Arguments For and Against Minimum Wage within the US

Patrick Tawadros, Corinne Dexter, Mark Hanna, Yuanwen Dong

Mediated Speech Outline – Minimum Wage


I. Introduction

  1. In this country, regardless of views and opinions, the controversial topic of minimal wage has resounding effects on staff, businesses, and customers alike.
  2. We will attempt to parse out the gory details by debating the professionals and cons of: growing the minimal wage.
  3. We have done in depth research, in addition to worked our fair share of minimum wage jobs giving us the ability to speak confidently on matters associated to minimum wage.

  4. It’s likely most of you may have minimum wage jobs supplying you with something to relate. If you don’t work for minimal wage you’re most likely nonetheless a client and thus both by way of wage will increase or value will increase the outcomes of this debate will have an impact in your life.
  5. There are robust arguments each for and in opposition to elevating the minimum wage including
    1. The potential to enhance health, teachers, and scale back crime rates.
    2. The potential to lead to a spike in unemployment
    3. The potential to minimize back poverty levels
    4. And finally the potential to lower demand

How might just some dollars do all this? Well let’s begin with the primary: health lecturers and crime.

II. Body

  1. Pro Argument 1 (PATRICK TAWADROS): Increasing the minimum wage would have optimistic well being results, enhance lecturers within the total sense, and cut back crime rates.
    1. Increasing minimum wage sustains a wholesome inhabitants and lowers mortality.
      1. In a study carried out by Rajiv Bhatia, MD, on the California minimum wage, it was discovered that the next minimal wage would finally allow staff to have enough to eat, be extra prone to train, and even stop premature deaths (Bhatia).

      2. In another examine conducted by Barhii, he “concluded that insurance policies that reduce poverty and raise wages of low-income folks may be anticipated to considerably enhance general well being and reduce well being inequities” (Barhii).
    2. To add to the added well being advantages, increasing minimum wage would enhance college attendance, while simultaneously reducing high school dropout charges.
      1. Teens dwelling in poverty are twice as prone to miss three or extra days of faculty per thirty days when in comparability with teens who don’t live in poverty (Bhatia).
    3. A higher minimum wage would scale back crime.
      1. In a research carried out by the Executive Office of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors, it was discovered that by raising minimum wage to $12 by the year 2020 that there would be a three to five p.c crime decrease. This is primarily because of the reality that larger wages provide viable and sustainable employment. (Executive Office of the President)
      2. In one other study performed at the University of Virginia, it was discovered that an increase in wages is related to a reduction in property-related crimes. (Fernandez)
  2. Response to pro argument (con) (YUANWEN): At first look, the increasing of minimal wage would permit individuals of lower incomes to live a better life. But growing minimal wages adds many potential threats to the equilibrium of the free market. The net impact of this interference is not necessarily good. To specify, growing minimum wage will trigger higher unemployment price, and has no significant links to lowering the crimes..
    1. There is few proof to show that there is a hyperlink between the increasing of minimal wages and decreasing of crime rates. According to a study conducted by Boston College in 2013, “‘crime will enhance by 1.9 percentage points amongst 14-30 year-olds because the minimal wage increases.’” (Fuller).
    2. Due to the upper unemployment price brought on by the growing of minimum wage, a variety of the subsequent technology won’t be able to afford the education. In 2009, a examine by the American Journal of Economics and Sociology found that in Maryland, “a 25-percent improve in the true minimum wage was related to a 0.55 % improve in the dropout rate for Hispanic college students.” (Crofton, Anderson, and Rawe).
  3. Con argument (YUANWEN): On the contrary, increasing the minimal wage would drive business to lay off more employees to save tons of budgets and raise the unemployment rates.
    1. Sub point 1: Increasing minimum wage will elevate the value of companies, lower their employment ranges, and cause larger unemployment rate.
      1. Raising minimal wage will increase the price of businesses, forcing businesses to put off extra employees. The Congressional Budget Office predicted a $7.25 to $10.10 minimum wage increase could potentially cost 500,000 jobs. (Congressional Budget Office).
      2. Increasing minimum wages will decrease the willingness of companies to hire more employers, because of the rise of the fee. There was a survey conducted of 1,213 businesses and human assets professionals and 38% of the employers who payed minimal wage mentioned they would resort to letting go some employees if it was raised to $10.10. Among them 54% said they might decrease hiring levels (Kast).
      3. Statistically, comparing to countries that wouldn’t have minimal wage coverage, countries with minimal wage policy have higher rate of unemployment. In 2014, Steve H. Hanke, Professor of Applied Economics at Johns Hopkins University, conducted a survey of the 21 European Union international locations that had a minimal wage and discovered that they had a median unemployment price of about eleven.8%, which was a 3rd greater than the 7.9% common within the remaining EU international locations with no minimum wage (Hanke).
    2. Sub level 2: Increasing minimum wage will put lower-skilled worker at a disadvantage, since the rise of wage exposes those lower-skilled to the identical competitors with those extra skilled.
      1. Raising minimal wage will put lower-skilled workers at disadvantages. From an employer’s point of view, folks of decrease skills don’t justify the rise of minimal wages, however they have no selection however to hitch the competition with the more expert, if minimal wages are elevated. James Dorn acknowledged that a minimum wage improve by 10% “leads to a 1-3% lower in employment of low-skilled workers” within the quick time period, and “to a larger lower within the long run” (Dorn).
      2. Increasing minimal wages places lower-skilled staff at a disadvantages by forcing them to be exposed to the same competition with people who find themselves extra expert. George Reisman acknowledged that if the minimum wage was increased to $10.10, “‘jobs that presently pay $7.25 had to pay $10.10, than employees who previously would not have considered those jobs due to their capacity to earn $8, $9, or $10 per hour, will now contemplate them. The effect is to reveal the employees whose skills do not exceed a degree similar to $7.25 per hour to the competitors of better educated, more skilled workers presently in a place to earn wage rates ranging from just above $7.25 to just beneath $10.10.’” (Reisman).
  4. Response to con argument (CORINNE): Despite the claim of an increase in unemployment, research on past minimal wage hikes have shown little effect on unemployment in each federal mandated and state mandated hikes.
    1. Sub level 1: A case study of the quick food business which compared two states, New Jersey and Pennsylvania after New Jersey elevated the minimum wage, and Pennsylvania did not, showed that there is “‘no proof that the rise in New Jersey’s minimal wage lowered employment at fast-food restaurants in the state’” (Card, Krueger). The department of labor statistics additional contends that in 65 years of federal minimum wage hikes, unemployment rates prior to now have generally gone down, or stayed the identical after will increase within the minimum wage with just one exception in the 70’s and that unemployment spike is linked to different causes such as recession and an power crisis (Real Minimum Wage…). History shows that it secure to assume that if anything a higher minimum wage will put extra money in people’s pockets for use for discretionary spending which is ready to stimulate the market or hold it the identical, but not improve unemployment.
  1. Pro argument (CORINNE): What, hoever, minimum wage increases always do, is reduce poverty and in turn cut back authorities spending.
    1. Sub point 1: Currently, the minimal wage just isn’t sufficient to stay on. The economic coverage institute using authorities sources discovered that the average price of dwelling in the united states, excluding discretionary spending is roughly $50,000 greater than what a minimum-wage employee earns (Cooper). As a result many people are either barely making it by, or are under the poverty line entirely and counting on authorities help to take action. In the 2014 Congressional Budget Office report, it showed that growing the minimal wage to $9 would lift 300,000 folks out of poverty, whereas raising it to $10.10 would bring 900,000 folks out of poverty (Congressional Budget Office). Accounting for inflation minimum wage should really be even higher at $10.fifty two or more depending on where somebody lives implying that poverty charges might shrink even decrease with a extra aggressive elevate (Cooper).
    2. Sub point 2: By helping families survive off the the diligent work that they do we are additionally serving to the taxpayer burden. It was reported in 2014 by The Center for American Progress that by raising the minimal wage to $10.10, SNAP spending would decline by $4.6 billion (West, Reich). Likewise The Economic Policy Institute came upon that by making the minimal wage to be $10.10, a minimum of 1.7 million Americans would not rely upon government help applications (Cooper). The wage increase would save $7.6 billion on annual government spending for income-support applications (Cooper). This money could both go back into the pockets of the everyday particular person or be used for different helpful applications.
  1. Response to pro argument (MARK HANNA): Unfortunately a lower in authorities spending for revenue support packages may result in unintended adverse sideeffects down the road for the poor and unemployed.
    1. People who’ve then been laid off would suffer from reductions in advantages due to congressional budget cuts to programs such as the supplemental vitamin help program (SNAP, previously called food stamps), short-term assistance for needy families (TANF), the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), child-care subsidies, housing vouchers, and Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) because of the profit charges fading as earnings rises (Sherk, 2013). Those people nonetheless employed would have the power to afford extra so the necessity for these packages would diminish and as extra people will have to use these defunded applications as unemployment will increase, poverty will rise because the price range won’t be able to help them (Sherk, 2013).
    2. The standard of living will also increase as minimal wage will increase. In a examine conducted by Purdue University’s School of Hospitality and Tourism Management, they discovered that growing wages to $22 an hour raises client costs by 25% (McClure, 2015).
  2. Con argument (MARK HANNA): Thus, raising the minimal wage would really decrease demand for market growth and merchandise because of greater prices, leading to negative long run outcomes for families and the financial system.
    1. Studies show that if the minimal wage was to increase from $7.25 an hour to $10.10 an hour, the demand for workers would decrease and many individuals would get laid off. Meanwhile, those who weren’t laid off pay 15% extra on payroll and earnings taxes for each extra dollar that’s added to the minimum wage (Sherk, 2013). This decrease in demand may have unavoidable negative consequences for unskilled staff and their households in the long run within the type of much less opportunity for employment and ability acquisition. Chaplin, Mark, and Andreas (2003) found by way of a study they performed that rising the minimal wage would “lower the continuation price for grades 9-12 in states with dropout ages beneath 18.”
    2. Raising the minimum wage will trigger demand to fall for what James and Mary Kau (1973) name “industrial incentive,” which is described as the inducement for trade to progress itself ahead. This fall in incentive was documented in a research carried out by Van Sickle (1946), where he discovered that the south was booming with industrialization for a couple of a long time then plummeted after the Fair Labor Standards Act was passed. The rising prices created by low demand for work would also impede competitors, as the worth of manufacturing of goods from the south to the north would improve (Kau & Kau, 1973).
  3. Response to con argument (PATRICK TAWADROS): Long term effects of the minimum wage being increased do not have an result on instructional alternatives for teen workers and don’t hurt demand for client items.
    1. In an journal article by Warren and Hamrock (2010), they describe how the consequences of a minimal wage increase wouldn’t impact teen staff who weren’t already doing poorly academically as others say it could. They claim it would solely impression those who would have had “a historical past of failure; who usually are not engaged in significant extracurricular, social or athletic actions in class; and, perhaps most importantly, who’re able to meaningfully improve their ranges of labor market participation” (Warren & Hamrock, 2010). They proceed to state that if the elevate would impact a sure academic subset, it would be these college students who’re competing with adults for jobs and/or who would be dropouts both method (Warren & Hamrock, 2010).
    2. Minimum wage will increase do not influence market development as innovation has all the time been outrunning minimal wage will increase. This is proven in an article published by The Economist (2015), stating that in most developed nations minimum wages rise with revenue ranges, however in America that’s not the case, as one would suppose that in a country with a GDP of $53,000 per particular person, the minimum wage should be at least $12 an hour, but it is not. Therefore, as a outcome of it has not stored up with revenue rises, it cannot be safely mentioned that elevating the minimum wage kills innovation.

Thus far, what have we discovered from our discussion? Let’s recap.

III. Conclusion:

  1. Ultimately, growing minimal wage might reduce poverty, therefore, bettering well being, educational efficiency, and lowering crime charges. However, then again, increasing minimal wage could stress enterprise to lay off employees and could lower demand for labor and merchandise.
  2. Regardless of perspective, the controversial and divisive matter of minimum wage is a far reaching concern in the United States of America and so you will need to weigh all sides equally to return to a balanced conclusion.

Works Cited

Patrick’s Pro Argument Sources

  • Executive Office of the President, Council of Economic Advisors, “Economic Perspectives on Incarceration and the Criminal Justice System,” whitehouse.gov, Apr. 2016
  • Fernandez, J., Holman, T., & Pepper, J. V. (2014). The Impact of Living‐Wage Ordinances on Urban Crime. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 53(3), 478-500.
  • Rajiv Bhatia, “Health Impacts of Raising California’s Minimum Wage,” Human Impact Partners web site, May 2014
  • Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative (BARHII) “The Minimum Wage and Health: A Bay Area Analysis,” barhii.org, Oct. 2014
  • Warren, J., & Hamrock, C. (2010). The Effect of Minimum Wage Rates on High School Completion. Social Forces, 88(3), 1379-1392. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu/stable/40645895
  • The Economist. (2015, May 20). Pay dust. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/05/minimum-wages

Corinne’s Pro Sources:

  • Card, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2000). Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania: Reply. American Economic

Review,90(5), 1397-1420. doi:10.1257/aer.ninety.5.1397

  • Cooper, David. Raising the Federal Minimum Wage to $10.10 Would Save Safety Net Programs Billions and Help Ensure Businesses Are Doing Their Fair Share. Issue temporary no. 387. New York: Economic Policy Institute, 2014. Print.
  • Real Minimum Wage Rate vs Unemployment Rates January 1950 to January 2013 [Chart].

(2013.). In Bureau of Labor Statistics .

  • Reich, Michael, and Rachel West. “The Effects of Minimum Wages on Food Stamp Enrollment and Expenditures.” Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society fifty four.4 (2015): 668-94. Web.
  • The Effects of Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income. Rep. no. 4856. N.p.: Congressional Budget Office, 2014. Print.

Yuanwen’s Con Sources:

  • Congressional Budget Office, “The Effects of Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income,” cbo.gov, Feb. 2014
  • Kast, S., “New Express Employment Professionals Survey of Employers Shows 38% of Those Who Pay Minimum Wage Will Lay Off Workers If Wage Is Hiked,” prweb.com, Mar. 19, 2014
  • Hanke, S.H., “Let the Data Speak: The Truth Behind Minimum Wage Laws,” Cato Institute website, Apr. 2014
  • Dorn, J., “The Minimum Wage Delusion, and the Death of Common Sense,” Forbes, May 7, 2013
  • Reisman, G., “How Minimum Wage Laws Increase Poverty”, Mises Institute website, Apr. four, 2014
  • Crofton, S.O., Anderson, W.L., & Rawe, E.C., “Do Higher Real Minimum Wages Lead to More High School Dropouts? Evidence from Maryland throughout Races, 1993-2004,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Apr. 2009
  • Fuller, D., “Multilevel Study Finds No Link Between Minimum Wage and Crime Rates,” uc.edu, Nov 18, 2013

Mark’s Con Sources

  • Sherk, J. (2013, June 25). What is Minimum Wage: Its History and Effects on the Economy. Retrieved from http://www2.heritage.org/research/testimony/2013/06/what-is-minimum-wage-its-history-and-effects-on-the-economy
  • Chaplin, D. D., Turner, M. D., & Pape, A. D. (2003). Minimum wages and school enrollment of youngsters: a take a glance at the 1990’s. Economics of Education Review, 22(1), 11-21.
  • Van Sickle, John, “Geographical Aspects of a Minimum Wage,” Harvard Business Review, XXIV (Spring 1946), 288.
  • Kau, J., & Mary L. Kau. (1973). Social Policy Implications of the Minimum Wage Law. Policy Sciences, 4(1), 21-27. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxy.libraries.rutgers.edu/stable/4531512
  • McClure, G. (2015, July 27). Study: Raising wages to $15 an hour for limited-service restaurant employees would increase prices four.3 percent. Retrieved from http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2015/Q3/study-raising-wages-to-15-an-hour-for-limited-service-restaurant-employees-would-raise-prices-4.3-percent.html

Arguments for and Against Keeping Animals in Zoos

Zооs аrguе thаt thеy sаvе еndаngеrеd spеciеs аnd еducаtе thе public, but аnimаl rights аctivists bеliеvе thе cоsts оutwеigh thе bеnеfits, аnd the viоlatiоn оf thе right оf thе individuаl аnimаls is unjustifiаblе.

Rоаdsidе zооs, pеtting zооs, аnd smаllеr аnimаl еxhibitоrs tеnd tо kееp thе аnimаls in smаllеr pеns оr cаgеs.

Sоmеtimеs, bаrrеn cоncrеtе аnd mеtal bаrs is аll а tigеr оr bеаr will knоw fоr thеir еntirе livеs, Lаrgеr, аccrеditеd zооs attempt tо distаncе thеmsеlvеs frоm thеsе оpеrаtiоns by tоuting hоw wеll thе аnimаls аrе trеаtеd, but tо аnimаl rights аctivists, thе issuе nоt hоw wеll thе аnimаls arе trеаtеd, however whеthеr wе hаvе а proper tо cоnfinе thеm fеr оur аmusеmеnt оr “еducаtiоn”.

Arguments For Zoos

* By bringing pеople and animals collectively, zoos educate the public and foster an appreciation of the animals. This exposure and education motivates folks to protect the animals. * Zoos save endangered species by bringing them right into a protected setting, the place they’re shielded from poachers, habitat loss, starvation and predators.

* Many zoos even have breeding packages for endangered species. In the wild, these individuals might have trouble discovering mates and breeding. * Reputable zoos are accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums and are held to excessive standards for the treatment of the animals. According to the AZA, accreditation means, “official recognition and approval of a zoo or aquarium by a group of experts.” * A good zoo supplies an enriched habitat by which the animals are by no means bored, are properly cared-for, and have plenty of space.

* Zoos are a tradition, and a visit to a zoo is a wholesome, household exercise. * Seeing an animal in particular person is a a lot more private and more memorable experience than seeing that animal in a nature documentary. * Some would argue that people have little, if any responsibility to non-animals as a outcome of humans are extra important, and if keeping animals in zoos serves any instructional or entertainment purposes, we will ethically do it. * Zoos assist rehabilitate wildlife and soak up exotic pets that folks now not need or are no longer able to take care of. * Both accredited and unaccredited animal exhibitors are regulated by the federal Animal Welfare Act, which establishes requirements for care. Arguments Against Zoos

* From an animal rights standpoint, we don’t have a proper to breed, capture and confine different animals, even if they’re endangered. Being a member of an endangered species doesn’t mean the person animals have fewer rights. * Animals in captivity suffer from stress, boredom and confinement. Intergenerational bonds are damaged when people get offered or traded to different zoos, and no pen and even drive-through safari can compare to the liberty of the wild. * Baby animals usher in visitors and money, but this incentive to breed new child animals leads to overpopulation. Surplus animals are offered not only to other zoos, but in addition to circuses, canned hunting facilities, and even for slaughter. * The overwhelming majority of captive breeding packages do not launch animals again into the wild. The offspring are forever part of the chain of zoos, circuses, petting zoos, and exotic pet commerce that buy, sell and barter animals among themselves and exploit animals. Ned the Asian elephant was born at an accredited zoo, but later confiscated from an abusive circus trainer and at last despatched to a sanctuary.

* Removing individuals from the wild will additional endanger the wild inhabitants because the remaining people will be much less genetically diverse and may have more problem discovering mates. * If individuals want to see wild animals in actual life, they will observe wildlife in the wild or visit a sanctuary. A true sanctuary does not buy, sell, or breed animals, but takes in unwanted exotic pets, surplus animals from zoos or injured wildlife that may now not survive within the wild. * An individual’s rights shouldn’t be infringed for the sake of the species. A species just isn’t asentient being and subsequently has no rights. * If zoos are teaching children anything, it’s that imprisoning animals for our personal entertainment is appropriate. * At least one examine has shown that elephants kept in zoos do not reside so lengthy as elephants within the wild.

* The federal Animal Welfare Act establishes solely essentially the most minimal standards for cage measurement, shelter, well being care, air flow, fencing, meals and water. For instance, enclosures should present “sufficient house to permit each animal to make regular postural and social changes with sufficient freedom of movement. Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor situation, debility, stress, or irregular habits patterns.” Violations often result in a slap on the wrist and the exhibitor is given a deadline to correct the violation. Even an extended historical past of inadequate care and AWA violations, such because the historical past of Tony the Truck Stop Tiger, won’t free the animals.

* Sanctuaries also rehabilitate wildlife and soak up undesirable exotic pets, with out breeding, buying and promoting animals like zoos do. * Animals generally escape their enclosures, endangering themselves in addition to folks. There have even been incidents of zoo animals consuming other zoo animals. In the case of zoos, both sides will argue that their facet saves animals. Zoo proponents don’t consider in animal rights, so most of the arguments in opposition to zoos aren’t persuasive to them, whereas different arguments could appear to use solely to inferior zoos, such as roadside zoos and petting zoos.

