We Are the Heroes

Human beings are superheroes. We can fly, we have X-ray vision, we can climb buildings. We also have the power to change our minds about how we view the world. There is no need to get lost in the everyday routine of life. We are strong, intelligent, capable beings, and the power to live life to the fullest is right in our hands. We only have to accept that there are no limitations to what the world can offer us. If we open our eyes to what inspires us, the world is our playground.

One thing human beings cannot do is see what will happen down the road. More often than not, we make plans, chase dreams, and prepare for the future, only to have it all fall through. Life has a way of throwing us curveballs. One day, the sun is shining and a fresh breeze blows, but the very next day, the breeze picks up to a violent wind, and out of nowhere the rain pours down. This doesn’t only apply to nature. Sometimes we can succumb to the storms in our lives, and we feel that we can never come back from the pain and sadness that are haunting us. The despair has proven to be too much, and life will never be the same. It’s just too hard to keep going.

Shut Down Sea World

Beloved animals are close to our hearts. Whether it is a pet or wild, everyone has a favorite animal. What if you were told that your favorite animal was endangered? This means that a specific species of creatures are seriously at risk for extinction. My favorite animals are orca whales and sadly, they are endangered. SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment has been keeping orca whales, and other sea life, captive for over fifty years. Sea World claims to have been providing personal, interactive and education experiences with wildlife sea creatures for more than 50 years. There are four parks in America with nearly 11 million visits pre year. The parks create orca, dolphin, and sea lion shows year-round featuring specialized whale trainers. Sea World originally opened to provide animal rescue and rehabilitation services and are the first facility to have held the birth of the first killer whale in captivity. What Sea World visitors do not know is that they are actually harming ocean life. Sea World Parks and Entertainment needs to take responsibility for their horrible actions or animal cruelty. Research shows that Sea World shortens the life expectancy of their captured sea life, unknowingly harm and fail to care for their captive whales and animals, and continuously let their animals hurt their trainers.

Orcas are the apex predators of the sea and the largest members of the dolphin family. They are highly intelligent, highly adaptable and able to communicate and coordinate hunting tactics. According to USWhales.org, researchers say there has never been a documented attack on a human in the wild, and that there are in fact some stories of orcas actually protecting humans at sea from sharks and other predators. Orcas are found throughout the world’s seas, typically in pods, or families, that share a common dialect. When an orca is born, it stays with its family its entire life, just like humans do. They mostly live in cold areas of the sea, like in northern regions. Luckily Sea World has not captured any new whales for over 30 years. Each whale in every park location was either born into captivity or was captured when he or she was a baby. Sea World of Hurt and PETA are working together to persuade park goers to discontinue their visits to SeaWorld. Their website gives information and statistics as to why SeaWorld is a horrible place.

Sea World Of Hurt has been working together with PETA for many years trying to liberate the captured mammals held in SeaWorld throughout the country. Evidence shows that Sea World shortens the life expectancy of orca whales. According to Sea World of Hurt’s website, orca whales have a lifespan of, “…60 to 70 years for males and 80 to more than 100 for females.” The average age of death for an orca at Sea World is about 13 years old. This is due to the fact that orcas are not in their natural habitats. Orcas can fend for themselves and supply food for their families; they are not in any danger in the seas. In the wild, orcas hunt and obtain water from their prey. But since they are captive cannot hunt, trainers keep gelatin to the whales in an attempted to keep the whales hydrated. Gelatin is an unnatural substance, made up of animal by-products, that is unnecessary for the whales (www.seaworldofhurt.com). The little things Sea World trainers do have huge impacts on each whale. Orcas are meant to be swimming in the wild ocean with every other creature.

These captive whales are not being treated properly. Orca whales swim up to 100 miles or more a day. In captivity, the whales are all thrown together into small swimming pools with no place to escape or exercise. According to SeaWorldofHurt.com, in order for a captive whale to get the necessary amount of swimming miles a day, he or she would need to swim 1,208 laps around the perimeter of Sea Worlds largest pool. Without this exercise, a male orcas dorsal fin, which is normally supposed to stand 5 feet high, is more likely to collapse. Also this exercise is needed to keep the whales body weight and inner organs healthy, just like humans. The ocean water creates a type of wave on the dorsal fin that allows it to stand erect. Sea World trainers claim that this condition is common, but research done by Sea World of Hurt shows that, “in the wild, it rarely ever happens and it is a sign of an injured or unhealthy orca.” If whales in the wild had collapsed dorsal fins then this condition would be natural, but since it is the result of captivity, a collapsed dorsal fin is unnatural. A collapsed dorsal fin is not the only harmful thing happening to the captive whales. The whales are left out in the sun for nearly the entire day. In the wild, SeaWorldofHurt says that, orcas spend up to 95% of their time submerged and find shade in the depths of the ocean, but at Sea World, their tanks are far too shallow. Since the tanks are so shallow, the orcas have no place to hide from the sun and just like humans, the whales get sunburned. The sunburns are then, “shielded from the public eye with the help of black zinc oxide, which matches their skin. Although zinc oxide is also used as a sunblock, orcas almost always have sunburn before it is applied.” No, black zinc oxide is not harmful, but the fact that the trainers at Sea World let their animals burn in the blistering sun is heartbreaking. Sunburn can lead to painful welts and if one is exposed to too much sun it could possibly lead to a form of cancer. Not only does the sun hurt the whales, but also they hurt each other. At the Sea World Park in Orlando, the female whales bully the male whale. The result of being held in a tiny tank leads to aggression. The most common injury to the whales is rake marks. These are the result of teeth scarping against skin, or being bitten. Unlike in the wild, when an aggressive attack happens, there is nowhere for the animals to escape to. In September of 2012 a whale, “was injured on a sharp metal edge in his tank at SeaWorld San Diego while reportedly feeling from an aggressive altercation with two other orcas.” The tanks holding these animals are no longer safe for them. In January of 2012, the USDA, United States Department of Agriculture, issued an official warning to SeaWorld San Antonio for its “repeated failure to provide drain covers that are securely fastened in order to minimize the potential risk of animal entrapment.” This is a violation and has resulted in the death of a sea lion. The USDA conducted an investigation and cited the marine park for several violations of the Animal Welfare Act, including the use of expired surgical materials, some almost a decade old. The USDA also documented that a dolphin tank and the areas surrounding the orca performance tank were in disrepair and contained cracked and crumbling concrete and rusty beams that could pose a threat to the health and safety of both the animals and workers. The USDA pointed out that the unsafe conditions “might create a health risk if these pieces of concrete fall off into the pool and get ingested, or if they become abrasive” and that they “do not facilitate cleaning and disinfection.” All of these many risk are harming the captive sea creatures.

Orca whales are wild animals. When a trainer swims in a whale’s tank, they are entering whale territory. Whale trainers are not marine biologists; they are simply performers. Most SeaWorld visitors have the same common knowledge as some, if not most, of the “professional” trainers. The whales’ relationship with their trainers is not built on unconditional love like a parents and children, but rather built on what the trainers gives him or her. Sometimes harsh behavior given off from the orca is not because of lack of food, “In a few cases, we can attribute this behavior to disease or to the presence of frustrating or confusing situations” such as a small tank and nowhere to escape to and bullying from other whales (Hoyt). There have been zero reported deaths or injuries of humans by orca whales in the wild, but according to http://www.Orcahome.de, there have been about 130 reported attacks, more injuries than deaths, of humans by orcas in captivity. In December of 2009, an orca killed trainer Alexis Martínez at a marine park in the Canary Islands. Only two months later, trainer Dawn Brancheau, SeaWorld’s best trainer, was killed by an orca at SeaWorld Orlando. OSHA, the occupational safety and health administration, tried to fight against SeaWorld saying Martínez’s death should have been served as a warning about swimming and working with whales, ultimately trying to save Brancheau’s life.  During a “relationship session” with Tilikum, the largest male whale at Sea World Orland, Tilikum pulled on Brancheau’s ponytail and dragged her to the bottom of the pool and ended up killing her. Sea World blamed Brancheau for her own death, when in reality it was all Tilikum. Tilikum has been involved with 2 previous deaths. OSHA believes SeaWorld knew how dangerous Tilikum could be but did nothing about it.  At this point, Tilikum should have been released back into the wild where he would be able to let his aggression be taken out on his prey, not trainers. The website Cetaceaninspirtation.com fights in favor of OSHA in trying to shut down SeaWorld and inform the world of the dangers and actions that occur there. SeaWorld will always put the blame on their whales for injuring their trainers, rather than putting the blame on themselves for causing the whales to go insane and ultimately injure trainers. One time, a dolphin bit a young child who put their tank in the dolphins’ tank. Personally, I would not want someone intruding my home and personal space either. SeaWorld has been in a three-year legal battle with the federal government, arguing that human contact with killer whales is educational and integral to the care of the species (Leinw, Leger). Now, there is a federal ban opposed on letting trainers swim with the whales. Why are the whales being blamed and not the trainers? Because the trainers are taught how to preform with the whales.

