Critical Review Battleground Essays - Agnosticism, Atheism

Critical Review: Battleground Stephen Bates Battleground is a non fictional book that tells the story of a protest, by a group of parents against what they see as "secular humanism" in a public school reading series designed for elementary, middle and high school students. The protest eventually turned into a lawsuit in 1983 known as Mozert, who was the leader of the group that was protesting (COBS), versus the Hawkins county board of education. The book begins by describing how the protest began from the beginning. A child, Sarah Frost, had some trouble with her school work and asked her mother, Vicki Frost, to help her. As Vicki read through the textbook she found that some of the stories were contrary to what her religion taught her, so she made some phone calls and eventually found a group of people who shared her same beliefs and offense to the readers. Eventually she and her friend Jennie Wilson were able to stir up enough people to attend an emergency meeting, where they explained their problems with the Holt readers to anyone who was interested, which at that point was not many people. Frost and Wilson were persistent. They went to the school board meeting and further explained their opposition of the readers to the school board, but they were ignored by the school board. They were discouraged, but they fought for their cause and continues to try to work with the principals and teachers of their children; while in the meantime they formed a group they called Citizens Organized for Better Schools, or COBS. They had meetings regularly and were able to get some of their "suggestions" recognized by the school board, but they were never able to achieve their main goal of Gadson 2 making alternate school books available for the children who's faith was "burdened" by the Holt readers. Their efforts eventually resulted in the jailing of Vicki Frost, which made a lawsuit unavoidable in their eyes. The end result (after two large organizations, the Concerned Women for America, and the People for the American Way became not only involved, but the actual voice if the litigants), three years later, was a decision that the children would be able to"opt-out" of the offensive reading class and be home schooled on the one subject, but still attend regular classes for the rest of the day. This decision was later overturned after an appeal. Stephen Bates tells this story in an almost fictional type way, so it is easy to forget that this is a true story, and did not take place long ago, but Bates reminds the reader of the reality during his detailed and lengthy interludes and in one case an entire chapter on the history of education and the separation of church and state. His details, though they might seem boring to anyone who is not really interested in the history of education, does bring validity to many of the issues. The main issue of this book is the first amendment. Both sides of the argument had valid issues. Frost, although I did not see the Witchcraft, Hinduism or any other anti-Christian suggestions in the passages that were mentioned in the book, had every right to state that she did not want her children reading these books, she is a parent and her and her husband have the responsibility of raising her children in a way that they feel thinks is moral and religious. It is a shame that someone in Frost's situation, with a valid argument, would have to worry that the school might teach her children the exact opposite of what she is trying to teach them. The school board and others continued to ask why she wouldn't put her children in a private Christian school, but why should she have to pay for education when part of her taxes are already going toward what should be a decent education for her children? Gadson 3 At the same time, the mere fact that she is not directly paying for the education of her education puts her in a position where she has to keep an open mind. The passages that she was opposed to were ridiculous. They were fictional stories, they were not the wicca creed. Anyone can see irreligious suggestions in almost anything. How does the court decide what is really "secular humanism" or implications of any religion? All judges and textbook sorters would have to be well read in all religions, this is nearly impossible. The only thing they

