out incident for years. 

2) My argument that this was a case of religious discrimination is that 

     - Kelly has gone for years with out incident.

     - The uniform did not give Kelly an unfair edge in competition.

     - The judges told her about alternate options after the race had commenced.

   I do believe that it is fair for some athletes to be disqualified, but in the case of Kelly she had a religious obligation, and in the constitution it says that everyone is free to practice their religion. 

3) I would need a lot more information on the events of the day, i will also try to include the judges opinions as to why they decided to disqualify Kelly. I would also need more evidence from the constitution that speaks of freedom to practice once religion. Past cases where this issue has come up would also be important to the paper. Also the results of the judges decision and how that effected Kelly would also be useful.

4) Rogers doesn't defend his stance very well, specially since that it was found that the alternate options that he said Kelly was given, was given to Kelly after the race. 

5) I think there needs to be exceptions of the rules in some cases, specially when it comes to religious obligations. 

6) No this would not change my opinion on the disqualification of Kelly, i don't think this is a good enough reason to expect an individual to give up her religious dressing. Instead they could use other ways to determine a winner in a close finish. They could use cameras or even high speed video cameras, True this is a more expensive solution, but under the circumstances i think this is what is fair. 

Candidates views on Iraqi war

There are many smaller sub title issues dealing with the Iraq war. The candidates running for presidency, Barack Obama and John McCain have some similar and some different views on these topics. Their views on some of these topics are as follows:

- Opposing the invasion of Iraq: Obama opposed the war from the beginning saying that it was going to hurt our economy, and country very badly. He believed that we should concentrate our attack only on the al qaeda that attacked the united states. On the other hand McCain supported Bush 100%, he agreed that we should go to war, and that the war will be quick and easy. 

- Ending the War- Obama says that he has a plan that will end the war in 16 months, and that he will work with the Iraqi leaders in coming to a good closing. McCain so far has not proposed any plans to withdraw U.S. troops from the middle east. 

In addition the USA Today website also summarizes the candidates view on the war:

       John McCain: He believe that pulling out troops from Iraq will have very bad consequences, and believes that we should send in more troops to take more control. He believe that Bush had the right goals in mind but went about doing it the wrong way. 

       Barack Obama: He voted for the Levin- Reed amendment, believes that we should gradually pull out U.S. troops from Iraq in four to six months. He also believe that the Iraqi forces should be trained more effectively. He also calls for new diplomacy with Syria and Iran. 

I believe that Barack Obama's views on the war are very well supported. He says that he will withdraw all troops, but will leave a force to guard the U.S. embassy and "a counter-terrorism force to strike al Qaeda if it forms a base that the Iraqis cannot destroy."

I found that McCain attacks Obamas past relationship with Mr. Ayers. He tries to appeal to the peoples emotions trying to make them think that they should be scared to elect Obama, since Ayers is considered a terrorist. Over all the candidates use a lot of facts in their arguments, a lot of data and statistics. 

I would ask McCain:

 - What is the point of keeping and adding more troops to Iraq?

 - Why is it that you attack Obama on his past and not on his views on topics?

An organization that i found really interesting is Bring Them Home Now. As the name states it is an organization dedicated to bringing back the soldiers from Iraq. It is a site that gives a voice to the soldiers, their families and anyone against the war. It was started in 2003, and has been running ever since with the help of volunteers and donors. If you are interested in finding out more about this organization you can visit BringThemHomeNow.org. 

Essay #3 CD

THE REVOLUTION OF SECRETS

1) The 5-0 (police brutality)

Genre: Rap

Explanation: The genre of this song was chosen to be rap since most of the rap audience is African Americans, and it is African Americans that face police brutality. The music video will include real life police brutality clips. The song will address how racism and sexism plays an important role in police brutality and how it is covered  up by the government. 

2) The healing green (legalizing marijuana)

Genre: Reggae

Explanation: The genre of this song is chosen to be reggae, since reggae artists are related easily to marijuana. Also most reggae songs are about marijuana. The song will address how money can be saved by legalizing marijuana, and the impact it will have on our economy. 

3) The juice (athlete use of steroids)

Genre: Rock

Explanation: The genre of this song was chosen to be rock. I chose this genre because athletes tend to listen to a lot of rock, especially to get pumped up for a game. It will be more likely that the athletes who abuse steroids will actually hear this song. It will talk about the damages it can do to the human body and mind. It will also have clips of athletes in the past that have used steroids, and them telling how it messed up their lives. 