Sea World Parks and Entertainment holds over 50 innocent sea creature captive. The park is endangers some of the most beautiful and interesting creatures on this earth. Not only are orcas being treated badly, but also are dolphins, sea lions, and other incredible animals. Orcas are meant to be swimming in the wild with every other wild sea creature. Taking orcas out of the wild ruins our circle of life and puts their lives at risk. Not having enough room in a tank leads to a collapsed dorsal fins and fights among the whales. But is it too late to save the whales? Could they possibly survive on their own in the wild now after being captive their entire lives? Sea World should have been only used as an animal rehabilitation, not a circus show.

Works Cited

“Captivity.” WDC, Whale and Dolphin Conservation. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Hoyt, Erich. “Dangers to Trainers.” PBS. PBS, 1992. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

Leinw, Donna, and Leger. “SeaWorld Challenges Ban on Whale-trainer Contact.” USA Today. Gannett, 12 Nov. 2013. Web. 06 Feb. 2015.

PETA. “10 Things You Didn’t Know About SeaWorld – SeaWorld of Hurt.” SeaWorld of Hurt. N.p., 2015. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

“What Causes Dorsal Fin Collapse?” Cetacean Inspiration. N.p., 06 Jan. 2013. Web. 27 Sept. 2015.

The Liberals Are At It Once Again

Professors Indoctrinating Students with Liberalism

The fact that 72 percent of professors teaching at an American university are liberals and only 15 percent are conservatives is outrageous. Consequently, there is a high likelihood that teachers will bring liberal beliefs into the classroom. As a whole, that leaves professorates leaning far more to the left. While some professors persuade liberalism, others intentionally indoctrinate students. This affects our generation in many ways. Some examples are, teachers fail to adequately challenge liberal undergraduates which results in leaving many of them unprepared for the real world, and it leaves conservative students afraid to express their beliefs in the classroom because of the professor failing them for not conforming.

The Common Constitutionalist wrote the article, “Kids Need to be Taught Reality” where kids who are indoctrinated with liberalism are not prepared for the real world. Friendly competition is needed for children but when we look at the word “friendly,” it doesn’t mean everyone wins. Sports now-a-day give out trophies and ribbons for just showing up instead of honoring top achieving students. It promotes unhealthy competition if only one child were to get a trophy or ribbon. This affects us in the long run because students don’t learn from it. If children are given a trophy for showing up to an event, they’re not learning what they maybe did wrong but instead it’s like they’re being rewarded for not doing anything. If we gave a trophy to only the top achieving students, it would teach others to strive to be better so they can get a trophy next time. If students don’t have competition they are going to think they are the best and that there’s no need to improve themselves.

Bronson states in the article “Why competition can be healthy for kids” “If kids don’t learn to lose they’re going to feel entitled to win, they’re also going to make a connection that fear of losing is going to prevent them from taking the risk in the first place. And what kids do need to learn is losing is not that big a deal. They need to learn to lose and go ‘Oh, whatever,’ and move on and keep playing.” Not everything is going to be handed to us in life and we’re not always going to win. Take the loss and work on being better for next time.

Furthermore, kids grow up to not being able to cope with real world situations and essentially look for a scapegoat for everything. This is leaving people unprepared for real world challenges which relates back to kids that were indoctrinated with liberalism.

In today’s society, teachers are expected to have an unbiased view in the class. They are not supposed to share their beliefs. But many of times we see it still happening. If more teachers are liberals, there will be more liberal talk throughout the school and in the classrooms leaving students unable to preach their beliefs. If a professor believes in certain things and a student doesn’t it could cause problems in the classroom ultimately leaving the student to fail, fear of being failed or being inadequately challenged.

With the greater advantage of having a liberal teacher in an American university and one that is 3 times more liberal than normal liberals, students begin to hide their political views in the classroom with the fear that their professors will penalize them for having a different belief or potentially fail them. Many different beliefs are brought into the classroom that coincides with liberalism. For example teachers could be feminist, Marxism, atheism, anti-Christian and so much more. Teachers are indoctrinating students with their beliefs of what they feel is right and wrong.

David Pethick made a comment on the website “Quora” in regards to the question, “When people complain about left wing indoctrination in public schools, do they think right wing indoctrination would be better?” David talks about how schools should not have to decide on whether to be a conservative or liberal, but rather the students are able to learn basic skills and consider different ideas, opinions and beliefs. The school system should not indoctrinate students with neither left wing nor right wing, but instead be an unbiased place with no set belief.

In the article, “Admit it, American Colleges Do Indoctrinate Students” by Conor Friedersdorf, Obama wants all kids to go to college and wants them to all be indoctrinated. There are many Americans who see this as a good thing. But with many reasons to back it up, it’s not a good thing. Teachers are expected to keep their beliefs and ideas out of the classroom not teach them. The article also informs us that deliberate indoctrination usually occurs in higher education by staff, administrators, and classmates and not just professors.

The question, why there are so many Liberal teachers in American Universities seems to be asked a lot. Ryan Borek goes into detail in his comment on “Quora” in regards to the question, “Why are professors liberal.” Ryan gives us the 6 different reasons to why there are more liberal teachers and explains them. For starters, the first one is job descriptor characteristics. Being a professor is something that people with certain general traits strive towards. It just happens to be mostly liberal traits. Second, because being different is wrong. As stated before, liberal people just happened to already be Professors due to the simple fact that it calls to the same likes and wants. Also “liberals were willing to accept, hide, tolerate, etc. socially unacceptable conditions.” Third, professors are biased because their professors were biased. Basically people who were liberals wanted to be around other liberals. This lead to two very distinct issues arising. First, “I am a Liberal, and I see my teacher saying Liberal things. Now, I want to be a teacher too.” Or, “I am not a Liberal. My teacher says Liberal things. Now I am a Liberal, and want to be a teacher too.” Fourth, the job of “professor” is politically typecast as a liberal position. “When you think of a Professor, do you think of them as Liberals? If so, and you are a Liberal, do you want to go be taught by them? Do you want to be them?” Fifth, “Viet NAM.” Students who were not fighting in the war were wearing flowers around the campuses and the teachers began preaching to the choir. Liberalism became popular among students as well as professors which encouraged teachers to teach more liberally. And finally, it’s only humanities anyway. Most liberals are teaching humanities and only in humanities do we see outrageous amounts of liberals.

Conservatives on the other hand, are being silenced by liberals especially in schools and universities. Dana R. Casey makes a reference in her article, “Conservative Ideas Have no Voice in Education” of how conservatives have as much as say as a prisoner of war. One student at Swarthmore University stated in an interview that the ideas of a conservative individual should not be mentioned at a liberal arts college and those ideas that agree towards hers are acceptable. This is stated because she feels as though conservatism is the dominant belief and people should not conform to this. In a true liberal arts college, the objective is to find the truth within an argument by closely observing all sides, yet this student refuses to allow certain views in, thus making her argument not a true liberal arts belief. These ideas have come from her indoctrination at this school, and come from the professors that have fed these views to her. Liberal indoctrination is being forced into the classrooms through revised curriculum and policies.

Many students fear their liberal professors as well as failing the class due to not conforming, but not many speak up or even dare try to. The article “Professor Fails Student for Refusing to Conform to His Anti-Christian Bias” by Dr. Susan Berry is an example of a student stepping up and not allowing her teacher to indoctrinate her with liberalism and tells a story about Grace Lewis, a student at Polk State College where her teacher gave her 4 consecutive 0’s on assignments for not conforming to his beliefs.