Arguments for abortion and against abortions

The associated subject between the four articles listed under is abortion. There will all the time be an argument for abortion and in opposition to abortions. As a women, I can relate to each side; pro-choice and pro-life. The fact that the federal government is attempting to take away the choice for an abortions, raises lots of questions to me. Why shouldn’t girls have a choice? Krause, K. W. (2011, July-August). Abortion’s nonetheless unanswered questions.

The Humanist, 71(4), 40+.

Kenneth W. Krause is a contributing editor to “The Good Book.

” He is known as a humanist. Krause is also identified for placing hot topics underneath fire. The associated topic is about abortions. His article places the unanswered questions about abortion on the highlight within the article listed above. In Krause’s article, he questions what precisely “we” learn about abortions. KAMINER, W. (2000).

Abortion and Autonomy.

The American Prospect, 11(14), 40

Wendy Kaminer is a author and a lawyer. She primarily writes her books based mostly on social points and feminism issues.

Kamier’s article “Abortion and Autonomy” factors out the methods the legal guidelines have both protected abortion and pushed against them. The article reveals each opinions about pro-choice and pro-life. Kaminer actually believes the feminist motion has been “fractured”. She additionally makes points in her article about how the regulation has had an affect on abortions. McBride, A. December 2006. Roe v. Wade (1973).

Pbs.org

Alex McBride is a 3rd yr law scholar at Tulan Law School. He at present is clerking with Judge Susan Braden in Washington. McBrides article, Roe v.

Wade (1973), he explains the process in 1973 to keep abortion authorized. Norma L McCovey (Roe) claimed Texas criminalizing Roes proper to have an abortion. She mentioned the law was unconstitutional to her rights. McCovey’s rights were protected by the constitution. However, there have been pointers set to particularly outline whether or not a lady can have an abortion.

Joseph, C. (2011). Dems Spoiling for Planned Parenthood Fight. National Journal. Cameron Joseph is a young political journalist. He is at present working in Washington D.C writing about the re-election of Obama. The article listed above is about the republicans “defunding” Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is a company that provides contraception and in addition performs abortions. Indiana officers say that taking funding for Medicaid to fund Planned Parenthood is unlawful. “To stop pregnancy or abortions, why don’t we fund organizations that provide contraception to prevent abortions?”

Arguments for and Against Corporate Social Responsibility

“A business’s obligation to observe targets which might be good for both group and society within the long-term, and usually are not required by legislation.” Corporate Social Responsibility The term “corporate social responsibility” got here in to frequent use within the early Seventies. It means the obligation of a corporation in path of society in order to prove itself accountable about its actions and their results on surroundings, group and external stakeholders. It implies that a corporation is responsible for all its action in course of the people who find themselves affected by its actions and processes.

Therefore, corporate social duty may be outlined as: “Operating a enterprise in a way that meets or exceeds the ethical, authorized, commercial and public expectations that society has of business.” The Socioeconomic View

The Socioeconomic view acknowledged that it is the duty of managers and all group s to deal with public pursuits as well as their profits. Each group should be responsible for all its actions which may hurt or benefit neighborhood and should take actions to stop any malpractices in its operations, finance, advertising and human resource departments.

Business organizations should not only act for their own revenue but also for the welfare of group. They ought to take an lively part in happenings in the society and will perform such actions which can improve the political, economical, social and environmental circumstances of the society. In brief, corporate social responsibility makes a company to play its role in the enchancment and welfare of society. Arguments For and Against Corporate Social Responsibility

According to Classical view of social accountability of a corporation, the management and managers of a corporation are responsible for maximizing organizational earnings solely.

It just isn’t their duty to care for public interest. The solely objective of creating a enterprise is to generate earnings and due to this fact, he solely responsibility of managers is to maximize profits and scale back prices of doing enterprise. Given are a few of the arguments for and towards corporate social accountability:

1-Corporations as Moral Agents Business organizations are an essential a half of any society and play an necessary position in determining the economic and social situation of any society. As organizations are thought-about as one of the main factors affecting economy of a country, they should be accountable of what they’re giving to the society. They generate income by promoting their merchandise and providers to clients and, therefore, ought to be answerable for any good or bad results of their actions and merchandise on customers.

On the opposite hand, the proponents of this view state that organizations must be accountable only for generating profits. As the owners or traders are also a part of neighborhood, the group performs its obligation by maximizing the wealth of their shareholders. The sole function of an organization is not to serve society by getting involved in welfare actions. The group serves the community by making products and rendering services. Therefore, there isn’t a other obligation of a corporation towards society.

2-Social Responsibility and Economic Performance

The advocates of corporate social accountability state that by getting concerned in neighborhood services, an organization will get an opportunity to enhance its revenues. The social welfare activities enhance the nice will of the organization and make its corporate image better than its opponents. Customers choose to buy services and products from a company which proves it to be socially responsible.

Those who say that group should not be socially accountable state that such activities enhance the price of doing business. As one of many main targets of a enterprise is to scale back the prices, such practices are in opposition with advantage of business homeowners.

For instance, investing in a manufacturing plant which emits much less carbon to the setting wants greater expenses as compared to the conventional, cheap plant however is harmful for surroundings is a question for managers.

3-Social Responsibility and Ethics

Organizations shouldn’t be involved in any type of practices which can give rise to the sensation of inequity and unfair actions in society. Discrimination primarily based on gender, race and nationality is one major action which is considered because the social duty of organizations. When giving promotions to employees, each particular person ought to be given an equal chance to advance within the career and ought to be treated fairly.

The proponents of corporate social duty also admit the fact that the organizational practices should be ethical in nature however to a restricted extent. The practices shouldn’t hurt anybody but ought to place organizational curiosity before the community interest.

4-Social Responsibility and Environment A company must produce goods and providers that are helpful to society while making sure that the processes of manufacturing additionally keep away from harm, similar to pollution. The initiatives similar to green management and environment friendly products make it clear that prospects need to purchase the merchandise that are secure for them and do not harm setting. They also prefer those organizations which prove that they are not damaging the natural setting of earth in any case. On the opposite hand, the proponents of the view state that saving environment might enhance the price of their business and will make the organization less efficient in numerous its practices. They put the question of buying one type of machinery over the opposite which is surroundings friendly but incurs large costs.

Conclusion In order to get higher monetary performance and good will, it’s higher for a company to realize its corporate social accountability and manage all its operations in an moral way. Only an improved society can result in an improved enterprise which is in favor of both inner and exterior stakeholders of a company. More and more organizations are taking severe steps to become involved in socially responsible actions and consider it worthwhile in the long in addition to short run.

Arguments Against Slavery in the British Caribbean

As a newspaper reporter in 1825, write an article presenting arguments AGAINST slavery within the British Caribbean under the next headings: i) Economic ii) Religiousiii) Humanitarian

On each road corner, in each household, on each tongue and on each wall, contradictory views on the system of slavery are being disputed. The public is being bombarded by the economic, spiritual and humanitarian views of slavery. The urgent concern that might be highlighted in today’s article is the arguments towards slavery.

The economic arguments in opposition to slavery think about the economic losses skilled by planters and their interests (like the West India Interest etc) from having a system of compelled labour as opposed to free paid labour.

It is argued that slavery is uneconomic as provisions have to be made to the control of slaves. These provisions are dearer than the employment of free labour.Slavery is dear if you add up the prices of buying and maintaining the slaves and paying towards the forces needed to prevent revolts.

The economist, Adam Smith, in his book “The Wealth of the Nation” wrote that ‘the work of free men comes cheaper in the end than carried out by slaves.’ Slavery makes the slaves a reluctant labour force and so the slaves fell that their labour is useless as all of the earnings go to the master as the slaves usually are not allowed to personal something, not even themselves.The investments in slaves are actually being wasted as they are dying in massive numbers from measles, yaws, dysentery and other illnesses.

Also slavery is allowing the countries in the British Caribbean, example Jamaica, to turn into monocultural which is dangerous to our financial system; as a lot of the revenue comes from there. It could be mentioned that the most important point that might be argued is that British industrial growth could be stimulated by free trade because the retailers would be able to buy cheaper goods elsewhere as there would now not be mercantilism. Adam Smith also stated in his book that ‘the laws which stood in the way of free trade were dangerous for the prosperity of a rustic as a complete.’

In addition, the religious arguments that had been presented by the humanitarians were few; they were used towards the enslavement of people. These arguments were from the Christian individuals in England. They are stressing that slavery is opposite to the desire of God. Also, it is said within the bible to “love thy neighbor as thyself”; nonetheless the system of slavery engendered hate rather than position. All males are equal in the sight of God however slaves were subjugated to the need of their grasp. They believe it’s morally wrong to be concerned in slavery. The system of slavery violates the notion of justice as it is based on the exploitation of the slaves’ labor with nearly complete disregard for his or her rights.

The humanitarian arguments are offered as justification for the abolition of slavery. Supporters of slavery argue that slavery is inhumane, unjust merciless, unjust and that punishment meted out to slaves is harsh and brutal. It is also argued that the system of slavery dehumanizes and humiliates slaves as it regards them as part of stock, not as human beings. It is believed that slave house owners are not concerned with the wellbeing of their slaves, as food, clothes, housing and medical care are often inadequate. This can be believed to be the rationale the slaves typically fall prey to a number of ailments. It can additionally be argued that slaves weren’t protected by the law.

The colonial laws for the management of slaves are seen as repressive and do not present security for them. The judicial system is believed to be titled towards the slaves. This particular person seems so as some judges and magistrates are themselves slave owners, and they did not allow slaves to offer evidence against a white individual. Slaves also posses no legal right to own any property; they don’t have any proper to their families, determine or even their names.

The incontrovertible reality that slavery is already existent in Africa is an argument referred to many times in assist of slavery, however it’s typically argued that the conditions of slavery in the Caribbean are far worst than the situations of the domestic slavery practiced in Africa. Speaking of Africa, additionally it is believed that slavery has triggered plenty of civil war within the continent. The slave trade, it’s believed, had led to inter-tribal warfare in Africa, and destroyed household and political structures in its time, leaving the continent in full devastation.

Argumentative Essay Against Euthanasia

Introduction
Euthanasia is the follow of intentionally killing a person to spare him or her from having to cope with more pain and struggling. This is always a controversial concern because of the ethical and moral elements that are involved. This paper will focus on the arguments towards euthanasia.

Discussion
Euthanasia is clearly towards the Hippocratic Oath that each one docs need to fulfil. This oath principally states that medical doctors must never be involved within the killing of individuals as a outcome of in any case, they have been educated to guarantee that persons are in a position to get well from their diseases and accidents.

Doctors are the ones whom folks entrust their lives every time there’s something wrong with their well being. Thus, it is the duty of the doctors to at all times do the most effective they’ll to assist individuals stay and enjoy their lives (Cavan 48). If their patients die beneath their supervision, the doctors can settle for this for so long as they know and may show that they really did their best and exhausted all prospects to make sure the survival of the sufferers.

There are just sure cases the place the disease or the damage of the patients has turn into so critical that it is already difficult to treat and make the patients recover. In these cases, it is unfair accountable the docs for the dying of the sufferers. The Hippocratic Oath helps the doctors to understand how necessary their responsibilities are to the folks when it comes to their health. This oath also provides an assurance to the people that they’ll trust their docs and be assured that they’ll do no matter is critical to assist them cope with their health problems.

If euthanasia becomes legalized, then the effectiveness of the Hippocratic Oath shall be negated and the docs can have the option of immediately resorting to euthanasia especially in troublesome cases as a substitute of trying their finest until the very end.

Another argument against euthanasia is that it is essentially homicide
as a end result of the docs will kill the affected person even when it has been accredited by the affected person himself or the household of the affected person. Euthanasia isn’t that totally different from homicide because they both involve killing a person. The only distinction is that in euthanasia, there might be mercy and consent involved while in homicide there might be none (Tulloch 82). If murder is prohibited by law because individuals take matters into their own arms and kill others, then euthanasia must also be banned because medical doctors take matters into their own hands and kill their patients even if there is consent from the sufferers and their households or relatives.

Lastly, the continued enhancements and improvements in the area of medication and health care make euthanasia illogical to be carried out as an choice. The reason why medical experts continue to work exhausting to give you improved medical technologies, medicines and therapy methods is that they need to be positive that the sick persons are able to recover quicker and wholesome individuals become even healthier. All of those efforts are being carried out to make the society turn out to be more productive because of the presence of healthy and strong individuals (McDougall 26). Thus, docs won’t have an excuse for not doing their finest for his or her sufferers as they already have entry to the most effective medical applied sciences, medicines and remedy methods that can stop them from having to resort to euthanasia as the one choice.

Conclusion
There is little question that euthanasia must be banned as primarily based on the three arguments mentioned above, it doesn’t deserve a spot in human society. Doctors must never give up on their sufferers regardless of how hopeless the state of affairs might be. They should exhaust all options to give their sufferers a combating probability to outlive and

Arguments Against Plastic Surgery

It isn’t a secret that the requirements of magnificence these days are rather strict and demanding. No matter what combatants against discrimination say, appearances that match the prevailing beauty requirements stay one of the crucial traits of a modern individual. People who’re discontent with their appearances have alternative ways of bettering the greatest way they give the impression of being, corresponding to makeup, clothes, or being in harmony with themselves. However, there is a extra radical different, which is efficient when it comes to altering the means in which a person seems like, but is highly debated and ought to be abstained from in the majority of instances: plastic surgery.

The foremost cause for not getting plastic surgery is that this procedure can become extremely addictive (Huffington Post). Although an individual might suppose they would do a single improvement, the temptation to keep “adjusting” one’s look can turn out to be overwhelming and lead to unpredictable and infrequently unhappy outcomes. The best examples of this are ladies like Cindy Jackson (who got fifty five plastic surgical procedures, which is a world record), or Jocelyn Wildenstein, who’s rumored to have spent about 4 million dollars on plastic surgical procedures.

The “before and after” pictures of her can be discovered online easily, so you can also make your conclusions trying on the outcomes of the quite a few plastic surgical procedures she has undergone. Janice Dickinson, Michael Jackson, Courtney Love, and different famous personalities who had undergone plastic surgeries can also be good examples of why this sort of surgery must be abstained from.

Plastic surgery does not solve the main drawback of the person who decides to endure it, which is being discontented along with his or her look.

Such a person ought to somewhat concentrate on solving his or her inner issues and should pay more consideration to what goes on within themselves quite than on the surface of their bodies (MindBodyGreen). In the case of an aging individual, it may be the concern of death or the feeling that they don’t have a youthful appearance anymore that causes them to vary their appearance. If a person is overweight, they should consider changing their food plan and life-style somewhat than doing liposuction. There can be a critical psychological dysfunction called dysmorphophobia—the main symptom is being severely unsatisfied with one’s look, body parts, or body as a whole. Anyways, visiting a psychologist or a psychotherapist could be more helpful and satisfying than having your face redesigned.

It is essential to keep in thoughts that plastic surgery is one thing that continues to be with you endlessly (dbreath.com). You cannot return to your natural look should you feel discontent with the surgical procedure. You must do another surgical procedure to look similar to your unique self or attempt to enhance on your previous cosmetic surgery. Moreover, should you attempt to sustain with style tendencies, you’ll lose the race, because tendencies change, and your appearance stays. What is natural is almost all the time better than the synthetic, and deep inside you will know that the way in which you used to look earlier than the surgery was higher. However, it’s necessary to tell apart between beauty and reconstructive surgery. In case of accidents, when a person’s look is ruined, reconstructive surgical procedure is certainly necessary and helpful.

Plastic surgery in its beauty aspect must be abstained from. Changing and improving one’s look can become addictive, so a person may feel a continuing need to endure surgical procedures; additionally, this desire is normally attributable to points with well-being, which a psychologist could help out with higher than a surgeon. You cannot undo plastic surgery, so once you undergo it, you may have to reside with it eternally. Be your self, and see the wonder you maintain naturally.

Arguments Against Euthanasia

Of all of the arguments in opposition to euthanasia, the most influential part is the slippery slope and as quickly as doctors or physicians have the proper to kill patients, we will not be able to restrict the killing to those that want to make suicide or die. There is a complicated definition term of euthanasia and assisted suicide or dying but the two terms are completely completely different. Euthanasia is the termination of a terminally unwell person’s life to relieve them from the struggling with deadly injection is administered by a health care provider or physician.

Euthanasia was first utilized by Greeks, who call it “Euthanatos”, which suggests “easy death” (“Ethics of euthanasia…”, 2014). While assisted suicide or dying is the act of helping another person kill themselves by offering them with the means to do so, by prescribing a lethal medication. Although many people declare that euthanasia was launched for a compelling trigger, it was first misused by the Nazi’s in Germany, who considerately applied euthanasia on harmless children and elderly people, by misleading them by saying that they have been being given routine medical check-ups at health camps.

Lethal injections or toxic fuel was given to those innocent individuals to kill them slowly and from that day ahead, euthanasia was closely misused by different nations. But, still many individuals want to legalize it, as they believe that, euthanasia is a method of offering a simple end of life to the terminally unwell folks. This only involves extra ache and struggling, which is unseen to the particular person committing euthanasia, however felt and experienced by the particular person, going through it and is unable to precise it.

Now, euthanasia has a legal standing in lots of countries including Netherlands, Belgium, Thailand, Australia, Europe, and a few states in U.S.A like Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, Colorado, Hawaii, and Washington DC. Therefore, euthanasia shouldn’t be legalized as a end result of it’s nothing lower than cold-blooded killings that violate governing laws, morals, social, psychological values of the medical world. To begin with the definition of the terms, euthanasia is normally taking to imply ‘mercy killing’ and is utilized to conditions the place the patient is suffering severely or is enduring a terminal illness. Euthanasia may be more helpfully be outlined as ‘the international killing by act or omission of an individual whose life is felt to be not value living’.

Secondly, physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is a scenario where the doctor indirectly performs a deadly act, assisting the patient to terminate their very own life. In PAS, the doctor prescribes lethal treatment which the affected person swallows. In cases where the affected person can’t take the medicines, or the place the suicide attempt fails, the physician administers a lethal injection. There can be a voluntary euthanasia which refers to when the patient desires their life to be ended and makes persistent and durable requests where non-voluntary euthanasia is when the affected person lacks capability and has not requested to be euthanized. The final definitional time period is involuntary euthanasia, the place a mentally competent individual or patient is not consulted and arguably their life is ended in opposition to their own will. First, a strong ethical argument in opposition to using euthanasia is that it might soon become a slippery slope as a outcome of it results in involuntary euthanasia and killing of people who find themselves thought undesirable or might not be in a person’s greatest pursuits.

With the legalization of involuntary euthanasia following it, Lord Walton, the chairman of a House of Lords committee on medical ethics wanting into euthanasia spoke on the topic: “We concluded that it was just about inconceivable to guarantee that all acts of euthanasia were truly voluntary and that any liberalization of the legislation within the United Kingdom couldn’t be abused.’ Since involuntary euthanasia is indistinct from murder it would be inconceivable to regulate, causing the hazard of murderers not being dropped at justice, as a outcome of their crimes being handed off as involuntary euthanasia. There can also be concern that doctors might end up killing very sick patients with out asking for his or her permission, and within the worst-case state of affairs, start to kill off patients to release beds in hospitals, or to economize. These conditions present how dangerous it might be to let the legalization of euthanasia result in the legalization of involuntary euthanasia. This situation seems excessive, but we should always remember that concepts that have been first thought inconceivable and unthinkable can quickly turn into acceptable.

Let’s take the example of Belgium, sixteen years ago after the legalization of euthanasia, the law was then amended to allow euthanasia for children with incurable illnesses, no matter their age. This is the top homicide committed on human life who are essentially the most vulnerable that must be cared and guarded in opposition to deliberately taking the life of a child. If euthanasia or assisted suicide is legalized, we will be led down a slippery slope towards pervasive medical killings, endangering susceptible populations like disabled, elderly, minority, or poor people whose lives are a burden on society. Starting with Hippocratic Oath, the medical skilled code prohibits killing, holding the intrinsic value of human life and dignity above all different moral principles. Assisted suicide and/or euthanasia erodes the doctor-patient relationship and has the grave potential for misuse and abuse. Therefore, legalization would undermine the patient-physician relationship and the trust essential to maintain it; alter medial professions role in society; and endanger the worth our society locations on life, especially on the lives of disabled, incompetent, and susceptible people. Secondly, euthanasia is unnecessary when correct palliative care is on the market. Allowing euthanasia will result in much less protected care for the terminally sick persons.

