My Position: Public War

Freedom of the press, one of this nations first 10 amendments to the American Bill of Rights. This spans all things, however there are times that some people believe that the media should indeed be censored or prohibited in some areas of life. One of the largest arguments for censorship is the brutality and reality of war. The military successfully censored the media out of wars before Vietnam. The United states military even created a department to film and take pictures that showed victories and, more importantly, no dead bodies, unless they were the enemies. The result were propaganda-esque, and the civilians that were far removed from the war had an over-whelming support for the war. World Wars 1 and 2, and the police action in Korea all saw this method of media censorship, and the result was improved morale at home, as well as on the fronts. Or at least that is the arguement. The opposing view point is that the media has always been involved and in cases where it wasn't the people of America deserve to know.
Here is my position. I think that in the case of the military that we really don't need to see our own boys getting shot at and dieing. That is how wars are lost, people at home losing faith in the soldiers and in turn the soldiers getting down on themselves. Although we are a society of fear, this is something that we simply don't need to see. Clips would be provided, and the stories would still be heard. The numbers won't be messed with so the truth is all there the difference is that we, as American citizens, won't see our friends and family dieing on screen; and what is the harm in that. This is My Position.

My Position: Video Games

There are many things that have a larger effect on children, and the theory is that the more time a child spends doing something the larger the effect if has on the child his or herself. The most sizable and still growing examples of this is video games, especially as they become more participatory, violent, and graphic images. Since the start of video games, with pong, there have been many advancements to gaming. Now there is not one but dozens of options on game systems, and thousands of games to choose from. The newest of these video games sport a new type of violence, on that is realistic, as well as graphic. There are three things that parents are concerned about. The first is that their children are learning to act in aggressive manners, this is followed by the desensitization factor, and the final concern is that the children are becoming fearful of society.
As to the first concern, the fact that children demonstrate an aggressive demeanor does is not a reflection on video games, but rather on the society in which they live. The video games are rated, and similarly to movies, parents allow their children to play them, disregarding the label. The united states is a society of fear (refer to My Position: Societies Pacemaker) and as such the children reflect the aggression that makes them feel like they are following the parameters of what they are supposed to be in society. When a child is of steady mind, and is in the proper environment, than the games should not matter. Simply because they are violent doesn't mean that they corrupt; as so many lobbyists would have you believe. An example people like to use as an effect of video games on aggression is the attack on Columbine High School. The two shooters who committed this crime did in fact play the first person shooter, DOOM. While this is a poignant observation, I would like to counter that both of these children were mentally unstable, which their parents knew. And owned weapons, which their parents bought them. And both had histories with violent acts. The fact that they played DOOM does not mean that they learned violence from the games. I would rather suggest that DOOM may have been a coping mechanism. Regardless, it is important to remember the role that parents have on the minds and morals of their children. Self-control, patience, and talking through problems are all things that children learn from parents, fail to teach them, and forfeit your role as other aspects of their life teach them in your stead.
Desensitization happens to all people as age occurs, video games are just helping to build those walls sooner, building a buffer against the real pain that will, one day, attempt to inflict on the child. The amount of desensitization is negligible. While video games are getting to be more realistic, they are not quite to the point where they are so completely realistic that even children cannot tell the difference. And therefore this should not be a problem at all.
As I have already said in this blog posting once already, it is not video games that are responsible for the fear installed in our children. Rather it is the people, and places, around them. In a society where horrors, and thrillers, where Halloween is one of the largest (most participatory per capita,) celebrations all year it is hard to understand how they shouldn't be afraid. The media, government, and society all tell us to be fearful, that is a fact of life and that is what is creating fear in you and your children. The propaganda that suggests that it is video games are pure nonsense.
This has been my position on Video Games. Your Opinions do count, so answer the pole at the bottom of the page.

