In reading the following article on teen mothers getting pregnant for a second time http://www.childtrends.org/_pressrelease_page.cfm?LID=F9DF71F0-B45F-4396-9F537D6C0577B220 only made me think of one thing...NOT FAIR.
By not fair I am talking about the children. We just finished a video in class talking about all of the hardships and disadvantages single mothers usually take on when having a child... a teen mother with TWO children is in a whole other league. I work in a pharmacy off of main street and luckily for me (well at least that's what I think) I get to see the 'real' Gainesville. I deal with the voucher programs and the mental facilities that no other CVS deals with. There is also a group in Gainesville we work with that only deals with and takes in teen mothers. When these girls come into the store I often talk to then a little bit to make them a little more comfortable and let them know that they will not be judged here. A lot of them will tell you how the got pregnant and what their life was like growing up.....VERY different than mine.
My only question is... when life is so rough how in the world do these girls find themselves pregnant again. This is where I think it is not fair to the children. They do not have the same opportunity and chance that most other kids get. The article mentions how mother's that get the right type of pre-birth nursing and counseling, staying in school, and contraceptive use have a smaller chance at getting pregnant again. This is what I think we should be doing with teen mothers. I feel that some of them are up to the HUGE challenge but the majority of teen mothers cannot handle two kids. Programs like these should be put into place in every state. The good news is, in each state rates are declining but we are still far from great.
Marvin
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
good dad
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Domestic partner registry wins initial OK
| We have discussed this previous article in class in the past week or two. This article is quite intriguing, catching the attention of the public in an effort to acknowledge and help individuals acquire rights, who, by federal law, would not be considered a family. Actually, I have participated in the law making practices as an Intern for the Alachua County Poverty Reduction Program. In which, many of the decisions made are to promote a change as well as make the commissioner(s) notable during the election session. This law, in my opinion, does have its good points as well as downfalls, but to whomever it concerns. I believe that this effort to acknowledge individuals as a "family" with rights, will urge citizens to pursue the acceptance of the movement of gay and lesbian rights in the near future. Although many people believe the target audience is homosexuals, these rights are for all other individuals as well; For instance, sister/brother relationships, boyfriend/girlfriend relationships living under the same roof. This gives persons who may not have any family members, or they may live far, the right to designate a person of interest.I think this law is important but than again irrelevant to the current issues/problems, we have today. I think it will only complicate matters and make people strive to encourage our government to establish laws pertaining to rights for gay/lesbian couples. I know that people want to have control over their life without the influence of our government although the subject of this article is not about gay and lesbian rights; I want to express my thoughts in relation to this article.I believe that because the foundation of our nation and government was founded on Christian beliefs, and the beliefs that a man, woman, and child is considered to be a typical family. Our country is not ready to accept (lawmakers and decision holders) that it is changing. Furthermore, acknowledge gay/lesbian couples as families. Think about it, I am totally with the saying "whatever floats your boat" cliché but personally, I am from a southern Baptist background and I disagree with that lifestyle.In class, we discussed why our government does not provide health care and other "necessities" to individuals and their families, so think... If they are weaning people out of the system and not providing the things, we believe they should, then think about it in relation to giving gay/lesbian couples rights and privileges. The government is designed to give and take. But remember, the government takes the money that, we, tax payers give and distribute it to areas where they think it should be used... such as the war. If the government classified homosexual couples as families and give them the ability to reap the benefit from their spouse than the government will be taking money from other areas to furnish this ideal, which will not likely happen. Some people say it is fair, and some people say that it is not, but truthfully, that is just the way it is. |
Friday, October 19, 2007
Strip Search at McDonald's
I don't know if anyone remembers this from 2004 or not, but it was on 20/20's website. I guess they replayed it again to bring awareness. It shows a manager speaking to someone on the phone who says that he is a police office claiming that one of the employees that worked there had stolen a customer's purse. The manager calls back the young girls and continues to follow the instructions of the so-called officer. He orders the manager to tell the girl to undress in front of her to see if she has taken anything. So the girl does and spends over an hour sitting in the nude waiting to get justice. The caller was not an officer and was caught. But I can't believe that there are people out there that would do something like that. People need to know their rights when it comes to any situation.