Sample Essay Explication

Sample Essay ExplicationOne of the best aspects of learning to write is to write a sample essay. Not only will you get to see your writing in action, but you will also learn about essay format and common pitfalls that can trip up even the most experienced essay writers. It is not enough to merely know what you are doing with your essays, so instead you will want to focus on methods that will help you avoid the most common mistakes of a novice writer.When it comes to writing an essay, the simple fact is that no two students are going to write alike. For example, they may very well have very different attitudes toward grammar and structure, as well as the ability to express themselves clearly and concisely. Because of this, essay sample explication is extremely important. Even the most well-meaning teachers cannot fully anticipate every student's writing style, and if you do not provide an explanation for your own essay, others will not be able to pick up on the thought process that go es into it. It is your responsibility to create a sample essay that will teach others what you learned.The first thing you want to make sure you take note of is the title of your essay. Some students look at the title as the first thing that catches their eye, while others think that it is part of the essay itself. It is important to make sure that your title doesn't slip out of your head; try to make sure that you start your essay name with a capital letter. This ensures that you will always see your essay title when you are reading through your work, and that you will find yourself compelled to write the article or essay at some point.If your lesson plan is based on a popular event or a piece of literature, consider including a relevant quote or scene from that piece of literature in your essay. For example, if you are teaching an American history course, you could choose to include a quotation from a famous author or a phrase from a popular song. These are especially useful for s tudents who are planning to write something on a wide variety of topics, as it allows them to explore ideas and themes, rather than just introducing the content of the essay.Just to make sure that you are on the right track, you should include an initial disclaimer and a short summary of the story that is included in your essay. After the disclaimer, you will then need to begin discussing each of the information in your essay, and this will require you to give your students a clear idea of the overall plot and what is happening in the essay.When it comes to exposition, it is important to let your essay speak for itself. You will want to provide your students with the clearest explanation of the whole idea that you are presenting, and it is important to put your own thoughts into your writing. However, you do not want to leave readers hanging, so it is also important to include any other evidence that you have related to the particular topic that you are teaching in your essay.After you have created a clear outline for your lesson plan, consider adding in any other ideas that you have as well. You will want to encourage all of your students to think critically and creatively in order to become successful writers, so it is important to make sure that you stay on track with your lessons and your essay writing.

What is globalisation....... essays

What is globalisation....... essays What is globalisation and in what way is it pertinent to our understanding of politics within the state The word globalisation perhaps suggests the shift of political activity away from the local and national and into the global realm. Hudson extends this definition: Globalisation signifies an increase in the importance, volume, speed and scope of cross-border flows of ideas, money, commodities, and people, challenging the exclusive territorial authority of sovereign states.(Newman, Boundaries, Territory and Post-modernity.) From this definition it can be seen that globalisation is a word which cannot be merely defined but must be explained, must be signified. In addition it comprises with it the second part of the question, the idea of its challenge to and effect on the state. Accounts of conflict and war between the various city-states of Ancient Greece is itself a recognition that the international dimension to politics is as old as the discipline itself. (Heywood, Politics). However, during these early years of civilisation, politics, and subsequently power rested mainly in the state. Indeed, according to Aristotle the state is The final association, formed of several villages... For all practical purposes the process is now complete; self-sufficiency has been reached...the state continues in being secure in the good life.(Aristotle, The Politics). Historical war is the crudest and most obvious example of international political activity. However, the last fifty years has seen the dynamics of global politics progress past the bounds of war and change beyond all recognition. These changes are not only pertinent but utterly intertwined with our understanding of politics within the state and can be viewed into two separate categories. Firstly there is that of the public sector. The highlights the increase in inter-state diplomacy a...

3.Explain techniques that a law enforcement officer can use to modify Essay

3.Explain techniques that a law enforcement officer can use to modify the effects of stress - Essay Example Some of the effects of stress include, slow digestion, increasing heart rate, speeds up metabolism and blood pressure. An Officer likely to have the above named effects is a threat not only to the officer’s health, but to the public too (Williams, and Harris, 1998). A law enforcement officer may opt to use the slow and deep breathing technique. He/she should look for a comfortable and quite place with no distractions. The officer should locate one hand on the lower abdomen and the other on the upper chest. In using the lower hand, he/she should try to breath. After managing to breath, he/she should try to manage the rate of breathing by holding the breath. He/she should try out the exercise for several times until the body familiarizes with the practice. This is one way of fighting stress. It is a simple and mostly used to counteract effects of stress too (Williams and Harris, 1998). The muscle relaxation technique is also an option to modify the effects of stress. One should lie down in a comfortable place away from the noise. Then, shut the eyes and concentrate on breathing out slowly pausing a little before breathing again. Concentrate all the muscles in the left foot and hold for some seconds. Thereafter, release the muscle concentration after some time and do the same for the other foot. Later concentrate all the muscles in the left leg and relax, then repeat the same procedure in the right leg. The process should be carried out in every part of the body (Jacobson, 1938). For all kind of stress-related problems that any law enforcement officer faces, such as, muscle tension, depression, heart disease, digestive problems or chronic fatigue among other, it is certain that either of the two techniques must modify the effects of stress (Jacobson,

The History About Saudi Arabia Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