Moreover, legalizing will discourage the seek for new cures and advanced treatment for the terminally sick patients and additional undermines the motives to offer diligent look after the dying, and ache aid. Currently, terminally sick sufferers are given drugs and other forms of support to help relieve the physical ache and mental effects of being terminally sick. If this palliative care is competent then it could possibly relieve the affected person of a lot of pain and discomfort and will give the affected person a better high quality of life. It has been said by the World Health Organization that “palliative care affirms life and regards dying as a standard process; it neither hastens nor postpones dying; it provides reduction from pain and suffering; it integrates the psychological and religious aspects of the patient.’ Effective palliative care will give the affected person and their beloved one’s chances to spend quality time collectively and will permit the affected person to reside the remaining a part of their lives with hope to get cure and pain removed as attainable by the unstoppable medical doctors and the rising technology to innovate a solution cure for the terminally diseases. However, some argue that euthanasia is the right alternative for the terminally sick patients and imagine that a discount within the availability of palliative care, as euthanasia is more cost-effective than prolonging the life of dying sufferers by providing palliative care.

This could expose weak folks to strain to finish their life because of they’re may be selfish families or terminally sick sufferers whose households abandon could feel euthanasia is the one resolution. If the ache is treated effectively, there isn’t any have to terminate the patient’s life as if the affected person were the issue to be eradicated. Fortunately, advance medical expertise has made it possible to boost human lifespan and high quality of life. Palliative and care and rehabilitation facilities are higher alternate options to assist disabled or sufferers approaching demise life in a pain-free and better life. For old and invalid individuals nothing can deliver a change except that they’re blessed with a brand new life which is not humanly potential in any method so voluntary euthanasia must be allowed to those old and unwell who have no hope for any know-how or medicine to cure them. God only is aware of when a life will end who are we to end a life pondering it to have reached its finish.Thirdly, euthanasia is bad due to the sanctity of human life that is to be valued, regardless of age, intercourse, race, religion, social standing or their potential for achievement. Most of the non secular group particularly Islam, Jews, Hinduism, and Christianity goes against euthanasia as a outcome of it violates the principle that life is given by God. Human life is a sacred and a present from God and subsequently taking a life deliberately should be prohibited except only in self-legitimate protection of private life or protecting other human life from hazard. For instance, the philosopher Immanuel Kant mentioned that rational human beings ought to be handled as an finish in themselves and not to one thing else. This signifies that we shouldn’t deal with other folks to our personal ends simply because it seems the simplest method of placing an finish to our struggling.

Many physicians do not want to have God-like energy over others, and they shouldn’t be pressured against their own convictions, to help in patient’s suicide. Almost all spiritual beliefs, understanding the worth of human life leads away from mercy killings and human life is a God’s gift to us and due to this fact sanctity of human life are subsequently strong restrictions on the taking of life. The affected by pain is a half of all non secular life and part of the general human experience in a fallen world. Hence, bodily and emotional pain can not finally be avoided and be challenged to take care of hope and perseverance in all situations. All human life, whether or not in the womb or outside, is a sacred and God-given price such that mercy killing(euthanizing) is morally impermissible. The notion of sacred life lays behind almost all faiths or religious teaching on the problem of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. Everyone has private rights to determine to stay or give-up life. By saying this we’re permitting suicides in society. If suicide just isn’t taken as a good act then how can we take euthanasia on good terms? People usually are not allowed to take their very own lives in their arms. Life is bestowed upon us by God almighty and however painful it’s all of us have to live via it that’s part of cut price where there are good instances there are dangerous occasions as nicely.Euthanasia turns into a means of health care cost containment and by legalizing will start utilizing it for his or her profit.

Old, senile people who are difficult to be taken care off will be put for euthanasia to assist their households save money by paying their hospital payments. For occasion, disable, irregular, mentally retarded infants or youngsters shall be given off by parents for mercy killing to ease the struggling of the child as properly as to save the household from the burden of the child’s therapy costs. In addition, insurance coverage corporations to get off a heavily insured terminally sick affected person could be in favor of euthanasia in order that they don’t should pay for that individual unlimited hospital payments. Euthanasia will also become non-voluntary because Organizations working for organ transplantation will play a vital function in placing folks to euthanasia to get their organs for transplantation. People who won’t voluntarily wish to die no matter their illnesses would also be given for euthanasia to obtain their wholesome organs. People in favor of euthanasia often say that voluntary euthanasia won’t result in involuntary euthanasia however many occasions there are particular instances the place we can’t choose things as clearly as they appear to be for example if a affected person is just too old to know and hear to what an individual is asking for how can he be taken as a sensible particular person when he’s requested his consent for euthanasia .Moreover, if ladies going through depression is being encouraged to commit suicide and some doctor is assigned to make up her thoughts for it then how can we decide whether or not it was a voluntary euthanasia out of the ladies own will or something which she was inspired to do y her practitioner.

There will be unlimited problems if euthanasia will be legalized in any of its varieties.In the previous proponents of euthanasia are inclined to argue on the grounds of compassion. Under this line of argument, it’s kinder to provide somebody with a method of ending their life and even actively killing them when there is no approach to relieve bodily struggling. However, as palliative and social care improve, this argument becomes less necessary. It can also be increasingly clear hospice professionals that suffering turns into less necessary. It is also more and more clear from hospice professionals that struggling can have a number of dimensions, many of which could be relieved, as an example, via the restoration of a relationship. Interestingly, the drawbacks of healthcare providers find themselves in a more sophisticated state of affairs. They need to speculate more in their sufferers, and communication is time-consuming. The healthcare system is mostly primarily based on treating the illness, however at the end of life the paradigm shifts from the illness to the patient, and the patient is on the center of care.

Euthanasia or assisted suicide is morally incorrect and must be forbidden by law. It’s a murder and murdering another human cannot be rational underneath any circumstance. Most importantly, human life deserves exceptional safety and safety. Even medical doctors can not predict firmly concerning the period of death and whether or not there’s a possibility of remission or recovery with different advanced treatments. So, implementing euthanasia would imply many unlawful deaths that might have well survived later. Legalizing the euthanasia or assisted suicide legislation would be like empowering regulation abusers and increasing mistrust of sufferers towards doctors. Also, relations influencing the patient’s choice into euthanasia for private positive aspects like wealth inheritance is another problem, and there’s no means you may be certain if the choice in direction of assisted suicide or euthanasia is voluntary or compelled by others. In addition, the legislation thus opens the door for bodily healthy individuals to ask to end their lives because they may be bored with life. Does an individual who finds no meaning in life undergo unbearably? It would be tough, virtually inconceivable, for an evaluation committee to judge whether or not the factors for euthanasia are satisfied if the symptoms cannot be interpreted within the context of the bodily condition. Furthermore, euthanizing terminally unwell people or killing people earlier would otherwise happen and thereby to artificially get rid of their possibilities of residing to experience a remedy to their situation. At the very least, if not a remedy, euthanized persons are not round to profit from any step-forward in remedy that might alleviate their suffering.

In addition, given the fashionable advances in palliative care, it might also be argued that finish of life care isn’t any so superior that euthanasia just isn’t necessary to avoid suffering and so can’t be justified even on the standard of life grounds. It could be thought plausible that an individual with a severe and worsening illness who is not euthanized could have their condition and ache carefully managed by expert healthcare professionals to tremendously diminish any struggling. Above from the above causes, there are some aspects where there is a higher possibility of euthanasia being mishandled. How would one assess whether dysfunction of psychological nature qualifies mercy killing? What if the ache threshold is beneath optimum and the patient perceives the circumstances to be not worthy of living? How would one know whether or not they want to die is the end result of unbalanced thought process or a logical decision in mentally sick patients? What if the person chooses euthanasia or assisted suicide as an possibility and the family wouldn’t agree? Alternative treatments are available, corresponding to palliative care and hospices.  We wouldn’t have to kill the affected person to kill the symptoms.  Nearly all pain could be relieved. There is no ‘right’ to be killed and there are real risks of ‘slippery slopes’. Opening the doors to voluntary euthanasia may lead to non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia, by giving docs the facility to determine when a patient’s life isn’t worth dwelling. In the Netherlands in 1990 round 1,000 patients had been killed without their request.  We might by no means really control it.

Reports from the Netherlands, the place euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are authorized, reveal that doctors don’t all the time report it. The assumption that patients should have a proper to die would impose on medical doctors a duty to kill, thus proscribing the autonomy of the doctor. Also, a ‘right to die’ for some people may well turn out to be a ‘duty to die’ by others, significantly those who are vulnerable or dependent upon others. In conclusion, euthanasia ought to never be legalized. Even voluntarily permitting to die shouldn’t be permitted as a outcome of it’ll elevate many points in the society. People will do it openly for their very own benefits disregarding the ethical values of the society. Human beings might be handled as mere means and all those who are a legal responsibility on their family members or households might be put to euthanasia whatever the truth if they want it or not. Human life will be at stake.

The value and sanctity of life will lose its importance. Even if someone needs for it they need to hold their hopes in God and should keep on residing as this suffering will be rewarded within the life after. Moreover, one by no means is conscious of when a model new remedy could additionally be available to cure a terminal sickness. As so many earlier untreatable ailments have a therapy these days.

Arguments Against Mandatory Voting

Popular participation is usually cited as one of the basic ideas of democracy. The right to vote being a freedom that has, and continues to be, wanted by folks all round the world. Despite the value of many political systems’ movement towards universal suffrage, the few nations that have confused the best to vote, with a requirement to, have arguably deteriorated the importance of this achievement. Australia is a part of a substantial minority that implement compulsory voting laws, and of a good smaller subset that implement them.

Although the proponents of obligatory voting will be considered, the incompatibility of compulsory voting with implied freedoms, with broad theories of democracy and the general inefficacy of manufacturing a extra engaged public, serve as perspectives that substantiate the notion that voting should not be obligatory in Australia.

The Australian Constitution raises numerous questions concerning the constitutional validity of mandatory voting. Given this evaluation of an issue so pertinent to political rights, the implications of those challenges coming from a supply as authoritative as this can’t be understated.

The existence of a legal responsibility to vote could be perceived as incongruous with the implied freedom of political communication that was proved in Australian Capital TV v Commonwealth 1992 and recognised ever since. This inconsistency extends to the right to vote being proved as an implicit proper in s7 and s24 of the Constitution, which, as reported by Dr. Anthony Gray, is an entitlement to vote that includes the freedom not to. Whilst advocates for the present system of compulsion might contend that voting is a civic obligation, such reasoning could be seen as unconvincing as it fails to acknowledge that abstention is a perfectly legitimate type of political expression.

Through an evaluation of obligatory voting from a wider democratic perspective, the concept that compulsion is an infringement of free will becomes increasingly apparent. In addition to the plain paradox that a democratic country forces its constituents to vote, a truly free nation should allow for the demonstration of dissatisfaction and make provisions for a refusal to establish political views.

Although commentators in favour of compulsion could assert that the flexibility to provide an informal or ‘donkey’ vote facilitates this, the inefficiencies these contribute to in addition to its inherent irrationality, given they are discounted, are persuasive arguments against such an opinion. Moreover, although there is a sure degree of legitimacy in the declare that obligatory voting serves to augment the democratic ideals of equality and participation, compelling a person to vote is in the end, according to tutorial Katherine Swenson, antithetical to the idea of individual freedom.

A common belief maintained by supporters of compulsory voting is that it creates a extra politically active voters. Whilst in concept that is conceivable, its practical limitations make the alleviation of indifference a distant reality. In support of this, a 2007 experiment conducted by Peter Loewen et al. in a Quebec election discovered that required voting had “little or no effect” on the knowledge and engagement of its members. In the Australian context, regardless of the belief that the issue of participation is solved by necessary legal guidelines, in the final election around one-fifth of eligible Australians failed to solid a usable vote. It is argued that candidates and parties rely on these legal guidelines to get voters to the ballot.

If that is the case, perhaps the answer is to abandon compulsory voting and thus drive parties to organically incite a politically active populace via attractive and revolutionary insurance policies. The dichotomy of democracy is that it demands both particular person freedoms and equality. A great problem of recent politics has been the flexibility to strike a balance between these paradigms, and to determine at what point one have to be truncated to boost the other. Through an analysis of obligatory voting through a constitutional, democratic and sensible context, it has turn out to be clear that such a regime has no place in a society that strives to exist as an epitome of democracy. The time has now come for Australia to abandon its paternalistic voting legal guidelines and entrust its political future with the voluntary voice of the Australian public, and not in a bit of laws that commands it to speak.

REFERENCE LIST/ BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Chong, D, Davidson, S & Fry, T 2005, ‘It’s an Evil Thing to Oblige People to Vote’, Policy (St Leonard’s NSW), vol. 21 no. four, pp. 10-16.

2.Gray, A 2012, ‘The Constitutionality of Australia’s Compulsory Voting System’, Australian Journal of Politics & History, vol. fifty eight, no. 4, pp. 591-608.

3.Hoffman, R & Lazaridis, D 2013, ‘The Limits of Compulsion: Demographic Influences on Voter Turnout in Australian State Elections’, Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 28-43.

4.Krishna, V & Morgan, J 2012, ‘Voluntary voting: Costs and benefits’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 147, no. 6, pp. 2083-2123.

5.Lever, A 2010, ‘Compulsory Voting: A Critical Perspective’, British Journal of Political Science, vol. 40, no. four, pp. 897-915.

6.Loewen, PJ, Milner, H & Hicks, BM 2008, ‘Does Compulsory Voting Lead to More Informed and Engaged Citizens? An Experimental Test’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 655-672.

7.Singh, S 2011, ‘How Compelling is Compulsory Voting? A Multilevel Analysis of Turnout’, Political Behaviour, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 95-111.

8.Swenson, KM 2007, ‘Sticks, carrots, donkey votes, and true choice: a rationale for abolishing obligatory voting in Australia’, Minnesota Journal of International Law, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 525-552.

Gordon, SB & Gary MS 1997, ‘Cross-National Variation in the Political Sophistication of Individuals: Capability or Choice?’, Journal of Politics, vol. 59, no. ?, pp. 126-147.

Hooghe, M & Koen,P 1998, ‘Compulsory Voting in Belgium: an Application of the Lijphart Thesis’, Electoral Studies vol. 17?, no. ?, pp.419-424.

Arguing Against Television Addiction

Marie Winn classifies television watching as an addictive and damaging conduct, drawing similarities between it and the abuse of drugs and alcohol. On the surface, this claim appears justifiable and arguments could be made in its favor. However it’s Winn’s equating television with medicine and alcohol that is ultimately the downfall of her argument, demonstrating a misapplication of the term “addiction” and all of its conditions to television watching. First, let us outline addiction in the sense that Winn interprets it.

She claims, “The essence of any severe dependancy is a pursuit of enjoyment, a seek for a ‘high’ that standard life does not provide. It is simply the inability to operate without the addictive substance that is dismaying. ” This declare, made only three paragraphs into the piece, immediately casts doubt on her interpretation of dependancy. The addiction Winn is speaking of sounds similar enough to dependence upon medicine and alcohol, however the penalties don’t. The inability to function usually without the substance in question isn’t the one “dismaying” consequence.

Alcoholics drink themselves into early graves via liver and kidney failure or elevated blood pressure and coronary heart assault. Heroin addicts incessantly overdose as they naturally build an immunity to the drug and require extra for the same high. Television lacks any of these direct bodily detriments which would possibly be associated with addictive substances. The solely similarity left when taking her skewed body of the time period “addiction” under consideration is that television is a pleasurable experience, hardly grounds for labeling as addictive.

But lets settle for, for the second, that Winn’s definition of addiction is enough. One would possibly respond to my declare that tv has no bodily unwanted effects with the opposing claim: Your avid television watcher is more doubtless to be obese and pale, bodily signs resulting from sitting indoors and watching television all day. They would be appropriate in their assumption, however not in their reasoning. Obesity and pale pores and skin is a end result from simply not going outside and getting train. The same effect could probably be reproduced if someone simply sat on a couch for days at a time not watching television.

The tv itself does not trigger these signs, it merely motivates people to follow behavior that produces them. In addition, the consumption of alcohol and injection of heroin literally changes the mind chemistry of the consumer. Dopamine receptors are altered and left crippled, permanently, if usage is maintained over a protracted time frame. Television on the other hand does not do this to the identical degree. Sure, there may be a small burst of enjoyment when someone’s favorite present comes on, however nothing close to what a tripping heroin addict feels.

I really feel pleased when my dad and mom come to Colorado to visit me, I am not hooked on them. Addiction has greater than jus a bodily element, however, and since Winn fails to handle the physical side of habit allow us to now flip the behavioral. Winn visits this when she compares a heroin addict and a tv addict. The heroin addict shuns work, relationships and human contact to find a way to feed their addiction. In Winn’s eyes, the television addict does the same after they “they put off other activities to spend hour after hour watching tv. In short the tv watcher is doing the identical, drawing into themselves and ignoring something that could distract from feeding their habit. In this case Winn is having hassle with trigger and impact. A heroin addict changes their conduct to perpetuate the feeling the drug provides them. They might have turned to the drug for a selection of causes, but a true addict acts only out of concern for getting the subsequent fix. The drug causes the conduct. Television however can be treated as the conduct caused by one thing else.

Procrastination afflicts nearly everyone in some unspecified time within the future, and sometimes with great regularity. A procrastinator will interact in plenty of mundane duties to avoid work, tv chief amongst them. Someone who puts off different actions to look at tv may actually be watching tv to put off other actions. To reveal that this logic is completely inapplicable to medication and additional distance television from the realm of addiction one might pose a question: might you say that heroin customers inject themselves with heroin in order to postpone work as well?

The main problem with Winn’s argument is its extremity. She tries to color tv as an addiction when every thing she points to as proof merely constitutes a foul habit. She exhibits a partial view of habit, only the behavioral, in order to find a way to apply it to tv watching. She has fallen into the logical trap: “all carrots are orange, my had is orange, therefore my hat is a carrot. ” In this case it would learn, “All addicts do X, television watchers do X, therefore television watchers are addicts. Habits can be damaging and even obsessive, however they differ from dependancy within the physical and psychological effects they have on the practitioner. The adverse physical signs of extreme tv watching are in reality the negative results of not exercising. The constructive impact of manufacturing pleasure fails to even strategy the peak of medication and alcohol, and finally, the behavior of a heroin addict should be outlined by their dependancy whereas the conduct of watching tv can and often is the consequence of something else completely.

Argument Against Universal Health Care within the Us

Argument Against Universal Health Care in the Us BY shaker71493 Jacob Nieuwenhuis Contemporary Issues MSR 10 March 2010 Universal Health Care in the United States “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the great of its victims may be the most oppressive. It could be higher to live beneath robber barons than underneath all-powerful moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may typically sleep. His cupidity could at some time point be glad; however those that torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their very own conscience.

” -C. S. Lewis (1898 – 1963)

The issue of universal well being care taking up the current well being care system has turn into a heated topic throughout America. With President Obama’s promise to pass a bill that will give authorities protection to all Americans, most people have been joyful that health care would turn out to be more reasonably priced for them. But is that this the case? There has been a stiff opposition to the passing of any bill of this type all through the whole course of, however the longer a invoice stays in circulation the extra time individuals need to type an opinion on the issue.

With the regulation in effect now the problem now turns to if this can e higher off for America in the lengthy term, and if there could be any good to such a system. History has lots to say about socialized medication. There have been many nations, not solely socialistic nations which have used a public method of offering medicine.

A few of those nations are Great Britain, Canada, France, Australia, and in addition the European system. These systems will be analyzed from their roots up so as to see whether or not they had been successes or failures. The National Health Service (NHS) of Great Britain, which was created on July 5, 1948, is the world’s largest publicly funded health service ever.

As can be seen on the diagram, the NHS is divided into two sections: main and secondary care. Primary care is the primary level of contact for most individuals and is delivered by a broad range of impartial service providers, together with general practitioners, dentists, pharmacists and optometrists. Secondary care is recognized as acute healthcare and may be either elective care or emergency care. Elective care means planned specialist medical care or surgical procedure, normally following referral from a main or community health skilled corresponding to a general practitioner. In this technique there are lots of different trusts (refer to iagram). These trusts are the place the cash is shipped for certain forms of care. The main trusts are the Primary care trusts. Primary care trusts (PCTs) are in management of main care and have a significant role round commissioning secondary care, providing community care companies. They are the primary core to the NHS and control 80% of the NHS price range.

Green, did a report on the effects of preventive care in Great Britain for illnesses corresponding to circulatory illness and most cancers. His primary focus was on the circulatory system and the conclusion of his reviews states that: “The primary findings could be summarized as follows. The I-JK has a poor document of stopping death from ailments of the circulatory system. After allowing for the totally different age construction of every nation within the European Union, the I-JK dying price from circulatory diseases for individuals aged lower than 65 was ranked thirteenth out of the 15 nations studied. ” There are many adverse features of the NHS.