Grace took a chance on this online humanities class and went against what Professor Russums’ beliefs were. He had an anti-Christian perspective with his lectures and homework assignments that Grace didn’t agree with. When Grace confronted the professor on the phone about how she felt, Professor Russum was “angry because he took his personal time away from his family to speak with her, only to be disrespected by her disagreement with him.”

When Grace and her mother tried to seek help from the dean of college, Donald Painter, after Professor Russum wanted Grace to drop the class, they got no help from Painter. Painter reviewed the class and saw nothing wrong with the way Professor Russum was teaching the course but instead blamed Grace for possibly not being mature enough to take the class. “I have reviewed the materials in Professor Russum’s HUM 2020 – 57094 course and believe them to be appropriate based on the course description and learning outcomes. Further, I found nothing derogatory or defamatory toward any group of people.”

With nowhere else to go, Grace and her mother contacted Liberty Counsel, an international nonprofit litigation, education, and policy organization dedicated to advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of life and family. The Liberty Counsel captured screenshots of Professor Russum’s now deleted Facebook page showing inappropriate pictures and sayings. As Matthew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel stated, “Russum’s behavior amounts to “abuse of students. This has nothing to do with teaching, the professor is using his position of superiority to abuse students and this has no place in a college.” Grace was punished because she refused to agree with Russum’s anti-Christian perspective and worldviews of Marxism, atheism, feminism, and homosexuality. Liberty Counsel demanded that Professor Russum’s course context and his behavior’s be evaluated, Grace’s papers be graded by another professor, an apology letter to Grace, and assurance that Professor Russum’s future classes be “free from such unlawful discrimination.”

Another big thing is the fact that students feel their professors are brainwashing them into being a liberal. Nathan Ketsdever Posted a comment on the website “Quora” in response to “Does the American college system brainwash students towards liberalism.” Nathan talks about how professors are brainwashing their students with liberalism. He discusses how being exposed to diversity, literature, and the arts is more likely to liberalize one’s viewpoint. If teachers express these things more to a class it’s almost like they are brainwashing the students. On top of that, this also connects back with students fear being failed for not conforming because they don’t want to go against what the teacher has to say. Thus brainwashing the students because they have to sit through the lecture and agree with the professor to pass the class.

Overall, professors continue to indoctrinate students with liberalism and while some of us try to fight it, most students won’t. It’s still a problem in today’s society and it’s still getting worse. With the ever growing percentage of liberal professors in American universities, more and more students are being indoctrinated. Conservatives need to step up and voice out their opinions and take down these liberal professors. If the conservatives don’t, then this will continue and cause more problems. One conservative at a time speaking up and we can make a difference slowly but surely.

Work Cited

Berry, Susan. “Professor Fails Student for Refusing to Conform to His Anti-Christian Bias.” Breitbart News. N.p., 06 May 2015. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

Borek, Ryan. “Why Are Professors Liberal?” Why Are Professors Liberal? N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

Ketsdever, Nathan. “Does The American College Sysytem Brainwash Students Towards Liberalism.” Quora. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.

Pethick, David. “When People Complain about Left Wing Indoctrination in Public Schools, Do They Think Right Wing Indoctrination Would Be Better?” – Quora. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

“Why Competition Can Be Healthy For Kids.” MindShift. N.p., 29 Mar. 2013. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

Who Wins the Battle?

Every day we are locked in a battle with our own law enforcement. The same cops that promise to provide public safety, peace and support by providing assistance during emergencies, crisis and life threatening situations has now become a threat to us. This battle that we are confined in most of us do not win and if we are lucky enough we’ll make it out alive. If we are even luckier than that we will make it out without suffering from a long-term psychological disorder that can only be alleviated by Prozac, Zoloft and other addictive antidepressants that’ll wear off within the next few hours but we’ll be forced to take another dosage as a way of escaping. Escaping the everyday brutality our police officers direct towards us as they continue to beat and kill victims.

This battle starts off with police candidates who receive training and are given guidelines on using force prior to their employment. However, even the best training cannot change the core personalities that some of these officers have and the repercussion of this is the engagement in brutal behavior that injures and cause the death of suspects. These brutal behaviors come from cops frequent use of excessive force even when suspects do not demonstrate that they need it to regulate them. The term “excessive force” has yet to be exactly defined but according to an article from U.S Legal, “Excessive force is the use of force greater than that which a reasonable and prudent law enforcement would use under the circumstances is generally considered to be excessive.”

Most people know who takes the lost when it comes to this battle with our law enforcement. According to Mapping Police Violence, a research collaborative website that contains information on police killings nationwide, the estimated number of people killed in the United States in 2014 due to police brutality was 1,149 and so far in 2015, 1,046 cases has been reported according to the Guardian . These statistics demonstrate that the amount of people being killed each year is rapidly growing as the statistics in 2015, is very close to the numbers reported in 2014 with the full month of December remaining. Not only do our law enforcement boasts around their badges and weapons but abuse their authority as they resort to using excessive force on suspects that leave them permanently injured but in most cases dead.

As our police officers continue to engage in these brutal behaviors they aren’t only injuring and killing suspects but they degrade and dehumanize them as well. According to No Bullying, an online forum aimed at educating and advising to stop bullying, “When an officer dehumanizes their victim, it helps them to avoid feelings of guilt when it comes to using violence.” The online forum goes into further explanation on how dehumanizing victims make officers feel.  Cops tend to avoid the feelings of guilt, by convincing themselves that the object of their actions are less than human. This results in officers feeling better about hurting suspects when they are beating, choking and killing them. Never do they take full responsibility for their actions, instead they might make an ignorant remark such as “They deserved it!”

Police brutality is continuing throughout the United States and shows how training isn’t effective on our officers as they beat, kill and dehumanize victims and in most cases direct the brutality towards minorities through racial profiling. Often when the topic of police brutality is discussed, many find it impractical to avoid the topic of race and how the legal system is bias towards minority cases of brutality. Unfortunately, many cases prove this bias such as Eric Garner who was placed in a choke-hold and killed, Michael Brown who was shot and killed and the infamous Rodney King who was severely beaten. All these cases of brutality were done by white officers on unarmed African-American men. Although racism isn’t the only factor in many cases of police brutality, the outcome has a serious impact on the African-American community and all who have to witness it.

However, police brutality doesn’t stop at the amount of people who are targeted and killed from it. Sadly, it goes beyond that. Still to this day, I hear children say they want to become police officers when they grow up because they have a job of preventing crime and keeping everyone safe. They dress in cool uniforms, make a lot of money (on average a decent salary of about $56,260 a year) and are allowed to carry a gun (a Glock 22 to be exact). I’m sure none of these younger children are aware of how dangerous cops can be as they sometimes abuse their authority. Once again, this is known as police brutality which is the deliberate use of excessive force that is physical, by law enforcement. As we all know and witness that in most cases of this brutal behavior, victims normally end up dead. However, the very few who survive the beatings end up with psychological disorders that can be treated but not cured.

The long-term effects of brutality aren’t always immediate and obvious (unless it involves suspects being killed instantly). It takes plenty of doctor visits before victims can be diagnosed with a psychological trauma that is a result of brutal behavior enacted by a cop. However, when victims are identified with a specific illness it is primarily Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a serious psychiatric disorder that normally occurs from life threatening situations which makes sense as to why most victims of police brutality develop it. It is not an immediate illness which means it can take years before it unfolds for some people or it can begin right after a frightening event. The symptoms of PTSD is hallucinations, flashbacks, lost of interest, outburst of anger, irritability and insomnia which can sometimes be confused with other illnesses such as Bipolar Disorder, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Schizophrenia that have the same effects. Unfortunately, PTSD cannot be cured but it can be treated by a variety of medications like Prozac, Zoloft, Paxil, etc that control the feelings of anxiety. In most cases therapy is highly recommended to help victims cope with their issues but most do not take advantage of it as a result of lost of interest.

