"Jigsaw Activity" for 4/25

1) Give a quick explanation of the topic and propose a debate resolution of the topic. (a couple of sentences)

In 2004, there was an ammendment passes that stated that the desecration of a US flag. Some think this is a violation to their free speech because supposedly burning a flag is the only moral, honorable way to dispose of a flag.

2) Explain why it is an important topic. You choose what to write about, but here are some suggestions if you are stuck: How does it impact your constitutional rights? Can it impact your daily life? Does it empower or disempowered you as an individual? Does it promote or inhibit public discussion? Does it help or hurt people getting along with one another? (short paragraph)

Well, I think that burning a flag is not a big impact on our everyday lives and that people shouldn't care whether they make it against the law to burn a flag or not. However, apart of the big "Free Speech" ammendment this is tied to, now that's a big part of our lives. There are many things that tie to this and there are still big debates about this today. There is a boundary you cannot pass, there is a big difference of cussing infront of friends and cussing on national television.

3) Write one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the con side and one or two sentences that explain a good point made by the pro side (2-4 sentences total).

The con side makes some good points about how veterans fought hard for their countries freedom. Thought I'd have to side with the pro side considering they have some good points and just one of them is that burning a flag is not even part of "Free Speech" and that it isn't even speech, also it's the only proper/moral way to dispose of a US flag.

The Press in Times of Crisis for 4/24

Assume that our next debate will have the resolution, "The press should be censored in times of crisis."

1) Indicate wheter your reading selection is pro or con for the above resolution and write three things that support the pro or con position on this issue.

My reading selection is pro to the above resolution and I fully support the things that support the pro position on this issue. Just a couple facts to support my thinking is one, the press should be censored because they are one of the main spreaders of rumors. Two, because they can manipulize the actual story into something totally different by releasing only certain video clips, audio clips, or stories/facts out of the many they obtain. And lastly, three, because anything they show may be false, e.g., the documentary we watched in Humanities today.

2) Write a paragraph where you state your opinion on the issue. It should include some evidence from the reading, but it does not have to follow each viewpoint to the letter. You can also include ideas and evidence from other sources or individuals.

My opinion on this issue is that the media should be censored in times of crisis because they influence the people, and the people influence the government. The people can revolt, protest, and make motions to change the ways of our government. So if the media shows you something false or an opinionated story, and you decide to stand up for what you believe in, you could end up changing the government in a bad or useless way. You want to get your facts straight and make sure of it because if you are reading, hearing, or seeing is false, and you start a protest/motion about it- the matter will only end up staying the same or getting worse.

Don Imus Controversy for 4/19

ANSWER ALL THREE QUESTIONS and post on your blog. Don't forget to put the questions in bold.
Short Answer: a few sentences for each question:
1. According to the NAACP, why should Imus be silenced?

Because he needs to be silenced for what he said to start a movement to get rid of the dirty language that is being used in the media.

2. According to Frank Rich, why should Imus not be silenced?

Because there are many other things being said on the air that are way more wrong and dirty then what Imus said. The NAACP is just picking on Imus because he's white and it's unfair that other races can say those words and it won't be wrong but for some people it will end up getting you fired? This doesn't make any sense because it is being extremely unfair to certain races.

Long Answer: Write a short essay, w/ intro, body and conclusion, about 4-5 paragraphs with at least 4 sentences each.
3. Do you think Imus should be silenced? Why?

Imus definitely shouldn't be silenced, you just have to read the first paragraph of this summary and know what the NAACP is doing to Don Imus is wrong. He's white and says something that would be alowd from a black person and he gets in trouble, the NAACP is being racist in doing so because it is unfair for one race to be alowd to say some things and the other race not alowd to say those things.
That would go against the whole "Everyone is equal," statement that I've heard so many places but the thing is that isn't true in this case. The NAACP is accusing Imus for saying something wrong when he didn't do anything wrong because going back to what I said before the NAACP would not take this out of perspective if he was black. This comment has got to get heard because I'm sure many people would agree.
Caucasian people have the hard life when it comes to Freedom Of Speed because there are words that will offend other races if you call them that, however, if someone from the same race call them that they'll take it as a "Hey man!" or something like that. It seems like only some black people will refer to someone from the same race as the N word. I think this because I've never heard another Mexican, Caucasion, or Asian person refer to a "friend" of their own race as the racist word for each one, (You know which ones I'm talking about).
In conclusion, I think that it is unfair and what the NAACP is doing to Imus. I don't know if this would be a good idea, but maybe give Imus his job back with a warning and an agreement that he won't refer to inicent people with racial words that can be very offensive to a certain race.

Plato Reading and Blog for 4/18

2. What is your reaction to the ending of the section? What is good and/or bad about the type of society outlined by Socrates?

Restricting the arts will not benefit the men, that's for sure. In doing this he's restricting the mens creative release and I'm predicting that this will start a revolt against Socrates. This might make his society last a while longer but in the end the men will realize that they do not need to comply to the stupid laws Socrates has laid out to them. This will definitely have a bad effect on this community and restrictions such as this one, is definitely going to be broken some time or later.