The History About Saudi Arabia - Research Paper Example During its earlier stages, Saudi Arabia came up with strategies such as legalizing international scholarships in besides allowing foreign workers into the nation (Denman & Hilal, 2011). It was due to this move that saw the nation rise to become one of the most developed states in the Middle East. The discovery of oil in the nation was one of the main reasons the Saudi Arabia quickly developed economically despite its located in a desert. The essay will relay more information on the history of Saudi Arabia in terms of its kingdom and culture. This is Saudi Arabia’s ruling family whereby studies contend although it comprised of thousands members, the most influential of all was Saudi Arabia’s kings, who were normally descendants of Muhammad bin Saud. Studies show that the House of Saud is the translation of Al Saud, whereby the latter implies â€Å"family of† hence referring to the kingdom’s founder, Muhammad Bin Saud (Saudi Arabia, 2013). To date, the term Al Saud is a common reference carried by any descendant of Muhammad bin Saud or his brothers who are Mishari, Farhan and Thunayyan. The other family branches of Al Saud the reference is â€Å"Cadet Branches† and its members, just like those of Al Saud, hold high positions in the government. The only difference between Al Saud and cadet branches is that whereas the Al Saud’s are in a position to succeed the line of throne, Cadet Branches do not stand a chance (Saudi Arabia, 2013). Al Saud and cadet members have been close to one another to the extent that they intermarry in a move to reestablish their lineage hence continue wielding influence in the government. Studies contend that Mani’ibn Rabiah Al-Muraydi was the first ancestor of Al Saud, he alongside his clan, Mrudah, settled in Diriyah. For decades, the Mrudah ruled al-Diriyah, which rapidly prospered to become an important settlement for the Nadji. Gradually as the clan grew,

