In Shaina Vitanza's blog, Gay Marriage Battle, Shaina states that "Times are changing, things that used to be considered "weird" or "unacceptable" are now being tied to the word "normal" and "artistic."" and I could not agree more. The Constitution does grant everybody equality so gay marriage shouldn't be an issue. Like Shaina, I am also not for gay marriage but it does not affect me so it should be righteous for every state to allow it.
She stated that "The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the right to marry the person you love is so fundamental that states cannot abridge it. If this is true, denying a gay couple the right to marry is a huge contradiction." which is correct and should be common sense. All Americans should have the right to marry whomever they love and the right to gay marriage should be upheld no matter what. Legalizing gay marriage wouldn't hurt anyone but even further the constitutional right to be treated equal-- which is even a more reason to support it!
Furthermore, I think that Shaina brought up good points about supporting the same-sex marriage issue. Her proof of court cases and using the Constitution to support her idea were excellent in giving the idea that all Americans should have equal rights and that we should "uphold this right for all Americans, no matter what their sexual preference may be."
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Monday, August 10, 2009
New Bible Requirement Hits Texas Schools This Fall
On Saturday August 8th, 2009, Kate Alexander of American Statesman stated that the Wichita Falls school district last fall jumped at the opportunity to offer its students a new high school elective course on the Bible after the Legislature created the course in 2007. Legislators had built safeguards into the law that were meant to ensure the class on the Bible's impact on history and literature of Western civilization would be taught in an "objective, academic manner that neither promotes nor disparages religion," and not "from a particular sectarian point of view," according to the law. But the Texas Education Agency told school districts that it would not provide the training and materials because the Legislature did not budget the $750,000 to do so, so the Wichita Falls district administration canceled plans for the Bible class.
Though district spokesman Renae Murphy said, "There was a lot there that was left up in the air with no details, and we needed a lot more details." so all Texas public school districts for the first time this fall must offer instruction in the literature and history of the Bible under the 2007 law. Even though the Bible is a big part of America's history, I believe this course requirement is completely absurd (no offense to religious persons). Many school districts, including Austin and most other Central Texas districts, say their current high school curriculum already satisfies the requirement because it addresses world religions in history and geography courses. To me, that's already enough. We don't need more classes teaching about religion and the Bible.
"If you're teaching history and literature without the Bible, you're not really teaching it," said Mike Stratton, an art history and humanities teacher at The Woodlands High School in the Conroe school district.
Really? We don't need religion to fully understand the subject a teacher is teaching. Some students and teachers believe that the Bible is important to grasp literature, history and culture but that doesn't mean this course should be a requirement. Religion, to me, is out of the question when it comes to teaching at school-- especially a course completely dedicated to it. I'm not against religions that intertwine with the Bible but I believe schools shouldn't have Bible classes because religion is such a personal and culturally touchy topic. Overall, religion and schools does not mix.
Though district spokesman Renae Murphy said, "There was a lot there that was left up in the air with no details, and we needed a lot more details." so all Texas public school districts for the first time this fall must offer instruction in the literature and history of the Bible under the 2007 law. Even though the Bible is a big part of America's history, I believe this course requirement is completely absurd (no offense to religious persons). Many school districts, including Austin and most other Central Texas districts, say their current high school curriculum already satisfies the requirement because it addresses world religions in history and geography courses. To me, that's already enough. We don't need more classes teaching about religion and the Bible.
"If you're teaching history and literature without the Bible, you're not really teaching it," said Mike Stratton, an art history and humanities teacher at The Woodlands High School in the Conroe school district.
Really? We don't need religion to fully understand the subject a teacher is teaching. Some students and teachers believe that the Bible is important to grasp literature, history and culture but that doesn't mean this course should be a requirement. Religion, to me, is out of the question when it comes to teaching at school-- especially a course completely dedicated to it. I'm not against religions that intertwine with the Bible but I believe schools shouldn't have Bible classes because religion is such a personal and culturally touchy topic. Overall, religion and schools does not mix.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
'Mountain out of Mole Hill' Commentary
In Government by Asia's blog, "'Mountain out of Mole Hill' Approach Slows Government", Asia talks about an incident that happened on July 16th where a man named Henry Louis Gates (an African American professor at Harvard) was charged with disorderly conduct for breaking into his own house. He had been profiled by the arresting officer, Sgt. James Crowley, who is white and during a press conference a week later, president Obama was asked questions regarding the incident and stated that he thought the police "acted stupidly" in their handling of this incident.
But I disagree with Obama's comment because the officers were told that "two black males with backpacks are trying to gain entry into a house"-- which instantly sounds like a burglary situation. Also, the professor lost his temper to the cops which made the officers be even more convinced that the professor was guilty. Obama's comment about the police seems one-sided on the professor because he's African American.
I have been aware of this news before and I instantly thought that this matter was insignificant. But otherwise, such an incident doesn't seem like a situation important enough to be brought up to the president in Asia's opinion and I agree. The media just wants Obama's opinion on this situation so they can scramble his comments to how people want to hear it. But honestly, Obama should have nothing to do with this insignificant issue and should be more focused on fixing the economy of the U.S.
But I disagree with Obama's comment because the officers were told that "two black males with backpacks are trying to gain entry into a house"-- which instantly sounds like a burglary situation. Also, the professor lost his temper to the cops which made the officers be even more convinced that the professor was guilty. Obama's comment about the police seems one-sided on the professor because he's African American.
I have been aware of this news before and I instantly thought that this matter was insignificant. But otherwise, such an incident doesn't seem like a situation important enough to be brought up to the president in Asia's opinion and I agree. The media just wants Obama's opinion on this situation so they can scramble his comments to how people want to hear it. But honestly, Obama should have nothing to do with this insignificant issue and should be more focused on fixing the economy of the U.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