There are beautiful stories of people who didn’t get care, or who waited for months to have the ability to get prevented care. One instance of a horrible factor that occurred just lately in Great Britain was a most cancers patient who had to await 62 weeks before starting remedy. Patients had been outraged by this. They said that for some cancer patients with slow rising tumors may wait that lengthy but that it is atrocious that someone must wait that lengthy to receive any kind of care at all. It was in contrast facet by side with a case from 20 years earlier, when Heather Goodare was diagnosed with the same drawback and eceived treatment within two weeks after first being identified. The European system has run into a lot of obstacles over the years, principally financial. There is currently a 5 % to 8 percent improve in bills per 12 months in real phrases, leading to huge deficits and even greater issues when the rate of unemployment rises. When employment rates enhance, the deficits are eased because extra taxes come in to pay for care. But as quickly as employment falls again (which is widespread all over the place proper about now), deficits come again. A widespread method used for getting over this deficit is rationing care and restricting use of excessive ost preventive cares similar to CAT scans. Sometimes that is only in the path of individuals who meet a sure standards, e. g. the aged. This can only be bad for the patron. Michael Tanner sums this up properly in his article condemning socialized medicine within the U. S. : “The Europeans have run right into a quite simple economic rule. If one thing is for it. Think of it this manner: if food were free, would you eat hamburger or steak? At the same time, health care is a finite good. There are solely so many medical doctors, so many hospital beds and so much expertise. If people over consume these assets, it drives up the worth of well being care. “

All the countries in Europe have this health care system. There are, nevertheless, three international locations in Europe that allow their citizens to opt out of the official system and to take with a tax credit score for the cash they paid to the official system, to purchase non-public insurance coverage in the well being market. These countries are Germany, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. In these countries, citizens do not have to pay twice to be able to purchase private health insurance. The systems of these three countries are important in that they may level the greatest way to an answer for the present monetary issues Western well being care techniques are experiencing.

This private plan is more expensive however reachable for at least a 3rd of the population. For probably the most part, people in Europe are happy with the well being care they receive. In the Netherlands there’s a basic plan that everybody should buy (it is not a authorities mandate). This covers issues corresponding to damaged limbs, emergency room visits Oust the visit), and seeing general practitioners. On top of this, an individual could purchase whatever “premium add-ons they need. An example of an add-on is dental and orthodontic care. With this add-on all of the individuals in the household of the insurance coverage purchaser receive ull dental care in addition to braces for all the children of the family. Trudy Rubin, who is a Philadelphia Inquirer opinion columnist, says that the United States isn’t learning priceless lessons from the European system of healthcare. She addresses the three myths that she thinks are considered believed as truth. She takes these myths from an excerpt from T. R. Reid. The three myths are as follows: “Myth No. 1, he says, is that overseas methods with universal coverage are all “socialized medication. ” In countries similar to France, Germany, Switzerland, and Japan, the coverage is universal whereas doctors and insurers are non-public.

Individuals get their insurance through their workplace, sharing the premium with their employer as we do – and the federal government picks up the premium if they lose their Job. Myth No. 2, which is long waits and rationed care – is one other whopper. “In many developed nations,” Reid writes, “people have faster access to care and extra selection than Americans do. ” In France, Germany, and Japan, you can pick any provider or hospital within the nation. Care is speedy and prime quality, and nobody is turned down. Myth No. three actually grabs my consideration: the delusion that nations with common care “are wasteful methods run y bloated bureaucracies. ” In truth, the opposite is true. America’s for-profit medical insurance firms have the very best administrative prices of any developed country. Twenty % or extra of each premium dollar goes to nonmedical prices: paperwork, advertising, earnings, and so on. “If a profit is to be made, you want an army of underwriters to deny claims and switch down sick individuals,” says Reid. ” Canada is another place the place well being care is run by the government. This came into effect when the parliament unanimously passed the Canadian Health Act in system. Under this regulation, provinces should make positive that their well being care systems respect ive standards: The first is public administration. This means that the medical well being insurance plans have to be administered by a public authority who’s accountable to the federal government. The second is complete benefit. The plan must cover all medically needed providers prescribed by physicians and offered by hospitals. The third is universality. This means all authorized residents of the province must be coated. The fourth criterion is portability. Under this, residents continue to be coated in the occasion that they transfer or journey from one province to a different. And the final criterion is accessibility.

This implies that providers have to be made out there to all residents on equal terms, regardless of income, age, or capability to pay. The course of which a patient goes via to receive health care could be very simple. When an individual goes to a doctor for any sort of medical therapy they have to current what known as a provincial health card. This is a credit score card-looking piece of plastic that lets your doctor know you are a legal consumer of the system

An Argument Against Gun Control

Gun management has turn out to be increasingly more of a hot-button matter within the United States, especially after events just like the Sandy Hook taking pictures in 2012, when many individuals questioned the need of the second modification in this day and age. Indeed, upholding the second amendment continues to be a tough prospect when it does not appear to be these guns are being used for good. However, the overwhelming majority of individuals not only use them responsibly, but additionally shield themselves and their households, utilizing these guns.

For this cause, weapons should not be limited by the federal government. Essentially, the issue of gun control boils down to 2 main points which have been in battle with each other since the founding of America: freedom vs. safety. In particular, you possibly can examine it at Argumentative Essay Examples. Anti-gun control advocates insist that their weapons are essential for their very own security, but in addition fulfill the liberty requirement by permitting them to freely practice their second modification rights.

Anti-gun advocates see issues differently, nevertheless, since, to them, having most people in America brandishing a firearm represents a profound security threat to them. However, this safety danger that’s touted by pro-gun management activists is negated by the need for weapons to be able to guarantee security, and that the odd shooter is a problem with society at giant, not the guns themselves.

If gun control had been in full effect, and it have been made unlawful to own a firearm, criminals would merely purchase guns illegally, and would just about have free reign of whoever they needed to kill, since law-abiding residents would not have the means to cease them.

Evidence of the effectiveness of firearms as a self-defense device may be seen in numerous research. For instance, based on a research in 2000, an estimated 989,883 U.S. citizens used some form of gun to defend themselves (Agresti and Smith, 2). In addition, in 1993, 3.5% of households had used a firearm to defend themselves “for self-protection or for the protection of property at residence, work, or elsewhere” (Agresti and Smith, 3). These numbers put gun management in a means more constructive gentle, particularly from the angle that they want to be used to extend security in an increasingly insecure country. The finest method to prevent taking pictures incidents just like the Sandy Hook shooting is to not merely take away all weapons, as that will not repair the underlying downside, but to focus on rehabilitating people who either have had violent tendencies up to now, or exhibit signs which are according to mass shooters.

Those who assist gun management see every particular person in possession of a firearm, particularly these with a hid weapons license, as another potential Sandy Hook or Virginia State shooting simply waiting to happen. That is a legitimate claim, for the explanation that potential is certainly there. The argument that “people don’t kill individuals, guns kill people” is one other popular quote heard within the pro-gun control group, and whereas it has some merit, it requires some closer examination to be able to decide the validity of the assertion. While it is actually true that a gun has the potential to kill somebody, it’s only a software. The greater issue when it comes to violent crimes, especially gun-crimes, is the person behind the gun. To this end, one of the most effective options to the problem of gun violence on this nation is to fix the underlying drawback, to not simply take away the guns, as a result of that would only invite more violence, particularly from the more hardcore gun activists. And, after all, many deaths and injuries from violent crime come from firearms. For example, in 1996, sixty five percent of all murders between spouses have been carried out with a firearm (Rand, 3).

This is the place the idea of firearms as a device comes into play. A felony who was determined to commit a felony offense would likely commit the identical crime, no matter whether or not or not firearms have been allowed. Limiting firearms solely succeeds in making everyone a possible helpless sufferer in the event of a taking pictures. In order to grasp how firearms truly work as a deterrent to gun crime, it’s essential to understand that those who use guns for violent functions (i.e. not in self defense) ought to be grouped into a different section than those that solely use firearms for sport and self-defense. This has actually been done earlier than, and refers to two forms of gun possession: legal gun ownership and non-criminal gun ownership. For instance, a study taken in 1995 confirmed that “Where non criminal gun-ownership is larger, criminal gun ownership can additionally be greater; and where criminal gun possession is greater, the % of crimes which are dedicated with guns is higher” (Squires, 197).

Essentially, because of this weapons beget more weapons, which, in turn, beget more violence, or a minimum of that’s what this examine exhibits. However, the difficulty is a little more complicated than that. For instance, many areas of the nation are merely violent by virtue of their inhabitants, and, even when guns have been outlawed, they would nonetheless fight amongst themselves utilizing whatever weapons are obtainable. In addition, it’s possible that many who reside in these areas with large quantities of violence really purchased guns themselves for the sole purpose of self defense, so that in the event that they themselves had been attacked by an assailant utilizing a gun, they’d not be fully helpless. Although firearms work nicely as a way to protect oneself, they also act as a risk of instant vengeance by the sufferer, assuming the victim is in possession of a firearm. “A study showed that, in a survey of male felons in 11 state prisons, 34% had been “scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim,” whereas 40% said they determined not to commit against the law as a outcome of they knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun, and 69% stated they knew of one other felony who had not dedicated a criminal offense as a result of the victim had a firearm” (Agresti and Smith, 6).

This helps to show what gun-advocates call the brighter aspect of the gun-control debate: that weapons can, and oftentimes are, used as a self defense or deterrence measure, somewhat than a pure instrument of violence. This principle seems to carry some water, since a research exhibits that, in 1988, only about 30% of residents owned weapons. Yet, in 1996, that quantity had elevated to 50% (Lott, 38). In 2004, that quantity remained steady. The fascinating factor about these figures is that violent crime in America has actually been reducing at a sluggish rate. While it might be foolish accountable this entirely on guns, it’s a good indicator that weapons no less than operate, on some level, as a deterrent and personal protection software. The only problem, in fact, stems from the truth that criminals have guns as nicely, however allowing nearly anybody to own a gun levels the enjoying field to an extent. If guns were totally outlawed, encounters would be much more one-sided, as criminals might assault residents with little to no worry of immediate reprisal on the a half of the victim. Gun control is a fairly black-and-white problem, yet seems to only have extremists on one side or the opposite. While it will be simple to simply dismiss all pro-gun management arguments, they do have some advantage.

For this cause, there should be consolations made so as to make guns a little bit safer for everybody. The finest way to deal with this concern is proceed permitting residents to use firearms, however perhaps restrict access to guns so as to guarantee security for the greatest number of individuals. Allowing firearms if the gun user registers and carries a allow for the firearm would assist to reduce the variety of homicides with firearms, if not as many individuals have them. Each action has its own drawbacks, nonetheless, and you will want to understand that, particularly for this problem, which has undergone something of a deadlock within the latest previous. Freedom and safety must be balanced in equal measure, and it is important to provide you with solutions to this problem with that in mind.

Works Cited

Agresti, James D., and Reid K. Smith. “Gun Control Facts.” Just Facts (2008). 2-3 Lott, John R. More guns, much less crime: Understanding crime and gun management laws. University of Chicago Press, 2013. 37-38 Rand, Michael R., et al. “Violence by intimates: Analysis of information on crimes by current or former spouses, boyfriends, and girlfriends.” (1998): 1-30. Squires, Peter. Gun Culture Or Gun Control?: Firearms and Violence: Safety and Society. Routledge, 2002. p.197

Against Human Cloning- Argumentative

Cloning in general has been a rising debate throughout the globe since earlier than Dolly the sheep was cloned in 1996. The success of being in a position to clone an animal brought scientists to wonder a couple of more difficult task, cloning humans. This consideration is morally incorrect and shouldn’t be stood for. Some people seem to not realize the negative aspects that cloning would bring right into a world which is already suffering. Religious standpoints, the expansion of the inhabitants, and every human’s individuality are only a few of the supporting reasons that stand against cloning and assist why it should not be legalized.

Simply as a end result of there are a few components that make some in favor of cloning doesn’t rectify the atrocity that it would deliver.

One supporter that stands for cloning, Simon Smith, states that it will be useful to produce clones for fertility reasons corresponding to infertile couples and couples carrying a genetic disease. This appears affordable; nevertheless, there are different options available which may be higher suitable.

Adoption, synthetic insemination, and other profitable surgical procedures are extra appropriate, presently out there options. It appears questionable as as to if an individual wanting to produce a clone offspring of themselves would be corrupt or unprincipled in wanting to take action. Wanting to make a duplicate of your self could be a shameless act.

There are supporters in favor of cloning such as Professor Robert Winston to make note that cloning could be an possibility available to these individuals who have lost a loved one. Have we forgotten our virtues and that with the delivery of life, at some point will come death? The construction of residing and dying applies to every species.

It’s not one thing most people look ahead to for themselves or for anyone they love but inevitably in the future it’s going to method us all.

This is the explanation living issues are given the flexibility to breed, to provide life to the future. It’s a alternative given, but not one all of us have to choose on. The personalities of people and other creatures is what makes you care for them and produce a bond, not their physical appearance. Having a replica only similar in picture and not in persona would not bring back a misplaced liked one; on the contrary, it could make it even tougher for some individuals to manage and cope with.

Individuality is another issue to consider when thinking of the finish result cloning would deliver. This is what makes our world so unique, if clones become produced, we are going to lose that uniqueness. Having human clones in existence would be an insult to human sort and the distinctiveness of every human being. It would change what it means to be human. If life could be formed in varied methods apart from the methods intended, how can it have that special value that being human has? Clones may doubtless end up as another minority fighting for equal rights. Could you think about what it’d really feel wish to know that you just have been a clone of someone else’s being? Would you feel inferior to human life and all that it brings? Would you even have a soul? These are all questions that society puts apart that should try to be answered.

The rising population within the United States and in other international locations around the globe is also an important component to assume about. Although it would be great to have the fountain of youth, it doesn’t appear very effective. People have to die; in any other case the population can be a larger concern than it presently is. If individuals had been dwelling an extra fifty years or more, the world would become chaotic. Citizens of the U.S. already have to struggle for there entitlements they want to receive as elders. Prolonging the lifetime of people would eventually become the cause of their extinction. We eat far too many sources that we have to survive and are doing far too little to replenish them. Trees will become a factor of the previous within the not so distant future. Without this mankind can not survive due to the lack of oxygen. This together with the extinction of different pure resources will solely trigger the human race to decrease.

Scientists after a time period might even possibly evolve clones to be the best human race. The DNA to supply clones might be manipulated after advance research to make them have specific traits and possibly mind-set as well. They may probably be made to have a particular perform in life similar to changing into an Olympic swimmer or even a killing machine in the army, programmed to go off to war. What Hitler was making an attempt to perform in the course of the Holocaust could turn out to be reality if clones were to be created. It has been proposed that in the not too distant future, cloning technologies could advance to the extent where they might even recreate a deceased individual within the adult kind. They might likely even recreate there past memories and experiences. There doesn’t seem to be any ethical issues for this, as twisted as the thought of it seems to be.

Everything occurs for a function and for that reason alone cloning is wrong and should not be legalized. The saying goes, if it’s not broke, don’t repair it. This saying ought to apply to cloning just as nicely. The overwhelming majority of people are completely capable of reproducing offspring; subsequently there is no cause to clone. Along with the scientific accomplishments it might bring to man sort many down falls would follow only shortly behind. It might appear to be many advantages may happen within the scientific neighborhood if cloning were to be legalized, but only leading to having just a few benefits and a lot of downfalls. The possible outcomes that may exist in its legalization doesn’t make it being performed morally right.

Works Cited

Smith, Simon. “HumanCloning.org.” 2002. Human Cloning Foundation. 22 March2007.

Winston, Robert. “The Promise of Cloning for Human Medicine.” British Medical Journal (1997):913-14. 21 March.

Against Plastic Surgery

The debate on plastic surgery is well-known around the world. First of all, what’s plastic surgery? Plastic surgery is reconstruction of the face and body and can be used to enhance a person’s capacity to perform as properly as their appearance and self-image. Society has made folks imagine that beauty does not are available within, but on how excellent ones physical look is. Cosmetic Surgery dates all the way back to 800 BC in India where they might carry out reconstructive surgery.

Cosmetic surgical procedure techniques really first began with delivery defects and war trigger deformities, now within the 21th century it has become this new attraction that no one is prepared to overlook out. The variety of Cosmetic Surgery procedures performed each year is on the rise, however, folks do not appear to know the risks and dangers behind growing their self-esteem by going “under the knife”.

Some unwanted effects of cosmetic surgery are the next: Scarring, An inevitable a half of making holes and cuts within the pores and skin is that they go away scars behind, an ironic fact for a type of surgical procedure meant to advertise magnificence.

Nerve Damage – If a surgeon nicks or cuts nerves whereas finishing a surgical procedure, it could trigger a partial or complete lack of feeling in sure parts of the physique. Also, Necrosis, which is demise of tissues because of lack of oxygen within the space where surgical procedure was carried out. Lastly, hematoma which changes of skin shade to blue or purple due to any infection. Therefore, it is clear that cosmetic surgery has its risks but folks appear to not care due to the belief of being perfect.

Believe it or not, plastic surgery also has its perks.

Plastic surgical procedure might help in Physical Benefits for these individuals who were born with a deformity or were damage during wars. Just like physical advantages, it may additionally be physiological help for these patients who lack in self- esteem and provides them confidence preventing self-harm. Cosmetic surgical procedure can help you take charge of your look. Maintaining a youthful appearance requires exhausting work, and sometimes your diet, and dedication to a healthy way of life simply isn’t enough(Diana Suckerman).

Cosmetic surgery procedures can help you’re taking cost of your look so that you get pleasure from a youthful look at any age. Overall, plastic surgery will always be a tough subject to talk about. Whether you are PRO or CON, the choice of having plastic surgery is highly serious and personal. Some individuals support the thought of plastic surgery because they assume it has psychological advantages, others are in opposition to because of the hazard and the change isn’t permanent. Plastic surgery may be either taken as being a quick change for a short-term satisfaction or boosting someones self-esteem(Edmonds Alexander)..

Against schools

The brief article Against Schools is a extremely interesting article or would possibly case great argument and concern about public education systems in America right now. Born in Monongahela, Pa, John Taylor Gatto is a retired America school teacher with nearly 30 years of experience within the school system. Gatto is a recipient of numerous awards such as: The New York City Instructor of the Year award in 1989,1990, and 1991 and The New York State Teacher of the Year award in 1991. He is broadminded harmful of obligatory education, and creator of a number of books on schooling.

Gatto voiced his perception that most of the people college system that we utilize, is not there for academic methods; as a substitute, exist to satisfy the perform to maim youngsters in the long term. After studying Gatto’s article and considering for his viewpoint, I harmonize with Gatto’s perception. His quick article discusses how our system was constructed and its purpose. I felt that the factors he made displayed a substantial amount of reality in them and it brought to fact results about public faculty techniques that I would have never believed to concern or acknowledge.

In the article Versus School, John Taylor Gatto expresses his outlook that most of the people faculty system isn’t there for helpful steps, quite “it exist to satisfy six hidden capabilities meant to cripple our kids.” (Gatto 14) He discusses most of the people faculty system not being of what we consider and the means it originates from the Prussian tradition, which is a system deliberately designed to provide common psychological capacities that are simply ran.

He emphasizes in the article how needed education has motivated kids to not consider in any respect as an end result leaving “them sitting geese for the fashionable era of marketing”.

(Gatto 148) Gatto mentions the truth that do to the training in school, “we have really turn out to be a rustic of youngsters, delighted to surrender our judgments and our wills to political admonitions and industrial blandishments that might insult precise grownups”. (Gatto 148) The quick article goes on to disclose Gatto’s viewpoint that the varsity system motivates children not to imagine for his or her selves and kids must be taught to manage their very own lives. He says that he feels the choice is to merely allow them to be their true selves.

One of the most important factors that Gatto explains in the article Against School is how the public college system originates from the Prussian culture and the way obligatory school was intended to be just what it had been for the Perssia. According to several sources, “Horace Mann, credited as the father of the American public faculty system, studied a extensive variety of academic fashions before implementing the Prussian system designed by Fredrick the Great. King Frederick created a system that was engineered to teach obedience and solidify his control.

Focusing on following directions, primary abilities, and conformity, he sought to indoctrinate the nation from an early age. Isolating students in rows and lecturers in individual classrooms common a strict hierarchy—intentionally fostering fear and loneliness. Mann selected the Prussian mannequin, with its depersonalized learning and strict hierarchy of energy, as a result of it was the most value effective and easiest way to teach literacy on a big scale. Social efficiency theorists who sought to industrialize the tutorial process perpetuated this technique throughout the early twentieth century.

Led by educators similar to Ellwood P. Cubberley, they used training as a tool for social engineering. Building upon the depersonalized uniformity and inflexible hierarchy of the Prussian system, they constructed an industrial education mannequin designed to produce tens of millions of workers for America’s factories. Believing that nearly all of America’s college students had been destined for a life of menial, industrial labor, these theorists created a multi-track academic system meant to sort college students from an early age.

While one of the best and brightest were carefully groomed for leadership positions, the majority was relegated to a monotonous education of rote studying and task completion. Consequently, our schooling system continues to be locked into the Prussian-industrial framework of fear, isolation, and monotony. For both students and teachers, procedure is emphasized over innovation, uniformity over particular person expression, and control over empowerment. It is, therefore, not shocking that virtually all of America’s lecture rooms have modified little in over one hundred years.