The real impact is on the emotional and social lives of the victims of abuse and trauma, like this commenter on Copblock who states: “…please stop victimizing people especially when they are rendered as defenseless it is not necessary. Bullying is NOT allowed in our schools and it most CERTAINLY should not be tolerated on the streets especially by authority that we are supposed to be able to depend on.” This commenter suffers from PTSD, frequent anxiety attacks and is borderline agoraphobic (type of anxiety disorder, in which the victim fear and often avoid places that might cause them to feel embarrassed or trapped) all because of an attack by cops that should have never taken place. Before encountering this, she made it clear that she instilled all her trust into the law enforcement as she believed that they had a job of protecting people not hurting them. Now this victim is left with living in fear sun up to sun down which impacts her emotionally and mentally as she is unable to live a normal life because she is afraid of what others are capable of doing to her. After all the police who are supposed to protect her didn’t hesitate to beat her down. What makes her think a stranger off the street won’t attempt to do the same?

Unfortunately, police brutality goes beyond shooting a victim in the head and leaving them dead on the ground. It leaves suspects who survived the brutal beatings and even bullet wounds, left to live a hopeless life in fear. Not many people who suffer from PTSD or other anxiety disorders, come out to the public and speak on the battle they lost to law enforcement because of the humiliation it brings. Instead, the people who suffer mentally and emotionally from these incurable disorders are left to suffer alone.

During this battle, police officers lack accountability as they will typically say they used excessive force on suspects because of the attempt to resist arrest and putting the officers in danger. This could be done by fleeing when arrested, life-threatening remarks, fighting back or using profanity when addressing cops. When suspects demonstrate any of those behaviors, law enforcement now has the permission to control suspects and that is done by using brutal behavior. In the United States, resisting arrest is a criminal charge and police officers have the right to use excessive force on suspects who can’t demonstrate self-control and follow arrest procedures. Typical arrest procedures include asking the name of the suspect, date of birth, where the suspect is from and the suspect’s side of the story. However, if the excessive force is used to control suspects who haven’t demonstrated resisting arrest and causes GBI or great bodily harm (physical injuries) to them, they now have the right to use self-defense against law enforcement. That’s if they get to it before the cops do.

On July 17, 2014, Eric Garner spoke his final words on a city block in Staten Island, New York “I can’t breathe!” Garner was well known in the area for selling untaxed cigarettes nearby the Staten Island Ferry Terminal and was arrested twice and charged with circumventing state tax law earlier that same year. However, on this specific day police officers Justin Damico and Daniel Pantaleo took it entirely too far as they immediately recognized Garner and attacked before questioning or before Garner could give signs of resisting arrest. Unarmed Garner’s life was taken at the bare hands of white officer Pantaleo as a result of a chokehold that was recorded by multiple people on the streets of Staten Island. While the officer continued to choke Garner who was supposedly “resisting arrest,” many heard his cry for help as the unarmed man yelled “I can’t breathe!” Instead of releasing Garner from the chokehold, Officer Pantaleo and other officers who were at the scene left him handcuffed and motionless on the ground without instantly seeking proper medical attention. Before videos were released of the chaos that took place most people had no idea how Garner’s death took place or if the police were the reason behind it.

Law enforcement will always win the battle that we are confined to. It is sad to know the same officers who have a job of protecting us and keeping peace are the same officers who exhibit brutal behaviors. If it doesn’t involve choking the life out of a suspect or beating them until they are black and blue in the face, there is a funeral honoring the life of a suspect who was recently murdered by police officers. The very few who survive the tragedies, are left with permanent scars, that can be both physical or mental. Many have faith in our law enforcement, believing the brutal behaviors can be stopped if they are willing to take accountability and follow typical arrest procedures. Until that happens,  we will always take the knockout.

Works Cited

“Excessive Force Law & Legal Definition.” Excessive Force Law & Legal Definition. Web. 24 Oct. 2015.

“One Troubling Statistic Shows Just How Racist America’s Police Brutality Problem Is.”Mic. Web. 26 Oct. 2015.

“Police Brutality: 5 Things You Didn’t Know|NoBullying|.” NoBullyingBullying CyberBullying Resources. 30 Jan. 2015. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.

“25 Shocking Facts About the Epidemic of Police Brutality in America.” Mic. Web. 13 Nov. 2015

“The Counted: People Killed By Police in the US.” The Guardian. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

“Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).” WebMD. WebMD. Web. 3 Nov. 2015.

“The Long Term Effects of Police Brutality | Cop Block.” Cop Block. 15 Feb. 2012. Web. 3 Nov. 2015.

“Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (Easy-to-Read).” NIMH RSS. Web. 17 Nov. 2015.

Ryan, Tom. “Police Brutality: The Impact on the Victims.” EHow. Demand Media. Web. 3 Nov. 2015.

Baker, Al, J. Goodman, and Benjamin Mueller. “Beyond the Chokehold: The Path to Eric Garner’s Death.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 June 2015. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

“Resisting Arrest When Police Use Excessive Force | Nolo.com.” Nolo.com. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

“What Procedures Must the Police Follow While Making an Arrest? – FindLaw.” Findlaw. Web. 20 Nov. 2015.

What American Culture Actually does

The most amazing thing about this world is that every different geographic location is special. On this Earth, there are seven continents and within those continents there are a vast number of countries that have the ability to break down even more. What is amazing about these little pieces of land is that they all have a different culture that makes them unique. Culture is the way of life, which includes the food native to the area, drinks, celebrations, and other things. Now one can go to these places to experience a different type of culture, or well they used to be before the American Culture started to dominate the land. Now Cultures are being attacked and destroyed by the dominant american culture we call fast food.

  Let us take Mexico for one example. Mexico is one of United States neighbors in which they are influenced due to the fact they are so close to the United States. Mexican food has always been a specialty. Mexico has a rich diet that contains such delicacies that would make one’s mouth water. Some of those are culturally rich food are cabrito ( baby goat), fresh pico de gallo, handmade corn tortillas and freshly mashed guacamole. Now some may say that America has only helped expand on the food and people, when in reality that is not true at all. All of these foods are rich in vitamins so how did Mexico go from all these healthy foods to the dangerous world of obesity? With the good old help of American fast food culture.Before 1994, There was not a free trade zone between North America and Mexico. This means that the fast food chains and their disastrous products were not allowed to be in the country and Mexico was free of the dangerous foods. In 1994 the game changed and the obesity rate started to rise. In 1994 the NAFTA came into place. The NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is an agreement between United States, Canada, and Mexico that allowed the countries to freely trade and implement their fast food culture, including the dangerous food that came with it, in their way of life. With this opening up, it only damaged the health of Mexico. Citizens increased their soda drinking to 43 gallons of soda per capita annually. With the increase of sugar it puts the user at an increased chance of health related problems. According to a study done at harvard, when one is diagnosed with obesity it puts them at an increased chance to 20 times for diabetes. Not only does it increase the chance for diabetes, it also opens them up to high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, and gallstones. All because of American fast food culture wants to increase their yearly revenue. Americans are not trying to helping the Mexican culture, they are just damaging it and ruining the country’s citizens.

There will be some that say, Mexico is just one area that went south, that American fast food culture has helped so many regions become better. That is not true at all. Other Countries, such China, are having their cultures destroyed and having nothing but negative outcomes from the American fast food culture. According to NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov, Asia, the Continent that houses China, alone, has 60 percent of the worldwide total of people that are diagnosed with diabetes. China used to be a country that their main diet was centered around white rice and the people that lived there had such fast metabolisms they could burn off the calories quickly. With the introduction of the sugary sodas, processed foods filled with fat and carbs, their metabolism has slowed down and the weight gain increased. Asia is home to over 2,000 Mcdonalds and countless other restaurants that take away from the original culture infused food that used to be eaten there. All of the places to eat that used to be open could not compete with the cheap and convenient price of the fast food. Not only is China one of the areas that is affected, but India is being affected negatively by the American Fast Food culture. According to CNBC, “India has a long had a reputation as being unfriendly to foreign businesses, but when it comes to fast food, international chains are being warmly welcomed by a young, upwardly mobile population.” This is meaning that India was once a country that did not let American fast food chains into their land, but now they are letting them in, but starting to see negative side effects. With the increase of fast food chains, the number of people diagnosed with diabetes will increase from 61 million to 101 million. With the increase of diagnosed people this means that the demand for medication in order to survive with the disease will only become more expensive for the people that can afford it. Many people will die due to the fact that they are unable to afford the medicine they need since American fast food culture pushed themselves into other countries. Helping a country would mean decreasing the amount of people that are dependent on medication, not increasing the number.

