Please wait for class to begin to write your post. Meet in classroom first.
Chose a topic from that we have covered in weeks 1-5 of this class. Write an essay arguing your opinion about the topic. Write it in a word processing program so that you can check for spelling and grammar and then paste into the blog. Please refer to the book for arguments written about the topics and cite the book at least twice. You may reference any films or current events or even books on the topic. You have an hour to get it posted and then you will watch the film Dead Man Walking. I will assign homework on the blog this evening so pay attention as always.
Good luck. Any questions, email rachel.g.hoffman@gmail.com
22 comments:
Abortion
Abortion is a strong topic and there is a large division on this matter. However, I believe that abortion should be illegal and therefore it shouldn’t be done. Not only because of my religious beliefs, because this is not a matter whether the baby is his or her mom’s womb and she has control over him, but is just the sense that he or she didn’t wanted to be created and it was because of a consequence while on having a sexual intercourse. “Don’t forget—there’s always adoption” (Olen, J., Van Camp, J., Barry, V.) This is what a pro-life person would tell a woman who had an unwanted pregnancy. I agree with this quote. A child is not responsible for the consequences that his or her parents had and therefore he or she is not the one to be punished by ending his or her life.
The book tells us that a woman is the rightful owner of her body and unwanted pregnancies can cause emotional damage. All that this is telling me that a woman that was not careful enough and took the necessary precautions to not get pregnant (although there is always a chance of getting pregnant) had the consequences of carrying a child and because she is a rightful owner of her body this gives her the right to end his or her life. This is not the case when dealing with the life. Abortion is murder. Whenever a couple has sex they know in what can be the effects of it and in result they can have a baby. If they don’t know this then they shouldn’t even be trying to have sex. Education I think is the most important thing here. There should be teaching about what pregnancy will have effect on and also the different methods of taking necessary precautions or the adoption option.
The current society’s young woman get pregnant in their teenage life and while many still keep their baby and take the chance of giving the child a normal life, abortion is on top of the game for those who do not want the responsibility of taking care for a child. Like I said: “Abortion is murder”. Is a crime and those who agree with abortion are also agreeing with murder.
Source:
Olen, J, Van Camp, J, & Barry V. (2008) Applying Ethics, Belmont, CA Thomson Higher Education.
Luis Joel Lopez
Abortion
It is amazing how many people wish to control what grows in a woman’s body. They believe that people in general are stupid, and don’t know how to take care of themselves and that their opinions do not matter and this is the case when it comes to abortion. The right to terminate a pregnancy is a right all women should have.
Many people will argue that abortion is right when (1) it is necessary for a woman’s mental or physical health, (2) anticipating that a child will have a severe disability (3) or after rape (Olen, Camp, Barry 2005). And many still do not believe that it is right at all under any circumstance, and then often their argument leads towards expressing their religious beliefs. This is why the argument against abortion is so flawed; it is based more on the moral issue then medically. People wish to control what a woman can do with her body, and most on that side of the issue use their religion as a basis for their reasoning.
Anti-abortionists conveniently like to forget is that abortion has always been done, in the most grotesque of ways. If a woman or even her significant other truly do not wish to have a child, they will find a way for it to be so. What is in the best interest for the country is that the service be provided as safely medically as it can be done, so a desperate woman does not have to go back to a horrific practice. A major argument for the anti-abortion opinion is that a woman should take full responsibility of her sexual actions (Olen, Camp, Barry 2005). A woman can become pregnant even when she has taken nearly every step to prepare herself, and it is still done. Abortion is still responsibility. A woman, or the couple, should decide on what is best for themselves or their unborn child.
Abortion should never be taken lightly as well, and I do think it is important that doctors and clinics should alert the woman of the potential risks that the woman should consider. But this should not be meant to dissuade the woman from her decision. She has the right to know what should go wrong but she in most cases can make the decision for herself. It is her body, and no government or legislative law should control it or the unborn fetus inside of her body. It is a step of personal control that people deserve.
Resource:
Olen, Jefferey, C. Van Camp, Julie, and Vincent, Barry Vincent (2005) Applying Ethics, Belmont, CA Thomson Higher Education. Pages 119 and 126
Moral Reasoning.
Based of the idea mainly around being or not being of right, wrong, virtuous or vicious. The mind surrounds the idea from a young age that we act upon instinct without sitting to think out the reasoning for it, but when it is sat down upon it is then captured fully with the question, of being right, wrong, virtuous, or vicious. At the time of thinking a rational reasoning is taken under consideration. Explicit Reasoning reaches to find a well supported answer to answer a well defined question. Tacticle reasoning is also considered with the answers we give out to a particular situation or answer we are faced with. In others, it might even be a mistake to reason tacitly — because, say, we face a pressing emergency. Thus, even if we are not called upon to think through our options in all situations, and even if sometimes it would be positively better if we did not, still, if we are called upon to do so, then we should conduct our thinking responsibly: we should reason.
