Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Free Press Reaction
I found the responses to Patrick Leahy letter very surprising coming from what I assume are members of or near the Burlington area. I assumed they would all be for hate crime legislation and have very liberal views on this situation. To my surprise, this wasn't the case. They were actually all views that I feel the same way about. As a country we have been fighting for equality in all aspects one can think of. Putting certain groups into a new law that protects them isn't creating equality it is separating them from the rest of the public. I personally don't agree with hate crime laws. "Hate" isn't illegal, and if it ever becomes illegal I think people will have to start rethinking about their surroundings. I personally feel that yes no one likes to be hated in any situation, but people need to become adults and stop pointing the finger at someone because they said something that offended them. Its part of life, its part of our rights, thats why we do it. As the gay conservative person says in the reading its only going to make people more pissed off and hate even more people. Hate crime laws seem to protect blacks and homosexuals, I dont see anything in there about protecting white people. If someone punches me and they were black and I try to say that it was a hate crime, people would laugh at me because for some reason I feel people don't think you are able to illegally hate a white person. You can obviously see my opinion on this situation and how I feel that it is unnecessary to increase a jail sentence because someone hated someone else. I guess what I'm trying to get at is we should give up on the idea of equality because its never going to happen, someone or group will always be treated better then the other. Thats just the way of life.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Reflection ch. 9
"Each year, more and more major corporations grant financial benefits to unmarried, same-sex domestic partners".
If I'm understanding this quote correctly its saying that big corporations are giving bigger and better financial benefits for people that are gay and not giving the same benefits for straight people. For some reason this seems to fall off of the equality for everybody issues that seem to always be coming up in homosexual vs. heterosexual arguments. I guess I just dont understand how people can fight to be equal with everyone, but then expect to have different support in other areas. It seems that this issue happens in civil rights, racial rights, anything that people say isnt the norm. Newman writes that corporations do this because it seems to increase workers satisfaction and motivates them to do better work. I'm sorry but if I worked for a company that gave more money to someone because they were gay I dont think it would make me more motivated, it would probably make me more pissed off and have a worse work ethic. For years upon years Americans have been fighting for equality in every aspect you could think of. People either need to give up on the fact that were not all equal, or actually make things equal so people cant bitch about stupid things anymore.
If I'm understanding this quote correctly its saying that big corporations are giving bigger and better financial benefits for people that are gay and not giving the same benefits for straight people. For some reason this seems to fall off of the equality for everybody issues that seem to always be coming up in homosexual vs. heterosexual arguments. I guess I just dont understand how people can fight to be equal with everyone, but then expect to have different support in other areas. It seems that this issue happens in civil rights, racial rights, anything that people say isnt the norm. Newman writes that corporations do this because it seems to increase workers satisfaction and motivates them to do better work. I'm sorry but if I worked for a company that gave more money to someone because they were gay I dont think it would make me more motivated, it would probably make me more pissed off and have a worse work ethic. For years upon years Americans have been fighting for equality in every aspect you could think of. People either need to give up on the fact that were not all equal, or actually make things equal so people cant bitch about stupid things anymore.
Reflection ch. 8
"In the interests of reducing the welfare rolls, the government enacted massive reforms in 1996. As a result, financial assistance to the poor is no longer a federal entitlement".
With welfare no longer being on the shoulders of the federal government it has put all the weight on the state government. Eligibility for welfare is now only good for two years of receiving benefits, with a five year lifetime limit. The reasoning behind this is to have mandatory work requirements for adults, so they can teach their children to have a good work ethic. When I think of people on welfare the first thing the comes to mind is lazy people that have no incentive to go out and get a job to pay for the things they need to survive in life. Although this may sound harsh and narrow minded this is what I have witnessed growing up in a town with people that are on the welfare system. I completely understand that some people just cant have a job for a certain period of time, however when that period of time starts to grow to over five years I think they are just taking advantage of the system. With people that use the system like it is their job its what puts the bad name on welfare, and is the reason why people assume they are just lazy.