Class Discussions
I wanted to tell everyone that I think the discussions in class have been going so well! I think we have raised a lot of different points of view when it comes to paid leave. I think that it is really ridiculous that the United States does not provide paid leave. We are supposed to "set an example" for everyone else and we falling behind other countries! How can that be? I guess it might be like some people say...."if it isn't broken, don't fix it." So I guess to most people, it isn't a problem that is big enough concern. I can only hope that by the time I am a parent that something will be in affect.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Birth Control for 11 year olds
http://www.alligator.org/articles/2007/10/18/opinion/columns/column1.txt
Read the above article and be prepared to be amazed. I know I was. Dr. Brennan was talking about this in class today and I had to run home and read it for myself.
Now don't get me wrong, B.C. is a good thing...when you are of sound mind and know how to use it correctly, but at 11 years old?
The kicker of the story is that these middle schoolers don't need their parents permission to get condoms or even B.C.
Where does that leave the parents? Does the school have the right to make such rash decisions for kids that don't belong to them?
Are children prepared to take on such a rash decisions that even some adults have a hard time with?
It all comes down to this...Kids are going to have sex no matter if we give them condoms or not. So as the family...the first line of defense, we have to do something. I applaude the Maine community for stepping up and recognizing a problem, but the solution isn't promoting safe sex among these middle schoolers, but its educating them, and trying to prevent sex at all costs.
Jeez...what happened to playing with Barbies and legos?
The world is changing and we have to step in and say something, we have to do something rash before our future generations just crash and burn.
Read the above article and be prepared to be amazed. I know I was. Dr. Brennan was talking about this in class today and I had to run home and read it for myself.
Now don't get me wrong, B.C. is a good thing...when you are of sound mind and know how to use it correctly, but at 11 years old?
The kicker of the story is that these middle schoolers don't need their parents permission to get condoms or even B.C.
Where does that leave the parents? Does the school have the right to make such rash decisions for kids that don't belong to them?
Are children prepared to take on such a rash decisions that even some adults have a hard time with?
It all comes down to this...Kids are going to have sex no matter if we give them condoms or not. So as the family...the first line of defense, we have to do something. I applaude the Maine community for stepping up and recognizing a problem, but the solution isn't promoting safe sex among these middle schoolers, but its educating them, and trying to prevent sex at all costs.
Jeez...what happened to playing with Barbies and legos?
The world is changing and we have to step in and say something, we have to do something rash before our future generations just crash and burn.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Failing Schools Strain to Meet U.S. Standard
This article written by Diana Jean Schemo raised many points about the education system and how it is in dire need of change. Article below:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/16/education/16child.html?ex=1193198400&en=0db7921503e02bc1&ei=5070&emc=eta1
My sister is an elementary school teacher and always talks to me about her kids passing the FCAT. Michelle (my sister) teaches in a big school back at home in Miami where not only does she have 25 students but students that speak 5 different languages as a first language as well as different religions, and economic backgrounds. The significance to this is the No Child law in my opinion often forgets about the 'new' America. We are now a country that has more diversity then every, yet we want to live by one set of standards. This law is fine and dandy to me for the upper class rural neighborhoods across America, but what about the cities like L.A in the article and Miami.
Teachers are so pressured into teaching what might be on the state exam instead of just teaching and letting the the class and instructor facilitate the learning environment. Schools under this act that are threatened to close down or allow students to transfer does not remedy the problem one bit. By sending these students to better schools is this going to make them learn better...NO! In my opinion its going to be just like the mother in the article said when her son was not learning something and the teacher responded, "You're slow" rather than going over the material again. These students will bring down the learning in the classrooms of the better schools that is why they don't want then either.
What is the answer? The answer is to first put more money into schools with better teachers (better paid), better teaching tools (books, desks, school supplies), and a state that backs them rather than places an exam at the end of the year that is supposed to apparently rank them. After six years in east LA where not even one in five students can do grade level math in high school it is quite obvious that this No Child act is doing no good at all, the only thing I see it doing is displacing students all over their neighborhoods.
