|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| I'm writing my huge research paper on health care and I'm looking for opinions to use in my argument.
I am NOT looking for opinions on Obama's plan specifically, because that is not what the paper was about. My main purpose is opinions on a government-funded public option IN GENERAL.
If you agree with the idea of a public option in general, say so and why.
If you disagree with the idea of a public option (again, NOT Obama's plan specifically, just a public option in general), say so and why.
If you have any sources to back up your argument, even better, but I don't need you to go look anything up (unless you want to).
If I quote you, I will cite you, so no worries, I'm not stealing your ideas. :) | | |
| Hm. Something inside me says I should be the bigger person. That something inside me is the voice I call the LAME voice.
I've been on Xanga for years, but didn't really start blogging (besides to bitch about my "terrible" middle school life) until a few months ago. And I think I've found my first hater! Yay! Now it all seems real, lol. 
Anyway, a few days ago, the lovely SerenaDante wrote a lovely blog about a lovely thing called comprehensive sex education. And a certain dude, JandJinJapan, seemed to miss the point. Going on and on about how abstinence must be taught. Even though comprehensive includes abstinence. So there should have been no argument, unless you're one of those Rush Limbaugh-types and think giving a kid a condom MAKES him go have sex.
Back to the point, Mr. Japan said something along the lines of "if my kids will be living in my house and eating my food, they won't have sex...if they have sex, they're saying they want to move out and are free to go." This is, of course, heavily flawed...sure, some kids will actually listen. Good for them. More likely, they are going to do exactly what you tell them not to do (whether it be having sex, drinking alcohol, slacking on schoolwork, whatever) and lie and be sneaky about it. So I point out this flaw to him, and what happens? He writes a blog about it.
He went and wrote this huge blog whining about how Serena was so wrong and how this isn't about prevention, it's about responsibility. Right. And instead of just sending a reply to me, he included me and several others in his blog, saying we "slapped a stigma" on him. Right! He compared his request that his children not have sex to God's command to Adam and Eve. Which they broke, if I'm correct. And I don't know what "stigma" I slapped on him--if someone can explain to me, please do. Because he hasn't.
Which is why I'm doing this! Mr. Japan, if you're going to call me out in your blog and then not reply when I point out the flaws in your logic, or answer when I ask why you're accusing me of labeling you, then I will call you out. If you're going to call me out for "mocking" and "slapping a stigma" on you, then I might as well go on and do it. Am I taking the high road? Nope. Do I want or care to take the high road? Nooooope.
What about kids who got STDs from their mother passing it on? They didn't have to have sex for that to happen.
What about rape victims? Technically, they didn't remain abstinent, but that's not their fucking fault! Teach abstinence-only, and these people will have to rely on outside (and potentially incorrect) information about pregnancy, STDs, and STD testing. Are they going to have unsatisfying marriages?
Sex is part of a healthy relationship, yes, even after marriage. If one or both partners are not satisfied, it can lead to frustration, resentment, and so on...thus, not exactly a satisfying marriage.
Blanket statements are dangerous.
Yeah that's all...fare thee well everyone.
Good night and good luck.
UPDATE: Finally, finally, finally, when I was about to give up, he finally responded. Well, more like he repeated what he's been saying the whole time. Oh, well.
| | |
| I've been wanting to write an entry on this for a while now, but I haven't really had much to inspire me about it lately. If I don't feel inspiration to write something, I end up rambling unnecessarily.
Well, today I was blessed with not only inspiration but the gift of time.
That bitchy English teacher of mine whom I wrote about earlier? Yep, her again! She pretty much said matter-of-factly "Well, women in China have the 'right' to abortion. The women in the Soviet Union had the 'right' to an abortion. As you can tell, I just don't like abortion, although I really don't know much about it. I don't judge anyone though!" We weren't having a discussion on the matter or anything--she just kinda came out and said it. (I know she's allowed to say pretty much whatever she wants as long as she doesn't force it on us--but that's not what this is about.)
I don't LIKE abortion either. But I'm not going to be like her and admit my ignorance then continue on as though my opinion still means more than someone else's. By typical social definitions, I am pro-choice. I support the rights of a woman to have an abortion if she so chooses. I also support the right of a woman to choose to put her baby up for adoption or to become a mother. If I won't tell a woman not to have an abortion, then I can't tell her to have an abortion either.
That being said, I still entitle myself to my beliefs on what might have been a better choice. No, not out of arrogance, just out of my own opinions. And yes, I do feel that sometimes abortion might have been a better choice in some situations.
So how in the world am I "pro-life" then?
Simple. I care about life. The life a child knows. Do I remember being in the womb? No. Do I remember growing up without a father, a mother who was barely around and often physically took her frustrations out on me, an alcoholic uncle who sexually abused me for years, and a family who resented that I had ever been born? Yes. I like my life now. I'm glad to be alive. But that wasn't always the case. There were many many times in my life where I wish I hadn't existed. There were times when all I wanted to do was kill myself. I got into many destructive behaviors, because they were the only ways I felt better.