Growing up for the first half of my life my mother was single and shortly fell into the single mother problem of juggling too many things at one time. We were on welfare for almost a year but my mother wouldnt just accept that she needed its services, and was ashamed that she had to use food stamps every week. She did just what the book stated, and what the government wanted to happen with the new welfare plan. She showed me a good work ethic and to never give up on life because it will get better. After we were off welfare life only got better, and still gets better every day. Although I can sit here today and say that a lot of people on welfare are using the system, I can say that there are a few people that use it properly to get them back on their feet.
With welfare no longer being on the shoulders of the federal government it has put all the weight on the state government. Eligibility for welfare is now only good for two years of receiving benefits, with a five year lifetime limit. The reasoning behind this is to have mandatory work requirements for adults, so they can teach their children to have a good work ethic. When I think of people on welfare the first thing the comes to mind is lazy people that have no incentive to go out and get a job to pay for the things they need to survive in life. Although this may sound harsh and narrow minded this is what I have witnessed growing up in a town with people that are on the welfare system. I completely understand that some people just cant have a job for a certain period of time, however when that period of time starts to grow to over five years I think they are just taking advantage of the system. With people that use the system like it is their job its what puts the bad name on welfare, and is the reason why people assume they are just lazy.
Growing up for the first half of my life my mother was single and shortly fell into the single mother problem of juggling too many things at one time. We were on welfare for almost a year but my mother wouldnt just accept that she needed its services, and was ashamed that she had to use food stamps every week. She did just what the book stated, and what the government wanted to happen with the new welfare plan. She showed me a good work ethic and to never give up on life because it will get better. After we were off welfare life only got better, and still gets better every day. Although I can sit here today and say that a lot of people on welfare are using the system, I can say that there are a few people that use it properly to get them back on their feet.
Reflection ch. 7
"State and federal legislation usually reflects public opinion, and public opinion on legalizing same-sex marriage is indeed mixed a this point".
When the controversy of same-sex marriage started to become a popular thing across the country it seemed to bring in very different opinions depending on your geological location. Here in Vermont one would think that everyone was pro same-sex marriage because of its liberal overviews however, in my corner of VT it mast mainly against the idea of same-sex marriage. I think we had more "Take back Vermont" signs in my town, and surrounding towns, then actual road signs. This is why I probably don't agree with same-sex marriage. Although I don't agree with same-sex marriage doesn't mean that I'm completly against homosexuality, because that isn't the case. Honestly, I could care less what people decide to do in their own lives, but allowing them to get married seems wrong to me, and against my catholic beliefs. While I was watching the news the other day there was a new poll that actually showed that 53% of VT residents are now opposed to same-sex marriage, a big change over the last few years.
Newman writes, "Even in Vermont, fewer couples than expected have taken advantage of the state law allowing them to register their civil unions". This last quote made me start to think about all the time, effort, and fighting homosexual couples put into trying to get legal marriages, and civil union rights, and now that they have them they don't use them. I guess I don't see the point in fighting for something that your not going to use once you gain access to it. Maybe its because they're scared to start the trend, I'm not really sure. Like I said before, it doesnt really effect me that much one way or the other, so people can choose to do what they want.
When the controversy of same-sex marriage started to become a popular thing across the country it seemed to bring in very different opinions depending on your geological location. Here in Vermont one would think that everyone was pro same-sex marriage because of its liberal overviews however, in my corner of VT it mast mainly against the idea of same-sex marriage. I think we had more "Take back Vermont" signs in my town, and surrounding towns, then actual road signs. This is why I probably don't agree with same-sex marriage. Although I don't agree with same-sex marriage doesn't mean that I'm completly against homosexuality, because that isn't the case. Honestly, I could care less what people decide to do in their own lives, but allowing them to get married seems wrong to me, and against my catholic beliefs. While I was watching the news the other day there was a new poll that actually showed that 53% of VT residents are now opposed to same-sex marriage, a big change over the last few years.
Newman writes, "Even in Vermont, fewer couples than expected have taken advantage of the state law allowing them to register their civil unions". This last quote made me start to think about all the time, effort, and fighting homosexual couples put into trying to get legal marriages, and civil union rights, and now that they have them they don't use them. I guess I don't see the point in fighting for something that your not going to use once you gain access to it. Maybe its because they're scared to start the trend, I'm not really sure. Like I said before, it doesnt really effect me that much one way or the other, so people can choose to do what they want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)