http://www.ajc.com/news/news/officer-fatal-shooting-12-year-old-described-distr/njLCN/
The article "Officer Who Shot 12-Year-Old Described As 'Distracted,' Immature." discusses the police officer who shot Tamir Rice in Cleveland. The police officer was described as someone who was immature and twisted the rules- two years before the incident. The child was shot approximately two seconds after the officers arrived on the scene, according to police video footage. He had not pulled to gun but had moved toward his waistband where the gun was kept. The 911 call reporting the boy said the gun was "probably fake".
I think this policeman deserves to go to jail for the inappropriate use of deadly force. It's obvious that he didn't follow procedure. Two seconds is not long enough to ask someone to put their hands up and wait for them to respond. Additionally, the 911 call pointed out the weapon could have been fake, so he should have stayed behind his door and erred on the side of caution. I also think this is clearly affected by race and even possibly gender. Somehow I feel that if my little (white) sister, who is also twelve, had been playing with exact same gun in the exact same place, she would not have been killed by a policeman. Even with argument of self-defense, policemen have shown better judgement and patience when a full-grown man was pointing a gun at them, so a twelve-year-old with a "probably fake" gun in his waistband should have gotten more than two seconds.
Wednesday, December 3, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Modern Montana
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-strikes-down-montanas-gay-marriage-ban-n252016
Montana's same-sex marriage ban has been struck down in a federal court, as the judge ruled that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. This means that the state must also recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. The state may appeal the ruling, as another state, South Carolina, is planning to do. Recently bans on same-sex marriage were upheld in four states, which may mean that the matter may go to the Supreme Court (see more here http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/us/appeals-court-upholds-same-sex-marriage-ban.html).
I agree that the Equal Protection Clause should apply to same-sex marriage. There should be equal opportunity for a man to marry another man, just like an African-American can marry a white person or a an American can marry someone who isn't American. South Dakota still has a ban on same-sex marriage but having a state so close to us overturn their ban may mean South Dakota could as well.
Montana's same-sex marriage ban has been struck down in a federal court, as the judge ruled that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. This means that the state must also recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. The state may appeal the ruling, as another state, South Carolina, is planning to do. Recently bans on same-sex marriage were upheld in four states, which may mean that the matter may go to the Supreme Court (see more here http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/us/appeals-court-upholds-same-sex-marriage-ban.html).
I agree that the Equal Protection Clause should apply to same-sex marriage. There should be equal opportunity for a man to marry another man, just like an African-American can marry a white person or a an American can marry someone who isn't American. South Dakota still has a ban on same-sex marriage but having a state so close to us overturn their ban may mean South Dakota could as well.
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
Alabama Tries to Sneak by Supreme Court
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/jurisprudence/2014/11/alabama_foreign_law_amendment_challenges_supreme_court_on_gay_rights_death.html
Alabama has just amended its state constitution to state that their courts will not consult international laws when making decisions. This amendment was a way for the state to attempt to ban Sharia law- the religious laws which Muslims must follow- (see more on that here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/sharia-law-usa-states-ban_n_3660813.html), since it is not an American-made law. As an example of Sharia law, interest is prohibited, so a loan between two Muslims possibly may not have interest added. Another example is Muslim parents having their older children participate in Ramadan, the monthly fast. Right now, judges respect these choices as long as they do not violate the Constitution (so all rights are still protected). Under the amendment, a Muslim not putting interest on a loan to another Muslim may be considered illegal due to discrimination, and the Ramadan case might be ruled abuse of children. The amendment avoided mentioning the Sharia law outright because several states laws which tried to ban it have been struck down by the Supreme Court for targeting Muslims. This amendment is also a way for Alabama to ignore other Supreme Court decisions. For example, in 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that executing minors was unconstitutional. The judge mentioned in his ruling that America was the only country that officially approved the execution of minors. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia attacked the decision, as did several Republican Senators. The Alabama amendment would make this decision void, since the judge consulted international law when making their judgement. This is also connected to a series of Supreme Court decisions concerning gay rights. In 1986, a judge ruled that states should be allowed to ban same-sex intercourse since it was common in the history of Western civilization. This would also be void under the Alabama law (something they might not have considered). However, a judge ruled in 2003 that states could not ban same-sex intercourse and stated that neither America nor any other country had a consistent history of laws banning it. The judge also pointed out that most countries considered to be 'Western civilization' are now supporting the gay rights movement.