The Use of Animals in Biomedical Research Essay Example for Free

The Use of Animals in Biomedical Research Essay There is a big issue on the use of animals for biomedical research (i.e., research done for the understanding and promotion mainly of human life. Such would include, but not limited to, medical formulation and testing, formulation and testing of hypotheses about diseases, surgical experimentations, testing of various consumer goods for safety, and psychological experimentations). At least up to the present time, animals are still widely used for research. In an estimate by Barbara Orlans (2001, 400), there are like 50 to100 million animals being used for research annually. Nevertheless, with an increasing awareness on the complexity of animal psyche and the increased voice that animal rights advocates have, the morality of such research (along with the other uses that animals have) has been put into question. In a Dutch animal committee hearing on the use of animals for cancer medical testing, for example, a woman who is terminally ill due to cancer stepped forward and said that she would rather die than have another animal suffer painlessly just for her cure. Human beings are beginning to be acutely aware of such experimentations and different sentiments and ideas have been brought to the core. Now, amidst the almost unending debate on the use of animals for biomedical research, I would want to first, present the philosophical debate on this issue; then second, present my opinion on it. To be able to accomplish this goal, I would first present the debate between Carl Cohen and Bernard Rollin. Afterwards, I will present what I think is a middle position between the two. The Cohen-Rollin Debate   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   A representative debate on this issue would be the debate between Carl Cohen and Bernard Rollin. Basically, the two are debating on the moral status of animals. Allow me to present a summary of the points of these two philosophers.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Carl Cohen, a speciesist, says that animals do not have rights and that animal experimentation should go on. A speciesist (2002, 303) is someone who says that our species, i.e., the human species, gives us all the moral rights that we have. That ultimately, what makes us different, and hence rules on human experimentation are different, is the fact that we belong to human kind. As such, humans cannot just be experimented on but would need precautions like informed consent; measurement of risk; the prior and post evaluation of the research using the principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice; etcetera. Hence, because we are humans, we have all the rights and privileges that we know we have.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Now, the next question that we may have, which Cohen answers, is: what makes us humans in the first place? For Cohen, the answer is pretty simple. We are human beings because we have moral capacities which animals do not have. These moral capacities refer to the aptitude of human beings in applying an abstract moral rule on an act; has capabilities to make moral claims; has the capacity to comprehend rules of duty; the capability for self-legislation; and are members of communities governed by moral rules (2002, 300-302). These moral capacities would then make human beings are capable of understanding conceptual principles of morality (like for example, â€Å"do good to others,† or â€Å"do not do actions that would purposely harm other human beings†) and apply such to individual human actions. Now because of this capacity, human beings have the capacity for self-restraint. They do not need others (presuming that they are already within the age of reason, i.e., mature enough to do these tasks) to restrain them from harming their fellows. Nor would they need others to goad them to do acts that are praiseworthy. As such, human beings could legislate themselves, i.e., govern their own actions. Now, because of this, human beings could very well belong to a community of other human beings who are capable of the same moral capacities as he is. And his belonging to this community is of the nature that rules and laws are there to minimally guide human interaction. They are not there to govern each single action of the human being. This would mean that human beings, on the most part, are free on how they interact with each other. She/he is free provided that her/his actions are responsible actions, i.e., actions that the human being may be made accountable for. Now, these moral capacities make human beings capable of rights. Rights basically refer to â€Å"claims, or potential claims, within a community of moral agents† (2002, 300). The human capacity for understanding concepts and applying such concepts in his dealings and acts with each other makes the human being capable of making such claims.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   At this point, Cohen says that these rights cannot extend to animals for the simple reason that animals do not have these moral capacities we have mentioned.   They are incapable of understanding, i.e., of moral reasoning, and such, all the other moral capacities could not be attributed to them. We have to state at this point that for Cohen, even psychologically disabled or comatosed human beings retain these rights plainly because they belong to the same kind. In one way or another, such human beings seem to â€Å"ride on† the capabilities of other human beings.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Hence, for Cohen, animal experimentation (of course not withstanding useless cruelty to animals) should go on for the good of the human race since we could not talk of violation of any rights in the first place since animals do not have rights. Bernard Rollin (2001, 418) responds to Cohen’s arguments by saying that it might be true that rights started from humans, but, it does not mean that such rights should remain among humans. He made an analogy on the game of chess. It might be true that chess was made initially for Persian royalty, nevertheless, the game started to have a life of its own and as such, it is not anymore restricted by the original makers of it. The same may be said about rights that human beings made and sorted out for themselves. What would stop the â€Å"Bill of Rights† from being applied to animals if sociological evolution would lead to such? Plainly, there is no guarantee that such rights would have to remain and be applicable only to its sources. In one way or another, Rollin seems to allude to the Ricoeurean hermeneutics on the life of the text, on the unstoppable and â€Å"unfigurable† refiguration of the text. Now, this may be true if the Bill of Rights could plainly be called a text, as a product of a social contract, but probably not if these rights are perceived in a naturalistic way. Rollin goes on to elaborate his basic stand: there seems to be no morally relevant difference between humans and vertebrate animals â€Å"to include all humans within the full scope of moral concern and yet deny such moral status to the animals† (2001, 413). Then, he goes on to define morally relevant difference: it is a â€Å"difference that rationally justifies treating them differently in some way that bears moral weight† (2001, 413). Hence, Rollin says that if two students coming from two different races and having two different eye colors would have the same class standing, they would be given the same grade. Their differences cannot be considered as â€Å"relevant† for the teacher’s act of grading. Now, Rollin states that the differences between humans and other vertebrates are not relevant because aside from the fact that both feel pain, both also have interests that must be respected. True, human interests may be different from animal interests, but the fact remains that both are interest-driven. Animal interests are violated when they are made to suffer; when social animals are kept in isolation; when burrowing animals are kept in steel cages; etcetera. Rollin also argues that there seems to be no difference between intellectually disabled humans and many animals, and hence, if consent is called for when experimenting on these human beings, such would also be called for when doing animal experimentation. The Middle Position   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Cohen is clear on his position: we are not violating anything when animals are used in experimenting since these experiments are needed for the human good. Rollin, on the other hand, is on the soft position that animals and humans are not relevantly different, and hence, the rights accorded to human beings in research ought to be the same rights given to other vertebrates. For Rollin, simply, animals should be treated as humans especially when it comes to biomedical research. Now, the consequences of their positions seem to be clear: Cohen’s position is a defense of the status quo, while Rollin’s position implies that medical codes on human experimentation like the Nuremberg Code should all be extended to vertebrate animals. I would say that though it is true that certain animals exhibit characteristics that are almost like that of humans (like the great apes, for example), still, Cohen is right in saying that rationality as it is present in humanity makes humans largely different from the other animals (just look at all the human civilizations and histories which even the most â€Å"intelligent† animals are incapable of, and as such, I find it hard to understand why Rollin says that the difference between animals and humans are not relevant differences), and as such, things that apply to human beings cannot all be applied to animals, like the medical code of ethics on human experimentation, for example. Such an application leads to d ifficult consequences. For one, such would necessitate the experimenter to gain the subject’s consent. How do we get an animal’s consent? What standard should we use? Should we ask the owners? How about animals that do not have owners? Next would be the issue of informed consent. Again, who do we inform and whose signature do we get? I would say that the present trend in animal experimentation in at least some parts of the world is a sober middle ground since at least in ten developed countries, legal measures have been passed regarding the control of pain and suffering of laboratory animals. Many other countries also have legislation on the inspection of research and breeding facilities, requirement for daily care, the checking on the competency and the licenses of qualified persons who handle the experiment, the monitoring by an independent committee, the searching for available alternatives for the experiment, and the creation of ethical criteria for decision making (Orlans 2001, 405). These legal concerns are far from the contents of the Code of Nuremberg or the Helsinki Declaration, nevertheless, they express a concern for the animals who also feels pain like human beings, and who also deserve a sort of concern from us. Hence, animal experimentation should not be stopped but legal constraints distinct from that of human beings have to be put on such experiments since animals are also capable of pain and have interests. REFERENCE LIST: Cohen, Carl. â€Å"The Case for the Use of Animals in Biomedical Research,† in Ethical Issues in Biotechnology, ed by Richard Sherlock and John Murrey, 299-308.   Rowman and Littlefield, 2002. Orlans, Barbara. â€Å"History and Ethical Regulation of Animal Experimentation: An International Perspective,† in A Companion to Bioethics, ed by Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer, 399-410. Massachusetts, Oxford, and Victoria: Blackwell, 2001. Rollin,   Bernard. â€Å"The Moral Status of Animals and Their Use as Experimental Subjects,† in A Companion to Bioethics, ed by Helga Kuhse and Peter Singer, 411-422. Massachusetts, Oxford, and Victoria: Blackwell, 2001.