4) The Chair (Death penalty)

Genre: Country

Explanation: The genre for this song was chosen to be country. The death penalty is supposed to be a sad event, and the emotions that come with the death penalty can be best expressed through a slow song. Also since most people who experience the death penalty are minorities and most people who listen to country songs are Caucasians, targeting Caucasians will ensure that they lean about what is going on. It will also address the issues of how people are wrongly accused, and will take the listener through the process of capital punishment. 

Lyrics: 

I close my eyes, and hold on tight, 

A tear drop falls, when i think of that night,

I pray god will give my soul flight,

Knowing i slipped causing it to ignite,

Never will i wake after tonight.

5) Welfare check (outsourcing, loss of jobs)

Genre: R&B

Explanation: The genre of this song was chosen to be R&B. R&B was chosen since most who listen to R&B are African Americans, and they are the once that mostly use welfare checks. The song will address how welfare checks aren't enough for families to survive on, and will include clips of people that use welfare checks. 

COVER DESCRIPTION:

The cover will be pitch black, with a rough texture ( like sandpaper). The title will be written in red, making it look like blood is dripping. Finally there will be a skull that is a grayish black, with tear drops coming down the sides. The skull color will be very close to the black of the cover that one would have to look very hard to actually see it. Also the space that the skull covers will be smooth unlike the rest of the cover space. 

Some Photos Lie

The photo is of an execution of a viet cong captain named Nguyen Van Lem. He was kept as a prisoner of war by police chief Nguyen Ngoc Loan. Van Lem was charged with the deaths of many south Vietnamese police and their families. The attack on civilians angered police chief Loan who took the opportunity that he had with the reports present to make an example of Van Lem by executing him in public. The picture was takes as the bullet was shot and was coming out of the head of Van Lem. The picture ended up making many of the people who didn't know the background of the war think that Loan was a monster, when in fact he was a loved hero to the Vietnamese public. Eddie Adams felt guilty for taking the picture since it resulted in Loan being made to look like a monster. Also as a result of the photograph, when Loan was injured and hospitalized in Australia the public of Australia was outraged and Loan had to be moved to Washington. 

-Those protesting the Vietnam war: I believe this group would find it useful that the picture was printed since it shows the negativity of war and outrages the public to the point where there would be a lot more anti-war movements.

-US government in support of the Vietnam war: would find this photograph to be very harmful to their cause. It shows the negativity of the war, and since the U.S. would be supporting Long it even makes the U.S. look bad and responsible for the action taken by Long. 

- Eddie Adams in 1969: obviously the picture had good short term outcomes for Adams in that he got the Pulitzer prise for it in 69, but it has a negative long term consequence in that he felt guilty for making Long look like a monster to millions of people when he was actually a beloved hero to the Vietnamese public. 

-Nyugen Ngoc Loan: This is a bad photograph for him but a good one for his cause. It is bad for him because it portrays him as a monster to the public that does not know the background of the situation, and also resulted in him getting removed from the Australian hospital where he was being treated for his war injuries. It is a good photograph for his cause since it shows that there is zero tolerance for the Viet Cong, especially those that harm the public. 

-Nguyen Van Lam's widow: This photograph in the long run helped her out in that the government ended up giving the widow and the children a place to stay, it also resulted in her getting a lot of sympathy by the public. 

-A publisher who must decide if this picture should appear in a fifth grade history book: would end up deciding to not print the picture since it portrays violence. it could also been seen as a way of promoting violence. Children of the age would not understand the background of the story or the reasoning behind the shooting. 

Soldiers Coffin

I believe choosing a picture such as this instead of soldiers coming home victorious, gives the idea that the Iraq war is a dead cause. It resulted in many unnecessary deaths of soldiers and civilians. It is also very interesting the Heisler chose to get a picture of the close up instead of the whole plane. I believe that maybe he wanted to show the importance of the soldiers and full give the meaning of the picture to the soldiers and the onlooking passenger. If he had chosen to take the picture of the whole plane i believe that might deter the complete attention of the audience from the soldiers into the plane. It is also very interesting to see the faces of the onlookers, who show a lot of sadness even though they seem to be very diverse. It seems like most of the are immigrants, rather than the white Americans. This i think also adds the meaning, that we are one nation no matter what ethnicity you are, we are all Americans. In the little compartment you can see the three soldiers trying their best to make the flag look good on the coffin. Also the framing of the compartment makes it look like the coffin is going into another world, as in it's going into the after life. It seems like that because you can not see anyone outside of the plane waiting to receive the coffin. 