This article makes me glad that I don't live in Alabama. I understand that we do not allow religion to control our laws, but we as a country have a history of respecting people's religion. For example, no state can pass a law against the practice of Christianity. People can follow their own religions as long as they do not violate the Constitution. Many people say that Sharia law would allow stoning and cutting off the hands of thiefs. First, as is common with most religions, your average Muslim-American tends to ignore the extremist parts of their doctrine. After all, the Bible supports stoning and says that women shouldn't speak in church, and I don't see a lot of Christians upholding that. Second, these would be clear violations of the Constitution's 'cruel and unusual punishment' clause and therefore would not be protected by judges. On another note, the fact that anyone was upset about a law forbidding the execution of minors is a little odd to me (as is the fact that we didn't ban it until 2005).
Alabama has just amended its state constitution to state that their courts will not consult international laws when making decisions. This amendment was a way for the state to attempt to ban Sharia law- the religious laws which Muslims must follow- (see more on that here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/29/sharia-law-usa-states-ban_n_3660813.html), since it is not an American-made law. As an example of Sharia law, interest is prohibited, so a loan between two Muslims possibly may not have interest added. Another example is Muslim parents having their older children participate in Ramadan, the monthly fast. Right now, judges respect these choices as long as they do not violate the Constitution (so all rights are still protected). Under the amendment, a Muslim not putting interest on a loan to another Muslim may be considered illegal due to discrimination, and the Ramadan case might be ruled abuse of children. The amendment avoided mentioning the Sharia law outright because several states laws which tried to ban it have been struck down by the Supreme Court for targeting Muslims. This amendment is also a way for Alabama to ignore other Supreme Court decisions. For example, in 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that executing minors was unconstitutional. The judge mentioned in his ruling that America was the only country that officially approved the execution of minors. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia attacked the decision, as did several Republican Senators. The Alabama amendment would make this decision void, since the judge consulted international law when making their judgement. This is also connected to a series of Supreme Court decisions concerning gay rights. In 1986, a judge ruled that states should be allowed to ban same-sex intercourse since it was common in the history of Western civilization. This would also be void under the Alabama law (something they might not have considered). However, a judge ruled in 2003 that states could not ban same-sex intercourse and stated that neither America nor any other country had a consistent history of laws banning it. The judge also pointed out that most countries considered to be 'Western civilization' are now supporting the gay rights movement.
This article makes me glad that I don't live in Alabama. I understand that we do not allow religion to control our laws, but we as a country have a history of respecting people's religion. For example, no state can pass a law against the practice of Christianity. People can follow their own religions as long as they do not violate the Constitution. Many people say that Sharia law would allow stoning and cutting off the hands of thiefs. First, as is common with most religions, your average Muslim-American tends to ignore the extremist parts of their doctrine. After all, the Bible supports stoning and says that women shouldn't speak in church, and I don't see a lot of Christians upholding that. Second, these would be clear violations of the Constitution's 'cruel and unusual punishment' clause and therefore would not be protected by judges. On another note, the fact that anyone was upset about a law forbidding the execution of minors is a little odd to me (as is the fact that we didn't ban it until 2005).
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Weiland Goes Green
http://grist.org/politics/meet-south-dakotas-surprisingly-green-senate-candidate/
Rick Weiland, the Democratic canditate for South Dakota, is refusing to back fossil fuels, which Democrats in rural, Republican areas usually do in order to gain votes. Instead, he has taken a firm stance against the Keystone pipeline, arguing that it would not create any lasting jobs within South Dakota. He also points that it is a Canadian company, not an American company, which is benefiting. In contrast, Mike Rounds has suggested getting rid of EPA regulations.
I actually didn't believe that Rounds would support getting rid of EPA and assumed it was just propaganda. After visiting his site, I discovered that it was not and that really is his stance on it. It makes no sense to me to, as his site puts it, "stop harmful EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions". While I don't have any strong feelings about the Keystone pipeline, I am in favor of protecting our environment in order to preserve it as well as prevent birth defects and death which have occurred when companies were not properly regulated.
Rick Weiland, the Democratic canditate for South Dakota, is refusing to back fossil fuels, which Democrats in rural, Republican areas usually do in order to gain votes. Instead, he has taken a firm stance against the Keystone pipeline, arguing that it would not create any lasting jobs within South Dakota. He also points that it is a Canadian company, not an American company, which is benefiting. In contrast, Mike Rounds has suggested getting rid of EPA regulations.
