Right Decision, Wrong Consequence

Darin Simak, a 7 year old from Pennsylvania is currently suspended and could face expulsion for doing the right thing. A bit confusing, isn’t that? Little Darin’s mother gave him a backpack to bring to school that unbeknownst to both of them had a toy gun in it. As soon as Darin saw the toy at school, he brought it to his teacher to let her know of the mistake.

Normally, people don’t get in trouble for things they didn’t do. Darin did not choose his backpack or even know what was inside it. And right when he realized that there was something wrong, he immediately reported it.

So how did the school react to his integrity? They slapped him with a suspension and possibly an expulsion along with it to come.

This is absolute insanity to me. The boy, who we should remind ourselves is only 7, did something that most adults wouldn’t do. He was honest to his school when he discovered something that wasn’t allowed. This kind of behavior from a little kid is something that should be rewarded with ice cream or a new toy. Instead he was forced to stay home for his horrible offence.

To me, Darin Simak is someone that should be looked up to for his brave actions. Both young and old can learn from this boy. I just hope that the next time someone faces this kind of situation, they will choose the same route as Darin but not get punished for it.

Read more here.

Comment below to weigh in.

Everyone's Watching

If you are in the public eye, just about every part of your life can be scrutinized by the media. Everything you do will be judged. We see this all the time with politicians, musicians, and athletes. The fact that millions watch you means that you have an extra responsibility to conduct yourself in a presentable way.

Kobe Bryant, one of the best basketball players of all time, knows this full well. Back in 2003, he was accused of sexual assault in a huge scandal that drew the attention of just about everyone in the country, basketball fan or not. Kobe knows the pressure and the invasion of privacy by the media.

The fact that millions watch you means that you have an extra responsibility to conduct yourself in a presentable way. Young kids look up to those in the spotlight as role models.

So what did Kobe Bryant do this time to get some negative attention? Smush Parker, an ex-teammate of his from 2005-2007, recently told ESPN of comments that Kobe had made to him during their days together. Here is the report from Parker:

“I tried to talk to him outside of basketball . . . And he looked at me in practice and was dead serious and said, ‘You can’t talk to me. You need more accolades under your belt before you come talk to me.'”

Kobe Bryant completely disrespected and shut down his teammate who wanted to have a simple conversation. Kobe thought he was too good to waste his time speaking with someone who hadn’t achieved the same greatness on the court that he had.

So what kind of message do the kids at home take with them after hearing this? They learn that once you’re the best, you don’t have to respect anyone. They learn that it is cool to be arrogant. They learn to be rude. Kobe Bryant’s true self was exposed by Smush Parker, and I don’t think he will be too happy about it.

Read more here.

Comment below to weigh in.

'Till Death Do Us Part

“‘Till death do us part”. Perhaps one of the most recognized lines from a marriage ceremony. This is a promise to stick together through thick and thin. The best and the worst.

Sadly, many Americans do not follow through with these vows. A shocking 41% of 1st marriages end with a divorce (McKinley Irvin). Yet all of those people said the exact same phrase on their wedding day: “‘Till death do us part”. This high divorce rate sadness many people, including me. That is why it is so encouraging to hear stories of successful marriages.

Rocky Abalsamo was the man whose story encouraged me earlier today. Rocky Was married to his wife Julia for an astonishing 55 years, until her death in 1993. How did Rocky respond? for the next 20 years he would walk to the cemetery she was buried in every morning, set up a lawn chair, and sit beside her grave. When asked about his amazing devotion he responded, "Being here makes me feel better. Not good, but better. I do it for Julita, and for myself." Rocky’s love was so deep for his wife that he was willing to sit by her for 2 decades as a symbol of his feelings.

This act of love for his wife sends a powerful message to the world. If you make a commitment, stick with it. Divorce rates have been falling since 1996, but 41% is still too high (McKinley Irvin). Maybe Rocky’s story can help the divorce rate to continue to fall and American marriages to become healthier.  

Read more here.

Comment below to weigh in.

Worth it?

How far should you go to save the life of an American soldier? That was the question president Obama was recently faced with as the situation with Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl unfolded.

Bergdahl allegedly deserted the U.S. Army and was captured by Taliban forces. There are reports that while in prison, he converted to Islam and taught Taliban members certain skills in making bombs. His search led to the deaths of multiple American soldiers. Obviously there is a large amount of controversy surrounding this man.