Marvin
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/16/education/16child.html?ex=1193198400&en=0db7921503e02bc1&ei=5070&emc=eta1
My sister is an elementary school teacher and always talks to me about her kids passing the FCAT. Michelle (my sister) teaches in a big school back at home in Miami where not only does she have 25 students but students that speak 5 different languages as a first language as well as different religions, and economic backgrounds. The significance to this is the No Child law in my opinion often forgets about the 'new' America. We are now a country that has more diversity then every, yet we want to live by one set of standards. This law is fine and dandy to me for the upper class rural neighborhoods across America, but what about the cities like L.A in the article and Miami.
Teachers are so pressured into teaching what might be on the state exam instead of just teaching and letting the the class and instructor facilitate the learning environment. Schools under this act that are threatened to close down or allow students to transfer does not remedy the problem one bit. By sending these students to better schools is this going to make them learn better...NO! In my opinion its going to be just like the mother in the article said when her son was not learning something and the teacher responded, "You're slow" rather than going over the material again. These students will bring down the learning in the classrooms of the better schools that is why they don't want then either.
What is the answer? The answer is to first put more money into schools with better teachers (better paid), better teaching tools (books, desks, school supplies), and a state that backs them rather than places an exam at the end of the year that is supposed to apparently rank them. After six years in east LA where not even one in five students can do grade level math in high school it is quite obvious that this No Child act is doing no good at all, the only thing I see it doing is displacing students all over their neighborhoods.
Marvin
Friday, October 12, 2007
Parental Involvement Key to Academic Success
Article: Parental Involvement Key to Academic Success
Website: http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000005696.cfm
I know that a couple of us wrote about FCAT testing and all the issues surrounding one of the articles Dr. Smith recommended. One of the points that cam up when Tricia and I were talking about the issue awhile back was that parents dd need to be involved. It is always said and researched but today in CitezenLink.com there was an article talking about parent involvement being key to a child's academic success.
The article states: "According to a study from the Center for Education Policy, what helps them the most is you! The research shows low-income kids in public schools do just as well as their peers in private schools as long as parents are involved."
One of the points that is made is that is should not be surprising that private schools get superior ratings, those who are in these schools are expected to go to college and usually have more parental involvement than student attending public schools.
Now, with that said, it is hard for me to imagine the parent of kids at my Job being involved. many of them may have made untimely decision with regard to having children, may not have an education, may have recently separated form a souse, or are in school bettering themselves. A lot of my parents do the best they can with what they have. Some fell that it is their own faults, but making bad choices is not against the law! I have some parents at my job who work 2-3 jobs and go to school, they are not able to be at their kids games or spend the weekends with them, but rely on the staff to help their kids academically and fill in that void.
I wonder if their is a way to help parents be involved with out them sacrificing work or school (both needed for them to better themselves or meet necessities). What responsibility do staff and teachers have to fill this void, if any? So many parents have different work schedules compared 30 years ago. It cost more to live and that equals less time with family. There are always exceptions and people that make it work, but for those who can't what can we do as a community to ensure they can be involved or that someone is?
Website: http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000005696.cfm
I know that a couple of us wrote about FCAT testing and all the issues surrounding one of the articles Dr. Smith recommended. One of the points that cam up when Tricia and I were talking about the issue awhile back was that parents dd need to be involved. It is always said and researched but today in CitezenLink.com there was an article talking about parent involvement being key to a child's academic success.
The article states: "According to a study from the Center for Education Policy, what helps them the most is you! The research shows low-income kids in public schools do just as well as their peers in private schools as long as parents are involved."
One of the points that is made is that is should not be surprising that private schools get superior ratings, those who are in these schools are expected to go to college and usually have more parental involvement than student attending public schools.
Now, with that said, it is hard for me to imagine the parent of kids at my Job being involved. many of them may have made untimely decision with regard to having children, may not have an education, may have recently separated form a souse, or are in school bettering themselves. A lot of my parents do the best they can with what they have. Some fell that it is their own faults, but making bad choices is not against the law! I have some parents at my job who work 2-3 jobs and go to school, they are not able to be at their kids games or spend the weekends with them, but rely on the staff to help their kids academically and fill in that void.
I wonder if their is a way to help parents be involved with out them sacrificing work or school (both needed for them to better themselves or meet necessities). What responsibility do staff and teachers have to fill this void, if any? So many parents have different work schedules compared 30 years ago. It cost more to live and that equals less time with family. There are always exceptions and people that make it work, but for those who can't what can we do as a community to ensure they can be involved or that someone is?
