Prompt : Guilty as Charged , But ? http://http://www.litmuse.net/prompt_guilty
Euthanasia is a very crude subject to inquire. In Roswell Gilbert ' s case , the judicial process was incoherent in its disposition about Gilbert ' s case. I , personally , think that if a person is suffering in immense physical pain that is incurable and the person is cognizant of his / her condition and possible out come due to their illness , should have a voice in the future affairs of their life. In Gilbert ' s case , it seem that he was in emotional distress over his wife ' s deteriorating condition. It also was a statement about her " embarrassment " , which I deem as superficial on the grounds of death. What was Gilbert ' s wife mental condition , was she capable of making such an important decision ? No one deserves to suffer and also no one deserves to die .
The decision of life or death for a loved one should be an unanimous decision among the entire family and friends. Gilbert ' s wife suffered from Alzheimer's , more of a mental disease . I , truly , do not see where Gilbert ' s wife was in so much pain . My grandfather suffers from Alzheimer's and the only pain I have witness is when he remembers he has very bad arthritis. I feel as if Gilbert was tired of seeing his wife in such a condition . It seems that he was in more pain than his wife . What constitutes pain and suffering and how much is enough ? Roswell Gilbert might have chose the right decision to end the pain his wife and he experienced .
The legal judicial system should analyze euthanasia cases very carefully . The medical field should have a lot of influence on this subject . Doctors and nurses who administer these patients should scrutinize every avenue of the case . The decision to live or die is a very hard pill to swallow . How can one ' s suffering and pain be communicable to the point of where another makes a life or death decision of the victim ? Love is strong but love endures pain and suffering . Personally , I could not be the one to make such a decision over another ' s life . Society should pause and reflect on the situation before passing judgement . If Roswell Gilbert is happy along with family and friends then his decision was justified . The American society is quick to pre - judge an individual without properly scrutinizing the affair , which also sometimes mimic our judicial system .
Monday, July 16, 2007
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Default Vision
Prompt: Why Are We at Warhttp://http://litmuse.net/prompt_mailer
It seems President Bush and his counsel has the American public with the rest of the world, in limbo about the true motives and future direction of the war. Many human lives have been lost, not including innocent natives of the land ; children, women , people who even oppose the Islamic extremists get caught in the cross fire. No one wins. The only benefactors are the " big Wig " ceo's and investors of corporations that establish the means of a " war " ; from corporations that manufacture military equipment and ballistics to corporations that re-construct places destroyed by warfare. Oil corporations are not clear out of the picture, they also benefit from all the blood shed by increased taxation. President Bush owes the American people along with the whole world an explanation for his actions concerning the war , including detailed information about 9/11.
Mailer pointed out on pg. 36 and 37., about the " deeper reasons " Bush and his administration had concerning the war. The Bush administration can not give the American people a straight forward answer as to why we are at war. Inconsistency- that sums up the President's explanations of the war to the American public. Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq , no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Searching for Osama and Al' Qeda , six months later Osama and Al' Qeda are " no concern " to President Bush , but Saddam is . There seems to be no logical , consistent reason for this war, at least none at the present time. Mailer stated that he wanted to " understand what the President and his inner cohort see as the logic of their present venture " , which only enunciates the notion that we are fighting a " no win battle " . The media along with the President and his administration's explanations keep the American people with only a partial vision of whats really happening.
At first , our motives was to apprehend the terrorists responsible for 9 / 11 attacks , then it shifted to weapons of mass destruction and now establishing a peaceful democracy. The American society , itself , is not a peaceful and " totally " democratic. If America was totally democratic Bush would not be President , at least not serving two terms. It seems President Bush has hidden agendas that he wants to conceal form the American public. President Bush's past is not too credible also ; drunk driving , drugs , " shaky " oil ventures with the bin Ladens and the notorious election of 2004 . Why are we at war ? Is an excellent question to ask President Bush , but will the answer be likewise ?
It seems President Bush and his counsel has the American public with the rest of the world, in limbo about the true motives and future direction of the war. Many human lives have been lost, not including innocent natives of the land ; children, women , people who even oppose the Islamic extremists get caught in the cross fire. No one wins. The only benefactors are the " big Wig " ceo's and investors of corporations that establish the means of a " war " ; from corporations that manufacture military equipment and ballistics to corporations that re-construct places destroyed by warfare. Oil corporations are not clear out of the picture, they also benefit from all the blood shed by increased taxation. President Bush owes the American people along with the whole world an explanation for his actions concerning the war , including detailed information about 9/11.