So what did the president of our country decide to do? He released 5 Taliban Guantanamo Bay prisoners to get back the deserter. Mohammad Fazl, Khairullah Khairkhwa, Abdul Haq Wasiq, Norullah Noori, and Mohammad Nabi Omari. The “Taliban Five”.

This was done in the name of sticking to the no man left behind rule. I happen to agree that we should not leave our own soldier behind. I also believe that if the soldier abandons the army, converts to the religion of the enemy (note: I firmly support our right to choose any religion. What I am pointing out here is that Bergdahl converted to the religion of those who captured him, which obviously means he connected with them in a way that a soldier should not connect with the enemy), and helps them make bombs, the person is not a “hero” and should not be celebrated and is not worth releasing 5 Taliban members.

It’s great that he is safe now, but his safety comes at a hefty price.

Read a similar editorial here.

Comment below with any comments you have.

Junior Theme Part 3

On tuesday of last week I turned in my Junior Theme final draft and it felt great. All the hard work had finally come to an end. I felt very proud because this was the biggest paper I have had to write so far in high school.

I learned a lot throughout the whole writing/editing process. The peer editing day helped me realize the value in letting others criticize your work. I thought my rough draft was fine and there wasn’t much to change, but the peer edit quickly helped me realize I was wrong. My partner Colin showed me some passages that weren’t very fluid and could use some word changes. He also showed me places where he was confused with the point I was trying to make. I was able to expand in areas that were a bit under explained once I saw where these areas where. I learned that letting a peer look at your work will have a positive impact on the quality of the work.

I also learned that it is important to stay open minded and not put too much prind into my work until it is finished. What I mean by this that It isn’t good to hold onto ideas that won’t help. For the first three weeks of the research process I was determined on including a section in my  paper about the way in which we eat our food as an example of change in the American diet. I had come up with this idea completely by myself and I really wanted to include it in the paper. I started doing research on this topic and couldn’t find much. After three days I should have just given up and looked for a different subtopic, but I kept looking. And looking. And looking. I wasted so much time searching for something that just wasn’t there, and I couldn’t let go of the pride in my idea. I learned that I need to be able to realize what is good in my writing, and not blind myself with what I want to be good.

The Junior Theme paper was a great experience for me. I believe I became a smarter and better overall writer because of it. I am looking forward to getting my final draft back so that I can make the appropriate edits and improve my work.

Junior Theme Part 2

My topic has not changed since my last post, but my view of it definitely has. I’ve learned a tremendous amount about the American meal as I have researched it. My Why question I will be answering in the paper is “Why does the American meal look the way it does?” To answer this question, I will be diving into 4 different sections.

1. The way we eat

This is referring to how we eat our food. Over the years, this has changed. In my introductory paragraph I reference a statistic about the percentage of meals eaten outside the home. The number grew from 2% in 1900 to %0% in 2010. This plays a large role in our diet.

2. Changes in industry

This section is about how the way food is made is completely different. The amount of GMOs in food is one of the big topics in this section. Food today is much more highly processed than it was just 20 years ago. Industry and technology have completely changed what our food is made of

3. Social changes

As society changes, so does the manner in which we eat. The family plays a big part in deciding how one eats. With the traditional family intact, there are more at home meals with everyone present and more organization. Where the family is scattered, meals are quicker and less important.

4. Public policy

The government makes many policies and laws that affect what we eat in ways that we don’t see. This can range from price floors to school lunches. The government has great influence over our diets.

I am excited to continue my research and begin the writing process of the body paragraphs. I will keep you updated with my progress.

Junior Theme Part 1

This week in American Studies has been completely focused on kick starting our Junior Theme papers. I have dreaded the thought of this assignment since I was in 8th grade when my brother did his. Now it is my time to write this monster of a paper.

I started the week browsing around for topics and has a list of 5 possible directions to send my paper in. They were abortion, gun control, minimum wage, laziness and technology, and nutrition labels. I am a very passionate advocate for the pro-life view on abortion, and thought that this would make a fantastic topic to write my junior theme on.

I did a good amount of research to get arguments from both sides on the issue of abortion and thought that there was no possibility of doing any other topic. Mr. O’Connor then shut that topic down because of how difficult it would be to make the paper NOT an argument for my side, and instead a more balanced and historical look at abortion.