”(Web) Gatto makes this point by stating these historic information in his article. Gatto additionally offers examples of the outcome of compulsory school, which he says, ends in adults that are manageable beings. He says those adults by things they don’t need as a end result of they are educated to believe they offer some sense of proudness like a tv to order more things on TV. Gatto states, “ Easy answers have eliminated the need to ask questions. ” (Gatto148) The level is particular confirmed by Gatto in the article which is that “ obligatory schooling serves children incidentally… its real objective is to turn our children into servants.

” (Gatto 149) He feels that as a substitute of let the federal government managing our kids, the solution is to allow them to manage themselves. The finest method this might be achieved in Gatto’s vision is through homeschooling youngsters. When I thought about the public school system, I did not ever query its purpose however to be anything but benficual to kids. I thought it was to enlighten them and produce out their true individualism and make them productive citizens in society. I agree with Gatto’s article after recalling again to my experience at school.

Everything was so ordered and strict, to mildew everybody to be what was told of them. I did every so often query the why can I not do this that means or why can it not be something else and I was all the time advised by my academics as a outcome of that is the right way. Everybody does it like this so you want to as well or you’re mistaken. Gatto says that education structures us into the reliant, mindless adults we’re in methods like: “easy divorce encouraging us to not work on relationships, simple credit score removing the need for fiscal management, straightforward entertainment eradicating the want to entertain one’s self, etc.

” (Gatto148) It does not make sense that if we’re each people, then why are we taught and ma to think the same. Gatto feels the answer is to return to the unique means and probably train children our selves, preferably at home not in a “institution and the government should not really have any say so over it. I believe that yes youngsters must be encouraged to be who they truly are and discover their minds deepest capacities; nonetheless, there ought to nonetheless be some stucture of their lives exterior of residence.

They must be taught to coexist with others and their own concepts as properly. I do not agree with the thought of homeschooling utterly. With the economy being the greatest way it is households need to work to offer for there households and a few households are single mother or father properties, therefore leaving no time to instruct the children to proper means. John Taylor Gatto purpose for wring the article Against schools, was to convey to light the issue that our authorities is corrupting Americans from the beginning through one thing almost everybody helps, Our educational system.

Gatto greater than prospered with attainment of his level being acknowledged. I was stunned to find that the American public faculty system is one designed to casts an being’s thoughts to be what its advised to be, not what it is suppose to be or wants to be, and that is very disturbing to me. Gatto bringing the origin of the general public faculty system to mild did his work justice. On the distinction, I don’t consider that the resolution is to teach kids at residence.

In conclusion, the fact of it is: despite the fact that the system is corrupt and controlling, it has been operating for years and no one has modified it. We won’t ever be in a position to subdue the government, so one of the best is to simply make do the best way we are in a position to. Works Cited 1. http://thenewamericanacademy. org/index. php/home/our-philosophy-menu/the-prussian-industrial-model. 2. Gatto, John Taylor. “Against Schools. ” Rereading America. 9th ed. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, Bonnie Lisle. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2013. p141-150.

Against the Odds, and Against the Common Good Essay Review

In her essay, “Against the Odds, and Versus the Typical Good,” Gloria Jimenez examines the controversy for state-run lottos and assumes that state representatives, having people’ well-being in thoughts, should not move prices advising them to gamble. In today’s society, state-run lottery video games are typical institutions serious about most of our nation has one. Thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia all have lottery games justified as essential state funds helpful to the everyday good. However with state lottos no one wins– not colleges, not the federal government and not the American public.

(1) The lottery system does not contribute vital funds to the state or colleges (2) it is a regressive kind of taxation (3) it develops restricted tasks (4) it is dangerous to American values and society (5 )however they claim to be affordable and honest. In general, lottery video games are neither useful nor honest, and they are dangerous to the frequent good. Initially, let me point out that lottery video games do not accomplish their first objective of contributing noteworthy funds to the state or faculties.

The most respectable defense for lottos is that they may increase

[newline]

Educational financing, when, in actuality, contributes very little. In her analysis, Jimenez briefly describes her findings and deducts “the lotteries have actually been paying out roughly four % to the organisations whereas taking in practically $20 billion in 2002.” (New York Times, May 18, 2003, sec. four, p. 1). If states raised income tax by a portion of a p.c, they could create just as a lot earnings as state lotteries. That is how irrelevant they’re.

Along with being an ineffective cash elevating scheme, the lotto is also a regressive kind of taxation. The vacationer attraction of the lotto is to strike it rich instantly and by no means must work as soon as again.

The message is most evident to the poor, undereducated, and compulsive gamblers. As a outcome, these citizens participate in the lottery spending a median of three times as a lot of their income on lottery tickets than the rich would. This is, in effect, because of false and deceptive advertising aimed particularly at this market. Furthermore, the one new jobs that are created unless, by probability a model new on line casino goes in, are the vacancies for promoting executives and accounting clerks. The positions for clerks that really promote the tickets do not want filling because they are previously stuffed at convenience and grocery stores.

In addition, state run lotteries are unwholesome and dangerous for the frequent good. They send out a message that opposes the ethics of hard work, sacrifice, and integrity—everything Americans believe in. The lottery is deceptive and encourages folks to consider that they will win something for nothing. Still, government permits lotteries and really promotes them, encouraging residents to take part.

One of the greatest problems associated with the lottery is that it may possibly lead to habit. So though persons are buying the tickets of their own free will and free will to participate is likely considered one of the pro’s of the lottery. Exactly how a lot free will actually is there when all of the manipulation is being carried out by the advert executives targeting prime citizens, the federal government strong-arming the constituents into their lottery schemes, and the playing addicts can not actually help themselves? Government has no enterprise engaging people to gamble their hard earned money for an towards the percentages probability of winning a giant cash prize. It is irresponsible, immoral and far from fair and sincere.

Works Cited

Jimenez, Gloria. “Against the Odds, and Against the Common Good.” Pg. 112-114. Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing. Barnett & Bedau. New York. Bedford/St. Martin.2008. Print

Against School-Engaging The Text

1. Question: Why does Gatto assume that college is boring and childish? How does Gatto’s depiction of school compare with your own elementary and secondary faculty experience? Answer: Gatto thinks faculty is boring as a result of the lecturers and students are uninterested in materials. The college students say they already know the material. I can evaluate my school expertise to Gatto’s depiction of faculty. My experience in elementary was a breeze and easy. Then I entered secondary college and was shocked. I was shocked that I had nobody to carry my hand and tell me what to do.

I was given assignments and dues dates. It was up to me to get them done in time.

My teacher’s taught me with their opinion, I actually didn’t study by that type of teaching. But I read the textual content and studied exhausting, a means that I be taught the best. 2. Question: What, based on Gatto, are the six unspoken purposes of public schooling? To what extent does your own prior instructional experience help this bleak view of American education? Answer: The six unspoken functions of public schooling are as follows 1.

Adjustive or adaptive function: extra self-discipline then educating 2. The Integrating function: being made to be someone you aren’t 3. The Diagnostic and Directive Function: plenty of testing 4.

The Differentiating Function: lecturers holding again the scholars and not letting them obtain their goals 5. The Selective Function: college students are being put down and never in a place to succeed 6. The Propaedeutic: students are taught to be robots and to do what they are told and not ask questions.

This view sort of pertains to me. I was taught by the teacher’s liberal views and opinions. I was raised to respect to others opinions. But I don’t give into the thought or concept that I am to learn and suppose as a result of my teacher advised me so. I did my work and did quite properly with out using their opinions. 3.

Question: To what extent would you agree that we actually don’t need to go to school? Given the current state of know-how and globalizing economic system, do think most individuals would acquire the talents they want to survive and thrive via homeschooling? Answer: I suppose training is VERY necessary. I disagree that kids do not need to go to high school, they should go. I assume the college system and academics could make college extra interesting to students by altering the best way they teach. For example they will do group actions, maintain class some place else apart from a classroom; like Starbucks, exterior in the grass, a park.

Anywhere where its stimulating, that means each day is a query of the place is class going to be today? Homeschooling is sweet in case you are self disciplined. I was homeschooled the first three months of my senior year in 1997. I graduated in November 1997 as an alternative of June 1998. It is dependent upon the person, if you are a go getter and want a method out of the school system ( in my opinion holds you back), then homeschooling is the ticket. 4. Question: How would you go about instructing your own youngsters to be “leaders and adventurers” to assume “critically and independently,” and to “develop an internal life in order that they’ll never be bored”?

How many parents, in your estimation, have the time, experience, and assets to make Gatto’s best schooling a reality? Answer: In educating my children to be “leaders and adventurers” and to “think critically and independently,” I would educate them the fundamentals of proper and mistaken, respect their elders, and most significantly respect yourself. What you say and the way you handle your self is at all times watched by others. I would remember to teach them to be open minded about other’s opinions. And to ask inquiries to why they have that opinion, you might be enlightened and see your opinion a unique way.

Asking questions and studying from them will make you smarter person. I consider my baby will be profitable in school and out of school, if I raise them with integrity, respect, good work ethics, and good morals. But in this day and age many dad and mom can’t try this, because of the lack of time, lack of knowledge, and the lack of expertise. I taught myself after I did the homeschooling program via BYU, it was hard not having an teacher to assist me. And my dad and mom tried to assist however luckily I had web access. My Reflection.

In reading Against School, I thought it was written like a factual story. I did be taught so much concerning the historical past in how faculty was. Back within the early years, schooling wasn’t that important. What was essential was cash, race and social class. They used lots of discipline as properly. The academics and students are bored with the material and with faculty in general. Often teachers train with their opinions and what they’ve been taught. I assume that if teachers learn with the students and be open minded with what they are educating, the students may choose to need to be taught and luxuriate in college.

The Summary Against School is a couple of retired teacher named John Gatto. He explains how faculty is boring for the scholars and academics. He feels that the students are bored as a end result of the academics are bored too. Its identical material yr after yr, same classroom year after 12 months. The college students want to be taught freely instead of being compelled to be taught. He feels faculties have modified our children into addicts and youngsters into children. He additionally feels that we suppress our genius as a end result of we don’t know the way to handle them. His solution is to allow them to be their own person and assume for themselves.

Against Cybernetics/ Bionics

No one will deny the worth of serving to those with injuries from lack of limb or assist the death or blind. However, do you actually need to read your e mail or write reviews together with your mind? When I stroll around, I see individuals distracted by phones how much more would this have an result on an individual. Or what should you can hack into these implants and see what an individual is doing through their very own eyes.How long until a problem is seen with these instruments and how often whenever you need it fixed.

A lot of this can require brain surgical procedure to implant these chips.

Is giving someone these instruments honest for others. Classism having others not be ready to afford these. Is that fair for others giving a transparent advantage that over nature presents to each of us? Or will you be forced to have some of these implants if you want to work in a sure job field?

Most probably both of sorts of augmentation will be used in the future however, I’d nonetheless like to full examine these towards each other.

In the end, I suppose the reader ought to decide nonetheless now that we’ve pro and con each varieties let have them square off.

Cybernetics and Bionics

Are considered one of these two forms of modification higher than the other. I find it exhausting to say but let’s have a glance at the information. Cybernetics and bionics are extra availed to folks in the way that at any stage in life they are often implanted with these upgrades.

Sense talents greater than the animal kingdom could be achieved with these implants. Also, limb substitute with prosthetics is already broadly excepted unlike cloning and rising a substitute. A more isolated effect if something is incorrect then it will solely have an effect on people who had surgical procedure. Unlike genetic engineering that could be passed down the line.

Genetics

The advantages of cybernetics and bionics are numerous if you take a look at it. Cybernetics can’t remedy HIV or most cancers or improve basic physical skills like intelligence. Tools can aid folks in a task but can not essentially enhance fundamental capability. A e-book can present data to lookup but, cannot enhance reminiscence for individuals. So this might lead folks with cybernetics just having reduced reminiscence abilities and mathematical skills total. Wherewith a couple of tweaks one might simply modify these for higher cognition.

Conclusion

[newline]

The danger outweighs the befits in many ways which have been mentioned by many people. Or that it will solely be for the rich. The argument is true that often the rich have entry to new applied sciences. Reading and writing had been just for wealthy people to have such. However, similar to the car and learning it became frequent for the lots.

This could probably be a frontier that might make better lives for our children and children’s youngsters. Will individuals be inclined to assume lesser of these with or with out these augmentations? Using science to prove individuals better or not as basis being of nature and never of design? With that in mind, the choices as such not are made flippantly on not if we ought to always use augmentation and furthermore what kinds ought to be embraced.

Closing comments what are humans? Are the products of nature or a god(s)? What are humans created by humans? Cities, agriculture, industry, and rising cattle all human works that are not truly natural. Maybe we’re already in regard to what we are supposed to be synthetic humans, and that is simply the following step stimming that course. Artificial = pretend, false, or insincere to describe artificial perhaps we should bear in mind what that word is outlined as.

For or against racial profiling Essay

Write an essay that presents your opinion on racial profiling. Begin with a debatable thesis statement. Then follow the guidelines for writing an argument essay. As you write your essay, be sure you support your opinions with reasons.

ESSAY OUTLINE

INTRODUCTION (5-7 sentences)
1. Hook (1-2 sentences)
2. Background information (3-4 sentences)
3. Thesis Statement (1-2 sentences)

BODY PARAGRAPH 1 (REASON 1)
1. Topic Sentence (1 sentence)
2. One piece of evidence with citation
3. Commentary sentences (2-3 sentences)
4. Second piece of evidence with citation
5. Commentary sentences (2-3 sentences)
6. Transition/ Closing Sentence (1 sentence)

BODY PARAGRAPH 2 (REASON 2)
1. Topic Sentence (1 sentence)
2. One piece of evidence with citation
3. Commentary sentences (2-3 sentences)
4. Second piece of evidence with citation
5. Commentary sentences (2-3 sentences)
6. Transition/ Closing Sentence (1 sentence)

BODY PARAGRAPH 3 (COUNTERARGUMENT AND REFUTATION)
1. Topic Sentence (1 sentence)
2. Opposing side’s argument evidence with citation
3. Refutation argument 1 (2-3 sentences)
4. Refutation 2 (2-3 sentences)
5. Transition/ Closing Sentence (1 sentence)

CONCLUSION (5-7 sentences)
1. Restate your thesis statement
2. Sum up your two arguments
3. Ask “so what?” questions (2-3 sentences)

BRAINSTORM ARGUMENTS

Arguments for racial profiling
Arguments against racial profiling

*In persuasion, we use the term arguments to mean reasons.

Which arguments do you find most persuasive? Which side will you argue in your essay? I will argue that __________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________.

My 2 arguments will be (choose 2 from the table above):

The best argument for the opposing side is ___________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________.

Thesis Statement (main idea of my essay): __________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.

FINDING EVIDENCE

Now that you have your thesis statement and your arguments laid out, you need to find evidence to support those arguments.

EVIDENCE CAN INCLUDE:

Facts from your sources (newspaper articles, USDA website)
Statistics
Quotes from experts like spokespeople for companies, university professors, scientists who study nutrition, and experts on psychology or advertising

Personal experiences or observations

Go through your articles in the racial profiling packet and put an arrow next to any evidence you may plan to use for your two main arguments and your argument for the opposing side. Write the number of the body paragraph (1,2,3) next the evidence you plan to use in your essay.

TWO SAMPLE MLA IN-TEXT CITATIONS

1. Introduce the source and author

In “If You Pitch It, They Will Eat” Davis Barboza argues, “Television, of course, remains the most powerful medium for selling to children” (39).

2. Put whole citation after the quote (author and page number)

The article says, “Television, of course, remains the most powerful medium for selling to children” (Barboza 39).

Never ever write (pg. 39)!!!!!

MLA NEWSPAPER CITATION

A works cited page always puts the sources in alphabetical order by the author’s last name and is double-spaced.

FORMAT
Author’s last name, first name. “ Title of the article ”. Newspaper publisher. Day month year of publication, Pages.

SAMPLE CITATION
Barboza, David. “If You Pitch It, They Will Eat”. The New York Times. 3 Aug. 2003, 37-41.

RACIAL PROFILING ESSAY: BODY PARAGRAPH 1 OUTLINE

TOPIC SENTENCE

EVIDENCE/QUOTE 1 with source (“article title” and author)

COMMENTARY (Why is this evidence important? How does it relate to the thesis?)

EVIDENCE/QUOTE 2 with source (“article title” and author)

COMMENTARY (Why is this evidence important? How does it relate to the thesis?)

TRANSITION/ CLOSING SENTENCE

RACIAL PROFILING ESSAY: BODY PARAGRAPH 2 OUTLINE

TOPIC SENTENCE

EVIDENCE/QUOTE 1 with source (“article title” and author)

COMMENTARY (Why is this evidence important? How does it relate to the thesis?)

EVIDENCE/QUOTE 2 with source (“article title” and author)

COMMENTARY (Why is this evidence important? How does it relate to the thesis?)

TRANSITION/ CLOSING SENTENCE

BODY PARAGRAPH 3 COUNTERARGUMENT AND REFUTATION

The topic sentence for body paragraph 3 will be the opposing side’s argument and will include one piece of evidence to support their claim (the opposite of your thesis).

For your two refutations you will explain why the opposing side is wrong. Use two pieces of evidence to support your argument.

TOPIC SENTENCE (OPPOSING SIDE’S ARGUMENT)

OPPOSING EVIDENCE/QUOTE

REFUTATION 1 EVIDENCE

REFUTATION 2 EVIDENCE

TRANSITION/ CLOSING SENTENCE

Role of a youth against corruption

As a teenager Bala Balchandran argued with his father over why he did not want to become an IAS officer and why he wanted to go to the US to pursue a career in academics.

“While IAS was a good alternative, a politician, who may not be as smart as you are, would always be your boss and you will have to do whatever he wants you to do,” he would counter-argue. Bala, now J L Kellogg Distinguished Professor of Accounting and Information Management Northwestern University, told rediff.com over the phone from Chennai recently.

Bala — his students fondly address him as Uncle Bala — finally reached American shores in 1967 on a scholarship to the University of Dayton to do his engineering masters in industrial operations. From there it had been a fruitful and satisfying journey as he went on to teach at Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, where he also did his doctorate and to Kellogg School of Management.

Earlier, after completing honours in statistics Bala began his teaching career with Annamalai University from where he had graduated earlier. A bright student throughout his academic career, he completed his PhD from Carnegie Mellon University in two years instead of four. He won a gold medal for his thesis –“Nobody got (a gold medal) in Carnegie Mellon before me or after me and until today,” he told rediff.com.

Bala strongly believes that what India today needs is a youthful leadership as older people don’t fit into scheme of things. “India’s youth between 25 to 45 years of age should take charge of the country’s destiny,” he says.

Bala discussed his life’s challenges, achievements, ambitions, inspirations, success mantras, what he thinks about India’s youth and why top-rung foreign schools and universities will never come to India with Prasanna D Zore.

“Harvard will not establish a school here (in India) no matter what,” he said.

Were you always interested in academics?

Yes. Actually, my father wanted me to go for IAS. I wanted to be totally independent and the job of a professor allowed me to remain independent.

But in between I was a second lieutenant of the National Cadet Corps because I am a very patriotic Indian. When the Chinese attacked India in 1962 I had decided to join the Indian Army without telling my family. So I worked full time as a Captain for two years managing a battalion from 1965 to 1967.

Then in 1967 I got my scholarship to go to the US to do an engineering course in industrial operations. I took advantage of this opportunity and went to the US.

What challenges did you face when you first landed in America as a student at the University of Dayton?

Fortunately or unfortunately I was married. I had a one-year-old child when I reached there at 28. The money I received from my scholarship was good only for one person so I had to leave my child and wife behind in India. I wanted to establish myself before I could bring them to stay with me.

Later I got a job as an assistant professor in industrial and systems engineering, after finishing my masters in engineering at Dayton. This additional income allowed me to bring my wife there. But as she wanted to do her MS in Biology in US we decided to keep our son back in Chennai at his grandparents’ house for some more time.

After I went to do my PhD at Pittsburgh and by when my wife finished her MS, we decided to bring back our child to US when he was 5. At least one parent was in a position to look after the child then.

Argument Against Gun Control

Final Paper: Argument Against Gun Control

The argument on firearm regulation has been a heated discussion for many years. On one side of the debate, we have people in favor placing restrictions on guns, while, on the opposite end of the spectrum, we have people fighting the regulation of guns. People in favor gun restrictions believe gun control can reduce crime ,while, the people against gun control believe having the right to bear arms is an effective crime deterrent. I believe that every law abiding citizen should be able to carry a gun and defend themselves against people who intend to harm them.Gun control laws are simply ineffective and they have an adverse effect on crime. Instead of reducing crime, gun control laws just simply take guns out the hands of good people and puts the guns into the hands of the bad guys.