My Position: Gay Marriage

One of the largest politically and socially controversial issues that has ceased the nation over the last decade or so, is gay marriage. This is when people of the same sex, either two men or two women, get married. Some consider this to be an abomination to the religious institute of marriage. While others claim it as just "unnatural." While these arguments have some legitimization's they are overall unsubstantiated. The other side of the argument is that marriage is also a civil institution and as such the couples that have decided to be with a partner of the same gender wish to share in the benefits and commitment of marriage. And yet others who are considered to be more extreme, would say that the religious institution of marriage is also one that should be accessable to homosexuals. There have been many laws that have been passed both for and agianst Homosexuals and their rights to marriage.
My Position is rather direct and may chafe at some peoples perception of me. I beleive that not only is Same-sex marriage a legitimate form of marriage, I also beleive that in many cases that their marriages are more stable than the many heterosexual marriages that exist, and end up in divorce. While I am not personally sexually inclined toward other men, i think that if others are than that is there perogative and for them to deal with as they will. It is not our place to judge them. In fact the gay people that I know are some of the best people that I know. And they deserve to have the rights of other people in other legitimate relationships.
It doesnt matter if they are gay, if they want to get married they should be allowed. This is one of the key pillars of being an american, the right to do things with freedom, and composure. Instead the nation is divided up on this issue, this issue is simple. It is simple, it is not our place to judge. Rather it is ours to love then. This perspective is from a religious standpoint. If you are not religous then you should respect their "freedom" as Americans. This is my position on gay marriage.

My Position: Freedom Used Liberaly

In 2009, John McCain, the 2009 presidential campain republican forerunner, introduced a bill into senate that was entitled, the Internet Freedom Act. This bill was do disolve the internets neutrality. This means little to most people, however should it be passed it would effect most of the united states population.
This republican senator from arizona suggested a bill that would allow companies like comcast charge for different amounts of money for different internet sites, should you use their internet services. It would allow the various internet providers to do to the internet what direct TV, Cable, and Comcast has done to TV. The best example is with Comcast; you pay for a package that includes channels x,y, and z. However should you want to watch channel a, b, and c, you must pay for an upgrade in packages, or pay individually to use those channels. This concept has been suggested to be transposed onto the internet. Saying that you can pick a number of internet "channels," and you can visit those for free, however should you want to use another, you have to pay extra.
Whats my position? I'm glad you asked. This proposal should never have even been printed out for the senate. This is the land of the free and the internet has kept this a reality, allowing people to have free reign of where they go, what they see, who they talk to, and so on and so forth. By putting limitations onto the internet, like the ones suggested by senator McCain, you do not "free,' the internet. Rather the opposite, these are limits, not freedoms that would be added to the internet. These are freedoms for organizations that want more money in this stuggling economy, and at the cost of the average American. The thought that a presidential campaign forerunner should champion a bill like this suggest that he has accepted money, or he is totally ignorant. The second is more likely as he chose govenor Palin as his running mate int the 2009 election race. To propose a bill like this is to put a limit on the freedom that America claims to uphold.

My Position: Eastern's Food

Eastern University currently employs another company to take care of its food services, this is not anything that is not expected on today's college campuses. Many colleges and universities use other corporations to take care of these services, as well as other services on their campus. Eastern University uses a particular organization called Sedexo, which provides all of the personnel and food stuffs in order to provide this particular University with a steady supply of food to the students.
Now this is my position. There is no problem with sedexo or the food that they serve, it is the redundancies and the mundaness of the food that they serve. For the first couple of weeks Sedexo provides top quality meals three times a day, through the cafeteria; and all throughout the day through the Jamin Java, the campus cafe; of through The Breezeway, the grill. After the extended eating of this food it all seems to taste the same. And what are the altrenatives. You can order out, or eat at the Jamin Java, or the Breezeway. However good these options are, they all cost money. After paying 36,000 dollars for schooling, housing, and a meal plan. There are times that we have to eat out, either through necessity, or to keep your sanity. It is particularly difficult when you play sports. Sometimes practices go longer tahn the hours at the cafeteria and there is no way to make up for loosing a meal, both financially and physically. Sedexo should etiher provide more money on the atheletes cards, or provide a to-go meal after hours for them. This is my postion on collegee food, and Sedexo.