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Defintion of family.....
What's your definition of family? So I was inspired today to look up definitions of family and see if any of them all had a common element. So here's what I came up with!
1: Anthropologists say a culture's biological and marital kinship rules and patterns of
reciprocal obligations define family. (http://libertariannation.org/a/f43d1.html)
2: The collective body of persons who live in one house, and under one head or manager; a
household, including parents, children, and servants, and, as the case may be, lodgers or
boarders.
The group comprising a husband and wife and their dependent children, constituting a
fundamental unit in the organization of society. (http://www.brainyquote.com/words/fa/family163674.html)
3: A fundamental social group in society typically consisting of one or two parents and their
children.
Two or more people who share goals and values, have long-term commitments to one
another, and reside usually in the same dwelling place. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/family)
So these were the best one's I could find. So they all mention that you can be living together, and I believe that you could have some kinship. One does specifically address having a wife and husband unit, but the others don't. one even says boarder or servants can be deemed family! the one i lie the most is in number 3 where it talks about having a commitment between two or more people and sharing goals and values while residing in a commonplace.
Although these definitions are not all encompassing I think they are pretty open in some aspects to be applied to a variety of "family forms". These definitions give hoe to the idea that cohabits and couples can be classified as family. to me this is great! I know there are counter arguments about what family is, but coming form a non traditional family i am accepting of definitions that seem to be ambiguous in interpretation.
1: Anthropologists say a culture's biological and marital kinship rules and patterns of
reciprocal obligations define family. (http://libertariannation.org/a/f43d1.html)
2: The collective body of persons who live in one house, and under one head or manager; a
household, including parents, children, and servants, and, as the case may be, lodgers or
boarders.
The group comprising a husband and wife and their dependent children, constituting a
fundamental unit in the organization of society. (http://www.brainyquote.com/words/fa/family163674.html)
3: A fundamental social group in society typically consisting of one or two parents and their
children.
Two or more people who share goals and values, have long-term commitments to one
another, and reside usually in the same dwelling place. (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/family)
So these were the best one's I could find. So they all mention that you can be living together, and I believe that you could have some kinship. One does specifically address having a wife and husband unit, but the others don't. one even says boarder or servants can be deemed family! the one i lie the most is in number 3 where it talks about having a commitment between two or more people and sharing goals and values while residing in a commonplace.
Although these definitions are not all encompassing I think they are pretty open in some aspects to be applied to a variety of "family forms". These definitions give hoe to the idea that cohabits and couples can be classified as family. to me this is great! I know there are counter arguments about what family is, but coming form a non traditional family i am accepting of definitions that seem to be ambiguous in interpretation.
Gay-friendly film yanked from New Jersey school with a little help from mom
I thought this was interesting, and happened a little over a month ago in a New Jerseys town in the Evesham School District.
‘That’s a Family’ is a movie that features several gay families, and explains why each is normal and acceptable...yet a mom was appalled by it and got it yanked from the school.
Apparently the mom was upset because it was promoting same sex marriages, and then later said it was the idea that it was too much for her 8 year old to see. I am not sure why her child was able to see it because it was approved for fourth grade classes.
This lady raised a bit of hell and got it kicked out. Now I do not think it is fair to kick it out, because there might have been kids whose family form is that of a same-sex one. how is that fair to them, they have no choice about the lifestyle they live.
I think that the video was extreme in addressing how this one lady wanted a baby and was going to go to a man to have it "naturally" since she did not have a husband.
I agree that it is possible a 2nd grader would not be able to handle that and shouldn't be forced to. maybe they could do it like they do sex ed and get permission slips. everyone didn't disagree so those who were not in favor could be doing a different activity.
On the other hand Vice President Cheney's daughter is a lesbian and recently had a baby, it is clear that her female lover didn't create the baby with her, should we then block children from watching news as well? I mean this example is extreme but it was national news!!!! i don't know whether this kid watches news but at 8 I was and I understood a lot that was going on.
Another point, is that if you can show that a male and female have sex in sex ed, then you really aren't addressing anything new with regard to how a baby is conceived, it merely has to be about the "gay" aspect.
‘That’s a Family’ is a movie that features several gay families, and explains why each is normal and acceptable...yet a mom was appalled by it and got it yanked from the school.
