Professors Prejudice?

This editorial piece (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/11/opinion/sunday/professors-are-prejudiced-too.html?ref=opinion&_r=0) is about the unintentional, or intentional discrimination of professors against students. It was a seemingly routine activity, emailing a large amount of professors across a broad spectrum of different schools and racial and gender backgrounds. The results were still shocking despite the routineness of the study. The study still showed that white, male students were the most likely to get a response back from a professor no matter what kind of background that professor had. It is shocking in a way to know that the people teaching higher education still hold some type of bias towards certain races, even if it is subconscious. College and university paths are supposed to broaden the mind and understanding of an individual, normally making them more socially progressive and liberal. It is so strange to see the opposite qualities possessed in the professors than how many would imagine them to be. The authors of the piece do make an excellent remark that 'we still have a long way to go'. If professors, teachers of higher education, still maintain some type of racial bias there is still plenty of racism and injustice in our society. From now on, as an Vietnamese female I'll be on my guard to make sure I am not getting discriminated against. I just never thought I would have to be on my guard from my own professors, the same ones who teach the wrong deeds in history. I would just imagine that these people of higher education would be able to see past that kind of unequal treatment.

Zhimiao's Comment

http://zhimiaojin.blogspot.com/2014/04/blog-stage-7.html

Zhimiao talks about the finer points about abortion in his post and describes why abortion should stay legal and free to women as a whole. It is a nice thing to see so many people flocking for women's rights in modern times. Men and women will stand by each other to fight for one thing; the ability for a woman to choose her own lifestyle. I won't get into how men have always been able to and how women haven't, I want to talk instead about Zhimiao's points. His second point is probably the most important, "being a mother is just one option for women. Many hard battles have been fought to win political and economic equality for women." Women shouldn't be stuck into a role for the rest of their life because of the way they live their lives. In essence, women should be able to make their own destiny without worrying about others' moral insecurities and vindictive natures affecting their future. I plan on having children one day but I am in no way against abortion. Some people are just not born to be a parent and if they don't believe they can do it, or want to do it, they shouldn't have to. The American people have the ability to choose their profession from any of the ones available in America. Just as the American people can choose professions, women should be able to choose if they want to become a mother or not, not have the views of others crammed down their throats. Keeping abortion legal will keep America fair, equal, and progressive, just as it is supposed to be.

Gun control does not mean outlawing guns

For Reference:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/04/23/what-georgias-expansive-new-pro-gun-law-does/

There has been a large tug-of-war around the concept of gun control in the United States. A lot of people desire stricter parameters for those who are purchasing weapons and the NRA does not want to change a thing, and in fact wants to reverse some things. Recently in Georgia, some new gun control laws went into play and instead of taking safety into mind, they went ahead and did away with a lot of important restrictions. Some of these new allowances include being able to take guns into bars without the owner's consent. The most important change is different than a new gun carry law however, it is the fact that gun owners are no longer required to receive finger prints for their license renewals. Not only is there no longer finger-printing but databases on license holder are no longer legal. Personally, I'm all for guns. I believe in the idea of self-defense and being able to defend myself, property, or family from any possible threats. But at the same note, I believe in restrictions on who can own guns and how easy they are to obtain. The last thing I need while I go to sleep at night is thinking about all the lunatics out there who can easily buy a gun. It is a paradoxical thing that I require a gun to protect myself from other people with that same gun. But I digress, I believe gun restrictions are necessary, we need more of them, and we need the NRA to stop strong arming the representatives we expect represent us. The NRA is almost beyond gun rights in their zealous war against restrictions and control on guns. 

Critique on Lauren's Blog "It Matters" on the post "Tolls and Rage"

I think this post is kind of a fun topic really, though not necessarily fun for the people that have to deal with toll roads. I've been all over the U.S in the places that I've lived in, but I haven't been in Texas for long. So far, I've been able to diagnose a few things about the toll roads here:

1. They're inconveniently placed (Either they're in a direction that nobody is going, or they funnel cars to such a degree that they create traffic).