I actually didn't believe that Rounds would support getting rid of EPA and assumed it was just propaganda. After visiting his site, I discovered that it was not and that really is his stance on it. It makes no sense to me to, as his site puts it, "stop harmful EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions". While I don't have any strong feelings about the Keystone pipeline, I am in favor of protecting our environment in order to preserve it as well as prevent birth defects and death which have occurred when companies were not properly regulated.
Wednesday, October 22, 2014
What Does South Dakota Care About?
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/10/22-2014-midterms-key-issues-south-dakota-senate-schaff
This article answers various questions concerning key issues in the South Dakota Senate race. It describes the issue caused by Mike Rounds' federal visa scandal as a big topic as well as health care and the Keystone pipeline. Because South Dakota's population has a large number of senior citizens, Social Security and Medicare are also important topics. Gun rights are also a point of dispute between the candidates. The stance of each candidate on all of these isssues was explained. The article also discusses sponsorship of the candidates and who was backing them. It identified the reservations as being largely Democratic but less likely to vote, and the "West River" area of South Dakota, specifically Rapid City, as more Republican.
I think it's important to learn about the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate as well as their stances on different issues. Although I can't vote in this election, many of my friends can and will. I was interested to learn that the reservations are Democratic. I wonder how South Dakota would be affected if there was a larger native turnout at elections.
This article answers various questions concerning key issues in the South Dakota Senate race. It describes the issue caused by Mike Rounds' federal visa scandal as a big topic as well as health care and the Keystone pipeline. Because South Dakota's population has a large number of senior citizens, Social Security and Medicare are also important topics. Gun rights are also a point of dispute between the candidates. The stance of each candidate on all of these isssues was explained. The article also discusses sponsorship of the candidates and who was backing them. It identified the reservations as being largely Democratic but less likely to vote, and the "West River" area of South Dakota, specifically Rapid City, as more Republican.
I think it's important to learn about the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate as well as their stances on different issues. Although I can't vote in this election, many of my friends can and will. I was interested to learn that the reservations are Democratic. I wonder how South Dakota would be affected if there was a larger native turnout at elections.
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Art Helps Preemie Babies Dream Big
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/10/living/nicu-to-the-moon-photos/index.html?hpt=li_t3
In Atlanta, the Children's Healthcare of Atlanta is starting a Safe Sleep Campaign to try to teach parents about how to keep their babies safe at night. Dangerous behaviors can include having babies sleep with their parents, sleeping with too many stuffed animals, or, the most well-known, sleeping on their stomachs. To promote this campaign, the neonatal intensive care unit at the hospital teamed up with a local branding agency to design adorable art featuring their preemies, all born after only 25 to 37 weeks of pregnancy. This art shows the babies in the future careers that the hospital imagines they might have.
I love this idea for many reasons. Because my father helps deliver babies, I know how terrifying pregnancy and early birth can be. Recently, he had three women miscarry in only one day. I've been at the hospital and seen new parents watching the intensive care unit, praying their baby would make it through the night. So I know how important it is for these parents to be able to visualize a long, successful life for their babies. This art not only gives hope to the parents, it shows why doctors and nurses do what they do- so that people can go on to do great things and change the world.
In Atlanta, the Children's Healthcare of Atlanta is starting a Safe Sleep Campaign to try to teach parents about how to keep their babies safe at night. Dangerous behaviors can include having babies sleep with their parents, sleeping with too many stuffed animals, or, the most well-known, sleeping on their stomachs. To promote this campaign, the neonatal intensive care unit at the hospital teamed up with a local branding agency to design adorable art featuring their preemies, all born after only 25 to 37 weeks of pregnancy. This art shows the babies in the future careers that the hospital imagines they might have.
I love this idea for many reasons. Because my father helps deliver babies, I know how terrifying pregnancy and early birth can be. Recently, he had three women miscarry in only one day. I've been at the hospital and seen new parents watching the intensive care unit, praying their baby would make it through the night. So I know how important it is for these parents to be able to visualize a long, successful life for their babies. This art not only gives hope to the parents, it shows why doctors and nurses do what they do- so that people can go on to do great things and change the world.
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Senator Proposes After Helping End Ban
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/08/politics/nevada-state-senator-gay-marriage-proposal/index.html
After the ban on same-sex marriage in Nevada was overturned, the senator of the state, Kelvin Atkinson, held a press conference to discuss the changes that would occur. Everyone was stunned when Atkinson suddenly proposed to his partner, Sherwood Howard, during the press conference. Fortunately, Howard said yes. Atkinson says his family, especially his 18-year-old daughter, are all very supportive of the engagement. It's possible they may be the first couple married in Nevada.