I believe this explans alot of the human reasoning and I believe solemly it is absoluly correct about it all that we base all of our reasoning off from the youngest of days that we live. It all starts with the morals we stand for and the values that were taught to us from the earliest days.
If we turn from the possibility that perceiving the facts aright will displace moral reasoning to the possibility that applying the correct moral theory will displace — or exhaust — moral reasoning, there are again reasons to be skeptical. One reason is that moral theories do not arise in a vacuum; instead, they develop against a broad backdrop of moral convictions. Insofar as the first potentially reductive strand, emphasizing the importance of perceiving moral facts, has force — and it does have some — it also tends to show that moral theories need to gain support by systematizing or accounting for a wide range of moral facts (Sidgwick 1981). As in most other arenas in which theoretical explanation is called for, the degree of explanatory success will remain partial and open to improvement via revisions in the theory. Unlike the natural sciences, however, moral theory is an endeavor that, as John Rawls once put it, is “Socratic” in that it is a subject pertaining to actions “shaped by self-examination” (Rawls 1971, 48f.). Accordingly, that which is to be explained by moral theory is arguably less independent of revisions in provisionally accepted theories than are the data in some other domains. By the same token — and this is the present point — a moral theory is subject to being overturned because it generates concrete implications that do not sit well with us on due reflection. This being so, and granting the great complexity of the moral terrain, it seems highly unlikely that we will ever generate a moral theory on the basis of which we can serenely and confidently proceed in a deductive way to generate answers to what we ought to do in all concrete cases. This conclusion is reinforced by a second consideration, namely that insofar as a moral theory is faithful to the complexity of the moral phenomena, it will contain within it many possibilities for conflicts among its own elements. Even if it does deploy some priority rules, these are unlikely to be able to cover all contingencies. Hence, some moral reasoning that goes beyond the deductive application of the correct theory is bound to be needed.
Sean White
CLONING AND STEM CELL
The issue of our future and cloning humans is very intriguing to me. The main controversy steams from our connection to religious beliefs and our cultural values of life. I think it will start out by being secretly developed in countries that don’t oppose it until finally it’ll work its way into mainstream society. The problem with cloning in my opinion is it doesn’t allow for someone to have a sense of identity of their own but already have expectations to be someone that has already existed. This would have a severely adverse affect on anyone who is cloned and finds this out. It could provoke them to end their own life or be depressed knowing that they have no unique place in society and that they were just a manufactured human being without a normal set of parents. There has even been in development ways to produce human organs by simply printing it out layers at a time on a modified inkjet printer. I think in the future any body part we want could be implanted seamlessly without scars or anyone even noticing it’s not real. In the movie Bladerunner it get to where they technology is so advanced that you almost can’t tell who is real and whose not. There is also the issue of weighing in the pros and cons of steam cell research. On one hand you have the ability to help save lives or improve the quality of life of many people suffering on a day-to-day basis. Over 2/3rds of Americans support steam cell research but it’s being blocked due to our president not supporting it. Cloning can be used in many negative ways and it’s a power which many people feel isn’t for us to toy with. I think personally that cloning will likely be used for many negative purposes. Many scientists would be tempted to fill orders received by people offering huge amounts of money for them to clone famous people or someone they had a crush on in high school for all you know. Many people prefer to be a unique individual and different from anyone else in the world. Knowing what you will look like in the future and how you might die can be extremely stressful to someone. They might go crazy towards the end of their life and do radical things such as Roy in the movie. He knows he will die soon and completely loses respect towards others lives. More importantly is how the characters in the movie had a love and hate relationship with machines and clones. As long as it looks and acts somewhat like a real person it still gives them some sort of feeling of friendship like the character Sebastian with all his machines he created. He lives all alone but has them around to talk to and associate himself with.
I think in the long run we will evolve as a society into more of a tolerant of extremes and our values will be less strict and structured. Eventually I predict that both religion and science will be able to coexist and not conflict with each other allowing us to pursue anything we want. I believe that anything we can think of we can do. Another important issue is how anyone would feel about the person who brought him or her into the world as a cloned human being. Roy in the movie is very angry towards his creator and ends up killing him. If he has emotions he’d probably feel that he’s just a science experiment and doesn’t have a true identity in the world of his own but of what someone else wanted. I think by the time cloning and science advances this much we will by then have a way to create immortal human beings. It’s already been found out that genetic engineering might allow for this to happen. We still could die from disease or suffer from illness but have the ability to not age. All the attributes to aging and our lifespan are coded into our DNA. The only problem with that is living so long and watching those around you age and die. I think our natural human instincts and needs will still endure and when we mix in cloning and the loss of individualism will deeply scar those who are cloned or have genetic alterations.