I had no idea what to do from here because I had banked so much into the abortion topic. I later met with Mr. Bolos to discuss ideas with him. I had written “nutrition labels” basically just to have a 5th topic so it looked like I was working harder. Bolos saw this and explained to me some unknown details about the food industry that really fascinated me. He showed me a book called The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Michael Pollan, which goes into an in depth analysis of the food industry and how it works.

Right now I am thinking that my paper will be based around the question, “Why does the American diet look the way it does?”. I’m guessing this will change, and will keep posting blogs as my topic takes different forms.

Why do You Stand?

It is not often that you hear an elite level athlete make a statement about society that angers many people. Statements that athletes make are normally minimal and not detailed, so that there will not be too much controversy attached to their name. Kobe Bryant did just this recently, calling out black America, specifically the Miami Heat, for collectively taking one side in the Trayvon Martin case.

Bryant said about the situation, “I won’t react to something just because I’m supposed to, because I’m an African-American. That argument doesn’t make any sense to me. So we want to advance as a society and a culture, but, say, if something happens to an African-American we immediately come to his defense? Yet you want to talk about how far we’ve progressed as a society? Well… then don’t jump to somebody’s defense just because they’re African-American. You sit and you listen to the facts just like you would in any other situation, right?”

Bryant’s words carry a lot of truth. He says that his reason for doing things will not be because his fellow African-Americans do it. That would just create more stereotypes and be counterintuitive to any anti-racism movement. Bryant says that people need to defend others based on evidence, not based on skin color.

I am not here to take a side on the whole Trayvon Martin case. Obviously I think it is horrible that someone died. I do happen to agree with Kobe, because his words are so insightful. I see people all around me in my life make decisions and take stances without actually looking at evidence, and instead going with the crowd. This lesson that Bryant gives transcends the world of racism and can be applied to many different things. Some people hold political views without doing any research as to what exactly they believe and why they believe it. Instead, they let other people think for them, like the media. If you take a stance on an issue, make sure you are taking the stance intelligently, and not just going with the flow.

Read more here.

Comment below to weigh in.

Freedom of Religion in Business

Right now Hobby Lobby is waiting on a decision from the Supreme Court. The controversial issue right now is whether or not companies can refuse to pay for certain contraceptives based on religious reasons. Hobby Lobby does not wait to pay for two forms of contraceptives, IUDs and morning-after pills, because they see those as abortion.

On Tuesday, the Hobby Lobby lawyer Paul Clement was questioned intensely by the Supreme court. Here are a few of the questions and responses:

Justice Sonia Sotomayor: What about employers who have religious objections to health plans that cover other basic medical procedures — blood transfusions, immunizations, medical products that include pork?

Clement: Each would have to be evaluated by the courts to see if it is fully justified and accomplished by the least restrictive means.

Sotomayor is taking Clement’s logic to the extreme, and asking what would happen if a company opposed to something on religious grounds that was considered basic by all. Clement responded that every instance would have to be handled in a case by case manner, weeding out cases that are obviously preposterous from reasonable ones. He applies the same argument moments later when another justice jumped in.

Justice Elena Kagan: Using that reasoning, an employer might have a religious objection to complying with sex discrimination laws, minimum wage laws, family leave laws and child labor laws, to name just a few.

Clement: Just because claims are being brought doesn't mean that they will all win. The courts, he said, can "separate the sheep from the goats."

I think this is a great defense because it shows that Hobby Lobby’s view really is reasonable and down to earth. Yes, they are taking a stance on a controversial issue, but it is not as if their side cannot be defended through logic and reasoning, like the instances Kagan brings up.

Clement continues to do a very solid job defending this viewpoint, and you can continue to read the dialogue here.

I agree with Clement’s claims and I believe that a company needs to have religious freedom like individuals have. Companies are individuals working together, and everything that comes out of a company is from individuals. If a company cannot voice an opinion and exercise the freedom of religion, then we need to take a look at our government is using the Constitution. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. It’s right there in the Constitution. The free exercise of religion is not to be prohibited, plain and simple. Forcing a company to pay for something it has moral issues with because of religious standards it hold itself to is unconstitutional and un-american.

Collegiate Compensation

Today the Chicago district of the National Labor Relations Board decided that football players at Northwestern University qualify to be employees and can unionize. This decision is highly controversial, being that many people agree with this decision, while others find it terrible.