I am very happy for both Atkinson and Howard. I'm also excited for all the other couples in Nevada and Idaho who will now be able to marry. The article also discusses the rapidly growing number of states allowing same-sex marriage. I have several family friends and relatives who are gay or bisexual, and I know that they are estatic about the incredible progress of the movement. I can only imagine how Atkinson felt when he overturned the ban knowing that he could now get married.
After the ban on same-sex marriage in Nevada was overturned, the senator of the state, Kelvin Atkinson, held a press conference to discuss the changes that would occur. Everyone was stunned when Atkinson suddenly proposed to his partner, Sherwood Howard, during the press conference. Fortunately, Howard said yes. Atkinson says his family, especially his 18-year-old daughter, are all very supportive of the engagement. It's possible they may be the first couple married in Nevada.
I am very happy for both Atkinson and Howard. I'm also excited for all the other couples in Nevada and Idaho who will now be able to marry. The article also discusses the rapidly growing number of states allowing same-sex marriage. I have several family friends and relatives who are gay or bisexual, and I know that they are estatic about the incredible progress of the movement. I can only imagine how Atkinson felt when he overturned the ban knowing that he could now get married.
Thursday, October 2, 2014
Losing Parents to Ebola May Doom Children
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/02/health/ebola-outbreak/index.html?hpt=wo_c2
In West Africa, nearly four thousand children have been orphaned by Ebola. Now those children are unable to find homes. While relatives would normally be quick to adopt them, fear of infection prevents many from taking these children in. The nations of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone now have to deal not only with Ebola but the thousands of orphans who have nowhere else to go. Fortunately, UNICEF is working on providing aid for them and educating people to increase the chances of adoption. But while they need around 200 million dollars to effectively work on the problem, only 25% of that amount is available. And the number of orphans is only going to increase as Ebola spreads. In Sierra Leone, five people are dying from the disease every hour.
I feel horrible for these kids. It would be bad enough to watch your parents die an awful death from Ebola, but these children are being left for dead with no one to take care of them. I hope UNICEF is able to raise the money they need to help with this problem. This disease is ravaging West Africa, but many people could survive it if they had the proper water resources, medical supplies, and hygenic hospitals. We need to work on providing them with these tools and on providing aid for the survivors and children.
In West Africa, nearly four thousand children have been orphaned by Ebola. Now those children are unable to find homes. While relatives would normally be quick to adopt them, fear of infection prevents many from taking these children in. The nations of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone now have to deal not only with Ebola but the thousands of orphans who have nowhere else to go. Fortunately, UNICEF is working on providing aid for them and educating people to increase the chances of adoption. But while they need around 200 million dollars to effectively work on the problem, only 25% of that amount is available. And the number of orphans is only going to increase as Ebola spreads. In Sierra Leone, five people are dying from the disease every hour.
I feel horrible for these kids. It would be bad enough to watch your parents die an awful death from Ebola, but these children are being left for dead with no one to take care of them. I hope UNICEF is able to raise the money they need to help with this problem. This disease is ravaging West Africa, but many people could survive it if they had the proper water resources, medical supplies, and hygenic hospitals. We need to work on providing them with these tools and on providing aid for the survivors and children.
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Muslims discredit the beliefs of ISIS
More Than 100 Muslim Clerics Sign Letter Condemning ISIS
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/09/24/More-100-Muslim-Clerics-Sign-Letter-Condemning-ISIS
Today Muslim leaders in America released a statement saying that ISIS is not following the laws of Islam. This statement was signed by 111 Muslim clerics from around the world. Murder and torture were two of the most prominent issues. The leaders explained that these acts are not justified by Islam as ISIS says they are. Other issues, such as fatwas (legal opinions on Islamic law) made by ISIS, were also refuted. The Muslim leaders encouraged the terrorists to stop all violent and illegal acts. Many Grand Muftis (the highest Islamic position in the nation) signed the statement, including the Grand Mufti of Egypt, the former Mufti of Istanbul, and the Mufti of Palestine.
This is a very strong stand against ISIS by the Muslim community. While American Muslims are know to speak against ISIS and other terrorist groups, it is unusual to have Muslims from so many different countries unite to defend their religion. This action shows the world that Islam is not a religion that supports terrorists or violent acts.
