Think Your Kid Is Not ‘Sexting’? Think Again

Sexting

A new fade is on the rise… Sexting: sharing sexually explicit photos, videos and chat by cell phone or online. The article above addresses the problems and consequences that come along with sexting. Statistics show that more than a quarter of young people have been involved in sexting in some form. Most sexting is done by young teens and early adults… It starts off innocent, but sometimes turns into foul play. What authorities have done to reduce sexting is issue criminal charges against those caught participating. Teens are now being charged as sex offenders for distributing what authorities label child porn. While I agree that it is a problem for young teens to participate in such acts. I do not agree with sentence. It is unethical to issue a sentence of that stature upon a teen who engage is common inappropriate judgment. Before it was Polaroid’s now its texts, there will always be curious teens out there, and you can prevent that. Unless society changes the acceptance and utilization of sex to advertise. But to use the justice system to limit this is unacceptable. What are your thoughts…

Ansmith2

White House Crashers

White House Crashers Michaele and Tareq Salahi May Face Criminal Charges, Says Secret Service

Recently in the news was the scandalous party crash. The Virginia couple, Michaele and Tareq Salahi,, are accused of crashing President Obama’s first White House state dinner. The article speculates that an investigations may take place and may reap criminal charges against the two. They should not be persecuted. If they are it should only be on the grounds of trespassing. And that should only be enforced if there was a sign posted no trespassing. This case should be treated like any other case similar to its kind. I don’t think it is ethically right to treat one case different just because the president was involved. We are all equal and have the same rights. No one should be more privileged then the other in the justice system… What is your take?

Ansmith2

Kanye West Crashes VMA

Kanye West Crashes VMA Stage During Taylor Swift’s Award Speech

Most if not all are familiar with the incident that happened at 2009 VMA awards. Kanye West interrupted the Best Female Video winner, Taylor Swift, speech to proclaim “I’m sorry, but Beyoncé had one of the best videos of all time.” He was reprimanded and had a few tour cancellations, but that was it. The ethical issue at hand is double standard, if it where a CMA award show and Darius Rucker was award best new country album, winning over Faith Hill, and Tim McGraw interrupted him, as Kyane did to Taylor, the racist backlash that would have arisen… I feed Kyane got off easy.. because race was not an issue. However if the shoe was on the other foot, or color… then race would be an issue… ethical double standards.

Ansmith2

Sanford’s Ethics Charges Revealed

Sanford’s Ethics Charges Revealed

This post addressed the three dozen ethics charges issued by South Carolina’s Ethics Commission filed against Gov. Mark Sanford. His extramarital affair this year sparked the ethical charges. The reasoning behind it among others was the using state funds for upgrades on airplane flights he made to visit the Argentinian with whom he had an affair. The ethical issues are noted in the article. The whole case in an ethical problem. At first glance I was against any backlash on Mark Sanford, on the grounds of him being a political figure and caught cheating. I dont think that just because his is a public figure he should be persecuted if he cheats, even if it is unethical. However he used funding to participate and that is wrong. He deserves to be impeached.
what do you think?

Ansmith2

Sex drive vs. golf drive

Player sues PGA over testosterone

This article addresses an issue over drug use and professional sports. The case is a bit unique in that the sport is golf and the drugs are synthetic testosterone and beta blockers. The Synthetic testosterone plays a key role in promoting health and well-being and beta blockers are used for the management of several heart conditions. The athlete in question is Professional golfer Doug Barron who was suspended form the PGA after testing positive for these drugs. His lawyer is now filling suit against the PGA under the Americans with Disabilities Act. “Barron struggled for years trying to understand why he was chronically fatigued and had trouble putting on muscle. And he had absolutely no sexual desire.” He finally seen a doctor in 2005, who discovered “the golfer’s natural testosterone count when he was prescribed the shots (of synthetic testosterone) was 78 nanograms per deciliter of blood. Most healthy men his age have a testosterone level between 300 and 500.” Also he had been taking the blockers to treat a heart condition since 1987. The ethical dilemma here is two pronged. The issues: drug testing in a career that is not necessarily un-performable when on drugs, and the over exaggeration of drug testing in professional sports. Yes it is evident that athletes have used drugs to have a competitive advantage of their opponents, but who is to say an athlete who trains all day and his opponent only half, does not then have a competitive advantage. Why are there so many regulations on us now days? Your opinions?

Ansmith2

attack on Rush Limbaugh’s Rams bid

Revs. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson attack Rush Limbaugh’s Rams bid

The article addresses the issue of Rush Limbaugh’s attempt to Bid for the Lions and it being attacked by Rev. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. I was disappointed when I heard all the negative publicity Rush was receiving after he decided to bid on the NFL team Detroit Lions. His attackers are civil rights leaders, who have been known to favor only one race. They attach Rush, and accuse him of “appealing to the fears of whites” with an unending line of insults against blacks and other minorities. But these attackers hold a double standard when it comes to their beliefs. Sharpton can be classified as racists with his inappropriate comments degrading a society, “White folks was in caves while we was building empires…We taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.” Jesse Jackson has made anti-Semitic comments when Jackson referred to Jews as “Hymies” and to New York City as “Hymietown” in a conversation with a Washington Post reporter that he had somehow presumed to be off the record. Why is it okay for them to be racially discriminative against their desired hated target and be praised for their actions, but Rush be persecuted and forced to withdraw a bid, all because he has had a questionable past of racists remarks. When did it become socially expectable again to allow one side of the spectrum to be favored and the other condemned? Is it ethical for society to accept the remarks made by the Rev. and Mr. Jackson, because they are minority, but then disregard all credibility to Rush because he is not a minority.