The side that agrees points to the amount of time spent playing football by the players, and that their scholarships are determined by on the field performance. They argue that since the universities rely on the players to generate the billions of dollars that come from college athletics, the role the students hold is that of an employee. Former Northwestern QB Kain Colter, an avid supporter of the ruling, said “For me this was just an opportunity to make things right and stick up for future generations and make up for the wrongs of past generation.” Obviously, he sees the potential of unionization and salaries as a good thing.

On the other hand are those who would end up with less money, those that work for the NCAA and the individual universities. Northwestern released a statement shunning the ruling saying “Northwestern believes strongly that our student-athletes are not employees, but students.” The advocates of the current system note that the way things are have helped millions of students attend college.

I happen to agree with the universities and the NCAA. Student-athletes willingly go to college to play sports, but to also be students. They are students who play sports. Not employees who go to school. Should high school football players unionize as well? Tickets are sold to attend the game, and money is made through those tickets to watch the students play. Obviously the answer is no, and the answer should be the same at a collegiate level. Student athletes are still students attending school who play sports. Until someone becomes a PROFESSIONal, when it is their PROFESSION to play a sport, they should not receive monetary compensation. Sports are extracurricular activities at schools. School is first, sports are a game on the side. No matter how hard you work at the game or how much time you put into it, it is still 2nd to education.

Read more here.

Comment below to weigh in

Enabling the Disabled

A few days ago on friday March 14th, our school got a great opportunity to watch a basketball game between New Trier and Lake Forest. It was not a varsity game though. It was an exhibition between students from both schools’ special needs programs. Every fan cheered as the players performed for a large crowd of faculty, students, and parents. Activities like this are so important if we want to respect and encourage those with special needs.

I think that here at New Trier High School we do a fantastic job of supporting people with special needs, and it is fantastic that those people are so accepted here. However, that is not necessarily the case across the country. Mentally handicapped individuals are made fun of and laughed at in many places in our country.

Two teenage girls in Maryland were recently accused of physical abuse on an autistic 16 year old boy. The horrible acts committed include sexual harassment, forcing the boy into a frozen pond, threats with a knife, kicks to the groin, and dragging the boy by his hair. Reading about this story completely blew me away, that somebody could be so insensitive as to bully someone in that way, let alone someone with autism. The two accused girls recorded the whole incidence on a phone, so fortunately they will not get away without some sort of punishment.

I have no clue where these kids go to school or what the attitude towards mental disabilities are in their area, but I do know that these acts were wrong in every sense of the word. The school that the students attend needs to re-evaluate exactly how they promote the respect of those with special needs. I think the way New Trier does it is a fantastic model. Kids with special needs aren’t locked away in some isolated room. They instead are completely integrated into the everyday life of high school. I have been able to sit with some of these students at lunch and gotten to know different people that I would have never gotten to had it not been for this system. There are a lot of things I disagree with about my high school, but one aspect I know they have gotten right is the special needs program.

Thoughts? Comment below

Read more here

Discrimination or Protected Expression?

Today I was completely shocked when I read an article by an openly gay woman, Tammy Bruce. In the article she defended Arizona’s religious freedom bill, that just got vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer. This bill would protect businesses if they chose to deny services to homosexuals. The main places where this applies is with wedding photographers and bakers who do not want to serve gay couples.

Many see this bill as allowance of direct discrimination against homosexuals. One person who holds this view is Jan Brewer. She did not feel like religious freedom was being restricted in any way, saying “I have protected religious freedoms when there is a present concern. And I have a record to prove it.” Forcing religious businesses to serve homosexuals was not a concern to her.

Tammy Bruce completely disagreed. She compared what people who believe homosexuality are going through is wrong, to what homosexuals have to go through, saying “Of all the people in the world who should understand the scourge of living under constant threat of losing life, liberty or the ability to make a living because of who you are, it’s gays.” She defends these businesses because she does not want to see civil liberties stripped from people, even if it might affect her in a slightly negative way.

I think that Tammy Bruce is right here. The first amendment guarantees religious freedom and freedom of expression without the government restraining them in any way. If a business does not want to condone the actions of an individual, based on their religious views, the business is guaranteed that right. Not offering service is their way of expressing their religion. Some people see homosexuality as ok, while others do not. If those who opposed the religious freedom bill wanted to show tolerance at all levels, they would tolerate the other point of view and not force their own views. Selective tolerance is not real tolerance, it is just the pushing of an agenda.