Apparently the mom was upset because it was promoting same sex marriages, and then later said it was the idea that it was too much for her 8 year old to see. I am not sure why her child was able to see it because it was approved for fourth grade classes.
This lady raised a bit of hell and got it kicked out. Now I do not think it is fair to kick it out, because there might have been kids whose family form is that of a same-sex one. how is that fair to them, they have no choice about the lifestyle they live.
I think that the video was extreme in addressing how this one lady wanted a baby and was going to go to a man to have it "naturally" since she did not have a husband.
I agree that it is possible a 2nd grader would not be able to handle that and shouldn't be forced to. maybe they could do it like they do sex ed and get permission slips. everyone didn't disagree so those who were not in favor could be doing a different activity.
On the other hand Vice President Cheney's daughter is a lesbian and recently had a baby, it is clear that her female lover didn't create the baby with her, should we then block children from watching news as well? I mean this example is extreme but it was national news!!!! i don't know whether this kid watches news but at 8 I was and I understood a lot that was going on.
Another point, is that if you can show that a male and female have sex in sex ed, then you really aren't addressing anything new with regard to how a baby is conceived, it merely has to be about the "gay" aspect.
Domestic Partenership Ordinance
I found today's class pretty interesting and although you all may be tired of this already I wanted to write about it. The Domestic Partnership Ordinance seems like a really good idea. To me if I wasn't involved with someone (committed) I wouldn't get one. However it opens the door in emergencies for a roommate, close friend, or someone besides next of kin to make decisions.
Now I know some of you do not support the ideas of same-sex marriages and I respect that, although my position is not the same. I think that if the qualities of the ordinance were tied into civil unions that would be a great idea. many of the issues same-sex couples address is that they cannot go to their partners child's school, or they cannot make medical decisions. This would, assuming same-sex marriages were never going to happen, be a more sufficient middle grounds. it would be recognized as a union and they would get a many rights. This ordinance wouldn't necessarily recognize a marriage but that these people were in a committed relationship and that they could participate in some of the family affairs. Yes, I do consider them families!
So my next point is that that Dr. Smith asked us if we think the ordinance should be offered to couples who are not considered family . I am not sure, I would hope that if you went and did this that you would consider the person like family or to be in a family like environment with you. I definitely wouldn't walk up to some random man and say let's go get registered. So yes, if they understand the implications and what it means and they are adults then they can have it extended to them.
Now I know some of you do not support the ideas of same-sex marriages and I respect that, although my position is not the same. I think that if the qualities of the ordinance were tied into civil unions that would be a great idea. many of the issues same-sex couples address is that they cannot go to their partners child's school, or they cannot make medical decisions. This would, assuming same-sex marriages were never going to happen, be a more sufficient middle grounds. it would be recognized as a union and they would get a many rights. This ordinance wouldn't necessarily recognize a marriage but that these people were in a committed relationship and that they could participate in some of the family affairs. Yes, I do consider them families!
So my next point is that that Dr. Smith asked us if we think the ordinance should be offered to couples who are not considered family . I am not sure, I would hope that if you went and did this that you would consider the person like family or to be in a family like environment with you. I definitely wouldn't walk up to some random man and say let's go get registered. So yes, if they understand the implications and what it means and they are adults then they can have it extended to them.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
A Side of Divorce I never thought about
I was looking through some articles online about Divorce, and I came across something that really made me stop and think. We all know the implications of Divorce on all members of the family: Parents and their childen, but have we really stopped to think about our extended family members? I'm mainly talking about Grandparents. Just because they are not the ones experiencing the divorce, doesn't mean that they don't feel the effects. According to this article http://www.gainesvillesun.com/article/20070902/ZNYT04/709020328 "My child's Divorace is my pain", a new point of view will show that grandparents suffer just as much as the people directly involved.
How are they affected?
Some Grandparents are strapped for cash because they are helping their child out finacially. This might cause a delay in retirement or vacationing. Also some grandparents are caught in the cross fire of custody battles, being denied the right to see their grandchildren. Emotionally it can be draining because they could be the middle man, forced to be the go between for the divorcing couple.
I know as policy makers we are constantly trying to find things that will benefit the family, mainly the children. I think we are ignoring how extensive divorce can be. Why kind of things could we do to help lessen the devestating effects on all family memebers, grandparents included?