Of all the sexy controversies we have to choose from to dissect, I find myself with a particular taste for Aristotle and his description of virtue. Our society is essentially based on the Greek philosophical model. Everything from the structure of our Democratic government to that of the Christian Church is based on the ideas of Aristotle and Plato. Their work serves as the foundation of all western philosophy. Yet I find myself disturbed by certain ideas and what they mean for the growth of our own society.
Virtue is often considered by scholars to be synonymous with “excellence” for Aristotle. To be fully aware of one’s actions and to know that one is doing good deeds for good reasons is the way toward making morally correct decisions. If that were so, a man would be have to be certain that no more people are hurt by an action than are helped. Yet he also describes having wealth as necessary to spread virtue. He relies on the idea that a man must possess things in order to help others. Wealth cannot be acquired through nothing but virtuous action. To build wealth, people must be exploited. This idea of virtue via wealth reeks of elitism and perhaps exists only to provide a moral escape hatch for hedonism to those unwilling to truly dedicate themselves to the service of their fellow man.
Aristotle limits the audience of his arguments for practical wisdom, stating that : “All free males are born with the potential to become ethically virtuous and practically wise, but to achieve these goals they must go through two stages: during their childhood, they must develop the proper habits; and then, when their reason is fully developed, they must acquire practical wisdom (phronêsis).” This means only rich males who were educated in accordance with the accepted views of the society could achieve virtuous action. He admits later in Nicomachean Ethics that the study of ethics cannot be described with the same precise certainty of mathematics, and that virtue essentially depends on the person and the situation.
Aristotle sincerely wanted people to work together to build a society that looked for the greatest good. However, words can be twisted against one another. We can use his work to support some of our most deplorable actions. Therefore virtue cannot be an absolute, and one cannot ever know if they are performing virtuous actions.
Euthanasia
The story they call The Sea Inside was about a real man, and was one of the top international films of 2004. In the time period around the turn of the 21st century, several films in particular cropped up addressing the issue of assisted suicide and euthanasia. Million Dollar Baby was one of them on the list, and another was The Event. Why did these films come out? Ramon Sampedro, the subject highlighted in The Sea Inside, dove into the sea in his youth and suffered a spinal injury – as a result spending the next 30 years as a quadriplegic, paralyzed from the neck down. His mother and then his brother’s family cared for him with love, but for the rest of his life, he begged, pleaded – campaigned – for his right to die with dignity. Being a physical person who had traveled in his youth, he could never become accustomed to his existence and refused even to use a wheelchair. The people in his life struggle to understand his desire – some understand only too late – but in the end, after losing his last legal recourse, he breaks up the task of suicide between his loved ones so that each will be held blameless in the law, and the scene of his death is broadcast over television afterward.
If you weren’t acquainted with this story, you may also be familiar with the case of Terry Schaivo. The fact these stories influenced so many other films shows how powerful it is as a debate in modern times. The case is divided between two sides. On the one hand, Christianity and its multiple offshoots generally hold that causing the death of another – or even your own death – is a sin and will condemn the doer to eternal suffrage. Also, many feel that it is morally objectionable to “play god” by deciding who lives and who dies, and that only God knows the plan for all people. Aside from the importance of religion in the lives of some, there are also more mundane issues to address, such as whether or not the person is ready to die. Some cannot let on when enough is enough, because their injuries are such that they can no longer communicate or participate in life in any way. There are also issues concerning the mental objectivity of the person in question, assuming they do wish to die – partially disabled individuals, people who still have awareness, with or without communication, can still take enjoyment from life around them and the people they love. Part of the difficulty with the issue is the struggle to understand when that is or is not enough.
On the other hand, a person who can no longer participate in life requires the constant unwavering attention of a person or persons to ensure their wellbeing and health. Being completely unable to fend for themselves, they lose their independence, their right to privacy, their ability to choose, and sometimes even their ability to comprehend some of the happenings around them. Regardless of your stance on the subject you must admit that this impedes an individual’s enjoyment of life immensely. Aside from this, a person who is in constant pain or mental misery may no longer wish to suffer, what they feel is needlessly. Death becomes an attractive alternative for those in search of peace. They no longer wish to burden the people who love them emotionally or financially, so there is also the wish to improve the quality of life for those around them.