Mailer pointed out on pg. 36 and 37., about the " deeper reasons " Bush and his administration had concerning the war. The Bush administration can not give the American people a straight forward answer as to why we are at war. Inconsistency- that sums up the President's explanations of the war to the American public. Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq , no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Searching for Osama and Al' Qeda , six months later Osama and Al' Qeda are " no concern " to President Bush , but Saddam is . There seems to be no logical , consistent reason for this war, at least none at the present time. Mailer stated that he wanted to " understand what the President and his inner cohort see as the logic of their present venture " , which only enunciates the notion that we are fighting a " no win battle " . The media along with the President and his administration's explanations keep the American people with only a partial vision of whats really happening.
At first , our motives was to apprehend the terrorists responsible for 9 / 11 attacks , then it shifted to weapons of mass destruction and now establishing a peaceful democracy. The American society , itself , is not a peaceful and " totally " democratic. If America was totally democratic Bush would not be President , at least not serving two terms. It seems President Bush has hidden agendas that he wants to conceal form the American public. President Bush's past is not too credible also ; drunk driving , drugs , " shaky " oil ventures with the bin Ladens and the notorious election of 2004 . Why are we at war ? Is an excellent question to ask President Bush , but will the answer be likewise ?
Monday, July 9, 2007
Greetings- I am, Charles Henderson, a freshman majoring in Business Administration. I am a native of Macon, who plans to operate my own electrical services company. I am currently employed at Macon Power. An entrepreneur by heart, so its by fate that i'll establish my own business.
Earlier years of my life were close to normal. I was blessed to have both of my lovely parents to be present and functional in the home. I witness the dedication and hard work my parents exerted to rise from lower middle class to a comfortable upper class. That is were I developed my hard work ethic. My father was an electrician, I guess that is why I choose that profession, and my mother was an educator. My parents are now both retired. I have an older brother, who lives in Atlanta and works for a telecommunications corp., as an marketing representative. We are very close but dont communicate as much. He is more an extrovert, while I am more of an introvert, so that is why our communication is minimum.
My hobbies are raising Pitt Bulls , restoring classic model chevy cars, remodeling historical houses and assisting in the advancement of at-risk kids. It is amazing , the sensation I recieve when I witness something in a state of deprivation manifest into something great and productive. Pit Bulls , like low-income disdvantage kids are stigmatized; labeled worthless, no use in society. Its a radiance of love to be a part of the uplifting evolution of a kids life for the better. When a family adopts a puppy, who later generates a source of joy and happines for the family to experience.
The esscence of all my beliefs stem from a concrete relationship with GOD. Installed in me as a child by my parents, spirituality has been an anchor in my life ever since. My desire to help the less fortunate is deep within. I detest to see another human being be oppressed physically, spiritually, economically or culturally. Oppression in any form to any human being by my belief and moral system is wrong. I truly believe, we, humans were created to be an inter-dependent species. The human races' fate depends on how we treat one another. Therfore, I never hesitate to aid someone in need, making my personal commitment, daily, to the advancement of the human race.
Earlier years of my life were close to normal. I was blessed to have both of my lovely parents to be present and functional in the home. I witness the dedication and hard work my parents exerted to rise from lower middle class to a comfortable upper class. That is were I developed my hard work ethic. My father was an electrician, I guess that is why I choose that profession, and my mother was an educator. My parents are now both retired. I have an older brother, who lives in Atlanta and works for a telecommunications corp., as an marketing representative. We are very close but dont communicate as much. He is more an extrovert, while I am more of an introvert, so that is why our communication is minimum.
My hobbies are raising Pitt Bulls , restoring classic model chevy cars, remodeling historical houses and assisting in the advancement of at-risk kids. It is amazing , the sensation I recieve when I witness something in a state of deprivation manifest into something great and productive. Pit Bulls , like low-income disdvantage kids are stigmatized; labeled worthless, no use in society. Its a radiance of love to be a part of the uplifting evolution of a kids life for the better. When a family adopts a puppy, who later generates a source of joy and happines for the family to experience.
The esscence of all my beliefs stem from a concrete relationship with GOD. Installed in me as a child by my parents, spirituality has been an anchor in my life ever since. My desire to help the less fortunate is deep within. I detest to see another human being be oppressed physically, spiritually, economically or culturally. Oppression in any form to any human being by my belief and moral system is wrong. I truly believe, we, humans were created to be an inter-dependent species. The human races' fate depends on how we treat one another. Therfore, I never hesitate to aid someone in need, making my personal commitment, daily, to the advancement of the human race.