I have done a little bit of research into the effects of divorce on children and never have I come across something dedicated to grandparents. I guess its just something we tend to look past because grandparents are not in the immediate enviornment, but unfortunalty they are usually the first means of support for the divorcing child.
How are they affected?
Some Grandparents are strapped for cash because they are helping their child out finacially. This might cause a delay in retirement or vacationing. Also some grandparents are caught in the cross fire of custody battles, being denied the right to see their grandchildren. Emotionally it can be draining because they could be the middle man, forced to be the go between for the divorcing couple.
I know as policy makers we are constantly trying to find things that will benefit the family, mainly the children. I think we are ignoring how extensive divorce can be. Why kind of things could we do to help lessen the devestating effects on all family memebers, grandparents included?
I have done a little bit of research into the effects of divorce on children and never have I come across something dedicated to grandparents. I guess its just something we tend to look past because grandparents are not in the immediate enviornment, but unfortunalty they are usually the first means of support for the divorcing child.
Aging and Gay, and Facing Prejudice in Twilight
In reading this article written by Jane Gross, I was quickly reminded how easy it is to forget about certain people in life.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/us/09aged.html?ex=1192593600&en=31488165b0295b95&ei=5070&emc=eta1
I am a huge supporter of not only gay rights, but equal opportunity and when I came across this article in my email I realized I have never thought out the elderly. While reading this article my girlfriend walked in the room and asked, "What are you reading?" I told her the topic and her response was the same, "WOW! I never thought about them." This article was something that I think every person should read whether you are pro or anti gay relationships. We often forget about the older people in our society as their voice is usually not as loud. In reading this article and seeing what they have to deal with in a nursing home just to get a fair chance at making friends and enjoying themselves made me sick. To see how they live in hiding and fear because they don't want people to judge them or mock them and make fun of them makes me think of something that should happen in a middle school, not a nursing home.
The care, or lack thereof, that they receive based on their sexual preference was also disturbing. The article did; however, mention groups that are now training people how to work and help gay and lesbian patients and how to make them feel comfortable was something I thought was very encouraging. The article also mentions how some of these patients were put with people with mental disorders because they didn't know any different and would not pose a problem, really ticked me off. These people don't have mental disorders, they are just as 'normal' as any other person in the home.
Overall, the article showed a sad world these people are living in, but it did show some progress and awareness. This was honestly one of the best articles I have read in a while because it really showed a very important part to a world we live in that no one pays attention to.
Marvin
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/09/us/09aged.html?ex=1192593600&en=31488165b0295b95&ei=5070&emc=eta1
I am a huge supporter of not only gay rights, but equal opportunity and when I came across this article in my email I realized I have never thought out the elderly. While reading this article my girlfriend walked in the room and asked, "What are you reading?" I told her the topic and her response was the same, "WOW! I never thought about them." This article was something that I think every person should read whether you are pro or anti gay relationships. We often forget about the older people in our society as their voice is usually not as loud. In reading this article and seeing what they have to deal with in a nursing home just to get a fair chance at making friends and enjoying themselves made me sick. To see how they live in hiding and fear because they don't want people to judge them or mock them and make fun of them makes me think of something that should happen in a middle school, not a nursing home.
The care, or lack thereof, that they receive based on their sexual preference was also disturbing. The article did; however, mention groups that are now training people how to work and help gay and lesbian patients and how to make them feel comfortable was something I thought was very encouraging. The article also mentions how some of these patients were put with people with mental disorders because they didn't know any different and would not pose a problem, really ticked me off. These people don't have mental disorders, they are just as 'normal' as any other person in the home.
Overall, the article showed a sad world these people are living in, but it did show some progress and awareness. This was honestly one of the best articles I have read in a while because it really showed a very important part to a world we live in that no one pays attention to.
Marvin
Saturday, October 6, 2007
20/20 Courts a Tough Road to Gay Marriage
I mostly posted this blog because it has something to do with this coming weeks topics about Gay marriages.
20/20 did a story on Sept 28, 2007 about the courts decision with regard to gay marriages. Although, many courts are not ruling in favor of Gay Marriages and the individual rights of those in Gay marriages - the story did shed light on the fact that by going to the courts over and over they are reaching the politicians and lawmakers. In a way it reaches the public as well!