If i were to use this picture i an argumentative essay, the essay would mostly concentrate on an anti-war theme. About the loss of not only young American life's but also the life's of the civilians in the countries where the war takes place. Also i could use the facial expression of the onlooking passenger to make the argument that the people are against the war. Another argument that can be made is that no matter what your skin color we are still all Americans under one flag. Other pictures i could use for theses argument would include pictures of soldiers with different backgrounds, more pictures of death and violence. 

-"Another young soldier being brought home in a coffin using a civilian flight. The passengers of the flight looking down with sadness and grief on their faces." I am trying to make the argument that this is not the only soldier that has returned dead, and also that many people from different backgrounds show the same feelings. I am using pathos in this caption since it applies to peoples emotions. I think death, brings out feelings very easily, and also brings out the same feelings in many different people. 

Capital Punishment

A life is a very valuable thing that must be cherished, even in criminals. True, the people who have received the capital punishment are suppose to be the very worst, and inhumane people. Should the government of such a developed country such as the United States be at the level of these criminals.
Arguments:
1) There have been cases in the past where after a person was executed, evidence was found that could have removed the capital punishment sentence and there have been cases where the person was found to be innocent.
2) The families of the executed will have to pay for the wrong done by the executed. Children could lose their father, wife's could lose their husbands, and parents could lose their children.
3) Poor and racial minorities seem to be the majority of the executed.


Concession:
1) True it does cost a lot of money to keep a man in jail, and it is cheaper to execute him. True, many tax payers are angry that their tax money is used for criminals and murderers. Should money play into such a thing as a taking a persons life.

Counterargument:
1) Families of the victims may need closure, and the execution is a way for them to get closure.
2) Cost less to execute the inmate rather than keep him alive in jail.
3) An execution for a crime could deter another from committing the same crime. (but research has shown that states that use capital punishment shows no decrease in crimes that lead to capital punishment.

Steroid Use in Sports

As a high school athlete it is required that we see a couple of videos on different health issues. On of the videos i saw was about steroids and how it ha so many negative effects on the human body that could even result in death. The video seems to completely contradict what we were told as high school athletes. I am surprised to see that the argument for use of steroids can seem so legitimate, it seemed as if this video had a lot of evidence towards the fact that if steroids are used carefully, and in the proper manner it is very unlikely to have and side effects. I went back and looked at the video a second time and i realized some small things that they seem to pass over, for one they say that it might not have any serious side effects, implying that steroids have small side effects and the videos also fails to use any strong, or certain language. It just seems like they don't guarantee the fact that there wouldn't be any serious side effects. Another thing that i caught onto is the fact that this is a video geared towards older males, so the side effects could be seriously different for women and younger children. I believe that the use of steroids is unfair in competition and should be definitely banned from competition. I do however believe that the use of steroids for personal reasons is up to who ever the user is. I personally have been though that steroids are very harmful and should not be used under any circumstance, but it is up to the user to use steroids if they think the risk is worth taking.

As i stated before steroid users that use it for personal reasons should not be prosecuted. However; steroid users in professional sports or even high school sports should not be allowed. If there were different standards for high school athletes and professional athletes i believe it would lead to more problems in the future of potential pro athletes. For example a high school athlete could get to the pro level because of the use of steroids but once the athlete has to stop taking steroids at the pro level he would not be able to compete at that level. Finally to summarize I believe that there should be the same protocol for steroid testing in all sports and at all levels of the sport.

I think Hoberman's idea that our culture forces the use of steroids is to put it simply just stupid. I think that if your not able to compete naturally through hard work and practice then you don't deserve to play at what ever level your playing at. I have had experiences like this in high school, some kids used protein drinks which made it easier for them to get stronger faster, and some kids would work out as hard as they could and still have a hard time getting stronger. This resulted in the the kids who used protein shakes to become stronger and faster getting more playing time that the kids who worked hard in the weight room and at practice. As anyone could see this was very unfair.