These are all compelling reasons for and against this case. I can never claim any right to impose my views on others, which is why I feel it is immoral and objectionable to attempt to impose anyone’s views on anyone else with law. At the same time, should an authorized process be followed that leaves the least amount of doubt as to the victim’s wishes? Of course, in a case like Terry Schaivo’s, however, no one knows for one hundred percent sure how the victim felt after the occurrence of the incident. As for myself, I know that the people I love are not in the position to support me or keep me alive for long miserable years. I can completely understand cases such as Sampedro’s, where even his Catholic sister-in-law supported his desire to die because, for thirty years, his feelings on his situation did not change, and he worked tirelessly for the right to die – to simply do with his life as he pleased. I don’t believe any such decision should be taken lightly or be made quickly. Personally, I don’t find religious constraints to be any constraints at all. The only reason I might want to stay alive after a disaster is for the benefit of my closest loved ones, who would also not want me to suffer, I believe. When one is talking about abortion, the terms pro-life and pro-choice are used. When one says pro-life, they mean restricting choice. While Pro-choice has come to be synonymous with the act of abortion itself, in the end what it really means is giving the person involved the right to choose. When it comes to the issue of euthanasia, I feel we are again given the options of Pro-Life or Pro-Choice. I support the individual’s right to choose. I know I would want the right to decide what to do with my own body and my own life if I were incapacitated. Maybe I wouldn’t choose to die – I am prone to the practical and likely to spend much time considering the decision and not deciding too hastily, as one doesn’t generally get to re-decide life, or death. But if I decided that enough was enough, my children could no longer go to college, my lover did nothing but work to support me and take care of me, and I could no longer contribute to the quality of their lives in any way, perhaps I too would decide it was time to die, and I want to have the right to make that decision if it ever becomes necessary.
Abortion is one of the most controversial topics in society. There are constantly debates, protests, arguments, and campaigns on the subject. Currently abortion is legal but there are those who wish to change that. I personally believe that abortion is wrong and immoral but I do not think that it should be made illegal.
One of the main arguments opposing abortion is the sanctity of life. Human life is something to be valued and treasured. It should not be terminated by anyone for any reason. Another argument is that life begins at conception, not birth. An embryo is a human life. I don’t believe that just because the consequences of your actions inconvenience you, that you should be able to end a human life.
Abortion is not the only option for an unwanted pregnancy. Adoption is always available. There are many agencies to help with the process and also to deal with the emotional factors involved. Also, many hospitals, fire stations, and police stations, are designated drop areas where women can drop off babies without providing any information.
Although I do not support abortion and I find it morally wrong, I don’t think it should be illegal. Women are going to get abortions no matter what the laws are. We don’t need to go back to the times before legalized abortion when not only the unborn baby would die but in a lot of cases also the woman carrying the child. I think what we need is more sex education. People need to be taught about contraceptives and they should be easily accessed especially for teenagers. More sex education would cut back on the number of unwanted pregnancies which in turn would cut back on the amount of abortions.
Basically, I believe that no one person has the right to kill another person. I believe that there is life at conception and that no one has the right to end that life.
Human Nature
Trust your own instincts. It is the phrase that has been used time after time and has been tested to see if it is true. If you think hard and you trust your instincts, it is hard to think back and see where you went wrong. Instincts are usually something that is telling you that what your around or what you are doing is making your body uncomfortable. If you trust your instincts enough, it can turn out very important and change the way things happen in your life. Think about all the times you have said, “Damn, I knew I shouldn’t have done that”.
In the movie Rear Window, staring James Stewart, he tests human nature to the fullest. Being stuck in a wheelchair with a broken leg, Jeff (James Stewart) spies on all his neighbors. After seeing what looks like a possible murder, Jeff starts getting nosey. After being shot down by everyone around him because the murder doesn’t seem possible, Jeff still insists that there is a murder. It is Jeff’s human nature and instincts that make the end of the movie come down to revealing there really is a murder. In the film, if it wasn’t for Jeff’s human nature he would not of caught the murderer.
Another film that demonstrates human nature is Disturbia, starring Shia LaBeouf. This movie is very similar to Rear Window because Shia is stuck in his house watching his neighbors on house arrest. The situation is different though when Shia’s mother goes over to the killers house and the lights turn off and he has to go save his mother. When he goes to into the house he uses his human nature in the dark to fight off the killer and stops him from hurting his mother.
Although both movies are similar, they both demonstrate human nature in extremes. If both of the cast members didn’t trust their instincts and go with what they believed, much damage could have been caused and gotten away with. If you ever have a time where you feel uncomfortable with a situation, seek it out and find out why. You may sometimes find out things you could never imagine or find out things that are very important. Don’t allow yourself regret what you do because making the decisions is just nature
I would have to say abortion is our most controversial issue in the classroom and outside world. Pro-life or Pro choice is a decision that is made by the mother and not by anyone else. There is more then one choice she can make. Like in Juno she had the choice to give it up to a family. Why can’t every mother have that choice instead of paying a doctor $550 to kill a life. But on the other had some say I fetus doesn’t become a child until the 4-5 week into the pregnancy. So what happens if she gets an abortion within the 3-week? Is she still considering a murder? I think so. It is immoral and not justifiable by any means. I figure if she is a woman enough to lay down she should be able to accept what comes out. Truthfully there are other situations where an abortion is acceptable such as rape. But there is still an alternate way of handlings that situation. It is true that a woman has the right to her body what ever she may do to it. But babies don’t ask to be born and the certainly don’t ask to die.
Plain sex
“One might have thought that conceptual analysis unnessisary in this area.” (Goldman, Alan H.)