I like this article, but I wish they had more information on the actual webpage. It is really encouraging to see so many people standing together against this terrorist group. I wonder if ISIS will respond, and if they do, what will their response be? I hope that the lack of support in the Muslim community will cause some of their leaders to question their actions, although that's probably too optimistic to hope for. Hopefully, though, many non-Muslims will view Islam in a better light after this statement.
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2014/09/24/More-100-Muslim-Clerics-Sign-Letter-Condemning-ISIS
Today Muslim leaders in America released a statement saying that ISIS is not following the laws of Islam. This statement was signed by 111 Muslim clerics from around the world. Murder and torture were two of the most prominent issues. The leaders explained that these acts are not justified by Islam as ISIS says they are. Other issues, such as fatwas (legal opinions on Islamic law) made by ISIS, were also refuted. The Muslim leaders encouraged the terrorists to stop all violent and illegal acts. Many Grand Muftis (the highest Islamic position in the nation) signed the statement, including the Grand Mufti of Egypt, the former Mufti of Istanbul, and the Mufti of Palestine.
This is a very strong stand against ISIS by the Muslim community. While American Muslims are know to speak against ISIS and other terrorist groups, it is unusual to have Muslims from so many different countries unite to defend their religion. This action shows the world that Islam is not a religion that supports terrorists or violent acts.
I like this article, but I wish they had more information on the actual webpage. It is really encouraging to see so many people standing together against this terrorist group. I wonder if ISIS will respond, and if they do, what will their response be? I hope that the lack of support in the Muslim community will cause some of their leaders to question their actions, although that's probably too optimistic to hope for. Hopefully, though, many non-Muslims will view Islam in a better light after this statement.
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
North Korea's Feelings Hurt By Nasty Rumors
Our Citizens ‘Enjoy Genuine Human Rights,’ Says North Korea Report
http://www.newsweek.com/our-citizens-enjoy-genuine-human-rights-says-north-korea-report-270285
North Korea recently made a statement explaining that its citizens have many freedoms enjoyed by the United States and other countries, such as freedom of religion or protection from torture. The government says it works to protect these rights for all its people. When discussing the numerous UN reports of obvious oppression and violation of human rights in North Korea, the government dismissed such reports as nasty rumors spread by its enemies. It also accused the UN of being controlled by the United States and therefore being biased.
We watched a documentary in Psychology last year about the situation in North Korea. By smuggling cameras into the country, journalists revealed the levels of poverty, government control, and danger there. North Korea's books are all written by the government, many people are sent to work camps for minor infractions, and there is no contact between citizens and the outside world. North Koreans do not have free speech, freedom of religion, or even physical freedom. They do not have the right to leave or try to communicate with people in other countries. They do not have the right to their own opinion. Worst of all, they were grateful to the government for letting them have so much freedom.
The fact that North Korea can even say something like this is unbelievable. Do they honestly expect people to write off prison camps, poverty, mass incarceration and more as 'mean rumors'? Even if the citizens are unable to understand natural rights or popular sovereignty, the government does have access to the knowledge of the outside world and is aware of those terms. They just don't care about them. The only reason they gave this statement is to try to get people to sympathise with them and ignore their horrible actions.
http://www.newsweek.com/our-citizens-enjoy-genuine-human-rights-says-north-korea-report-270285
North Korea recently made a statement explaining that its citizens have many freedoms enjoyed by the United States and other countries, such as freedom of religion or protection from torture. The government says it works to protect these rights for all its people. When discussing the numerous UN reports of obvious oppression and violation of human rights in North Korea, the government dismissed such reports as nasty rumors spread by its enemies. It also accused the UN of being controlled by the United States and therefore being biased.
We watched a documentary in Psychology last year about the situation in North Korea. By smuggling cameras into the country, journalists revealed the levels of poverty, government control, and danger there. North Korea's books are all written by the government, many people are sent to work camps for minor infractions, and there is no contact between citizens and the outside world. North Koreans do not have free speech, freedom of religion, or even physical freedom. They do not have the right to leave or try to communicate with people in other countries. They do not have the right to their own opinion. Worst of all, they were grateful to the government for letting them have so much freedom.
The fact that North Korea can even say something like this is unbelievable. Do they honestly expect people to write off prison camps, poverty, mass incarceration and more as 'mean rumors'? Even if the citizens are unable to understand natural rights or popular sovereignty, the government does have access to the knowledge of the outside world and is aware of those terms. They just don't care about them. The only reason they gave this statement is to try to get people to sympathise with them and ignore their horrible actions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)