And my life still, compared to a lot of kids' lives, has been really good. I wouldn't ever subject a child even to the life I had, let alone anything worse. Every child deserves a good home, with all the love someone can give to them. Absent, abusive, drug-addicted people are not proper parents. Foster care certainly isn't a good home (though probably still preferable to an abusive family). Anyone who isn't willing to give full time or attention to her child, or would knowingly be putting one into an unhealthy environment, really shouldn't be giving birth. That's just immature in my eyes. If a woman--regardless of age, marital status, etc--is ready to step up and take care of a child, then I'm glad she does it. If she can't, I lose all respect in her.
I also care about the life of the woman. Why should a woman have to share her body when she does not want to? What about rape victims? Should we force them to carry a child that results, thus rubbing salt in the wound every day? What are the anti-abortion people really getting at anyway..."you MUST have the child...but after that we will give you no help and shun you"..."every child deserves to live, even if they have a shitty life and hate themselves"..."life begins at conception--and ends at birth, cause welfare and public health insurance are evil socialist policies!"...Okay not all pro-life people think that way, but generally it does tend to be the same 'small government' right-wingers who are so fast to get involved when it involves punishing a woman for sexual activity.
It all makes total sense.
Agree? Disagree?
| | |
| I'm in my sophomore year of college, and not saying it to brag, but I've honestly never gotten a D on anything in my life. I've gotten C's before (can't be good at everything) and some F's when I wasn't trying or just didn't find it necessary at the time to even do it (senioritis, y'know how it goes...) but never once have I given my full effort and gotten a D.
Until today.
Yes, it's a little depressing to go through 14 years of schooling always doing well and then suddenly doing poorly. But that's not why I'm writing. I'm writing this because I'm pissed at the circumstances.
In my English class, we had to read "A Modest Proposal." If you aren't familiar with it, it's an essay based on the poverty in 18th century Ireland, and the author suggests that selling babies to be eaten would solve everything. It's all in satire, of course, no one sane would actually suggest anything so horrible. We studied this essay my 11th grade year and were asked to write a paper summarizing it and how it convinced us how bad things were in that time and place, while understanding the essay was satirical. Well, I was asked to do the same thing again this year. When I wrote the paper in high school, I got a good review and an A (and believe me, we didn't have a teacher who was easy to please). This time, I wrote to the exact same effect. I felt really good about it and was sure I'd at least get a B. And what do I get? A big, fat D. I reinforced the fact several times that I know the essay wasn't serious, but my professor still seemed to believe I didn't understand the purpose.
So back to the title of this blog. As a professor, how do you make a student want to drop out of your class? Two simple words: "I'm horrified." That was the only feedback written on my paper. No suggestions on how to make it better. Even after talking to her after class, pointing out specific things in my paper, the best I got out of her was "Oh, well, as long as you understand it..." but no offers to reevaluate or even read it again. If I know I understand and she knows I understand, then why am I still at a loss on how to make myself clearer?
I know college is hard. But I am paying $21,000 a year to learn something. I want those big bucks to be worth something. A professor's job should be to tell students what they're doing wrong and how to make it better, no? Not to discourage them. And I can't be the only one who's had this problem.
I'm horrified.
| | |
| Yeah, yeah, I know, I already did a blog about this. But after hearing about the reports on Consumer Watchdog, I just had to come back and update it.
Here is a sampling of the, uhm, strange and/or ridiculous reasons why someone could be denied private health insurance coverage.
Abnormal Pap smear
Acne
Allergies
Amputation
Anxiety
Arthritis
Back pain
Being a firefighter
Being a police officer
Bunions
Breast implants
Burns
Carpal tunnel
Cataract
Chronic fatigue
Cleft Lip
Climbing trees
Deafness
Depression
Ear infection
Erectile dysfunction
Hammer toe
Hemorrhoids
Incontinence
Infertility (you or your spouse)
Intent to adopt a child
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
Migraines
Paralysis (any case)
Pregnancy (or being an expectant father)
Prosthetics
Psoriasis
Sex change
Shingles with eye or ear involvement
Therapy within the past 6 months
Undescended testicle
Unintended weight loss
Varicose veins
Working in a stable
Working on windows higher than three stories
God forbid we help these risky people! Of course, if you have any other signs or symptoms that haven't been diagnosed, they can still deny you. Better safe than sorry, those darn headaches of yours could mean brain cancer three years from now! And they have two years or more to scour through all your records and say "oh, you had a pimple six years ago and you didn't tell us, so no coverage for you!"
Soo...seeing as the insurance companies will find any reason to not do their job, no matter how much we pay them, can we all agree that we shouldn't be defending them? | | |
|
@import url(http://www.google.com/cse/api/branding.css);