My Position: Legalization of Marijuana

There are many drugs that are considered recreational drugs, these include, but are not limited to, solvents, psychedelic mushrooms, opium, LSD, Barbituates/ Benzodiazepines, amphetamines, ecstasy, cocaine, heroin, and Cannabis (Marijuana). While all of these are considered recreational drugs, Marijuana is by far the most popular and most used of these drugs. Millions of people smoke marijuana, when this is considered from a legal standpoint there are millions of people who break the law on a regular basis. This is also a relatively harmless drug, when compared to some of the drugs that are legal in the United states like alcohol, or nicotine. They are also extremely less dangerous than the other drugs on that list. The fact remains that while Marijuana is an illegal substance drug related crimes will continue to grow as the next gereations emerge and grow.
Here is my position; it should be legalized. There is no real question about it. It is less dangerous than cigarettes, or alcohol. And it is a natural, unprocessed product. These are but some of the reasons that logic puts forth, however this is not enough to get anything done on a political plain, so lets look at the pros and cons of legalizing marijuana. As a drug its effects are less worse than drunkedness, and there is no scientific proof of the substance itself being addicted. From a political perspective it would allow for a larger, more profitable revenue stream enter the tax basins, decreasing national debt. It would also lower drug related crimes, and violence. By allowing these drugs to be moderated and distributed by people who know how to use it properly, as well as use it in moderation, there will be less abuse of the drug. It will also put much of the drug dealers out of business. There are many people who agree with both sides of this debate, for more information watch the video, or follow the link. This is My Position on the legalization of Marijuana.
<"">

My Position: Societies Pacemaker

A Pacemaker is a technological device that was invented in the 1800's but was redesigned and developed as technology permitted. The principle is simple, your heart can no longer keep a regular heart beat so a surgeon implants an artificial device that uses electrodes and a motor to creat an electrical beat that keeps the heart going on regular intervals. It started out similar to a hand spun pocket watch, the beat would be maintained by a spring bound mechanical device. This is not the pacemaker that so many have made a regular part of their lives, today, a pacemaker is a small, battery powered device that keeps the heart beat regular and going for up to 5 or 6 years. Keeping the elderly alive much longer than was thought possible 100 years ago. However, again, this is not the pacemaker of society; in this case the pacemaker is metaphorical, in reality this "pacemaker," is fear. The fear that people, society and the media feed into, is what keeps people compliant. What makes things worse is that people seem to enjoy fear, and it has become a multi-billion dollar business.
The Dalai Lama said it best when he said "Every day the media reports incidents of terrorism, crime, and aggression. I have never been to a country where tragic stories of death and bloodshed did not fill the newspapers and airwaves... but the overwhelming majority of the human race does not behave destructively; very few of the five billion people on this planet actually commit acts of violence. Most of us prefer to be as peaceful as possible." The simple fact is that fear is what keeps the pace of the world, especially America. You go to a paper it is covered with criminal acts, deaths, and stories that are demoralizing by nature, and yet this is what the world demands. The media is simply a mirror for those that watch, listen, or read them; and as such the american populace demands more. If the media does have something good in it is usually a small feature, barried beneath the other reports or other articles. And while many claim that they are not effected by the media, however all people are effected whether they want to be or not, and whether they know it or not. People live in fear of Terrorists, murderers, rapist, ex-convicts, and many other types of violent crimes and this is one of the largest forces behind some interesting trends in american society.
Did you know that America has the largest number of guns to people in the nation, this excludes military and police forces, and only includes registered guns. This statistic is staggering as it is not only hunting rifles that are out there with the average American many of these guns are handguns, shotguns, rifles and even assault rifles, all of which come in forms of manual, semi, and fully automatic. Why are these needed, because people are afraidd, they want to be able to protect themselves and yet what good has it done, violent crimes have only increased over time. Thriller, Slashers, and horror movies have become one of the most predominant movie genres in the United States, people pay to see someone raped, stabbed to death or even ripped to peices by garden and work implements. People, mostly the late teen years are some of the highest participents with this trend.
Fear is but one way to control freedom, when people are affraid they willingly give up rights for the illusion of security. And in this way it controls our society, our actions, and who we are. Government actions like mashall law and the patriot act, the war on terror, raised security at entry routes into the nation, are all ways that the government provides this illusion in exchange for votes, taxes, and legal and political compliance. By buying into the fear that is so much imbeded into the heart of our culture you surrender to the control of others. Do not be decieved by the subtlety, you are being manipulated, used, controled.Yes, Fear is the pacemaker of our beloved nation; however don't let it control the beat of your freedom, actions, or individuality. This is My Position on America's Pacemaker