Abortion

Since the decision of Roe vs. Wade in 1973 the debate between pro-life and pro-choice has been a constant battle. NARAL-Prochoice America  and National Right to Life are two of the leaders in their side of the debate. When researching each website and reading each article it was easy to see that Nation Right to Life had a better argument. On the site they had detailed information telling the whole abortion process, of course with some bias. While NARAL-Prochoice America gave a brief synopsis of an issue and said how pro-life legislation wants to shut it down, they did not go into great detail on very much, unlike the pro-life website. Based on the websites it is hard to tell which side of the argument is winning, but based on the movies and literature we saw in class it seems that it is a very close debate, but it is leaning towards the pro-life stance. After reading both sites my opinion on the matter has not changed, I am very pro-choice and will remain so because I believe that it is the woman's right to chose and her choice should not be based on peoples religious or personal beliefs. In addition I believe that any piece of legislation that is backed even a little bit by religion should not be permitted in our constitution because we separate Church and State.
As a 17 year old High School Student I believe that the parent deserves to know if their child is getting an abortion, but I do not believe that as a requirement to receive the abortion the parents must be notified. I believe this because the child my be embarrassed due to the nature of her getting pregnant and my be set on getting an abortion, but does not want her parents to intervene and try to convince her otherwise. They also should not have the right to decide for their daughter because it is her body and her life so she has the choice. With the father being notified I believe he should be contacted to know what is going to happen to his unborn child. I believe he should have a say, but not have that be the deciding factor in whether or not a woman gets an abortion.
I mostly agree with Illinois' position on abortion. I agree with the legislation that is permitting woman to get an abortion, but they have put up some stumbling blocks like parental and spousal consent. They also made it not allowed to use insurance for abortions as well as no state funding for abortions. Because I am so pro-choice I would get rid of the spousal and parental consent laws. The website gives Illinois a B- on their scale which is good, but it could be better for helping women get abortions.

More Death for the Death Penalty

Stages of the Death Penalty:

The Stages of the conviction process in court are somewhat designed to protect the accused. The whole process is set up to almost be fail proof because all evidence must be conclusive as well as the witness statements. Also the Jury is carefully selected so that they will not hold a bias towards a defendant and so that they can make the right/fair decision. I do not believe that the system is set up to only convict the guilty. I believe this because there is always human error that can mess up an entire case and convict an innocent man/woman.

Methods of Execution:

Of the five methods that were discussed the most human seems to be lethal injection. This is so because it puts the prisoner asleep and has marginal room for error. It is also the most human because with most the body is seriously harmed with defecation and eye balls popping out. The gas chamber, electrocution, and hanging could be considered the most inhumane because they seriously harm the body during and after death. Also they can cause the prisoner to feel extreme and prolonged pain.

Death Penalty Conclusion and States:

From this data one can conclude that the south has the most deaths with the death penalty and the most inmates on death row. One can also conclude that many states have inmates on death row, but do not execute due to all of the issues that revolve around it. These trends show that justice may not always be served. Because maybe someone was not guilty, but convicted anyways. Also it shows that the families of the victims my never see justice because the inmate who is on death row my not be executed.

Death Penalty information Center:

This information presented has changed my opinion greatly. I never thought of the death penalty as a race issue, but the information clearly shows that when the victims are white, the defendant is more likely to get the death penalty. Also I never new how much it costs to kill someone, I always believed that the death penalty could be more economic because you do not have to care for the inmate, but it actually costs more to kill them. This brings me to the conclusion that we need to make the death penalty more cost effective i.e. a single bullet to the head. From this given information from The Death Penalty Information Center I would say that they are against the death penalty, most of the carts and evidence given is in opposition of its use. This website is very convincing because it gives valid information that shows how costly, ineffective, inhumane, and unjust the death penalty is. Some additional information that I would like this source to provide is what kind of crimes got the death penalty and what kinds did not. And also circumstances of the defendant.