Many were hoping that courts would follow Massachusetts' lead and support the idea that banning gay marriages was unconstitutional, however after that ruling Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and Washington all refused to grant gay marriages.
Even with the court losses our readings and this story show that their are small progresses achieved for Gays. After all, Nine states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples: Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine, California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii constituting those nine.
Gays 'struggles have been compared to the rights of African Americans and as we all know those rights have not been achieved easily... it has taken a long time and even then their are still struggles/issues being faced. So in retrospect the story sheds light on the fact that all struggles come with hard work and that with all the court appearances eventually the courts will have to address Gays' rights and deal with same sex relations.
Saying no will not suffice and change is inevitable even if small.
20/20 did a story on Sept 28, 2007 about the courts decision with regard to gay marriages. Although, many courts are not ruling in favor of Gay Marriages and the individual rights of those in Gay marriages - the story did shed light on the fact that by going to the courts over and over they are reaching the politicians and lawmakers. In a way it reaches the public as well!
Many were hoping that courts would follow Massachusetts' lead and support the idea that banning gay marriages was unconstitutional, however after that ruling Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and Washington all refused to grant gay marriages.
Even with the court losses our readings and this story show that their are small progresses achieved for Gays. After all, Nine states have approved spousal rights in some form for same-sex couples: Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Maine, California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii constituting those nine.
Gays 'struggles have been compared to the rights of African Americans and as we all know those rights have not been achieved easily... it has taken a long time and even then their are still struggles/issues being faced. So in retrospect the story sheds light on the fact that all struggles come with hard work and that with all the court appearances eventually the courts will have to address Gays' rights and deal with same sex relations.
Saying no will not suffice and change is inevitable even if small.
20/20 FRIDAY: Sexual Abuse or Harmless Horseplay
So on 20/20 yesterday they did a story about two middle schoolers in Oregon who had participated in a game well known to middle schoolers called slap the butt. this reminded me of the Jessica Lunsford topic because these boys were arrested for slapping girls butts (girls were doing it to them as well) and for jumping up an down while acting goofy and this was compared to dry humping! Were they wrong for touching the girls yes as were the girls. However, they were charged with Felony Sex Abuse to the First Degree. a charge that would warrant young boys to have to register as sex offenders. These boys were strip searched several ties, held from their parent for several days - seems so outrageous. I posted this to show how this JLA could be too extreme. In any case, after about a year and all the girls signing a petition saying they did not feel threatened the judge dropped the case.
Home Van Newsletter 10/5/07
This was my first time reading the Home Van Newsletter, and I throughly enjoyed it as it challenged how I view homelessness a little bit more. It's so good to get shaken up and forced to think critically about what you believe, whether it be about God, homelessness or the President.
Arupa brings up an interesting point as she describes this dream that she has where she was comfortable and warm inside her bed, and peering into her windows are the faces of the homeless that she works with, which segues into a discussion of Carl Gustav Jung. Jung wrote about the 'shadow self', a mental construct of everything about ourselves that we don't want to deal with or confront, and how we tend to disassociate ourselves with those whom we see our shadow self in. We reject them, demoralize them, despise them because they represent the 'ugly us'.
I find this fascinating, most probably due to two contrasting views of homelessness I, and maybe most of us, have. On one hand, I see the reaction some people have to homelessness, where they stereotype them into lethargic, hopeless, languid, drunk caricatures. These people tend to seldom offer the helping hand because they see that they are just looking to get by today, and not trying to fix any long-term problems. On the other hand, there are those who faithfully serve at the shelters and homeless councils, who have personal friendships with some of these guys, and truly care for them. I feel that most of us battle with these two conflicting viewpoints, and sometimes the former takes control.
One of the largest hurdles to clear in Gainesville's attempt to defeat homelessness is social acceptability. It seems like everyone loves the idea of organizations and institutions being all philanthropic to help them out, but no one wants it in their back yard. No one wants this one-stop homeless shelter near their home or business, but they want the problem solved. It's always fascinated me that few ever want to be a part of the solution, and I mean in deeper way than giving Chair, Nixon or any other homeless dude $5 so he can go buy "food", which we all know is a lie so they can buy beer. We see the shadow self in some of these homeless, and it scares us. Sure, I think we say that the guy pushing the shopping cart full of trash bags down 2nd Ave is sketch, but what I think is even more scarry is that we see part of ourselves in those needy eyes. We don't consciously realize it, but it's there.