Philosophy is nevertheless of relevance here if no other reason than that the concept of sex remains at the center of moral and social consciniousness in our, perhaps any, soicety.” (Goldman, Alan H.)
Sex is one of the few ways 2 people can communicate and express happiness/saticifaction with their partners. On the other hand there seems to be those that would only want to satifcy themselves inimatly. It also stimulates and relaxes the mind by letting endorfenses, as well as excirise the body, causing wieght loss. But more importantly one gets to express passion, love, and appreciation to ones soulmate. In short its healthy and everyone should properly educated about sexual intercourse. However there are a lot of people that preach against sex. That it is no more than the way to reproduce, that it’s a weak point of the human instincs and should be taught to with stand these urges. Religion has a way of portraying the act of sex as something of mortal sin. While in reality shows that sexual intercourse is key to reproduction (though cloning is big topic) it has more to offer than just that and is nessisary for the survival of the human race. However there is a major difference to expression of love to an expression of hate through violence. One can harm, just as easily as one could love with this act. The matter at hand is would be to reevaluate sex education in the homestead and made away of the differences of what is really abuse and what is an expression of love. Though the 2 intents are as plain as day, one can never be clear enough about how important it is to teach respect and understanding as well as morality.
Goldman, A. H. (2008). Plain Sex . In J. C. Jeffery Olen, Applying Ethics (pp. 93-103 ). Belmont, CA: Thompson Higher Education.
Abotion or adoption? You decide. The topic I’m choosing to write about is dealing with the issues as a society we have on abortions, and adoptions. Last week in class, we had a brief 5-15 minute discussion on this particular subject at hand. Some opinions I agreed with and some I feel were far off fetched, (but I guess that's the point of an opinion, right?) However, being a mother myself, I can’t possibly imagine hearing a heart beat inside my womb from my first visit at the doctor’s office , then go and do thee unthinkable, like letting someone suck all the life out of me for my own selfish reasons. That’s not cool at all, let alone carry a little human who has helped develop me, and my personality to become a better person and understand life better over the course of nine months, then after giving birth and looking into that child’s eyes for the first time, only to let a total stranger take my child away, possibly forever . Wow, I mean seriously, I can’t even begin to imagine. Although I must admit, I can’t completely lie, and say I understand what a woman who can’t have children must go through , because it’s a huge void in her life, but I can say how I would feel,and react if one of thee above options affected my life, so I guess it would be similar. What’s the definition of an abortion? It means ending a pregnancy before the unborn child can live independently outside the mother. Whether or not abortion should be legal turns on the heated answer to the question of whether and at what point a fetus is a person. This is a question that cannot be answered logically. The concept of a person is neither logical nor empirical: It is essentially a religious, or quasi-religious idea, based on one's mind frame.What about adoption? Adoption is the legal act of permanently placing a child with a parent or parents other than the mother or father to whom the child is biologically related. An adoption order has the effect of severing the parental responsibilities and rights and transferring those responsibilities and rights to new adoptive parent(s). After the finalization of an adoption, there is no legal difference between adopted children and those born to the parents. The movie, Losing Isaiah is a great example about adoption and how tough they can be when a mother or the parents give up their child/ren , sometimes not even having a choice, but this movie goes into more depth about the color barrier we also deal with as a society. It’s difficult to say, and everyone has a story to tell , but let’s look at the big picture. There is no need for a woman to have an abortion. Teenagers are at a stage to know to use some sort of controceptive, so that’s not an excuse to me. If a young woman is old enough to lie down with a young man , or an adult , then she should be woman enough to respect and face her responsibility, and that is to take care of her child. There is help out in the world, and in each and every society. She has to want the help. Abortion, now that I ponder on it , I’m torn. If I can’t have children , then yes ,I would like the comforts of being a mother to someone else’s child , but she must understand the decision she is making , because once she gives that child to me, there is no turning around and coming back for that child. That baby is mine.
Now days people look for any means necessary to make their lives easier. Mankind as a whole seems to only focus on themselves. On the issue of abortion, I think it only proves my point that that mankind is selfish. I will start off by asking this question, If you don’t want your pet or you feel as though you can’t offer it a good living environment, do you take it out back and shoot it or do you find some nice family that wants you pet and can take care of it? Anyone who would be willing to kill their pet just because they don’t want it would surely be in trouble for animal cruelty and would be looked on as plain sick. If you wouldn’t kill your pet because you don’t want it, why in the world would you kill your child? There are many arguments for and against abortion. Those for abortion claim a woman has the right to decide what she does with her body. They also argue that women that have been raped or abused should be able to abort their baby to keep them from being reminded of their traumatic event. What the “experts” fail to mention is that just because the baby is gone the mother isn’t going to miraculously forget her experience. That event will be relived every time she closes her eyes, whether or not her baby is gone or not, except now she will feel even more guilt for killing her baby. No one tells about the psychological problems women face after they get an abortion. Including thoughts of guilt, sadness, suicidal urges, and many others. Not to mention that he number of women who get an abortion doesn’t even come close to those who get one simply because a baby would get in the way of their everyday activities. According to the bio-ethical reform web site, only 1% of abortions are performed because of rape or incest, 6% are done for health reasons, 93% are performed for social reasons. If a couple does not want their child to be born and the father punches the mother in the stomach to kill the child. He is put in prison for murder, but it’s ok to go to a doctor and have a tube stuck in the womb and have the baby sucked out like trash or have a salt solution put in the womb to burn the flesh off the baby and kill it. Many religious groups peach abstinence in unwed women. Although I agree that is the best method of birth control, I also understand that people will have sex. It’s in our nature, but it’s not that difficult to buy a condom. They cost like 75 cents at a gas station. Women under the age of 17 are twice as likely to have cervical damage after an abortion. There are approximately 1.37 million abortions performed each year. There are about 3, 700 abortions per day. The number of American soldiers killed in Iraq since the beginning of the war as of may 7th is 4, 077. Abortion is murder and abortion is selfish. Adoption is the way to go!