I would change one key part to this bill though. I only think it is ok to deny service to someone based on a specific action of theirs if the seller finds the action to be morally wrong and the service or good being provided would enable/help the buyer to do said action. For example, if a baker believed homosexuality to be morally wrong, he or she could refuse to bake a wedding cake for gay couple's wedding, since it would condone homosexual actions. However, if a gay couple went to the same bakery for a birthday cake, the baker could not deny that good since it does not enable or condone homosexuality. Along those same lines, if a Christian church approached a Muslim construction manager to build a church building for them, the construction manager could deny them that good if he or she felt morally compromised. A 7-11 owner could deny the selling of contraceptives to people who are not married if he or she believed that pre-marital sex is wrong. This would protect people's religious rights and rights to expression, while eliminating ignorant discrimination.

Feel the need to weigh in? Comment below with your thoughts

Read more here.

The Controversy of Minimum Wage

The Congressional Budget Office has recently released a statement saying that raising the minimum wage from $7.25/hour to $10.10/hour could cost around 500,000 jobs.

What do people on each side have to say about this?

Supporters of the wage increase point to the figure that says this increase would put 900,000 families above the poverty rate. Also, many agree that those who make over $10.10/hour could see increases in their pay as pay scales are adjusted by bosses. The author of the legislation, Sen. Tom Harkin D-Iowa, points to different research contrary to the CBO’s, stating higher minimum wage would increase the number of jobs.

Those against the wage increase look to the CBO statement and Economics 101 about what happens when minimum wage is increased. Jobs will decrease. When the price of work goes up, the demand of work goes down. Companies are in the business to turn a profit, and as the minimum wage increases, the less money they are able to walk away with. This motivates them to cut low end jobs. Those against also say that our goal is to get more Americans out of unemployment, and raising minimum wage would hurt that goal.

The way I see it, it all depends on what you value more. If you are looking to pay people more for doing less prominent jobs, raise minimum wage. If you are looking for more jobs, keep the minimum wage lower. I think that it is better to bring more people out of unemployment than to raise people’s pay for doing the same job, but I recognize both sides have solid arguments.

Read more here and here.

Thoughts? Comment below to weigh in.

Who Actually Pays for the Crimes?

As we examine civil liberty issues from the past and present in our American Studies class, it is interesting to see similar events unfold before our eyes. The civil liberty in question today comes out of Elko County, Nevada. The county’s Commission and Sheriff agreed to start charging inmates for their stay. $6 daily for meals, $10 for a visit from a doctor, and an initial $5 charge for admission into jail.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is taking issue with this. The ACLU is a non-profit organization whose mission statement is “to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States." Basically they defend people in court who they believe are having their civil liberties taken from them. In this case, they believe it is the right of a prisoner to get free food and health care from the county. The ACLU believe that if a jail charges its inmates, it takes rights from them.

On the other hand, there are people like Elko County Commissioner Grant Gerber, who believes the fees should be even higher. He says, “Why should the people of Elko County pay for somebody else's meals in jail?" Elko County Sheriff Jim Pitts reports the numbers for inmates is $85/inmate per day. This covers food, services, housing, and utilities. The capacity of the facility is 120, which means a total of $10,000 is spent each day on the prisoners. The prisoners don’t have to pay if they work for the jail, or if they are in prison under 24 hours. Also, those found innocent in the future get fully reimbursed.

Some might say this law would only feed the “Prison-Industrial Complex”. Arguments could be made that the prisoners would be exploited as either sources of income, or sources of free labor.

My line of thinking is completely opposite from that. I don’t think that civil liberties are being abused. I think this is criminals monetarily paying for their crimes.

First, we know that the prison system can be abused. Anyone who doesn’t want to work/can’t find work can easily commit a crime and get thrown into jail to get their needs met. Charging inmates would make this practice disappear, because crime would no longer be a free ticket to food and shelter.

Second, this would take a load off the backs of innocent taxpayers. Why would an innocent person have to pay for the crimes of others? That doesn’t make sense. Unfortunately, because prisons are government run, taxpayer dollars go towards that. Implementing this system would share the load between the taxpayer and the offender.

There are other reasons for my stance on this issue, but those are the two main ones. If you would like to weigh in, feel free to comment below.

Read more here.