So this may be the reason homelessness hasn't been ameliorated for all these years, because politicians and bureaucrats don't want to admit that they are just like those sleeping under cardboard. 'The Dirty' are just as hopeless, just as angry, just as selfish, just as jealous as the Senator on his private jet coming back from a formal dinner with the President, it's just that the senator has a few more materialistic masks to hide behind. Until we can level with ourselves on this issue of commonality with the socially despised, it seems our driving motivation for a solution to homelessness is derived more from obligation than undefiled compassion. I'm still leveling with myself, I'm no different from the rest.
--
David Lindeman
Arupa brings up an interesting point as she describes this dream that she has where she was comfortable and warm inside her bed, and peering into her windows are the faces of the homeless that she works with, which segues into a discussion of Carl Gustav Jung. Jung wrote about the 'shadow self', a mental construct of everything about ourselves that we don't want to deal with or confront, and how we tend to disassociate ourselves with those whom we see our shadow self in. We reject them, demoralize them, despise them because they represent the 'ugly us'.
I find this fascinating, most probably due to two contrasting views of homelessness I, and maybe most of us, have. On one hand, I see the reaction some people have to homelessness, where they stereotype them into lethargic, hopeless, languid, drunk caricatures. These people tend to seldom offer the helping hand because they see that they are just looking to get by today, and not trying to fix any long-term problems. On the other hand, there are those who faithfully serve at the shelters and homeless councils, who have personal friendships with some of these guys, and truly care for them. I feel that most of us battle with these two conflicting viewpoints, and sometimes the former takes control.
One of the largest hurdles to clear in Gainesville's attempt to defeat homelessness is social acceptability. It seems like everyone loves the idea of organizations and institutions being all philanthropic to help them out, but no one wants it in their back yard. No one wants this one-stop homeless shelter near their home or business, but they want the problem solved. It's always fascinated me that few ever want to be a part of the solution, and I mean in deeper way than giving Chair, Nixon or any other homeless dude $5 so he can go buy "food", which we all know is a lie so they can buy beer. We see the shadow self in some of these homeless, and it scares us. Sure, I think we say that the guy pushing the shopping cart full of trash bags down 2nd Ave is sketch, but what I think is even more scarry is that we see part of ourselves in those needy eyes. We don't consciously realize it, but it's there.
So this may be the reason homelessness hasn't been ameliorated for all these years, because politicians and bureaucrats don't want to admit that they are just like those sleeping under cardboard. 'The Dirty' are just as hopeless, just as angry, just as selfish, just as jealous as the Senator on his private jet coming back from a formal dinner with the President, it's just that the senator has a few more materialistic masks to hide behind. Until we can level with ourselves on this issue of commonality with the socially despised, it seems our driving motivation for a solution to homelessness is derived more from obligation than undefiled compassion. I'm still leveling with myself, I'm no different from the rest.
--
David Lindeman
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Maternity leave
Did you know that America and Australia are the only industrialized countries that do not provide paid leave for new mother nationally?
Even Iraq gives ten weeks maternity leave with 100% pay, interestingly Canada gives one year maternity leave with 55% pay.
Generally the US gives twelve weeks unpaid- it various by states and company you worked for.
Even Iraq gives ten weeks maternity leave with 100% pay, interestingly Canada gives one year maternity leave with 55% pay.
Generally the US gives twelve weeks unpaid- it various by states and company you worked for.
FCAT scores have educators reading between lines
The most amazing thing about this article is that “In Alachua County's public schools, only 7 percent of black 10th-graders met the state's reading standards as measured by the FCAT. I knew the scores for black student were low but I was shocked to see it the score at 7 percent.
The schools in American place too much emphasis on Standardized tests. They should take into consideration that all students do not develop at same rate; their environment can really affect the way students learn. For example, some students are introduced to school type material at much later age because some parents can not afford certain materials for their children.
The schools in American place too much emphasis on Standardized tests. They should take into consideration that all students do not develop at same rate; their environment can really affect the way students learn. For example, some students are introduced to school type material at much later age because some parents can not afford certain materials for their children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