2. They're not priced high enough (A whole dollar to go on the toll road? The problem with having such a low price is the fact that people are less likely to pay because there's no financial ramifications).

3. There aren't enough to justify the roads or a pass (I know of two toll roads, as I've only been here for a few months, the 183A and the 45. I have also heard of getting a pass which allows a person to travel the toll roads unlimited amount of times for x amount per month).

For these reasons, I agree with Lauren. The toll roads here are not executed in a logical, or fiscally responsible, way. It is possible to fix the situation by addressing any one, preferably all three, of my reasons. In this way the Austin toll road system may still be salvaged.

http://realtreecamo.blogspot.com/2014/04/health-care-critique.html

Our Leaders Aren't Representing the Voices of America ( At least not mine )

There's been a crisis in America for a very long time. For many it would be something along the lines of abortion, or the deficit, but if one would look carefully they would see something else at the heart of these debates. Our representatives have lost our voices on their way to office. This leaves America in a tough spot, similar to an identity crisis. With representatives no longer representing and the people demanding a stable life, a vicious cycle ensues. The representatives engage in "pork barrel projects" and the people keep electing those same representatives because they wet their constituents' beaks. The foundation of public office is no longer to represent the will of the people selflessly, but rather a series of bribes to keep one's self in office for their own interests. Not much change happens in Congress these days because the people's "representatives" have it good, nothing should change a great deal. Locking themselves in political debate about the "important" issues seems like a good enough distraction for most people, but I see past that. I see an America where those on welfare don't have enough to get by because the government cuts the program due to its "wasteful spending". All the meanwhile, our representatives in D.C are debating rights on issues that should be up to someone's beliefs. The agenda of a representative should not be of his own beliefs but to give the ability to an individual to choose based on their beliefs. Democracy is founded on the basis of being able to choose for one's self and that's the way it should remain.

Reading the Judges

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-clarence-thomas-supreme-court-silence-20140221,0,1703665.story#axzz2u1XK8rkU

The Supreme Court was designed and is designed to be a branch of government untouchable by the whims and corruption of society. The way it operates sets the bar for the rest of the courts in the country. Jeffrey Toobin, as Michael McGough writes, is going after one of the supreme court's members, Justice Clarence Thomas, for not doing his job. Toobin believes that Clarence isn't doing his jobs because he stares at the ceiling during court and dazes off as though he is not paying attention. McGough agrees to some extent with the direction of Toobin's claims. Court should be televised and able to be seen by the public, other than the people who live close enough to witness the Supreme Court in action. So what is being asked here is essentially if the Court should be able to have that much more interaction with the public, to risk the chance that their seats of Justice may be tainted with the wrongs of society? I say yes, I say a big yes to this. The idea of being able to actually know what is happening in our Supreme Court is a basic right, it is the entire point of being able to have the public witness the trial. The Constitution was a document designed to change with the flow of time and so should the other facets around it. The public has a right to know the way the system works in the country and it's about time we get to see what our Justices are really up to.

Obama Signs New Bill

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/07/obama-farm-bill-_n_4747837.html

I really do not appreciate the actions of our legislative branch anymore. I feel like our country barely manages to operate on account of them. It is constantly a tug of war between two parties that represent barely any people in our nation but make a majority of the decisions. Either too far left or right with their ideals but most people are near the center. Not every republican hates gays nor does every democrat want to help the needy. Even when congress manages to come together for just a bit, the whole bipartisan spirit crumbles after a few hours because "our party believes blah". I no longer end up blaming the president for the inability to correct this nation but rather the men in congress who delay every process to such a degree that some useful policies never come to fruition. The bill in the article is useful, and a cut that needed to happen to somewhere yet the conservatives are still not happy because it was not enough. They flat out refused to attend the celebration of the law because of being stubborn. This article shows more the inability of our congress to accomplish anything more than a useful bill being passed.