Monday, July 2, 2007
It Rolls Down Hill
- Prompt: The Alligator River Story
Respect is an attribute we earn as human beings. Like all other things you earn value, they come with making the right decisions. In " The Alligator River Story", two lovers were separated by a river filled with alligators. Abigail, one of the lovers, decides to ask the river boat captain, Sinbad, to assist her by giving her a boat ride to the other side. Sinbad agreed only if she have sexual intercourse, Abigail refused and turned to a friend named Ivan for help. Ivan, honestly, told her he wanted no parts of her problem. Abigail, in desperation, agreed with Sinbad's offer. When Abigail reached her lover, Gregory, she told him of the ordeal and as all males was distressed and " cast her to the side". Gregory was upset that his lover would do such a thing. Now, Abigail was heartsick and hurt to the point she told her friend, Slug, about the ordeal. Slug went to Gregory and "beat him brutally". Later Abigail was rejoicing over the fact that Gregory was attacked violently by Slug.
Respect, as I stated earlier, is earned by our actions. According to the story, the person I deemed with the most respect for is Gregory(1). Gregory displayed sternness for his feelings toward his lover. Anyone would be upset that their lover committed a sexual act outside their relationship, even if it was to get nearer her lover. Gregory showed feelings of resent, but who is to say how long he would have felt that way. The two had to have some sort of communication between each other across the river, later Gregory probably would have apologized for his actions. Abigail, I rate her next to the last(4). Her actions were selfish in all her dealings. Abigail was selfish in her agreement with Sinbad. She was so determined to get to the other side of the river, she lost the true meaning of the two lovers, unification through separation. She solely took it upon herself to execute the integration of the two lovers. Abigail also acted selfishly when she told Slug about the ordeal, allowing Slug to harm Gregory. Slug was just feeling "compassionate" for Abigail in his actions toward Gregory, which were wrong. Slug's actions were out of ignorance, he receives little respect(3) for his actions. It was not his place to torment Gregory, even though he felt sorry for Abigail. Another friend of Abigail was Ivan(2), who was honest and truthful about the ordeal, telling Abigail he wanted no parts of the situation. Ivan was truthful, he stated to Abigail his honest opinion. Ivan knew he could not help the situation, so he left Abigail to handle the situation herself. The character with the least respect , Sinbad(5), because he played upon the heart of a distressed woman in need to see her lover. Sinbad could have dwindled the whole ordeal by being a gentleman and assisting Abigail in her desperate voyage.
Human Rights, Majority Wrongs
In society today, majority rules distorting the moral belief system set in America by our fore-fathers. The system was established upon the Holy Bible; thy shall not kill,steal, honour thy parents, etc. These views are but a dismal remembrance of what America use to be. America use to be a nation of sternness and integrity, but now anything goes with the "majority rule". America has to return to its grass roots, and create an ethical standard to administer its laws under. Gay marriage or the unification of homosexual couples is absurd! What is the purpose, who benefits from it and how does promote a healthy society.
I, personally, have no malice feelings toward homosexuals, but I don't agree with their lifestyles. Many have compared the Civil Rights Movement with the Gay Pride Movement which is idiotic. During the Civil Rights Movement, many were killed and persecuted because of the color of their skin. Black Americans during those times were treated as "dogs", sub-human. Gays aren't being treated less than humans, just a few disgusting notions toward their putrid lifestyle. Gays are discriminated against because of their sexual preference, which is unnatural and out of the scheme of life. It is a mockery to the Black American people for the Gay Movement to be compared to the Civil Rights Movement. A persons race is not a preference, that is a God giving gift. Gays are gay by discretion, they choose to be by choice. If I choose to sleep with my cousin,or further more my dog; that is my choice. But that does not exempt me from public scrutiny and discriminated because of my actions. As humans, we all have responsibility to some degree; mainly our actions. All actions have an equal reaction. Negativity produces negativity, that is the way the Law of the Universe functions. Everything has to be balanced and in accord with one another for a harmonious life to function. I respect all humans, but that doesn't mean I agree with all humans and their decisions. Homosexuality, to me, doesn't benefit the individuals engaged or society as a whole.