People tend to turn a blind eye to the negative things and just try to harp on the things that have gone right, but yet there are none to find. Some may try to point out that it is not America’s fault, that the citizens do not have to purchase the food, that there are other options for them.  While that is true, no one is forcing them to buy the food, it is the only option that they have. The economy around the world is in the toilet. Regardless of where you go many people are hurting and can not afford to eat healthy food. It is oddly cheaper to buy a Big Mac, a sandwich that is popular in Mcdonald’s, than to purchase a salad. It does not seem normal that some things that are made by man cost more than those items that are grown naturally from our Earth. With that being said, it is considerably cheaper to eat at McDonalds. In Mexico, according to OECD, the average person only makes about 13,000 USD. This is significantly lower than what the average American makes. This means that they have succumbed to eating fast food due to the fact that their annual wage earnings do not allow them to eat the items that are classified as “healthy.” For $5 dollars a person is able to feed themselves at a McDonald’s compared to them buying a head of lettuce that leaves them desiring more food within an hour of consumption.

The Culture of China and Mexico were so dominant years ago that no one knew what a McDonald’s was. Now it’s common to see them, actually according to the website, Plosin.com, In 1955, only seven years after they opened their doors, McDonald’s had seven stores in the United States. As of 2015, McDonald’s alone, has over 35,000 in 118 countries. So with the increase of Fast food chains popping up all over the world, making it easier to have access to this food, can only mean terrible things. These things are not helpful as people claim, but actually making living conditions worse. With an easier access to food, one has an easier time consuming these foods that are terrible for your body. These foods are loaded with sugars, fats, and carbs that take a toll on one’s body. These things, when excessive (which is happening/happened) will cause people to become dependent on medicine. In the United States it costs anywhere from $8-$200 and some do not even have health insurance, so their costs would be even more. In other nations, such as Mexico, it costs the user 50% of the total cost.     

People can not look others in the face and say that American Fast food Culture is not ruining cultures and people worldwide. With the cheaper cost it stopped people from cooking dishes that they used to love in Mexico. It changed their diet from colorful plates to several different sized cardboard containers. Not only has it ruined that but it also has ruined China’s culture. It has gotten rid of most of the smaller shops and started to increase obesity across the charts. It has done the same thing in India and has made so many citizens of all different areas become drug dependent so that they won’t die.

Works Cited

“Mexico.” OECD Better Life Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“How Excess Weight Affects Your Health.” http://www.helpguide.org/harvard/how-excess-weight-affects-your-health.htm. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.

Pan, An, Vasanti Malik, and Frank B. Hu. “Exporting Diabetes to Asia: The Impact of Western-Style Fast Food.” Circulation. U.S. National Library of Medicine, n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2015.

“Indians Develop Taste for the Big Mac.” CNBC. N.p., 08 Jan. 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“Mexico.” OECD Better Life Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“The History of McD’s.” The History of McD’s. N.p., n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2015.

Today’s trends in micro-mini fashion, a term used to describe clothing geared to making kids look like mini-adults, is robbing the souls of adolescent girls in a cruel circle of advertising, sexualization, and the resulting psychological issues that damage these underage victims. Adolescent girls in the United States are over sexualized by the media, which influences what they wear. Adolescent girls have been told by society and the media that their worth is based on their physical appearance and their body, and therefore try to look “womanly” to subconsciously impress boys which perpetuates the ideal that women have to look sexy for men as their role in society. Even parents can fall into the trap of valuing daughters for their beauty and their sons for what they can accomplish which begins at a very young age. Despite the ruthless efforts of advertisers and other media outlets who conspire to trick young girls into buying what they are offering, we as a society have to end the myth that the objectification of women is acceptable and instill this ideal in our youth. Sexual liberation is okay, but there is nothing liberating about over-sexualizing young girls who can be traumatized if they are forced to  exist as sexual beings.

The term “sexualization” means “to render something or someone sexual,” which implies that this act is being done without consent or permission of the person being seualized. This is especially true with the shift in clothing for young girls where clothing companies manufacture girl’s clothing that fits the definition many researchers consider sexualized, such as clothing with suggestive writing, or that emphasize certain body parts. Clothing companies are sexualizing young girls without their permission even if the girls do not wear the clothing. Young girls are still being subjected to the images in store windows, clothing ads, the media, and to the idea which is being put out by these types of companies. It could be argued that when a company knowingly creates children’s clothing of a sexual nature they are sending a message that it is acceptable to view female children as sexual objects.

The suffix “ize” means to make something, thereby proving the irrefutable point that children are not sexual beings unless someone or something acts against them to alter that perception. “Sexualize” can also mean to cause someone or something to become aware of their own sexuality. Multiple studies on the subject have concluded that young girls who are sexualized suffer from low self-esteem, do not perform well in school, and often fail to measure up academically compared to boys of the same age. The word sexual when taken at its root means associated with sex. So when you sexualize young girls by marketing suggestive clothing to them and use them in media campaigns, you are literally asking everyone that comes into contact with the end product to view that child wearing the clothes or portrayed in the ad, to associate that child with sex. Having sexual relations with a child is both immoral and illegal, therefore there should be consequences to knowingly, and for profit, offer a child for the purpose of sex ,even if it is just in the mind of potential viewers of the child.

It is not acceptable to exploit the youth of our innocent children by turning them into sexual beings. We have a moral responsibility to our own daughters to choose age-appropriate clothing for them, but we can also object to the trends that encourages younger girls to buy and wear clothes that would be too revealing or too provocative even for much older girls.

Sarah Murnen, a social psychologist who was interviewed for the article, disputes a claim about sexualized clothing, saying that even though parents might have viewed the clothing as sexual, the children themselves did not.

But according to Stephanie Papas, a science blogger, clothing stores like Gymboree and Target tend to manufacture more appropriate clothes for girls which resulted in girls at the top of their age group declining to wear the clothes because they looked juvenile. This would indicate that the modest clothes are considered uncool by young girls and the over sexualized clothes are more desirable. They are also readily available at most children’s clothing stores.

In a study done by time magazine, 30% of clothing that is manufactured and advertised to young girls has “sexualized characteristics”. Sexualized clothing is considered anything revealing that emphasizes a specific body part, has a suggestive saying written on it, or looks like something a mature woman would wear. Women are sexual beings, young girls are not. But the propaganda perpetuated from this new trend could make mature men see these girls in a light they should not viewed be in.

Although blogger Stephanie Papas named target as one of the stores to make modest clothing, The Target chain, one of the largest retail brands for children, was considered one of the biggest offenders in the time magazine article, as well as Abercrombie Kids.

One unnamed blogger, who writes the blog “Binkies Briefcases” wrote an open letter to Target detailing (with photos of her own children) how Target’s girl’s shorts especially sizes 2T-5T are significantly shorter than those made by other brands. In one photo her two year old daughter who the blogger describes as very small for her age, is seen wearing shorts typically worn by a five year old girl. The shorts fit her daughter perfectly, leaving the blogger to question how inappropriately short they would look if worn by someone of their intentional size. In her letter to Target she says, “I know it wasn’t just a mistake with this particular pair of shorts. Don’t you dare try that with me.” The letter has a number of photos which compare and contrast the children’s shorts available at Target along with other brands and the letter has since gone viral on the internet.