What classifies as a couple? Is it a man and a woman or is it two people of the same sex? It is debated whether this is caused in nature or rather the nurture of the person’s up bringing. Upon my research on the topic more I found a quote from the American Academy of Pediatrics that stated “sexual orientation probably is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences.” If this is true than it can be said that a person doesn’t choose to be homosexual it is an event in nature, though many cultures deem it as wrong to be a homosexual. A person can not choose who they are attracted to. I have a many of friends that are gay and they didn’t just wake up one day to say they were going to be gay. It was something that they have known since they were old enough to understand what gay was. A person can not help who they fall in love with.
VEGETABLE SOUP
Toni Hausmann
With all the various types of ingredients that consist of a well-made vegetable soup, no wonder there are numerous favorite spoonful combinations. As Americans we coexist physically within our boundaries, having extremely diverse opinions floating around our environment, such as a pot of vegetable soup, all the vegetables are in the same broth, but no one vegetable has the same consistency. Being able to exercise our constitutional rights allows everyone to think and speak freely, so of course sometimes this flares up highly opinionated issues. So far, from what we have covered in my college Contemporary Moral Issues class I have chosen to explain my position on Euthanasia.
First of all, to properly be able to justify my opinion lets dissect and define the word, according to the research I found Euthanasia was literally defined as "good death" in Ancient Greek, eu means "good" and thanatos means "death". Alright so one would think that there wouldn’t be any controversy, the definitions is plainly simple, good death. But, in reality like every other issue we Americans feel the need to put our two senses in and debate euthanasia is high on the list. Really what the problem is, at what point is it morally okay to extinguish a life? And, whose decision is it? God? Nature? Fate? Individual? Family?
See? There are so many unanswered questions concerning this dilemma. As the book, Applying Ethics, A text With Reading, states “What conditions should be used as the criteria of Personhood? Can an entity be considered a person merely because it possesses certain biological properties? Or should other factors be introduced, such as consciousness, self-consciousness, rationality, and the capacity for communication and moral judgment?”(179) Wow, what or whose answers are the correct ones? I guess no one really can give a definite answer to any of these questions. It really depends on someone’s opinion.
My opinion? I guess it would have to depend on the person and the situation. Personally, if I was in a lifeless state for the rest of my life I wouldn’t want be in this world like that, especially because I have been fully functional my whole life. Then to have to live completely the opposite way, would just be prolonging the inevitable and killing my spirit along the way. But, if I had to be the person to actually “pull the plug” I’m not sure how I would handle that, regardless of my relationship with the person. A more in-depth definition of euthanasia states, the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a person or animal suffering from an incurable, esp. a painful, disease or condition. Referencing to the movie Million Dollar Baby, starring Clint Eastwood and Hilary Swank, at the end, Maggie (Swank) was completely conscious of her decision and knew that there was no hope for her to ever even be slightly functional. Her condition was irreversible and permanent and she seemed to want to just pass peacefully with still some dignity and happy memories. If she would have continued living in her state, she would have mentally driven herself crazy and passed with miserable memories. And I don’t think anyone wants to have their last memories on earth of the inside of a hospital. “Not too long ago, “nature would have taken its course”; such patients would have died. Today, we have the technological capacity to keep them alive artificially. Should we? Or at least in some instances, are we justified in not doing this and even obligated not to?” (179).
Euthanasia is difficult for anyone immediately involved, but sometimes the vegetables in the soup become over cooked and flavorless, leaving a bowl full of mush.
Brian Utaski - Curiosity Happens
Human nature is meant to be voyeuristic. To be curious is part of daily life. People watch television, other people, nature, movies, and concerts all just to be able to watch. People get dressed everyday and most dress to fit in or be noticed because they know what others will be wearing around them. How do they know? They have been voyeuristically looking about on their daily route. The argument still exists when is too much curiosity a problem. In this world there are watchers, lookers, and addicts. Seeing into those three categories will help solve the dilemma of when being voyeur is a problem.