Clifford Boggess to be or not to be exacuted

Originally when I heard about Clifford Boggess's case I was one hundred percent for his execution. I believe that serious offenders should be sentenced to death because society would be better without murderers and rapists. I felt very differently about Clifford Boggess, after hearing about his transformation I was convinced that he should not have been sentenced to death. For the most part, people get meaner and more violent while in prison because they are in a survival of the fittest world. But Clifford Boggess was different, he did a total one-eighty and seemed to because a calm human being. I am not a supporting that he should have been released, but that he should have just gotten a life sentence in jail. I believe from what I saw that he was no longer a threat to society; he had come to terms with his demons and repented and asked for forgiveness. Every one's life has value and no one person has more value than another, but in some cases a life needs to be taken for the betterment of society. This was not the case with Clifford Boggess, he was a two time killer, but no longer a threat to society because he was behind bars. The victims families would have gotten justice no matter what happened to Clifford Boggess, he had lost his freedom forever and the justice system did not fail in his case. It is a sad and horrible thing for people to wish for the death of another person no matter what the circumstances are. In essence Clifford go the easy way out because he did not suffer and he got to chose everything about his death. This should have brought more discomfort to the families because it really is not fair compared to what their loved one went through.
All though the death penalty is an effective tool for serious offenders, it was miss used in the case of Clifford Boggess. He was a mostly rehabilitated man who was no longer a threat to anyone. I believe that he should not have received the death penalty for his actions.

A Public Service Announcement not approved by AJWS

Cyber Bullying - Lets fight it Together

Bullying in Our Schools

Bullying is a problem in most American schools. From what we have looked at in our class is examples of extreme cases of bullying and how they are handled. For the most part the bullying was not handled well by the schools. In the case of Jamie Nabozny, nothing was done for him when he was being bullied for being Gay. Bullying is a problem that when first confronted, it needs to be stopped. Any type of bullying is bad and cannot be brushed off by administrations or parents. When children are not immediately punished for bullying, they get the message that it is okay and will continue to bully or torture one kid. In the case of Jamie Nabozny when his tormentors were first called into the office, they received no punishment, and the Principals response was "Boys will be boys." Jamie's tormentors were no punished even in the least bit for physically and mentally hurting Jamie. This showed his bullies that what they were doing was acceptable and they continued to torment Jamie. No matter what the case, no matter how small the act was; bullying needs to be prevented before or after the first offense. I know that there is always the petty mean girls issues between groups of girls, but I have not heard of anything getting violent. If bullying was a problem in our school, I solution that I would suggest; is bring in a speaker with first hand experience with an extreme case of bullying. In the video we watched about Jamie Nabozny, he was speaking to a school about his experience, this would be a very affective assembly in my opinion. Hearing about an extreme case of bullying from someone who experienced it is way more affective that having
In Deerfield High School, I do not believe I have ever witnessed or heard of any extreme cases of bullying. The only bullying that I have heard of is messing with freshman during Homecoming week. Even so that is not extreme at all and only occurs for one week each year. In my opinion Deerfield does not have a problem with bullying. I have heard from friends from other schools that bullying does occur, but nothing to the disturbing nature of Jamie Nabozny's experience. This would show all students how serious bullying is no matter how little a case of bullying may be.
Bullying is a serious problem that affects most people and need to be prevented to the best of parents and school administrators abilities.