The problem of girls being offered sexualized clothing is growing and the demand for micro-mini fashions is squeezing out the more modest options due to the fact they are no longer in demand. Sarah Murnen, a professor of psychology at Kenyon College, along with her team of researchers, found that on only 15 online stores in the united states there was a total of 5,666 items of girls clothing that were classified as sexualized. Murnen concluded that wearing the clothing could possibly contribute to the development of self-esteem issues and other psychological problems. The APA Task Force has the following to say:

Research links sexualization with three of the most common mental health problems of girls and women: eating disorders, low self-esteem and depression or depressed mood. Several studies (on both teenage and adult women) have found associations between exposure to narrow representations of female beauty (e.g., the “thin ideal”) and disordered eating attitudes and symptoms. Research also links exposure to sexualized female ideals with lower self-esteem, negative mood and depressive symptoms among adolescent girls and women. In addition to mental health consequences of sexualization, research suggests that girls’ and women’s physical health may also be negatively affected, albeit indirectly.

Self-esteem issues due to short clothing can stem from the fact that  girls do not like the way they look, and therefore use this sexualized clothing as a way to get attention and to make themselves feel better.

Taking away the Bratz dolls and even then barbies and replacing them with traditionally dressed dolls will not solve the problem. Monitoring the shows watched by children will stop them from being exposed to come but not all of the messages, but will not stop the influence from their peers, or other means of corruption that will still seep through.  The real solution is to teach these young girls to see these sexual messages for what they are which is nothing more than a trap to run out and buy what is being solicited to them. But it is not enough. Refusing to buy the product, watch the show, or put up with a misogynistic media cuts down on the profits being made at the expense of these young girls and sends a clear message to people that we as a society are no longer willing to tolerate the digression of our women regardless of their age.

This will also help young girls start to realize that if they start engulfing themselves with an obsession of how they look on the outside, they will never be happy with themselves. Mothers of boys should do their part to end the stigma as well, by educating their sons that the objectification of women is wrong. Many people young and old go through life without ever realizing that they have been buying into this misogynistic marketing message. Exposing people to it is the first step towards getting people to boycott the companies, TV stations, and clothing stores that are responsible for creating and profiting from the objectification of women.

Works Cited:

Taylor, Dr. Jim. “The Disturbing Sexualization of Really Young Girls.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-jim-taylor/the-disturbing-sexualization_b_1948451.html&gt;.

“30% of Girls’ Clothing Is Sexualized in Major Sales Trend.” LiveScience.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. <http://m.livescience.com/14249-girls-clothing-sexualized.html&gt;.

N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. <http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/&gt;.

“‘Porn Music’, Slow Motion and ‘too Many Close-ups’: NBC Sparks Anger from Viewers over Sexualized Footage of Female Athletes at the Olympics.” Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 10 Aug. 2012. Web. 03 Dec. 2015. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2186262/Olympics-2012-NBC-viewers-angry-sexualized-footage-female-athletes-porn-music.html&gt;.

“Hypersexualization of Young Girls: What Are the Issues? Should We Be Worried?” Hypersexualization of Young Girls: What Are the Issues? Should We Be Worried? N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2015. <http://www.cwhn.ca/en/hypersexualizationprimer2&gt;.

The Mormons Aren’t Hurting Anyone

Many religions claim that it’s never too late to be saved, but one sect takes this concept to a whole new level.  While most denominations teach that an individual is ultimately damned or saved at the instant of death, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes that even after we die, we can have more chances to be saved than there are stars in the sky.  Mormons believe that when a person dies, their soul goes to Spirit Prison, but that it can still join Heavenly Father in the Celestial Kingdom if the person is baptized.  Therefore, believing that every individual is entitled to the chance to be saved from eternal damnation, the Mormons uniquely perform post-mortem baptisms for people of all religions—even Holocaust victims.

The claim that baptizing Holocaust victims is both disrespectful and harmful is untrue—it brashly asserts that the practice of posthumous baptism has harmed even a Jewish fly, and also reflects a fearful insecurity held by the Jews, whose anger has led them to believe that their religion is better than that of the Mormons, and also to forget their own harmful spiritual practices.  Others may disagree, but I submit that by performing baptisms for Holocaust victims, or any other dead Jews, the Mormons aren’t hurting anyone.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints holds the belief that it is never too late to achieve salvation, even after death.  As a result of this, the Church permits baptisms to be performed for the dead, out of love for humanity and a desire to provide salvation for all.  The Mormons show the utmost respect for the deceased individual, and assure the world that the remains of the dead person are not physically disturbed—the baptism is performed by proxy.  A young adult in the Church is physically baptized in water, while a Mormon priest calls out the name of the benefactor of the baptism as the holy imposter remains submerged.  The Church believes that this is good enough for Heavenly Father, and that the soul of the dead person has been given the chance to achieve salvation.

Out of further respect for the dead person and their soul, the Mormons insists that when a person is posthumously baptized by the Church, the dead person’s soul gets to choose whether or not it would like to join Heavenly Father in the Celestial Kingdom.  There is, however, no way to tell what the soul’s choice is, which has led to certain individuals being baptized more than once, such as Anne Frank, who was baptized at least nine times.  Such an open-minded practice can hardly be considered harmful—the Church is demonstrating a truly generous display of religious tolerance by baptizing victims of the Holocaust, while simultaneously ensuring that the deceased individuals are not disturbed, as Jewish law forbids the exhumation of bodies.  Further still, the Church still values the freedom of choice for every being, living or dead.  Only in a society that despises freedom can a practice that offers salvation, yet respects religious beliefs and personal choice be frowned upon.

To avoid claiming that no religious practices are harmful, let us examine the Jewish practice of circumcision, which has, unfortunately, caused babies to die.  Interestingly, this is a practice performed by the Jews—the very people who have spoken out against the Mormons for bringing harm to their fellows.  In Orthodox communities, the Rabbi performing the circumcision will suck the blood from the infant’s penis, in a ritual practice thought to help cleanse the wound.  However, the practice of circumcision has been labelled as nothing more than the mutilation of a baby’s genitals, and certainly does not offer an infant the chance to be saved by anyone other than Yahweh (the term by which Jews refer to God).  However, we must not pretend that circumcision’s favorable nature in Yahweh’s eyes negates the physical harm that it causes to babies, which is notably absent from baptisms for the dead (with the possible exception of the proxy getting water in his or her ear).

Circumcision, as opposed to post-mortem baptism, does not provide the chance for salvation—in fact, it seems to be completely arbitrary.  In the Christian Bible (the first five books of which constitute the Jewish Torah), in the book of Genesis, verses 9-14, we are told that:

“Then God said to Abraham, ‘As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come.  This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised.  You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you.  For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner—those who are not your offspring.  Whether born in your house or bought with your money, they must be circumcised.  My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant.  Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.’”

From this text, we can conclude that the practice of circumcision is, in context, completely arbitrary.  As opposed to posthumous baptism—which, according to Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormon religion, is permitted by 1 Corinthians 15:29—there is no reason for circumcisions to be performed except for the fact that the Jews believe God commanded it.  Furthermore, the Jewish babies have no choice in the matter, unlike the soul of a deceased person who has been baptized.  However, to assume that one practice is valid and the other is not would be disrespectful, as it would insinuate a belief that the Jewish faith is superior to that of the Mormons.

Recently, some Jewish infants contracted herpes as a direct result of ritual circumcisions.  Following the part of the ritual in which the Rabbi sucks the blood of the infant with his mouth, no fewer than eleven babies contracted the herpes virus between 2000 and 2012, at least one of whom died.  Anyone with a greater sense of morality than a sociopath can agree that killing babies is certainly immoral, and that is exactly what the Jews have done via the practice of infant circumcision.  While each individual person is different, and thus some may disagree, I submit that any practice that mutilates the genitals of infants who are merely days old, and furthermore can and has caused them to develop a terrible disease and even die, is most certainly a harmful one.  The hypocrisy of the Jews is darkly ironic: while they criticize the harmless practices of other religions, their own rituals kill babies.

The Jews’ claim that the Mormon practice of posthumous baptism is harmful is simply ludicrous.  While this practice is based out of love and causes no harm to anyone, the Jews are hypocritical in allowing babies to develop herpes and even die.  Furthermore, while both practices are supported by religious texts, we must question whether the Covenant between man and a possibly nonexistent deity is worth the lives of some very real babies.  We must also remember that posthumous baptism respects the choice of the individual by allowing the soul to choose to convert or not, while babies have no say in their circumcisions.  It is also interesting to note that while the Mormons graciously extend their ritual to people of any and all religions, we scarcely hear of any Jews going around and offering to circumcise people—while very few people enjoy it when others share their religions, it hardly seems fair to criticize the Mormons for a generosity that the Jews do not share.  After examining the two religious practices of the two religions involved in the controversy surrounding posthumous baptism, I submit that it is quite easy to determine what is harmful, and what is not.