Nobody likes to be watched. Just sit a local coffee shop and watch a family drink there caffeine. After about two minutes “the watcher” will be asked the awesome question “what are you looking at?” usually said in a derogatory manner. Truly though all the watcher is doing is watching, opening the eyes and looking around for something interesting to focus on. It is not like the watcher has audio video recording devices and wants to go home and relive the coffee shop experience. Watching can help solve a lot of problems before they arise. Watchers enjoy television, concerts, and nature. Just try not to stare.
Everyone has heard somebody close to them say “look at her shoes” or “man he is tall”. The infamous introduction to “the looker”. Toned down from the average watcher, lookers are those who find themselves gazing into crowds, or sitting on a park bench watching as people walk on by. Lookers are more to themselves and don’t usually like “watchers”. Getting out into public on special occasions is what lookers love to do. Lookers would be the type to see a car accident happen but not stop to see if everything is ok with those involved. They keep to themselves, look up or down often, rarely straight ahead.
Some “watchers” take it to the next level. Binoculars, telescopes, and video monitors are just a couple things used by “addicts”. Addicts put people into positions where they feel violated. When addicts are caught they don’t get asked “what are you looking at?” they get handcuffed by local authorities. This is an issue because addicts can break laws. Only the U.S. government has the right to watch what we do, and we don’t like that either. Addicts enter people’s public and private affairs and are unwelcome.
Curiosity or voyeurism can be thought of as a learning tool, until it is taken to far. To be voyeur is as easy as watching television, but television is comfortable because the people portrayed on television loved to be watched. It is a very interesting subject though trying to figure out when curiosity ends and addiction begins.
Jmeisha Jackson
Abortion
One of the most controversial topics in society is abortion. In my opinion, abortion should be illegal. It is, by all means, a form of murder and demeans the value of human life. Taking the life of an unborn child isn’t any different from taking the life of a born child. If a woman isn’t ready or doesn’t want kids at all, there are many types of birth control. A woman shouldn’t turn to abortion if she doesn’t want kids. She can take some sort of birth control and/or if she gets pregnant and doesn’t wish to have the child, she should consider giving the baby up for adoption. There are many married couples in the world who aren’t able to produce and would like to adopt.
It’s just not right to kill a human being at all, even if it isn’t born yet. It’s immoral, in my opinion. I feel that if a woman gets pregnant, she should take responsibility for her actions and be more careful next time she decides to have sexual intercourse. If she can’t afford to take care of the baby, then adoption should be her next option, never abortion.
Kyla Harris
5/9/08
Midterm Paper
Euthanasia
Human euthanasia will always and forever be one of those topics that the world will always disagree on and have different opinions on. It is not easy for some people like me to come to a definite conclusion on whether euthanasia is humane or inhumane but there are things about the subject that do leave me in a compromising state. I know some people thing that euthanasia and capital punishment are two different things but to me, in some cases, they play a very similar role. Personally I really don’t know what to believe when it comes to putting someone to death because they are convicted of a crime or what to believe when you think a person is in so much pain, but aren’t able to tell you how they feel, that you believe it would be only right to relieve them of such agony. In the movie Million Dollar Baby a boxer was intentionally hurt by another boxer who just could not accept defeat. The boxer started out as nothing but dreamed of becoming something, a professional boxer. She worked hard day and night to prove to a boxing coach that she could become something if he believed in her and he did. She had a perfect career she was undefeated and damn good at what she did until her last fight ended her dream. She was paralyzed from the neck down and would live the rest of her life in the care of others and on a breathing tube. She didn’t want to live the rest of her days watching life go by and watching her life and body waist away before her eyes she wanted to just go away peacefully. She asked her boxing coach to do it for her but it was just too hard for him because she was all he had left but he knew what he had to do, and in this case I completely agree with her because living life lying in a bed watching yourself waist away wondering when life will end is no way to live. I don’t think any human should have to live life that way. The definition of euthanasia is the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human for his or own alleged benefit. I you want to argue what kind of benefit it would have been to kill the boxer you could say that she would have completely lost her mind by the end of the year because she was so miserable and she tried to kill herself two or three times already. So putting her out of her misery was a definite benefit on her part. In cases of capital punishment it is hard for me to not sympathize with both parties when I know both sides of the story I guess that’s just the way I feel. I believe in God and I believe that God is a forgiving god and that every man deserves a chance even if they are evil. There are ways to punish but to take killing in your own hands for revenge purposes I believe that is wrong.