Student Drug Testing

I am a firm believer that suspicion less drug testing in public schools is completely unnecessary. Even though students may be seen in their community as leaders it does not mean that their privacy can be invaded. I believe that the only time student drug testing can be implemented is under suspicion of drug use during an extracurricular activities or a sport. Although drug use may be a problem in some schools it does not give the school the right to invade a students privacy and maybe reveal a hidden issue that a student wanted to keep to him or herself. It is not the schools job to play parent, it is the schools sole job to educate children and prepare them for their future education and job life. If a parent suspects that their child is using drugs then they can drug test their kid, if the school suspects that a student is on drugs; they can inform the parent or talk to the student, not drug test them. "Today's ruling affirms that schools are not constitutional dead zones..." said attorney Adam Wolf on the Savana Redding case. This rings true in any instance in which a students privacy is invaded, everyone has the right to privacy. In New Jersey vs. T.L.O, her purse was searched for cigarettes and when they were found the schools search was done because they had found what they were looking for. When they assistant principal continued searching her purse and found Marijuana, the search was unconstitutional because they were only looking for cigarettes and nothing else. 
       All in all I believe drug testing by a public school is unnecessary and not the job of a school. If school administrators want to play parent, then they should have a kid of their own and drug test him/her whenever they see fit, do not do it to their students.

Freedom of Religion a Useless Debate

There is no question about it, America is a free country in which our Constitution clearly states the freedom of Religion. In order to have complete freedom of Religion, there must be a complete separation of Church and State. This is why I see all debates about Religion that involve the Government as useless and a waste of time. Unless the institution is Religiously affiliated, Religion should not be brought up unless it is talking about History. I realize that people are in titled to speak their mind about Religion, but Government institutions should not be able to force Religious opinions on the public. At my school during my Freshman year, the administration tried to force a "Moment of Silence" on us during Homeroom as a time for personal thoughts and prayer. This was a direct slap in the face to separation of Church and State. 
 There should never be debate about Religious rights in a Government institution, it is clear- do not mix the two.

7 Days in September

The film 7 Days in September was very powerful and caused me to think back to how I felt nine years ago. The terrorist attacks that took place on September 11th occurred when I was only in third grade. Back then I could not really put two and two together and fully grasp what had happened; and up until seeing this film I had never thought about or really researched Sept. 11th 2001. The film provoked so much emotion out of me because at this age I can fully comprehend the after math of the attacks. The movie nearly brought me to tears when to footage of the second plane stuck the second twin tower. What I was most amazed by from watching this movie was how New York banded together as one to help restore the area around ground zero and to help the injured and emergency personal. I was surprised at all of the public debates that erupted between complete strangers and were resolved with a hug. Overall this film opened my closed eyes to the true and horrendous events that unfolded around 9/11.

Scare Tactics: 7 Reasons to Leave a Party

This past Monday (9/13/10) our school had an assembly on seven reasons to leave a party. Pretty much it was a giant scare tactic for the Seniors and Sophomores of Deerfield High School. The seven reasons were the worst case scenarios. They included: No money, no time, death, no privacy, no trust, Criminal record, and no Car. All though very possible the examples they used would only happen if everything possible goes wrong. I am not promoting hardcore partying because that could be dangerous. But the assembly was disorganized and horribly presented. It was forty minutes of two judges rambling about two or three horrible incidents. The worst of all is that there was no debriefing just, "Oh, we're out of time, go to fourth period." They left us with an image of a girl who was hit by a drunk driver. Even in homeroom today we had no time to discuss what went on and how to handle it because we were hit with announcement after announcement about irrelevant issues.
Overall the assembly was poorly handled.

Speech codes in our colleges

I believe the speech codes set in place by Universities are fair. Though speech codes can some what limit your freedom of speech, they are set in place for the personal safety of other students. The codes set in place are used to keep harassing and harming of other students to a minimum. The codes are also reasonable, much like the real world in order to protest and picket in a public area you need a permit. This happens in colleges, people may argue that they have the right to assemble, but it has to have a proper time place and manner. Although schools cannot severely punish someone for speaking their mind, they can put someone who is a repeat offender on probation of some sort. This is not in violation of someones first amendment rights because it is voided if harm is done to someone (physically or emotionally) or if it incites violence.
I believe that Speech Codes do not limit someones freedom of speech because they are reasonalbe in the fact that they protect all of the students safety eqaually.