Gun control laws do not deter criminals from possessing firearms. Whether or not there’s a law restricting gun use, criminal will always find a way to get a gun because criminals are less likely to obey laws. That’s why they are called “criminals”. Also there’s no law that can stop the supply and demand of the illegal arms trade. If there’s money to be made in the black market, someone will profit from it. Criminals can easily obtain a gun through the black market. An unnamed felon was quoted, “There’s guns everywhere. If you got the money you, can get a gun.” If a criminal wanted to get a gun,they are not likely to walk into a store to buy one. Therefore, they could care less whether they had a background check or not. No law can stop criminals from arming themselves to protect themselves. Most criminals have lots of enemies and they rather get caught with a gun than get caught without one. (Stossel).

The more gun control rules and regulations there are, the happier the criminals will be, for they know the more gun laws there are the less chance they have of having a crime victim defend themselves with a lawfully-owned firearm. In many right to carry states, crime statistics are lower than the states with gun laws. The reason why is because guns are used more defensively than criminally. Criminals are usually rolling the dice when they are targeting law abiding citizens in right to carry states. (Polsby) Criminals do not fear the police or other authorities. What they fear most is the citizens who might be potentially armed. It makes it harder for criminals because they do not know what to expect from them if they’re planning to rob them. They’re either fortunate to have an unarmed victim or they become a victim with a citizen that is ready to shoot and defend their families. (Stossel).

Gun control laws only affect the citizens who follow the law. The law does not apply to the criminals. Regardless if theres a gun ban or not, criminals will find a way to obtain guns. The gun laws have no way in curtailing the illegal arms trade. In Chicago, handguns are not for sale legally. Only shotguns, rifles and ammunition can be bought with people with a Firearm Owners Identification Card. The Chicago area is one of the most difficult places to legally obtain a gun.

In order to get a gun license, people have to go through a background check and wait up to a month to legally carry a weapon.(Polsby). While it is difficult to legally possess a gun, it is way more easier to illegally carry a gun in Chicago. There are thousands of unregistered firearms in the streets with thousands more coming in every month. Banning the sale handguns in Chicago makes no difference as well too. People can go elsewhere to buy a gun. They can go out of town or even out of state to buy a gun with Indiana and Wisconsin in close proximity.(Moorhouse and Warner).

Another example why gun control law are ineffective is the staggering increase in crime in England since they imposed a ban on guns. In 1997, England passed a ban on all guns, which makes it illegal for all citizens to carry guns. England’s gun sanctions made it one of the most strictest law in the world. The new law only created an illusion of the country being more safer. Instead of reducing crime, the law put it’s citizens at the mercy of criminals who are well assured that their would be victims are unarmed and defenseless. In the two years after the law was enacted, gun related crimes increased to 40% and armed robberies rose to 53%. From 1997 to 2001, violent crimes more than doubled. People are six times more likely to be robbed at gunpoint in London compared to New York. In the United States, the occurrence of home burglaries is 13% because the majority of burglars fear armed homeowners more than they fear the law. England’s burglary statistics are 5 times higher compared to the United States at 55%. England’s gun ban created the unintended consequences of lawlessness in the streets, as well as, it did not stop criminals from possessing guns and committing crimes. (Malcolm)

Even in the United states where states and cities that passed strict gun laws have found them to be ineffective. The places where gun control laws are the most strictest are places that have the most crimes are committed with firearms.(Piquero). Of the 15 states that have the highest homicide rates, 10 have very restrictive gun laws. New York, for example, has one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation has 20 percent of the nations total of armed robberies. Another example, Washington D.C., since guns were banned in 1976 the murder rate has risen 200 percent. In Chicago, the city consistently had one of the highest homicide rates in the nation since they enacted a ban on gun in 1982. In May 2010, a month before the Supreme Court overturned the ban, Chicago already had 113 homicides for the year.(Piquero).

Since gun restriction laws were repealed by the Supreme court in 2010, Chicago and Washington D.C. received significantly lower crime rates. The murder rate in Chicago in the first six months of 2011 is 14% lower than the first six months of 2010. This is the first significant drop in the murder rate since gun sanctions were first passed in 1982. In 2008, the Supreme Court lifted the gun ban in D.C. in the case of the District of Columbia vs. Heller. Since the gun ban was repealed, the murder rate in D.C. has dropped 35% from 2008-2010. The rate of assault with weapons decreased by 37% and armed robberies fell as well too by 25% (Lott). These statistics further prove how ineffective gun control laws are. Not only they do not work in reducing crime they create adverse effects on crime. Instead, they make the problems worst.

I believe that the right to bear arms is an unalienable right and I don’t believe that government have that right to take it away. I feel that all citizens have the right to protect themselves and their families. Gun laws restricting the use of guns does not help law abiding citizens. These laws only take away the ability of each citizens to defend themselves and makes us helpless against criminals. Gun control only creates an illusion that a society is safer and it does not solve the root cause crime. One cannot solve the crime problem by just simply taking away guns.

The crime problem goes way deeper than just guns. Criminals will find a way to get guns regardless if theres a strict law or not . Most criminals are opportunist and having a strict gun law only gives them the opportunity to commit more crime with less worry about that person being armed. I believe that there is other ways to fight crime, however, I don’t believe gun control is the answer to making our world a safer place.

Arguments Against Mandatory Voting

Popular participation is often cited as one of the fundamental principles of democracy. The right to vote being a freedom that has, and continues to be, sought after by people all over the world. Despite the value of many political systems’ movement toward universal suffrage, the few countries that have confused the right to vote, with a requirement to, have arguably deteriorated the significance of this achievement. Australia is part of a considerable minority that implement obligatory voting laws, and of an even smaller subset that enforce them. Although the proponents of mandatory voting will be considered, the incompatibility of compulsory voting with implied freedoms, with broad theories of democracy and the overall inefficacy of producing a more engaged public, serve as perspectives that substantiate the notion that voting should no longer be compulsory in Australia.

The Australian Constitution raises a number of questions about the constitutional validity of mandatory voting. Given this evaluation of an issue so pertinent to political rights, the implications of these challenges coming from a source as authoritative as this cannot be understated. The existence of a legal responsibility to vote can be perceived as incongruous with the implied freedom of political communication that was proved in Australian Capital TV v Commonwealth 1992 and recognised ever since. This inconsistency extends to the right to vote being proved as an implicit right in s7 and s24 of the Constitution, which, as reported by Dr. Anthony Gray, is an entitlement to vote that includes the freedom not to. Whilst advocates for the current system of compulsion may contend that voting is a civic duty, such reasoning can be seen as unconvincing as it fails to acknowledge that abstention is a perfectly valid form of political expression.

Through an analysis of mandatory voting from a wider democratic perspective, the idea that compulsion is an infringement of free will becomes increasingly apparent. In addition to the obvious paradox that a democratic country forces its constituents to vote, a truly free nation should allow for the demonstration of dissatisfaction and make provisions for a refusal to identify political beliefs.

Although commentators in favour of compulsion may assert that the ability to provide an informal or ‘donkey’ vote facilitates this, the inefficiencies these contribute to as well as its inherent irrationality, given they are discounted, are persuasive arguments against such an opinion. Moreover, although there is a certain degree of legitimacy in the claim that obligatory voting serves to augment the democratic ideals of equality and participation, compelling a person to vote is ultimately, according to academic Katherine Swenson, antithetical to the concept of individual freedom.

A common belief maintained by supporters of compulsory voting is that it creates a more politically active electorate. Whilst in theory this is conceivable, its practical limitations make the alleviation of indifference a distant reality. In support of this, a 2007 experiment conducted by Peter Loewen et al. in a Quebec election found that required voting had “little or no effect” on the knowledge and engagement of its participants. In the Australian context, despite the assumption that the problem of participation is solved by mandatory laws, in the last election around one-fifth of eligible Australians failed to cast a usable vote. It is argued that candidates and parties rely on these laws to get voters to the ballot.

If this is the case, perhaps the solution is to abandon compulsory voting and thus force parties to organically incite a politically active populace through enticing and innovative policies. The dichotomy of democracy is that it demands both individual freedoms and equality. A great difficulty of modern politics has been the ability to strike a balance between these paradigms, and to determine at what point one must be truncated to enhance the other. Through an analysis of compulsory voting through a constitutional, democratic and practical context, it has become clear that such a regime has no place in a society that strives to exist as an epitome of democracy. The time has now come for Australia to abandon its paternalistic voting laws and entrust its political future with the voluntary voice of the Australian public, and not in a piece of legislation that commands it to speak.

REFERENCE LIST/ BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Chong, D, Davidson, S & Fry, T 2005, ‘It’s an Evil Thing to Oblige People to Vote’, Policy (St Leonard’s NSW), vol. 21 no. 4, pp. 10-16.

2.Gray, A 2012, ‘The Constitutionality of Australia’s Compulsory Voting System’, Australian Journal of Politics & History, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 591-608.

3.Hoffman, R & Lazaridis, D 2013, ‘The Limits of Compulsion: Demographic Influences on Voter Turnout in Australian State Elections’, Australian Journal of Political Science, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 28-43.

4.Krishna, V & Morgan, J 2012, ‘Voluntary voting: Costs and benefits’, Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 147, no. 6, pp. 2083-2123.

5.Lever, A 2010, ‘Compulsory Voting: A Critical Perspective’, British Journal of Political Science, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 897-915.

6.Loewen, PJ, Milner, H & Hicks, BM 2008, ‘Does Compulsory Voting Lead to More Informed and Engaged Citizens? An Experimental Test’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 655-672.

7.Singh, S 2011, ‘How Compelling is Compulsory Voting? A Multilevel Analysis of Turnout’, Political Behaviour, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 95-111.

8.Swenson, KM 2007, ‘Sticks, carrots, donkey votes, and true choice: a rationale for abolishing compulsory voting in Australia’, Minnesota Journal of International Law, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 525-552.

Gordon, SB & Gary MS 1997, ‘Cross-National Variation in the Political Sophistication of Individuals: Capability or Choice?’, Journal of Politics, vol. 59, no. ?, pp. 126-147.

Hooghe, M & Koen,P 1998, ‘Compulsory Voting in Belgium: an Application of the Lijphart Thesis’, Electoral Studies vol. 17?, no. ?, pp.419-424.

Argumentative Essay Against Euthanasia

Introduction
Euthanasia is the practice of deliberately killing a person to spare him or her from having to deal with more pain and suffering. This is always a controversial issue because of the moral and ethical components that are involved. This paper will discuss the arguments against euthanasia.

Discussion
Euthanasia is clearly against the Hippocratic Oath that all doctors have to fulfil. This oath basically states that doctors must never be involved in the killing of people because after all, they have been trained to ensure that people are able to recover from their diseases and injuries. Doctors are the ones whom people entrust their lives whenever there is something wrong with their health. Thus, it is the responsibility of the doctors to always do the best they can to help people live and enjoy their lives (Cavan 48). If their patients die under their supervision, the doctors can accept this for as long as they know and can prove that they really did their best and exhausted all possibilities to ensure the survival of the patients. There are just certain instances where the disease or the injury of the patients has become so serious that it is already difficult to treat and make the patients recover. In these cases, it is unfair to blame the doctors for the death of the patients. The Hippocratic Oath helps the doctors to realize how important their responsibilities are to the people in terms of their health. This oath also provides an assurance to the people that they can trust their doctors and be assured that they will do whatever is necessary to help them deal with their health problems. If euthanasia becomes legalized, then the effectiveness of the Hippocratic Oath will be negated and the doctors can have the option of immediately resorting to euthanasia especially in difficult cases instead of trying their best until the very end.

Another argument against euthanasia is that it is essentially homicide
because the doctors will kill the patient even if it has been approved by the patient himself or the family of the patient. Euthanasia is not that different from murder because they both involve killing a person. The only difference is that in euthanasia, there is mercy and consent involved while in murder there is none (Tulloch 82). If murder is prohibited by law because people take matters into their own hands and kill others, then euthanasia should also be banned because doctors take matters into their own hands and kill their patients even if there is consent from the patients and their families or relatives.

Lastly, the continued improvements and innovations in the field of medicine and health care make euthanasia illogical to be implemented as an option. The reason why medical experts continue to work hard to come up with improved medical technologies, medicines and treatment methods is that they want to make sure that the sick people are able to recover faster and healthy people become even healthier. All of these efforts are being done to make the society become more productive due to the presence of healthy and strong people (McDougall 26). Thus, doctors will not have an excuse for not doing their best for their patients as they already have access to the best medical technologies, medicines and treatment methods that will prevent them from having to resort to euthanasia as the only option.

Conclusion
There is no doubt that euthanasia needs to be banned as based on the three arguments discussed above, it does not deserve a place in human society. Doctors must never give up on their patients no matter how hopeless the situation might be. They must exhaust all options to give their patients a fighting chance to survive and

Violence against women

Doctors have a big role on violence against women. For example; women are afraid of their husbands and they don’t tell the truth to the doctors. They lie about their injuries. How does the process work in Turkey? The cause of the injuries can be understood by the doctor in the emergency services and the other branches which the victims call upon. The experienced doctors have some methods to determine whether the injury is caused by pounding or a accident. The doctors have a huge role because women are afraid to tell that they are being pounded. However if the victims trust their doctors, they feel much more free to tell their problems. This is valid for all of the doctors but it is more important for the psychiatrist because getting beated is shameful and women are afraid of being isolated from the society. In our society there is a understanding that what happens in the family stays in the family. Therefore even the polices are afraid to interfere.

The families hesitate to externalize it because they are afraid of bad reputations. They don’t want to dechiper it. Violence has a contagious side so it is cover by the families to stop it for getting serious. When it is covered, the perpetrators don’t understand the power of the victims. Violence is a act that is applied by the stonger ones to the weaker ones. To feel the weaknesness and the desperation of the weaker ones, provokes the violence. Actually it is a though situation for the perpetrators too. The perpetrator should be examined because getting some help can relax them. For example, a girl and a boy’s mother is being exposed to violence by their father,how does the situation affect the children?

It affects them differently. First of when it is examined, it is seen that the perpetrator had eaxposed to violence in the past. For some cases, the perpetrator identifies with their perpetrators. However for some cases, it damages the witness and cause depression and anxiety. Or it causes not physical violence but verbal violence.For example insulting.It is much more difficult to treath.

Argumentative Essay against Capital Punishment

Human life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment?

Capital punishment is immoral and a violation of natural rights. It is wrong for everyone involved: the prosecuted innocent, criminals, victims’ families, and our nation. We need to replace the death penalty and capital punishment with life without parole, a safer and more inexpensive option. The death penalty does not guarantee safety for innocent victims, it does not follow the goals and promises of our nation, it does not effectively deter crime, and it does not give closure to victims’ families. Nothing good comes of hate, and nothing good can ever come from capital punishment. It cannot continue to be accepted by a nation that claims to have liberty and justice for all. The death penalty is murder on the sly and it’s dead wrong.

Capital punishment must not be implemented because it can lead to the possibility of wrongful execution. It is undeniable that there had already been many people sentenced of death penalty that were eventually executed even if they were truly innocent. Unfortunately, the crucial evidence that would have proven the innocence of these people was only obtained after their execution (McCafferty 71). It is because of wrongful executions that capital punishment must not be implemented in society. They only create doubts into the minds of the people that they cannot rely on the justice system especially once they badly need it. This is also hard to accept on the part of the families who already had members who experienced a wrongful execution as this is something that has a permanent impact. Obviously, the innocent people wrongfully executed can never be brought back to life anymore. Since the courts cannot be expected to make the best decisions all the time with regard to the people who deserve conviction and acquittal, it is difficult to guarantee that wrongful executions can be completely stopped in countries that have death penalty.

This is why capital punishment prevents the wrongfully accused people of the due process that they deserve to have in order to prove their innocence, something that is very unfair to them. There can be instances where the evidence that can prove their innocence is just so difficult to obtain so it takes a long period of time before it gets presented to the Court. However, because there is also a limited period of time to appeal for the death penalty sentence, it is usually the case that the wrongfully accused people are already executed before the evidence that could have set them free is discovered. This would not have happened if there is no capital punishment being implemented.

Aside from this, another detrimental impact of capital punishment is that it only helps to send a message to the people that the justice system is an advocate of revenge particularly on the part of the people who got victimized by heinous crimes. The capital punishment sends a message to the people that the justice system is just there to help the families of the victims of the heinous crimes and not for the accused people who could also be innocent (Kronenwetter 36). This can also be interpreted as a punishment that does not provide any opportunity for the offenders to correct their mistakes. In this case, the justice system can be viewed as partial and biased as it only helps the victims and not the accused party. The lawyers of the accused party will then have to work extremely hard to gather evidence to spare their client from capital punishment.

Finally, a society that values life does not intentionally kill people. The truth is that capital punishment is a traumatic case of homicide that has been approved by the government. This practically supports killing in order to impose a solution to the problems that are being faced by society (Mandery 58). This is something that is not very good particularly on the part of the youth who will grow up knowing that the government is approved of just killing people who violated the law. The funny thing is that governments all over the world have tried to validate capital punishment by stating what they think are the advantages of death penalty would provide to the people. The advantages of death penalty can be considered as illusory, but the chaos and the eventual annihilation of the decency of the society are very true. Thus, there is no sense to implement capital punishment.

Against racism

Racism dates back thousands and thousands of years back to the caveman times. In the short story “Desiree’s Baby”, Kate Chopin shows how discrimination by skin color can affect people. Desiree was abandoned and raised by Madame Valmonde. Armand, the father of the baby, was a member of the most notable families in Louisiana. He falls in love with Desiree and marries her. After they have a baby, their relationship quickly corrodes. A few months later, Armand realizes the baby’s skin has a darker tint than usual. He accuses Desiree of being black. Armand tells Desiree he wants her to leave so Desiree takes the baby and “disappears among the reeds and willows that grew thick along the banks of the deep, sluggish bayou” (Chopin 91) and never returns. Armand finds out that Desiree is black when he reads a letter that her mother sent her that read “she belongs to the race which is cursed with the brand of slavery” (Chopin 92). The story’s ironic ending has a connection with the story’s setting, imagery, and Chopin’s use of similies. The setting has a major role to the ironic ending because it takes place in antembellum South where blacks are not treated equally to whites. There are several hints at where and when the story takes place. First, Armand’s last name, Aubigny, was “one of the oldest and proudest in Louisiana” (Chopin 89) which tells us it takes place in Louisiana. Also, Chopin says that Armand owns a plantation and many slaves which wouldn’t have been possible after the Civil War times showing that the story takes place during the antebellum period. The name of Armand’s plantation, L’Abri, is also ironic because it means “the shelter” in French which is ironic for Desiree because it is a bad place for her not a good place. Chopin explains how “there was something in the air menacing her peace”. The story wouldn’t take place in any other time period or location because if it did, Desiree wouldn’t be discriminated for being black, therefore wouldn’t of run of into the bayou along with the baby. Chopin’s use of imagery leads up to the irony at the end of the story the greatest because Chopin contrasts black and white skin colors. First, Chopin explains how Armand’s plantation is all full of dark colors.

“The roof came down steep and black…branches shadowed it like a pall” (Chopin 89). This initial imagery shows Armand’s control. When Armand’s father ran the plantation, he was very nice to the slaves and treated them humanly, but when Armand took the plantation over he was very harsh and cruel, “under it, his negroes had forgotten how to be gay” (Chopin 89). Armand has a “dark, handsome face” (Chopin 90). This symbolizes Armand’s hatred and is a foreshadow to the end when it turns out Armand is black. Desiree, on the other hand, is always surrounded by light colors. For example, when she is leaving the plantation towards her death, she was still wearing a thin, white garment, and, “her hair was uncovered and the sun’s rays brought a golden glean from its brown meshes” (Chopin 91). The colors they are surrounded by also illustrate their personalities. While Desiree, who is “beautiful and gentle, affectionate and sincere” (Chopin 88) is surrounded by light, Armand, is “imperious and exacting” (Chopin 90) is surrounded by dark. The similes that Chopin uses also leads up to support the ironic ending by showing Armand’s emotional changes and Desiree’s feelings of rejection. Most of the similes to describe Armand’s actions happen when he falls in love with Desiree. Even though they knew each other since he was eight years old, he didn’t fall in love with her until they were in their twenties. Chopin explains that sudden love, “as if struck by a pistol shot” (Chopin 88) was the way everyone in Armand’s family fell in love. Two similes that explain Desiree’s shock add to the ironic twist at the end of the story. First, Desiree realizes her baby is not white and her blood, “turned like ice in her veins” (Chopin 90). Later, Armand tells Desiree he wants her to leave and Desiree turns away “like one stunned by a blow” (Chopin 91). This is how Chopin’s use of similes connect to the ironic ending. The main conflict in “Desiree’s Baby” is ultimately race. This story’s use of similes and imagery, along with the setitng, make for a good ironic ending in which Armand is really black not Desiree. Therefore, racism kills. Racism dates back thousands and thousands of years back to the caveman times. In the short story “Desiree’s Baby”, Kate Chopin shows how discrimination by skin color can affect people. Desiree was abandoned and raised by Madame Valmonde. Armand, the father of the baby, was a member of the most notable families in Louisiana. He falls in love with Desiree and marries her. After they have a baby, their relationship quickly corrodes. A few months later, Armand realizes the baby’s skin has a darker tint than usual.