Brennen Smith
Abortion
Abortion is a very strong topic. There are many arguments for and against abortion. Many people will tell you that Abortion is murder, which a living being is being killed and that is murder. While others will say that the life inside the mother is not yet a life because it is so young. I personally do not favor either side of the argument. I believe that Abortion should be legal only under certain circumstances. I think that if a woman is pregnant and wants the have an abortion, there should be certain criteria for the woman to get an abortion. If a woman cannot afford and/or does not have the money or living situations to support a child then I think an abortion should be allowed. Also, if a woman does not have a husband and the pregnancy wasn’t planned, and if the woman is younger than a certain age, I think abortion should be allowed. But other circumstances would not allow for an abortion, instead, the mother could turn to adoption. Abortion is a sensitive situation, there are reasons it is considered murder and there are reasons that do not. In the end, abortion is killing a living being, yes, the being cannot think or make decisions for itself, but it is still alive. But, other arguments state that since the baby is in the mother, it should ultimately be up to the mother to decide to get an abortion, which it is. I think abortion should be the very last resort for a pregnancy problem. If there is no other way out and adoption for whatever reason would not be an option, if a mother cannot support a child, she should have the right to not have one.
Moral Reasoning
I am a United States Marine, discharged from active duty this past year. I have felt a sense of belonging while serving in the Corps. Marines are broken down, and rebuilt. We are taught the fourteen leadership traits of justice, judgment, dependability, initiative, decisiveness, tact, integrity, bearing, unselfishness, knowledge, loyalty, and endurance. These are qualities demonstrated in daily missions, that help Marines earn respect, confidence, and loyal from fellow Marines. These traits are important, in setting goals on how to become a good leader, and a good follower.
According to the “bible” War is not the answer. In fact, this may be true, yet it is up to the moral reasoning that lies within oneself. I may be a Democrat, I may not be a believer in war, but I am positive, I am determined; I am motivated to make our world a better place, a PEACEful place. I have done the unthinkable of others to help make a difference, to bring change. I do not think it is right to kill, or harm others, but in order to protect who and what you are fighting for, you will go to any measure.
Unfortunately, my goal, my dream was cut short due to undisclosed issues. I was not brought down; I do not look at issues within our government, in our world with negativity. With each new day, I take what I have learned, who I have become and apply that in my everyday mission of helping to make change, regardless of what others think or feel...We are taught morals and values from the second we are brought into this world, but we grow and we learn from our individual life experiences.
Erica L. Gabor
THIS IS LISA COX!
In tenth grade I took biology and in biology we watched a pro stem cell research movie on stem cell research. In this movie was the most awful horrific sad stories of people’s life and what their life could be if cloning were possible. Our very on Superman was on the film he saw no harm in cloning himself and taking his clones’ back bone. In a way I am so for stem cell research but in another way I am so against it.
One reason on why I am against stem cell research is due to my religious beliefs. God created man, and I don’t think God would be to happy with us creating our own man. So would our clone have a soul, since the clone is created in a laboratory. Or does God still play is part in the cloning process. It’s a difficult subject. God also says thou shalt not kill, we are killing life just experimenting with the stem cells. Unless we choose to examine and experiment with the stem cells from ambillicle cords. Christopher Rieves was really for stem cell research, because in a lab they can recreate his exact spinal cord and replace it, that sounds good, it probably looks good on paper. But than it comes into mind... how can they grow a vital body part like a spine without the body. What are the scientist keeping from us..
One reason I am for it, is because the obvious reason, it saves lives. But In a way it also destroys life. Why not advance ourselves until we find the cure for dying. Why would someone want to live forever? So than why would we want to do that? There is a thing called population control, when people die from these common dieses it controls the worlds population. Just like war does. It’s a terrible thing, but think of the world were know one is dying, but everyone is breading... I wouldn’t want to be living in that dense population, where the whole world is built crammed in like Japan, I think I’d go crazy.
So I just found out in the middle of writing this essay, that I am against stem cell research on babies. And I am most definitely against cloning. Even if my mother was dying of a dieses that could be cured by stem cell research or cloning, I’d still be against it. If its time for my mother to die I am going to accept it and see her when I die. The circle of life. Joy wouldn’t be the same joy if we had no sadness.
So where do we draw the line? Just because we can create an exact replica of ourselves does it mean we should? We could be tampering with something that should be left alone. I would not like to see the wrath of God on man kind because we started playing God.
Like what if we created a clone of ourselves, than that clone becomes and evil clone... sounds scifi but zombies are real.
Shane Bresnahan
Euthanasia
This is a topic I feel strongly about. It is something I will probably have to face as my family gets older and older. My mother, for example, is a staunch supporter of her right to die if “vegetableized” as I am. She has forced me to promise her, that in the event of her being confined to a hospital bed and there is nothing that can be done I am tasked with pulling the plug. This I will sadly do for her, it is the least I can do. If a court order or the “law” tries to prevent this, I will do it illegally. It is an honor thing with me, coupled with the fact that she would do the same for me.
I could understand coping with the odds if a limb were removed, or you were confined to a wheelchair or blinded or something. The idea of being trapped inside a non-functional body just waiting, praying for death is very unacceptable. It goes double for my mom being trapped in such a way.
Post a Comment