Despite not being harmful, baptisms for the dead still appear to be absurd unless we examine them more thoroughly.  To make sense of this practice and to understand why it brothers the Jews so much, let us first examine another very common religious practice: mission service, which unlike baptisms for the dead, is not unique to the LDS Church.

On the website for their faith, Southern Baptists tell us that “as a convention of churches, [their] missional vision is to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world and to make disciples of all the nations.” Similarly, a page on Mormon.org explains the Mormons’ emphasis on mission service thus:

Imagine you found a cure for cancer.  How urgently would you spread the news of your discovery?  Who would you tell?  The gospel of Jesus Christ is the cure for so many of life’s ills that Mormons want to share the good news of eternal life with the same urgency.

The same website also tells us that after His resurrection, Jesus commanded His disciples, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” (Mark 16:15)  As we can clearly see, mission service exists in multiple religions, all of which have the goal of sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ with the world.  While the specifics of the tradition may vary from travelling to Uganda to baptizing dead people, it can be said that every religion is ultimately interested in gaining more followers.

Knowing that the Mormons, like others, wish to share the good news, we can assume that baptisms for the dead are at least partially done for the sake of converting non-believers.  This helps to make sense of the idea that a person can be baptized more than once.  Posthumous baptisms are certainly a result of the LDS Church’s admirably intense desire for every person to meet Heavenly Father in the Celestial Kingdom, but it is also true that more baptisms equate to more chances to convert, which—the Church hopes—ultimately lead to more Mormons (even if they’re dead).

While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has exhibited an enormous display of religious tolerance and inclusion by trying to save as many people as possible, the Jews have not taken kindly to the Mormons’ practice.  Jews, unlike Mormons, do not believe that an individual can be baptized after death.  The practice seems so foreign and perverted that it is completely unfathomable.  According to Rabbi Moshe Waldocks, many Jews feel that the Mormons have no good intentions whatsoever, saying that “It smacks of a certain sense of proselytism: If you [Mormons] can’t get them [Jews] while they’re alive, you’ll get them while they’re dead.”  This statement makes it evident that it is not necessarily the desire for converts that the Jews take issue with, but rather the perceived lack of respect for a dead person’s dignity.

While the Mormons clearly believe that it is never too late to be saved, the Jews apparently are firm believers that the living ought to let the dead lie.  It is this fundamental discrepancy in doctrine that results in a misunderstanding on the part of the Jews, which is reflected in an anger and some indubitably disrespectful shenanigans—one half-Jewish individual became angry enough to create a terribly disrespectful website titled alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com.  According to the website,

Sadly, many Mormons throughout history have died without having known the joys of homosexuality.  With your help, these poor souls can be saved.  Simply enter the name of a dead Mormon in the form below and click Convert!  Presto, they’re gay for eternity.  There is no undo.

This website, when coupled with a lack of any sort of evidence to demonstrate that the Jews are aware of the implications of baptism for the dead, serves as a clear sign that Jewish individuals simply have failed to perceive the good intentions of the Mormon Church, and instead feel abused by the Mormons for inadvertently violating the belief that dead Jews must stay both dead and Jewish, and are not to be converted by one Church or another.

Since Holocaust victims, for obvious reasons, can’t verbally object to being baptized by Mormons, living Jews have taken it upon themselves to claim that it is wrong for the LDS Church to posthumously baptize their dead brethren. However, as we have briefly touched on before, they simply misunderstand the mitzvah that the Mormons are performing by doing exactly that.

After Daniel Pearl, a Jewish reporter, died at the hands of terrorists in February of 2002, the Mormons promptly baptized him.  As we noted earlier, Rabbi Waldocks spoke for the Jewish community, and his comment would be merited if it did not assume that posthumous baptisms are only performed for the sake of converting people to the Mormon religion.  Rather, such as Daniel Pearl’s are performed merely as an offering of what the Mormons believe to be a key part of salvation.  Indeed, Michael Otterson, a spokesman for the LDS Church, asserted that “[t]he sentiment is one of inclusiveness and reaching out, that God loves all his children.”  Mormons are certainly interested in growing their congregations, but the Jews have unfortunately failed to see Pearl’s baptism for what it truly is—a message of interfaith brotherhood, caused by a belief that God desires that all humans be saved, regardless of religion.

Since we cannot be certain that any particular religion is more “correct” than another, the Jews cannot reasonably claim that the LDS Church is depriving their Jewish brothers of a chance at salvation.  Indeed, there is no scientifically accepted evidence that supports the existence of any version of God; it could very well be that the Mormons and the Jews are both wrong, and that we’ll all get eternal nothingness after we die.  Because of this lack of evidence, it is simply irrational for the Jews to reprimand their Mormon brothers for trying to share the love.

Assuming that the Mormons are in fact a bunch of lunatics and that Judaism has been the right religion all along, we can still conclude that the Jewish discontent is a result of a religious insecurity.  If God wants to save only Jews, then the Mormons can send as many people to their fictitious “Heavenly Father” as they please—it won’t matter, because God will ultimately decide who is saved and who is given a one-way ticket to Hell.  Furthermore, we also must remember that the Mormons insist that the dead individual must choose to become a Mormon.  The Jews, however, seem to forget this, and reflect their fear of a farcical religion by speaking out against a group that, unlike themselves, God has not picked as His chosen people.

There is a fundamental disagreement between Mormons and Jews when it comes to the idea of post-mortem salvation, presenting the opportunity for even the most thoughtful of actions to be taken as offensive.  Because many Jews have very deep-seated beliefs, they simply misperceive the baptisms of Holocaust victims as a personal attack on their faith.  Alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com reflects this sentiment, as it aims to do the same thing that the Jews believe the Mormons are doing: go after another religion’s deceased.  This misunderstanding results in the anger that has been seen in the Jewish community.

The Mormons, as it has been clearly demonstrated, do not intend any ill will towards the Jews, nor do they cause any harm to any benefactors of posthumous baptism.  Rather, they seek only to save as many people as possible, regardless of their state of life or their religion.  The Jews, however, not believing that a person can be saved after they die, mistake this gesture of inclusion for a disrespectful and sneaky attempt at converting dead Jews to the Mormon religion.  Unfortunately, the Jews have failed to recognize that while the Mormons do admittedly seek conversions by baptizing the dead, the offering of salvation is intended as a gift, not as a threat—there is no coercion in a post-mortem baptism.  Ultimately, the reactions of the Jews to the practice of posthumous baptism can be explained in one simple sentence.  First said by John Merrick in David Lynch’s The Elephant Man, “People are frightened by what they don’t understand.”

Works Cited

Mark. Holy Bible. Colorado Springs: Biblica, 2011.  Print.

Genesis. Holy Bible. Colorado Springs: Biblica, 2011. Print.

“A Missionary Church.” Mormon.org. Web. 3 Dec. 2015.

The Elephant Man. Dir. David Lynch. 1980. Film.

“Mission and Vision.” Http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/missionvision.asp. Southern Baptist Convention, 15 June 2010. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

All Dead Mormons Are Now Gay. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Play and Heal:

Video Games As Autism Therapy

A young autistic child sits alone in his room, glued to the television screen and playing a video game. Our assumptions may lead us to believe that he is doing this as a result of a symptom of autism: social isolation. Or, perhaps he just really likes video games. Surprisingly, this child is actually alleviating the symptoms of his disorder, whether he knows it or not. A plethora of research within the last decade has lead to the development of video games and apps aimed at treating autism. Although not yet legally considered a prescription medication, these neuroscience-backed games will likely be prescribed by the family pediatrician before long. The days of instructing autistic children to swallow pills that induce various side effects will end, soon to be replaced by fun and interactive games.