He accuses Desiree of being black. Armand tells Desiree he wants her to leave so Desiree takes the baby and “disappears among the reeds and willows that grew thick along the banks of the deep, sluggish bayou” (Chopin 91) and never returns. Armand finds out that Desiree is black when he reads a letter that her mother sent her that read “she belongs to the race which is cursed with the brand of slavery” (Chopin 92). The story’s ironic ending has a connection with the story’s setting, imagery, and Chopin’s use of similies. The setting has a major role to the ironic ending because it takes place in antembellum South where blacks are not treated equally to whites. There are several hints at where and when the story takes place. First, Armand’s last name, Aubigny, was “one of the oldest and proudest in Louisiana” (Chopin 89) which tells us it takes place in Louisiana. Also, Chopin says that Armand owns a plantation and many slaves which wouldn’t have been possible after the Civil War times showing that the story takes place during the antebellum period. The name of Armand’s plantation, L’Abri, is also ironic because it means “the shelter” in French which is ironic for Desiree because it is a bad place for her not a good place. Chopin explains how “there was something in the air menacing her peace”. The story wouldn’t take place in any other time period or location because if it did, Desiree wouldn’t be discriminated for being black, therefore wouldn’t of run of into the bayou along with the baby. Chopin’s use of imagery leads up to the irony at the end of the story the greatest because Chopin contrasts black and white skin colors. First, Chopin explains how Armand’s plantation is all full of dark colors. “The roof came down steep and black…branches shadowed it like a pall” (Chopin 89). This initial imagery shows Armand’s control. When Armand’s father ran the plantation, he was very nice to the slaves and treated them humanly, but when Armand took the plantation over he was very harsh and cruel, “under it, his negroes had forgotten how to be gay” (Chopin 89).

Armand has a “dark, handsome face” (Chopin 90). This symbolizes Armand’s hatred and is a foreshadow to the end when it turns out Armand is black. Desiree, on the other hand, is always surrounded by light colors. For example, when she is leaving the plantation towards her death, she was still wearing a thin, white garment, and, “her hair was uncovered and the sun’s rays brought a golden glean from its brown meshes” (Chopin 91). The colors they are surrounded by also illustrate their personalities. While Desiree, who is “beautiful and gentle, affectionate and sincere” (Chopin 88) is surrounded by light, Armand, is “imperious and exacting” (Chopin 90) is surrounded by dark. The similes that Chopin uses also leads up to support the ironic ending by showing Armand’s emotional changes and Desiree’s feelings of rejection. Most of the similes to describe Armand’s actions happen when he falls in love with Desiree. Even though they knew each other since he was eight years old, he didn’t fall in love with her until they were in their twenties. Chopin explains that sudden love, “as if struck by a pistol shot” (Chopin 88) was the way everyone in Armand’s family fell in love. Two similes that explain Desiree’s shock add to the ironic twist at the end of the story. First, Desiree realizes her baby is not white and her blood, “turned like ice in her veins” (Chopin 90). Later, Armand tells Desiree he wants her to leave and Desiree turns away “like one stunned by a blow” (Chopin 91). This is how Chopin’s use of similes connect to the ironic ending. The main conflict in “Desiree’s Baby” is ultimately race. This story’s use of similes and imagery, along with the setitng, make for a good ironic ending in which Armand is really black not Desiree. Therefore, racism kills.

Crimes Against Children

ABSTRACT

Child abuse clearly has a negative impact on children and can result in behavioral, cognitive, emotional, and developmental difficulties. This may lead to greater difficulties later in life that will extend into adulthood. The use of proper investigation techniques and appropriate handling of cases, however, can result in less traumatization for child abuse victims.

I. Introduction

According to Hess & Orthmann (2010), law enforcement agencies are charged with investigating all crimes, but the responsibility is greater when children are involved. Because children are more vulnerable than other members of society, their protection under the law must be greater. Crimes against children cover an extensive range of crimes, including but not limited to: maltreatment, sexual exploitation, sexual abuse, abduction, trafficking and molestation. Child abuse investigations involve many challenges and therefore warrant specific techniques and considerations for successful outcomes in terms of cases solved and prosecutions.

This paper will begin by defining specific terms that are germane to the topic of crimes against children. The next section will provide a scope of the problem concerning crimes against children. The following section will offer a theory framework to account for offenders of crimes against children. The fifth section will offer a literature review of current research findings regarding crimes against children investigative techniques. This is followed by a discussion section that will identify strategies and recommendations for successful investigative outcomes. Finally, the last section will summarize and conclude the important aspects of crimes against children investigation strategies as they relate to successful outcomes and prosecution.

The significance of this paper is that it contributes to the criminal justice system by critically reviewing investigative strategies and techniques as they relate to their mission of successful outcomes in crimes against children cases. This paper is written for colleagues and clerisy who have a professional or academic interest in reducing crimes against children through utilizing the best investigative strategies and techniques.

II. Maltreatment of Children Defined

Maltreatment means to treat someone roughly or abusive (Hess & Orthmann, 2010). The four common types of maltreatment include neglect, physical abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse. A. Child Neglect – The failure to meet a child’s basic needs. This could include starving a child, or not keeping a child clean and well-kempt. B. Physical Abuse – Refers to violence against a child. While the laws may vary from state to state regarding the specifics of what constitutes physical abuse towards a child, this term refers to excessive abuse such as punching, strangling, or causing bodily harm to a child. C. Emotional Abuse – Involves causing fear or feelings of unworthiness in a child. This may include hurling insults at a child, or intimidating a child. D. Sexual abuse – Sexually molesting a child, performing sexual acts, statutory rape, and seduction (Hess et al, 2010).

III. Scope of the Problem

The extent of the problem is described by two conflicting views. One on side of the spectrum, there is a maximalist alarmist perspective and on the other side there is the minimalist skeptical perspective. The maximalist alarmist perspective believes that child abuse and neglect is reaching epidemic proportions and unless drastic steps are taken child abuse will continue and only get worse. The minimalists consider the maximalist view to be overly exaggerated and overstated for their own self-serving purpose (Hess et al, 2010). According to Juvenile Offenders and Victims 2006 National Report, child fatalities are the most tragic consequences of maltreatment. An estimated 1,530 children died because of abuse or neglect. 41.1 percent of child fatalities were caused by neglect where physical abuse was also a major contributor. More than three-quarters of the children who died because of child abuse were younger than four years old.

However, some experts believe that child fatalities may be underreported by 50 to 60 percent (Hess et al, 2010). The effects of child abuse are upsetting, disheartening and potentially very dangerous. Child abuse and neglect result in serious as well as permanent physical, mental and emotional damage. Unfortunately, the effects of child abuse may lead some victims to behave in future criminal behavior (Hess et al, 2010). Emotional damage from the effects of child abuse is disturbing. It may cause the victim to have an increased level of aggression along with self-destructive tendencies. Antisocial behavior can put not only the family in harm’s way, but also the community (Hess et al, 2010). Antisocial behaviors along with physical aggression are two of the most constant outcomes of physical abuse. Fear and anger are also incorporated with abused children. Some studies have suggested that childhood abuse and neglect will reduce cognitive skills and can lead to attention deficit disorders. In addition to deficit disorders, neglected and physically abused children do not do well in school. These children tend to produce low grades, lower standardized tests scores and much retention in the same grade, but neglected children are far worse off than those who are physically abused (Chalk, Gibbons, Scarupa, 2002).

IV. Theory Framework to Account for Offenders

Crimes against children have numerous broad based causations rooted in criminological, psychological, and biological theory constructs. From a crimes against children investigative perspective, the power and control theory, (as a subset of conflict criminology), as posited by Hagan, Gillis, and Simpson (1990) accounts for a significant niche of offenders. In their theory Hagan et al. (1990) describe the power bestowed to males by the patriarchal system of marriage. While primarily an explanation of domestic violence, the power and control theory also incorporates domestic aspect of child abuse, neglect, and sexual assault (Hagan et al., 1990). Hess and Orthmann (2010) add further support in their claim that 90 percent of child abuse suspects are parents or an adult known to the child. Tanner (2009) notes limitation of the power and control theory is it does not explain or predict violent behavior, only that offending behavior toward children does occur in significant numbers in a patriarchal construct. Even with this limitation, the power and control theory is useful in identifying offenders and developing useful policies and strategies in crimes against children investigations.

V. Literature Review

A specific technique for a better outcome for handling child victim cases would be to establish a children’s advocacy center. Allowing these centers to place law enforcement officers, child protection workers, prosecutors, therapists, medical professionals all in one center will be to coordinate investigations, prosecution and treatment to the young victim. These centers can conduct child-friendly interviews rather than multiple interviews that may be in an interrogation room or in the house where the abused victim was neglected to such criminal activity. By placing children in an advocacy center and using a multidisciplinary team approach, it is easier for a team of professionals to work together to ensure that the maltreatment of the child is responded to in the best possible way with the least amount of further trauma. These centers “…improve the quality of information and increase the number of successful prosecutions” (U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1999).

Unfortunately in the criminal justice system, law enforcement agencies must vie for federal funding and therefore resources like advocacy centers may not always be available in all cities and towns to coordinate such a team of professionals. Another idea that has been proven to work better than others would be to bring other agencies together and form a multidisciplinary team approach to the situation. The purpose of bringing these teams and agencies together is to limit the amount of times the child is interviewed, to coordinate intervention, and to reduce the amount duplication of agency procedures (U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1999) Joint and coordinated responses help cases not “fall through the cracks” (Hess & Orthmann, 2010). Joint interviews and monitored interviews will help reduce inconsistencies that may occur and improve the quality of information that is given by the child (U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1999).

VI. Discussion/Recommendations

Investigating child neglect and maltreatment cases can be very demanding and is perceived by prosecutors as the most difficult to prosecute. Protecting the child from further harm, interviewing the child, and the need to involve other agencies are three challenges that occur when investigating child abuse and neglect (Hess et al, 2010). To help address these issues, there are some strategies in place to help children in need. To protect the child from further harm, under welfare regulations and codes, an officer may place a child in temporary custody without a warrant if there is an emergency (Hess et al, 2010). To help overcome challenges (i.e., short attention spans, difficulty discussing the abuse, and the fact the child was most likely told not to tell anyone) when interviewing a child, officers should consider the children’s age, their ability to describe what happened, and the retaliation by the suspect once the child “tells” (Hess et al, 2010). One idea would be to consider inviting a social worker or therapist who has studied child psychology and who is formally trained and has experience talking with troubled and abused children.

VII. Conclusion

Crimes which are committed against children have dire consequences, not just for the victims but for society as a whole. Police investigations of crimes against children require specific strategies and techniques for successful outcomes. With a wide scope of crimes being committed against children, law enforcement officials are charged with ensuring the safety of the child, and getting all the information about the crime from the child. This may involve bringing in social workers, creating children advocacy centers or other mental health professionals in order to provide an environment where children can feel they are safe to talk about what has happened. While some solutions to this problem may be expensive, time-consuming, or difficult; protecting the child is the ultimate goal for law enforcement and proper training for those who are involved in child abuse cases is paramount to bringing justice for these young victims.

VIII. References

Chalk, R., Gibbons, A., & Scarupa, H. (2002). The Multiple Dimensions of Child Abuse and Neglect: New Insights into an Old Problem. Research Brief, Retrieved April 11, 2013, from http://www.childtrends.org/Files/ChildAbuseRB.pdf

Hagan, J., Gillis, A. & Simpson J. (1990). Clarifying and extending the power and control theory. American Journal of Sociology, 9, (4), 1, 1024-37

Tanner, J. (2009). Teenage Troubles: Youth and Deviance in Canada, 3rd edition. Oxford Publishing

U.S. Dept. of Justice. (1999). Breaking the Cycle of Violence: Recommendations to Improve the Criminal Justice Response to Child Victims and Witnesses. Office for Victims of Crime, 6, Electronic Source Only. Retrieved April 15, 2013 from: http://www.ovc.gov/publications/factshts/monograph.htm

Hess, K. M., & Orthmann, C. H. (2010). Criminal Investigation (9th ed.). Clifton Park, NY: Delmar.

Against Euthanasia

“Freedom is defined as “the power to determine action without restraint” . Given this definition, is the practice of euthanasia morally justifiable or wrong? The debate of freedom arises. Euthanasia is acknowledged as a “mercy killing.” It is “the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a person or animal suffering from an incurable, esp. a painful, disease or condition”. This begs the question: does an individual have the right to decide to take another individual’s life? Religious groups would ultimately argue euthanasia is a “crime against life.” (Citation?)The issue of morality and ethnics are proposed. Is it moral to kill someone to take them out of their pain, as opposed to letting them live suffering? This is when spirituality comes into opposition with human rights.

Euthanasia is a controversial issue that compares one’s quality of life to ethics. It can be viewed as a form of suicide or a form of being merciful. Even so, does humanity have the right to determine if someone should die or not? Those who are governed by a faithful belief may see euthanasia as practiced against god’s will. However, others may believe mankind has the choice over their own lives (Remove comma) and that the belief of god is a theory. Economic costs and human resources are legitimate arguments as to why euthanasia may be an acceptable option. Yet, could financial problems cause one to consent under pressure?

Euthanasia denotes “good death” in Greek. This begs the question: does a “good death” exist? Despite it being acknowledged as painless, arguably it is still murderous. Society is forbidden to commit murder, making euthanasia contradictive, since it is allowing one to take the life of another. (Perhaps it may be helpful here to define “murder.”) Medically, euthanasia is the “norm” and portrayed as a gracious practice. Morally, it is dissipated and seen as an immoral exercise. Even though euthanasia is a “merciful killing,” it does not change the fact that it is murder. This practice is unethical and unrighteous. It should be internationally forbidden and prohibited.

In 1999, Dr. Jack Kevorkian was sentenced to a 10-25 year prison term for giving a lethal injection to Thomas Youk, a man who was in the final stages of amyotrophic . (Perhaps here you can explain a little bit about the disease, i.e. what it does, what this man’s life was like, what kind of pain he was in, what his future (if any) would hold.) Kevorkian saw his actions as a deed. Kevorkian stated that he has “helped more than 130 people since 1990”. The defense party focused on the issues surrounding euthanasia, while the prosecution concentrated on Dr.Kevorkian’s actions associated with Michigan’s laws. The prosecutor stated, “This case is about what Jack Kevorkian did, and what he did under the law under the state of Michigan is commit murder”. This trail did not touch base on the political aspect of euthanasia, but on the ethnical side. Thomas Youk videotaped himself consenting Dr. Kevokian to take his life, yet Dr. Kevokian was still charged with committing a crime. This is proof euthanasia is wrongful. There is no difference between Dr. Kevorkian and a medical surgeon when it comes to taking a life; the practice is still murderous. The court found him guilty since his actions were unlawful; meaning in general euthanasia can arguably be found a crime.

A similar case in Saskatchewan occurred when Robert Latimer murdered his severely disabled daughter, Tracy, on October 24th, 2008. The reasoning for Latimer’s immoral act was he could not bear to witness his daughter suffering from a severe form of cerebral palsy. He killed her by placing her in the back of his Chevy pickup, ran a hose from the exhaust to the cab, and watched her die. Latimer was convicted on November 4, 1993 of first-degree murder. The following year he was convicted of second-degree murder. This begs a question: what is the difference between Latimer’s actions, killing his daughter who suffers from excruciating pain, and a doctor who was given permission from a loved one to kill an individual who is also suffering from a brutal pain? A doctor must receive authorization to kill a patient who is overly sick.

Doesn’t Latimer have the right to take his own daughter’s life, since a doctor would have had to ask him anyways to have the right to “kill” Tracy? Latimer supposedly saved his daughter from being in pain, which is the same reason why many individuals chose to give permission for those who are not physically in good health to undergo euthanasia. His methods were the same as a person with a medical degree. He watched an innocent individual die. Latimer was punished since his act was seen as wrongful. So why it is that euthanasia is seen as “merciful killing?” Many thought Latimer’s behavior could be compared to the act of euthanasia, since it’s perceived as a “compassionate homicide”. How could a man who watches his daughter die is seen as a “merciful killing?” Obviously it was not, which is why he was sentenced for second degree murder. Are you suggesting that these decisions be taken out of the hands of qualified medical personnel? You could make reference to the qualifications of doctors in these situations; it could contribute to your essay.

John Pearson, born in June 1980 in Derby City Hospital, was diagnosed with Down’s syndrome (http:// http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2600923.stm.) and was left in the care of a specialized consulting pediatrician, Dr. Arthur. Three days later, Pearson was found dead. Dr. Arthur was later charged with the baby’s murder. He was allegedly asked by the parents to take the life of this child, whom he killed by starvation. In November 1981, Dr. Arthur was acquitted of murder (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2600923. stm), due to him taking the life of a child with the parents’ consent. (If he was acquitted of murder, you cannot call him a murderer. You can refer to him as an alleged murderer, but because he was not convicted, anything else would be inappropriate.) This is proof that the practice of euthanasia is causing other individuals to believe they have the right to take the life of someone in their family whom is suffering from a disease or disability. (Are you suggesting this newborn was able to make their own decision as to whether or not they wanted to live with this disability? If so, why do we not allow children to make more decisions at a younger age? Why not let elementary
students vote, for instance, or enter into their own legal contracts? Make sure your stances are logical and well thought out. The more times you allow an opposing view to poke holes in your statements the more difficult it will be for you to stay credible.) John Pearson may have not been as “privileged (Remove comma)” as others in society due to his disability, but he did not deserve to die.

It can be argued that euthanasia is form of suicide. This outrages religious groups who see this practice as immoral (Remove comma) and against the word of god. Suicide denotes “the killing of one self.”(Citation?) Euthanasia, a majority of the time, occurs when individuals decide to medically kill someone who is undergoing crucial agony. This practice can be perceived rather as “murder.” Murder means to “cause to die; put to death, usually intentionally or knowingly (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/commit/suicide). (This statement and the one previous should be placed earlier on in the essay. You can then make reference to it here if necessary.) Either or, euthanasia is condemned by many religious laws. The Jewish perspective states that instances of euthanasia should be dealt with as such: “any form of active euthanasia is strictly prohibited and condemned as plain murder”(http://www.aisha.com/societywork/science /Doctor-Assisted_Suicide.asp). Talmudic and Rabbinic sources state, “One who is in a dying condition is regarded as a living person in all respect (Talmud – Smachot 1:1).” The Jewish religion also believes: “One may not close the eyes of a dying person” (Talmud – Smachot 1:1).

Rabbi Merri interprets this saying as, “It is to be compared to a sputtering candle which is extinguished as soon a person touches it – so too, whoever closes the eyes of a dying person is compared to have taken the soul” (http://www.aisha.com/societywork/ science /Doctor-Assisted_Suicide.asp). Islam also criticizes euthanasia. Muslims see life as being sacred, since Allah provided it to them. Allah decides how long each human being will live, not a doctor. It states in the Qu’ran 5:32, “If anyone kills a person – unless it be for murder or spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed the whole people”
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethnics/ euthanasia. shtml). The Qu’ran 3:145 clearly establishes, “And no person can ever die except by Allah’s leave and at an appointed term” (http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/islamethnics/euthanasia. shtml).

This rule also applies to Christianity. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (2003) states: “All forms of suicide and euthanasia remain strictly prohibited, but questions of moral culpability and eternal salvation are left open” (http://www.acu-cell.com/suicide.html). In the Orthodox Church decisively is in opposition of euthanasia and considers it as, “as form of suicide on the part of the individual, and a form of murder on a part of others who assist in this practice, both of which are seen as sins. The Church does not expect that excessive and heroic means must be used at all costs to prolong dying, as has now become possible through technical medical advances” (http://www.acu-cell.com/suicide.html). Depending on your citation style requirements, this quote should probably be in block format since it is longer than 40 words.)

Internationally, there are over 3.3 billion Christians, Muslims, and Jews who are opposed to euthanasia (http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Theology-World-Religions.htm) . However, Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist groups make up 850 million of the world’s population (http://www.atheistempire.com/reference/stats/index.php). Atheists question the truth in religion; therefore they do not recognize euthanasia as a sin, or as a form of suicide. (Are you suggesting that all of these people believe euthanasia is a positive thing?) Even though theology is governed by powerful messages, it’s still not a reliable source. Religion is still seen as just a theory, since it is just a belief. Humanity has not yet seen or conversed with a higher power, so the religious information provided to mankind has not been proven.