Ansmith2

Appropriate attire policy

All-male college cracks down on cross-dressing

An all male college in GA recently passed an “appropriate attire policy” that prohibits students from wearing “women’s clothes, makeup, high heels and purses as part of a new crackdown on what the institution calls inappropriate attire”. It also “also bans wearing hats in buildings, pajamas in public, do-rags, sagging pants, sunglasses in class and walking barefoot on campus”. The reformed dress code is aimed at a small group of students said Dr. William Bynum, vice president for Student Services. “‘We are talking about five students who are living a gay lifestyle that is leading them to dress a way we do not expect in Morehouse men,’ he said.”

The policy has brought both positive and negative responses. One senior disagrees with the policy because it tells students what they should wear in free time outside of the classroom. He feels it infringes on the student’s freedom of expression.

The issue: should this college be allowed to tell the students what they can and can not wear. Why is the attire deemed inapropriate? If the students are not infringing on anyone elses rights why are their rights violated?

More School Days

Obama wants to overhaul education from ‘cradle to career’

I first heard the news from a colleague that Obama wants to extend the public school calendar. This flared my temper because it is not the length of time we receive an education that is failing us, it is the system. So I researched for an article that touched on this case.

The article I found is a briefing of what Obama suggest and plans to implement to improve the school system. Obama first notes several key elements that encourage the failing progress of American education. “We have let our grades slip, our schools crumble, our teacher quality fall short and other nations outpace us” (Obama). Obama argues that we should not lower the standards to help improve the low test scores, but raise them. He also notes the need for a merit pay vs. just tenure for teachers. He then suggests the longer school calendar. Obama makes note of change but does it mean it will work.

The issue I had was the extended school calendar. I am pro education and support higher education but I do not see how extending a school year will fix the problem. The problem is in the system. Govt run programs have seemed to decline in progress through out the years. It is time to revamp the system itself not add on to what is already in affect.

Teachers in public schools lack motivation to do a higher quality job then what their self motivation encourages. They are paid by the years they work not the quality of their skills. Some may argue that merit based is not a good way to pay because some teachers are not given quality standards to work with: ie lack of paper, books, utensils, etc. Rebuttal to this is the revamping of the system by making sure all public schools are provided with what they need, without the hand of lobbyist efforts.

It all boils down to politics. And that needs to be taken out of schools.

Ethical issue I propose is what standards should the govt be held to when providing for their socialized programs?

We Have Universal Health Care So leave it alone!

Universal Health Care
by Kimberly N. Hogg

An opinion letter to the editor, regarding an article titled “Obama’s Audience Speaks First”, by Anna Deveare Smith, commented on the moral reasoning behind the need for universal health care. The argument is it is ethically right to have health care provided for all Americans regardless if they can pay or not. Hogg further more argues what is so wrong with socialized medicine? And she notes that currently insurance companies are not out to provide health coverage but to gain profit. This can be criticized as unethical.

Rebuttal to her, Americans already have universal health care. That right people we can go to the doctor and we are able to be treated. No denial just because we can’t pay. Now we are responsible for the bill, but we still get treated. With the universal health care bill we would be given same benefits to hospitals but we are automatically charge through taxes regardless if we see the doctors. Right now if we don’t see the doctor we don’t pay.

So why is it ethical then to require me to pay under the bill of universal health care if I don’t seek the use of doctor’s care? Why not give me an option like not to pay for something I don’t use or pay for it when I do. Wait I have that option now… And you want to take that away? Why America Why? Give me Liberty or Tax me to death. :)

Relatives of Snatched Baby Question Why Officials Took Children

Relatives of Snatched Baby Question Why Officials Took Children

A woman was assaulted (stabbed) then robbed of her infant son. A happy ending to this story- child was recovered and the woman is also in stable condition. Happy ending is then trumpet with idiocracy. The kidnapped child and siblings where placed in foster care shortly after. The baby not only kidnapped but then NOT reunited with mother. In addition the woman’s other children were taken away.

The issue raised is what rights the legal system has in this case to strip a victim of her rights to care for her children. It is bad enough she was attacked, left for dead, and robbed of her infant son. Then to have her children taken away.
This was all do to a mistruth that led authorities to factor in the idea that the woman might have tried to sell the child thus deeming her suspect.

Cases like this are always misrepresented. Why are the parents first to suspect? And even further why does the political system give way for authorities to take morally questionable actions during investigations.

Why were these children taken and further more split up. That is traumatizing in itself to be taken from ones natural environment but then placed into an unfamiliar home with no one you know.

Issue then is should authorities have such free range over what the do in cases like this?
And further more considering their negligence should the family be compensated?