Contrasting Fortinbras and Laertes with Hamlet Essay -- comparison com

     Ã‚   In William Shakespeare's tragedy Hamlet, Laertes, Fortinbras and Hamlet find themselves in similar situations.   While Hamlet waits for the right time to avenge his father's death, Laertes learns of his father's death and immediately wants vengeance, and Fortinbras awaits his chance to recapture land that used to belong to his father.   Laertes and Fortinbras go about accomplishing their desires quite differently than Hamlet.   While Hamlet acts slowly and carefully, Laertes and Fortinbras seek their revenge with haste. Although Laertes and Fortinbras are minor characters, Shakespeare molds them in order to contrast with Hamlet.   Fortinbras and, to a greater extent, Laertes act as foils to Hamlet with respect to their motives for revenge, execution of their plans and behavior while carrying out their plans.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Although each character plots to avenge his father in the play, the motives of Laertes and Fortinbras differ greatly than that of Hamlet.   Fortinbras, who schemes to rebuild his father's kingdom, leads thousands of men into battle, attempting to capture a small and worthless piece of Poland. After his uncle warned him against attacking Denmark.   The added land will do little to benefit Norway's prosperity, but this campaign may cost "two thousand souls and twenty thousand ducats" (4.4.26) .   This shows that pride is a driving factor behind Fortinbras' plan because he is willing to put the lives of his countrymen at risk for a minimal gain.   Laertes, on the other hand, is compelled to seek revenge because he loses his father and eventually his sister.   The root of Laertes' revenge appears to be the love for his family because he proclaims that he will "be revenged / most throughly for [his] father" (4.5... ...side Shakespeare. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1974.    Mack, Maynard. "The World of Hamlet." Yale Review. vol. 41 (1952) p. 502-23. Rpt. in Shakespeare: Modern Essays in Criticism. Rev. ed. Ed. Leonard F. Dean. New York: Oxford University P., 1967.    Rosenberg, Marvin. "Laertes: An Impulsive but Earnest Young Aristocrat." Readings on Hamlet. Ed. Don Nardo. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. Rpt. from The Masks of Hamlet. Newark, NJ: Univ. of Delaware P., 1992.    Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1995. http://www.chemicool.com/Shakespeare/hamlet/full.html    Ward & Trent, et al. The Cambridge History of English and American Literature. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1907-21; New York: Bartleby.com, 2000 http://www.bartleby.com/215/0816.html