On January 11, 2003 Dr. David Jerrrey wrote a letter to the editor of the newspaper the Financial Times. In the letter he stated, “Terminally ill patients often fear being a burden to others and may feel they ought to
request euthanasia to relieve their relatives from distress” (cite). Given economic situations, many patients and families of the patients feel pressured by medical figures to turn to euthanasia. Michael Prowse wrote in the newspaper the Financial Times, published January 4th 2003, “If euthanasia became socially acceptable, the sick would no longer be able to trust either doctors or their relatives: many of those earnestly counseling a painless, ‘dignified’ death would be doing so mainly on financial grounds. Euthanasia would become a euphemism for assisted murder” (Michael Prowse). Many feel psychologically pressured to consent to voluntary euthanasia because they maybe a financial burden to their loved ones. However, those who do personally require euthanasia without being forced will allow this practice to continue. Humanity has the choice of fundamental principles, being they believe they should be allowed to make the decision if they want to die, since it’s their own life.

There is a shortage of hospital space, so those who have slim chances of living may feel that by them dying another who has a greater chance of life can have more attention by medical care (Michael Prowse). These arguments can be seen as a valid, which may overrule the fact that euthanasia is murderous. Individuals may sympathize with those who are in great pain, and feel they cannot continue on with life. Despite these intellectual reasons, euthanasia is a form of murder, and a practice that should be banned.

Euthanasia is a deliberate act of killing. Since the beginning of mankind our world has been exposed to laws that forbid murder. In the Ten Commandments, “thou shall not murder,” (Citation?) has influenced recent laws. This ethnical issue must be solved, but with the help of communities (Remove comma) and countries. There are two forms of euthanasia that must be focussed on: active euthanasia, or “inducing or assisting in the death of a person, who is undergoing intense suffering and who has no practical hope of recovery” (cite), and passive euthanasia, which is “withholding life-saving equipment or treatment, by medical equipment I mean surgeries, chemotherapy and other treatments beyond basic food, water, warmth, care and personal attention” (cite). Each form must be individually looked at. Passive euthanasia is what society must accept. Active euthanasia contradicts the
law (Remove comma) and commandments. The money that is being put into cloning and other scientific practices should be put towards cures that can stop the diseases which cause individuals to turn euthanasia.

The truth is mankind continues to play the role of god. Our world is presently exposed to cloning; organ transplants, etc. (If this is a strictly formal essay, refrain from using “etc.” Rewrite your sentence to something like “Our world is presently exposed to such morally compromising issues such as cloning and organ transplants.”) This allows one to think that euthanasia will become a dominant practice internationally. More will rely on it (Remove comma) and see it as a consideration in their decision whether or not they want to live or die. Religion does contain truth. Only nature should have the power to decide when it is our time to go, but as technology continues to advance it provides mankind with the choice to determine one’s life or death.

Illnesses do cause families grief and to suffering, but if humanity started to believe in “faith” again, maybe euthanasia would have to significance, (This is not a logical sentence; please clarify.) since we just lack hope. A doctor diagnoses a patient with cancer and automatically the patient senses death. What happened to believing in miracles and fate? Maybe mankind no longer believes in miracles simply because our world continues to destruct by war, poverty, and violence. We now turn to an easy way out, since the fight seems too long. Euthanasia is just a way to control our population and economy. It is a homicidal act that should be immediately stopped internationally. Dr. Jack Kevorkian, Robert Latimer, and Dr. Arthur (Remove comma) were all charged with murder because they chose to practice euthanasia without medical consent. These three men were charged with murder, which proves this operation is murderous (Remove semi colon) despite it having the word “medical” behind it. If a doctor performs euthanasia on a normal individual it should be equally weighed because it is a deliberate act of murder. Theology condemns euthanasia simply due to it being considered a form of suicide or murder. Individuals are pressured into euthanasia because they are sick and their life becomes less important than one that is healthy.

VIEWS AGAINST THE NEOCLASSICAL ECONOMICAL SHAREHOLDER APPROACH

INTRODUCTION

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), defined as “the broad array of strategies and operating practices that a company develops in its effects to deal with and create relationships with it numerous stakeholders and the natural environment” (Waddock, 2004). Globalization and liberalization has reinforced with the introduction of corporate social responsibility, Developing countries need to focus more about the corporate social responsibility planning and implementation process (Kiran and Sharma, 2011). Corporate social responsibility is one of the most important issues and developments of 21st century as the organization in 21st century faces problems for which corporate social responsibility is an answer (Horrigan, 2010). Davies (1973) says social responsibility starts when the law ends. Any organization is not socially responsible if it simply complies with the minimum requirement of law, as this is what any good citizen would do.

Milton Friedman argues that people responsible for decision and action in business should not exercise social responsibility in their capacity as company executives. Instead, they should concentrate on increasing the profits of their companies (Mulligan, 1986). Friedman (1970) the one and only social responsibility of business is to use its resources and involve in activities focused to increase its profit as long as it stays with in the rules of the game, which is to say engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.

This essay focuses on the views against the neoclassical economical stakeholders approach which states profit is the sole social responsibility of any business in comparison with Kellogg’s corporate social responsibility
and also discussing the views and theories supporting corporate social responsibility.

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

The concept of corporate social responsibility is considered to be a powerful way of achieving sustainable competitive profit and for achieving long term value for the investors, shareholders and stakeholders. Entrepreneur can consider corporate social responsibility as a win-win strategy or opportunity for business, financial investors and society. Accomplishment of proper corporate social responsibility practices can affect the perception of stakeholder’s customers, investors, local communities, environmental groups, government, suppliers and competitors (Kiran and Sharma, 2011). Organization should arrange its corporate social responsibility goals and decision making with the companies goal and strategy that makes corporate social responsibility natural as customer’s perspective (Maon et al., 2008).

A number of companies identify corporate social responsibility practices to its main strategy and the policy of the company based on the importance give to a) defining a plan for social action, b) intensity of investment in social programs, c) commitments of employees, d) perceived impact of social action on competitive position and e) measuring outcomes of programs (Husted et al., 2007). Previous research has shown that corporate social responsibility enables a firm to appeal to the socio-cultural norms of its institutional surroundings and contributes to its socio legitimacy (Handelman and Arnold 1999; Palazzo and Scherer 2006; Scott 1987). The moral and ethical case of corporate social responsibility has been described the “pure” case for business acting responsibly; it is the right thing to do as a member of the society (Osuji, 2011). Institutional corporate social responsibility helps to create strong relationship with stakeholders, a positive corporate image and goodwill.

Shaw (1988) there are some principles that are considered to serve direction and coherence into corporate social policy a) need – the increase in responsibility even when it has been caused by someone else or by the act of
god example organization helping red cross or emergency relief groups in times of natural disaster b) ability – none of the organization has an ability to cure society’s ills, but with their experience and competence organizations can participate in the process of improving the quality life example organizations proving quality goods and services at a reasonable prize c) proximity – knowledge of a social need is normally imparted by proximity, requirement to respond or rescue is a product of the ability of an organization, failure of the awareness of the need may or may not be excusable d) last resort – the rescue operation may indeed be more appropriate for some other social institutions, the government cannot be expected to do everything and the resolve to address social issues does not necessarily be troublemaking it simply means doing the right thing when the work needs to be done and no one else doing it.

Beliefs toward the corporate responsibility of the society is focused on the following; providing customers with quality products and services, having a safe working place, investing into human development, building genuine relationship with all stakeholders, increase the wealth of shareholders and business operations with the motive of adding values, following ethical values within the business process and by contributing to civil society through partnership and community development projects. Shaw (1988) not all organizations work with the motive of profit making for example, in a hospital or school the managers will not have profit as their object but believe in rendering of specific services.

THEORIES BEHIND CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

THEORY OF CONSISTENCY

Theory of consistency clarifies the views within the organization which also known to be the inside-out perspective, to achieve sustainable advantage organization sticks to its environment with all its resources (Mintzberg 1979). Organization should be planned in a way to react to its external environment in appropriate way. Herzberg’s two factor theory (1959) states for an organization hygiene factor and motivation are important for an
employees working condition inside an organization. Socially responsible image is not just used to polish the image of an organization it is also a way of motivation factor; there are possibilities that employees find satisfaction in their work under such circumstances (Ruschak, 2008).

Based on the consistency theory any organization needs to give equal importance to the corporate social responsibility to be incorporated in their firm, as it is one way to satisfy the employers in their work place and provide motivation toward achieving the goals of the organization.

THEORY OF CONTINGENCY

Everything in an organization depends on situations and environment plays an important role as it influence everything also the performance has to be based on the situation there is no specific behavior to be applied in all situation (Galbraith, 1973). Dictionary of human resource management (2001) the contingency theory suggests effectiveness of an organization is based on the factors taken into account by the managers that can have a positive or a negative impact on the organization. The main contingency factors are the environment, technology, size, product diversity and people employed.

According to the contingency theory environments plays an importance role in influencing the performance of an organization. Social responsibility is a factor used to improve communication between an organization and the society that can lead to better outcomes in an organization.

MILTON FRIEDMAN’S VIEW ON CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

According to Milton Friedman the social responsibility of a business is to increase profit. (Friedman,1970). In an enterprise the corporate executive is the owner of the business the executive has direct responsibility to his employers. Responsibility of a business is to make as much money as possible. As an individual any corporate executive would have many other responsibilities to his family, churches, clubs and etc these are considers being as the social responsibilities. He is spending his own money or time
or energy not the money of his employers or time or energy these are considered to be responsibility of an individual not as social responsibilities. Corporate social responsibility would reduce the returns to the stockholders, by increasing the price to the consumers he is spending the money of the consumer’s money by lowering the wages of the employers he spends their money.

There are companies that connect in fighting the idea of social responsibilities and environmental sustainability and cling to the classical view that the only social responsibility of business is to make money for investors (Winston, 2002). Social responsibility behavior could enhance loyalty and trust both of the customers and employees. The organizations are “ not just judged on their result but on their behavior too” (CSR campaign, 2005). The idea of corporate social responsibility has failed to create a good society (Freeman and Liedtka, 1991). Friedman’s argument is that corporation should pursue their economic self-interest and that any attempt to promote corporate social responsibility, however it might be defined, amounts to moral wrong. Friedman also argues that government is the best means for facing such concerns. The theory of shared value argues that business should consider profit more broadly than the financial bottom line, and includes societal benefits as value creation, recognizing that a business is affected by, and can contribute to solving, social challenges (Poter and Kramer, 2011).

Freeman and Liedtka (1991) mentions seven reasons to discard the concept of corporate social responsibility a) the beginning of the concept of corporate social responsibility are suspect, as they receive mainly from the field of economics b) Friedman argues profit maximizing is core social responsibility of an organization c) corporate social responsibility accepts the prevailing business of “capitalism: love it or leave it” d) corporate social responsibility is old-fashioned as it begins with understanding and ends in fixing the consequences e) corporate social responsibility makes mangers involve themselves in areas beyond their expertise f) corporate social responsibility considers business to be different from society bonded with set of responsibilities g) rights and responsibilities both are irrelevant
to the active managers.

Mulligan (1986) Friedman argues that the practice of social responsibility by a corporate executive is a) unfair due to taxation without representation b) undemocratic as it invents power to an individual to who has no proper authorization to control c) unwise, as there is no balance in range of governmental power that leads to judgment d) a violation of trust, as the corporate executives are employed by the owners “as a agent serving the interests of his principal” e) futile, as an executive imposes costs of his stakeholder, employers or customers he tends to lose their suppose which can lead to loss of his power and he is doubtful in judging the consequences of the social responsibility.

STAKEHOLDER THEORY

Ruschak (2008) Corporate social responsibility according to stakeholder perspective is considered to be only towards the stakeholders. Milton Friedman the man who won Nobel Prize in 1976 is the famous person to promote the stakeholders perspective of corporate social responsibility. According to Friedman companies are only responsible towards their stakeholders (Friedman, 1970). Adam Smith the father of classical economic theory favors Friedman’s view and argues what is good for the company is good for the society as well. Society determines its demands through the market and companies respond to those demands (Carroll, 1996).

Freeman, Marrison and Wicks (2007) offers two observations regarding stakeholder theory first being in a win-win situation with an aim of managing stakeholders and second giving importance to the values as it is essential in business. Friedman view of corporate responsibility is to deal with stakeholders in a profitable way by executing all operations required (Philips, 2011).

According to stakeholder theory it suggest that the purpose of the business is to create as much as value possible for its stakeholders following this theory Friedman argues, “the purpose of the business is business” therefore
the social responsibility of an organization is to its stakeholders.

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY OF KELLOGG’S

W.K Kellogg founded Kellogg’s company through his belief in nutrition and dedication to well-being more than 100 years ago. The main vision of Kellogg’s is to enrich and delight the world through foods and brands that matter. The purpose of Kellogg’s is nourishing families so they can flourish and thrive.

The corporate social responsibility of Kellogg’s is divided in to four different pillars a) market place – providing the consumers with great taste and high quality food that also includes nutrition’s and balanced diet for varying requirements b) environment – protecting and conserving natural resources is the key feature of sustainable growth, that is achieved by building sustainable agricultural practice and aiming to increase the recycled content of packaging and use more of recyclable products c) community ambition – providing breakfast for who needs it’s the most d) workplace ambition – support talented and dedicated workforce.

Kellogg’s company maintains six pillars towards social accountability such as no child or involuntary labor, safe working conditions, freedom to associate and no discrimination, protection of environment, fair wage tome off and living conditions and no harassment or coercion.

COMMITMENTS OF KELLOGG’S

Kellogg’s has certain corporate social responsible commitments such as a) operating an ethical company – committed in accordance with K values and maintain global code of ethics b) sourcing responsibly – committed to maintain a transparent supply chain free of forced labor and slavery c) environmental progress – set environmental goals to reduce energy use, greenhouse gas emission and water use by 15-20% from 2005-2015 and decrease waste level by 20% from 2009-2015 d) promoting sustainable agriculture – helping in minimizing environmental impacts of agricultural production e)
helping end deforestation globally – the consumer goods forum (CGF) pledged to mobilize its collective resources to help achieve zero net deforestation by late 2010, as a member of CGF the following steps were taken to reduce deforestation ensure that palm oil production is environmentally appropriate and socially benefit, not purchasing soy products from tropical deforested region instead specially from U.S and remain committed to sustainable use of forest products also committed to have 100% of virgin stock verified sustainable growth by end of 2013 f) continuously increasing sustainability of packaging – minimizing material use for package by focusing on three areas the package to food ratio, percentage of recycled and material content and percentage of materials commonly recoverable g) Helping to decrease greenhouse gas emission from refrigerator – committed use of sustainable refrigerators, having six frozen food manufacturing plants, all the refrigeration system is based on ammonia a natural refrigerant and nor a greenhouse gas h) responsible product marketing – since January 1 2009 Kellogg’s does not sell products that does not meet the nutrition criteria for children under 12 years and Kellogg’s does not market any product for children under 6 years i) nutrition education – committed to provide nutrition information to consumers enabling them to meet their dietary needs j) reducing hunger – providing one billion cereal and snack serving, more than half to children and families, this is a part of new corporate philanthropy initiative launched in early 2013 called breakfast for better days.

CONCLUSION

Corporate social responsibility is one of the major factor for a business to maintain its image and reputation. According to Friedman the social responsibility of a business is considered to be responsible for the stakeholders and increase their returns. Where as there are other theories proving being socially responsible is important for a business.

Unfortunately for Milton Friedman, corporate social responsibility was followed over many years and now it is no longer being considered a development but a long strategy incorporated in a business. Prior literature
has anticipated outcomes of corporate social responsibility, including corporate reputation, competitive position, and the fir between corporate social responsibility and core competence (Du et al., 2011; Porter and Kramer, 2011; Yoon et al., 2006).

Kellogg’s company follows and maintains the social responsibility as a result they have achieved many awards and recognition such as world’s 100 most reputable companies, powerful brand, innovative company by Forbes, In 2012 news week awarded Kellogg’s with green ranking, reader’s digest awarded with most trusted cereal brand and great place to work institute in Spain awarded Kellogg’s with best companies with 100-250 employers. Therefore corporate social responsibility is a strategy to promote business opportunities for companies. REFERENCE

Academia (2013), “Against Milton Friedman: An Argument for Corporate Social Responsibility” available at http://www.academia.edu/238431/Against_Milton_Friedman_An_Argument_for_Corporate_Social_Responsibility

Bryan, H (2010), “Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: Debates, models and practices across government, law and business”, Edward Elgar Publishing.

Christian, B (2005), “ Corporate social responsibility” GRIN Verlag.

“Corporate Social Responsibility”, (2009). Baylor Business Review, 27, pp. 20-23.

Du, S., V. Swaen, A. Lindgreen and S. Sen (2013). ‘The Roles of Leadership Styles in Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics, 114, pp. 155-169.

Friedman, M. (1970) “The Social Responsibility of Business is to increase its Profits” .New York. The New York Times Company

Freeman, R. E. and J. Liedtka (1991). “Corporate Social Responsibility: A Critical Approach’, Business horizons”, 34, pp. 92-98.

Hiller, J. S. (2013). ‘The Benefit Corporation and Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics, 118, pp. 287-301.

Katharina, R (2008), “Corporate social responsibility” GRIN Verlag

Kellogg’s company (2012), “Corporate social responsibility report of 2011” available at http://www.igd.com/Documents/CSR%20reports/Kelloggs_CR_Report_2011.pdf

Kellogg’s company (2013), “Corporate social responsibility report of 2012” available at http://www.kelloggcompany.com/content/dam/kelloggcompanyus/corporate_responsibility/pdf/2012CR/2012_Kelloggs-CRR.pdf

Kellogg’s company (2013), “About Kellogg’s company” available at http://www.kelloggcompany.com/en_US/about-kellogg-company.html

Kellogg’s company (2013), “Corporate responsibility” available at http://crr.kelloggcompany.com/en_US/corporate-responsibility/index.html

Kiran, R. and A. Sharma (2011). “Corporate Social Responsibility: a Corporate Strategy for New Business Opportunities’, Journal of International Business Ethics”, 4, pp. 10-17.

Mulligan, T. (1986). “A Critique of Milton Friedman’s Essay ‘The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits”, Journal of Business Ethics”, 5, pp. 265-269.

Omnex (2011),“Corporate social responsibility (CSR)” available at http://www.omnex.com/sustainability/csr.html

Radu, M (2008), “The dynamics of corporate social responsibilities” Martinus
nijhoff publishers.

Robert, A.P (2011), “Stakeholder theory”, Edward elger publishing.

Shaw, B. (1988). ”A Reply to Thomas Mulligan’s “Critique of Milton Friedman’s Essay ‘The Social Responsibility of Business to Increase Its Profit”’, Journal of Business Ethics, 7, pp. 537-543

Globalisation – for and against essay

In last few years we hear more and more about phenomenon called globalisation. But what we can understand under this notion? Globalisation is the process of international integration based on interchange of world views, products, ideas and cultures. The result of this occurrence is forming one, big world, in which people live together, like a one nation. In my essay, I will show arguments for and against globalization.

A major advantages of globalization is a social and economic progress for developing countries. We can have availability of global brands and products. Because of globalization we can notice progress in technology and communication advances. What is more, globalization give us opportunities to work or study abroad, which are a big chance for young people to meet new friends and get new experiences. It is also a chance for poorer countries to benefit from investment as a result of globalization.

On the other hand, globalization has some disadvantages. It exposes the gap between rich and poor – rich countries can have theirs cheap goods from poorer countries. They exploit workers. Also, we can see that globalization destroys local cultures and traditions. People don’t feel their membership to countries where they were born and grew up.

To sum up, it is hard to say if globalization has more advantages then disadvantages. In my opinion, pros and cons equilibrate. Globalisation is about progress in new technology and products. But is destroy peoples nationalities and make them multisocial. Globalisation – for and against essay

In last few years we hear more and more about phenomenon called globalisation. But what we can understand under this notion? Globalisation is the process of international integration based on interchange of world views, products, ideas and cultures. The result of this occurrence is forming one, big world, in which people live together, like a one nation. In my essay, I will show arguments for and against globalization.

A major advantages of globalization is a social and economic progress for developing countries. We can have availability of global brands and products. Because of globalization we can notice progress in technology and communication advances. What is more, globalization give us opportunities to work or study abroad, which are a big chance for young people to meet new friends and get new experiences. It is also a chance for poorer countries to benefit from investment as a result of globalization.

On the other hand, globalization has some disadvantages. It exposes the gap between rich and poor – rich countries can have theirs cheap goods from poorer countries. They exploit workers. Also, we can see that globalization destroys local cultures and traditions. People don’t feel their membership to countries where they were born and grew up.

To sum up, it is hard to say if globalization has more advantages then disadvantages. In my opinion, pros and cons equilibrate. Globalisation is about progress in new technology and products. But is destroy peoples nationalities and make them multisocial.