Personally, I could not have a homosexual person teach my children. I would not feel comfortable with a person who possesses limited moral perimeters around my child. If you choose to go out of your natural God-giving disposition and produce a sexual relationship with the same sex, its unimaginable what they could do to a child. Many people argue that this is a free country and its perfectly fine for the same sex to have a sexual relationship. Where is the line drawn? Can I be accepted in society if I choose to sleep with my dog? Why not, homosexuals are free to their sexual preference. Personally I believe, that sex is one of the greatest gifts God gave to man. God's first commandment was to " be fruitful and replenish the Earth. How can two men replenish the Earth? They can not! Homosexuality, to me, is a selfish act by someone lost void of their true existence as a vicegerent of the planet Earth. In order for a scheme or system to function it has to posses perimeters and guidelines governing to promote in deficient within its contrivance. Homosexuality promotes nothing but lawlessness and chaos, only fulfilling the tarnished sexual appetite of those engaged. As stated earlier, I respect all human beings, but I will not agree with their actions. I don't discriminate, more less discern, towards anyone, but you got to understand a person in order to assimilate with them accordingly. No homosexual could teach or supervise my children because I truly don't understand them or their views on life, and that goes for anyone without distinct laws or perimeters to govern their livelihood.
Everyones Right, Everyones Wrong
prompt: http://http://www.litmuse.net/prompt_right_wrong
There was once a man who sold drugs to support his family. His wife was disable due to an automobile accident. The family recieved only six hundred dollars a month for living expenses, along with the twelve hundred the man recieved as a plumber wasn't enough to support the family of five. The family expeditiously fell into poverty, when the man's employer decreased his pay because of slow business. The responsibility of caring for three kids and two adults including himself, the man resorted to selling drugs until he was financially stable. Menace drug dealer or desperate father in a financial crisis? Does his "moral" motive justify his means? Is he "right" or "wrong" about how he supports his family? What constitutes something to be "right" or "wrong"? These answers could never be based on universal truths. We as one could never come to an agreement of what is "right" or "wrong".
Decision making is a vital part of an individual's life. The decisions we make are the forces that determine the directions of one's fate or destiny. I firmly believe that every action has an equal reaction. My "moral' belief system is more "absolutism" than "relativism", but a combination of the two. I believe a well balance of the two, "relativism" and "absolutism," fashions a reasonable moral belief system. Excessive "relativism" creates tyranny, endorses slavery, genocide and other inhumane decisions that degrade humanity as a whole. Society itself can not determine what is "right" or "wrong". Inherently, to some instinct, we humans can interpret what is "right" or "wrong". We, as humans, all get some internal feeling towards persecution of another human, or animal of any sort for the matter. The internal feeling is upsetting, when we witness someone being mistreated in any inhumane form. The "norms" of society teaches us to supress those internal feelings that acknowledge to us something is "wrong". As humans, we are highly sophisticated creatures with numerous abilities and capacities beyond our full comprehension. A physical body that heals itself, alarms itself and sustains itself; I think, could easily acquaint us in a direction to a form of life thats more peaceful and harmonious. True human "morals" are accompanied by the laws of the universe. Nature abides by a universal law or code of existence. Flowers don't just grow, an intelligence of some sort governed by a law or code enables the flower to be a flower. This is evident in all living things that function accordingly and harmoniously to nature.
Moral absolutism has to be also administered accordingly. In excess, "absolutism" would distort certain laws; dealth penalty, abortion, gun control, sex education, etc. Sensitive issuses of society that are essential in making the world function. "Absolutism" is based on the uplifting of humanity and the nature of human evolution. The Universe and Earth are harmonious beings, working together, inter-dependent of one another. Humans are by far the most intelligent creatures on this planet, so there has to be some universal, intuitive, biological element that dicerns "right" from "wrong" in order for life to function harmoniously. I agree with the absolutist that all humans have some sort of inherent knowledge of "right" and "wrong", and if that element isn't present does it make you any less of a human, beastly in nature.
Regressing to the opening paragraph, was the father justified for his actions of supporting his family with drug sale profits? Conscious of any humans in danger or harm due to the father's dealings would , I think, be wrong. It may be considered a means of survival, but its not in harmony with nature and drug dealing is accompanied with many detrimental agencies that aren't beneficial to society. Basic moral rules I abide by : if it doesn't help, it hurts!
There was once a man who sold drugs to support his family. His wife was disable due to an automobile accident. The family recieved only six hundred dollars a month for living expenses, along with the twelve hundred the man recieved as a plumber wasn't enough to support the family of five. The family expeditiously fell into poverty, when the man's employer decreased his pay because of slow business. The responsibility of caring for three kids and two adults including himself, the man resorted to selling drugs until he was financially stable. Menace drug dealer or desperate father in a financial crisis? Does his "moral" motive justify his means? Is he "right" or "wrong" about how he supports his family? What constitutes something to be "right" or "wrong"? These answers could never be based on universal truths. We as one could never come to an agreement of what is "right" or "wrong".
Decision making is a vital part of an individual's life. The decisions we make are the forces that determine the directions of one's fate or destiny. I firmly believe that every action has an equal reaction. My "moral' belief system is more "absolutism" than "relativism", but a combination of the two. I believe a well balance of the two, "relativism" and "absolutism," fashions a reasonable moral belief system. Excessive "relativism" creates tyranny, endorses slavery, genocide and other inhumane decisions that degrade humanity as a whole. Society itself can not determine what is "right" or "wrong". Inherently, to some instinct, we humans can interpret what is "right" or "wrong". We, as humans, all get some internal feeling towards persecution of another human, or animal of any sort for the matter. The internal feeling is upsetting, when we witness someone being mistreated in any inhumane form. The "norms" of society teaches us to supress those internal feelings that acknowledge to us something is "wrong". As humans, we are highly sophisticated creatures with numerous abilities and capacities beyond our full comprehension. A physical body that heals itself, alarms itself and sustains itself; I think, could easily acquaint us in a direction to a form of life thats more peaceful and harmonious. True human "morals" are accompanied by the laws of the universe. Nature abides by a universal law or code of existence. Flowers don't just grow, an intelligence of some sort governed by a law or code enables the flower to be a flower. This is evident in all living things that function accordingly and harmoniously to nature.
Moral absolutism has to be also administered accordingly. In excess, "absolutism" would distort certain laws; dealth penalty, abortion, gun control, sex education, etc. Sensitive issuses of society that are essential in making the world function. "Absolutism" is based on the uplifting of humanity and the nature of human evolution. The Universe and Earth are harmonious beings, working together, inter-dependent of one another. Humans are by far the most intelligent creatures on this planet, so there has to be some universal, intuitive, biological element that dicerns "right" from "wrong" in order for life to function harmoniously. I agree with the absolutist that all humans have some sort of inherent knowledge of "right" and "wrong", and if that element isn't present does it make you any less of a human, beastly in nature.
Regressing to the opening paragraph, was the father justified for his actions of supporting his family with drug sale profits? Conscious of any humans in danger or harm due to the father's dealings would , I think, be wrong. It may be considered a means of survival, but its not in harmony with nature and drug dealing is accompanied with many detrimental agencies that aren't beneficial to society. Basic moral rules I abide by : if it doesn't help, it hurts!
Monday, June 18, 2007
Perception: What You See, Is What You Get
Perception is synoymous with discernment, meaning to discover, apprehend, distiguish, etc. Perception is nothing concrete and true in itself. The sophists philsophical ideas of Gorgias express that "nothing" exists. But what is "nothing"? Is the "nothing" something only when it is percieved in a certain way? Socrates believed that by discovering "universal definitions of the key concepts" that are essential for life to funnction, life arises from destroying the illusions of a "perfect world".Illusions destort perception, truth unifies and communicates knowledge producing virture. My beliefs on perception agree more with Socrates, focusing on the truths discovered by critical reasoning. Moral character to me is shaped by ones perception. The way an individual percieves life fashions their moral character.
Attitude is "everything", I was always told as a young child, not knowing how vital this information was. Many homeless and psychotic people percieve the world and society from a very distorted view, resulting in a disfunctional life. Society plays a major role in distorting the perception of the masses. Education, entertainment, news media, politics, and culture are all tools that assist in the manufacturing of the illusion society created. Truth is the essential element that bonds Me in all aspsects of life. How I percieve the world is through anyalyzing everything critically and basing it upon the truth. The truth is universal, breaking all barriers allowing knowledge to be communicatable. "The truth shall set you free", an age old Holy Bible verse which undermines my whole belief system. The lack of truth distorts how an individual percieves, producing ignorance. Ignorance breeds confusion manifesting into choas. Cultural and political conceptual ideas that produce prejudice and bias perceptions within society.
When the world is percieved through truth, knowledge is spread promoting a positive life. One of life's most detrimental ailments is the lack of communication among members of society. Distorted perception among members of society create division which produces prejudice and racism, America's two villainous pretators. How we percieve the world is very powerful. Many tyrant societies purposly distort the perception of the masses to control them. Many say, here in America, our perception on norms and values are unconsiously being manipulated to constain the masses. Socrates had an "unwavering commitment to truth", which acquired him the status of " father of western philosophy". Socrates believed, truthful perception developed moral character, which produced a succesful, peaceful atmosphere cultivated for a society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)