Game developers at the Center for Brain Health at the University of Texas, working alongside neuroscientists, pioneered the wave of autistic treatment games upon creating BrainVille. While familiar psychological treatment involves a patient sprawled on a couch and verbally deciphering social situations with a clinician, this new innovation is more realistic and hands-on. A socially-stunted child may have reservations about traveling to some unknown psychologist’s office to talk about problems. Yet the majority of the current generation of children have much experience with gaming. BrainVille presents players with real-life scenarios to navigate, including job interviews, going on dates, and dealing with neighbors, all from the comfort of home. Admittedly, children do not have a lot of experience in these realms, but they are sure to face them in coming years. Beginning to practice while young in a stress-free, virtual environment allows for those on the autism spectrum to overcome the obstacles of this disorder and become socially knowledgeable for future encounters.

High-tech graphics and face tracking are included to provide a realistic experience. The child can observe the life-like facial expressions of the virtual characters, who respond accordingly to actions they choose. If the player commits a social faux pas, the characters are designed to make unsatisfied faces, like scrunching or a furrowing of the eyebrows. These actions mimic our facial motions, allowing for the children to begin to read faces and understand what others are thinking.

The lead clinician of the project, Sandra Allen, noted remarkable progress in the game’s early users.  Scores rose on tests of emotional recognition and “theory of mind,” the ability to attribute mental states to oneself and others. During interviews several weeks after experiencing the game, most participants stated that conversation skills had improved and that they had developed several new friendships.

Playing the game did not make these kids mind readers, but it allowed for them to develop a deeper understanding of what causes certain emotions, and how these emotions look on the surface. This may all sound inconsequential to those of us who are socially savvy, but the ability to read faces and develop a better understanding of what to say and when is a large step in the life of a child suffering from autism.

College campuses appear to be the breeding grounds for these therapeutic games, as students at the University of Southern California released an app that is similar to BrainVille, yet goes one step further. The foundations of effective autism treatment, referred to as evidence-based practices, are consciously weaved into every aspect of Social Clues.

Say goodbye to the days of going to the pharmacy and picking up autism medication. Now, we can just download an app, hand a child the iPad, and begin treatment. The Social Clues app incorporates four key evidence-based practices that raise it into the realm of a treatment: ABA (Applied Behavioral Analysis), errorless learning, social narrative, and discrete trial training. These fancy phrases mean nothing to children, but that’s fine. The treatment they undergo is subtle, and they do not have to be aware of the science behind the game that they are enjoying.

Children are exposed to ABA through colorful in-game characters. No virtual scientist in a harsh white lab coat appears, detailing how behavior will be observed and measured during play. Instead, aptly named characters like particiPETE and communiKATE are available to control, and it is through either of these avatars that ABA is experienced. Various scenarios are presented, and the player’s job is to follow the most fitting course for the situation at-hand. For instance, a toy is lost and must be found with the help of classmates. The player is prompted to engage in social necessities such as eye contact and maintaining conversations for an allocated amount of time. The NPCs (non-player characters) react accordingly, either pleased or unresponsive to the social conduct that took place. Through these decisions and subsequent reactions, children learn what type of behavior is suitable for common social situations. Social Clues modifies behavior from the child’s home, a relaxed environment that is quite different from the normal, fluorescent hell that a doctor’s office tends to be. ABA subtly changes behavioral problems overtime, rather than attempting to force change upon the socially-anxious player.

Playgrounds are not friendly learning arenas. Although real-world social experience has advantages, those on the autism spectrum know the cruelty and humiliation that lurks around every corner at school. Take a social misstep in front of classmates, and rude remarks and admonition follow. Social Clues intends to remove this negative stimuli, employing errorless learning to do so. “You’ve failed” or “game over” messages do not litter the screen. As in real life, each decision made comes with different results. The player is gently guided to the most fitting choice by a humorous narrator, a parrot who lightens the mood and explains why one decision is generally wiser than another.

Children love stories of all kinds, and this app quenches the narrative thirst. Social narratives are inherent, allowing the gameplay to be relatable to young minds. For instance, a complete day at school is one such arc, covering the day-to-day aspects of taking the bus, talking with classmates, eating lunch, and doing schoolwork. All children who are not home-schooled are familiar with these concepts, and being able to experience them through virtual characters provides a cohesive plot that they can clearly grasp and watch progress thanks to decisions they make.

Discrete trial training (DTT) is the final science-based aspect of Social Clues. Each level is a trial aimed at instilling a certain social skill. Following each one, a report summarizes the player’s progress, detailing the areas that need additional work. Instructors or parents can view these reports and help the child in these specific skills. Since the game is divided up and does not make the player work on multiple areas of socialization at once, playing involves tackling digestible chunks one at a time.

The third in the trio of autism treatment games is Project Evo. Whereas the previous two games involved narrative arcs and entire worlds, this title is fast-paced and short, without multiple levels. Think therapeutic Pacman. The game epitomizes the work neuroscientists and game developers are doing to treat cognitive ailments like autism. Players control a car skidding on ice, simultaneously tapping color-specified fish that appear at the top of the screen. The goal is to employ multitasking, a capability in the same neural networks as attention span and working memory. These areas are bridged together while playing, training the brain to increase its focus and memorization. Tapping fish while driving a virtual car sounds nonsensical, but players in nine completed clinical trials displayed improvements in autism, ADHD, and depression.

The future looks bright for those on the autism spectrum. The child sitting alone in his room playing a video game now has good reason to do so. He is using a method developed by neuroscientists and game developers, one that uses evidence-based practices through fun and entertaining means. Currently, autism medications come with a slew of unfortunate side effects. These include sleep loss, low appetite, and stomach pain, to name a few. The creators behind these games expect a sharp decline in the use of these drugs once therapeutic games inevitably become available over the counter. Sore thumbs and tired eyes are the only potential side effects with this new method, which is much more humane than pills that cause all sorts of physical problems.

As it stands, these games are not available as prescription. The FDA is the sole roadblock. Games typically travel from conception to retail shelves in six months. This simple and quick process is extended to an arduous ordeal that can cost several million dollars and take up to three or four years to complete because of the FDA’s medical device approval process. The small companies who create these miraculous games do not have the money or time required for the FDA stamp of approval. Science, logic, and clinical trials have all been established. Once the approval is given, doctors can write prescriptions for games and insurance companies can begin covering the cost. Even drug companies are awakening to the possibilities. Pfizer, collaborating with the Project Evo team, is attempting to improve the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s using the game.

Health care professionals, neuroscientists, and pharmaceutical companies have all realized the potential of providing children of the 21st century with a treatment method they are bound to love and find accessible: video games. The FDA is the black sheep, the single reason that these medically beneficial games are not yet available as prescriptions. Video games will be legalized as therapy once the FDA is on board, and autistic children can rejoice as they grab the Playstation controller and begin undergoing an exciting new treatment.

Trepidation is inherent with most technological innovations. The counterintuitive nature of instructing children who are not socially adept to enhance this lacking area through a virtual, single-person endeavor can cause raised eyebrows. Yet healing is exactly what is taking place as a result of playing these new games. The evidence-based practices that pervade the gameplay, along with the neuroscience, clinical trials, improved social test scores, and the praise of players themselves, have made the era of therapeutic gaming a feasible reality. We should approach these new platforms of social learning with excitement, for in them await virtual worlds designed to heal suffering children.

Works Cited

Gregoire, Carolyn. “Why These Neuroscientists Are Prescribing Video Games” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 29 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2015.

Wong, Connie, Samuel L. Odom, Kara A. Hume, Ann W. Cox, Angel Fettig, Suzanne Kucharczyk, Matthew E. Brock, Joshua B. Plavnick, Veronica P. Fleury, and Tia R. Schultz. “Evidence-Based Practices for Children, Youth, and Young Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Comprehensive Review.” J Autism Dev Disord Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 45.7 (2015): 1951-966. 2014. Web. 8 Nov. 2015.

“Social Clues Game.” Social Clues Game. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.

“Therapeutic Video Game, “Project: EVO” Makes Headlines.” Autism Speaks. N.p., 16 Mar. 2015. Web. 26 Oct. 2015.

Dembosky, April. “‘Play This Video Game And Call Me In The Morning’“NPR. NPR, 17 Aug. 2015. Web. 26 Oct. 2015.

Fighting Fire With Heroin

The most intuitive and logical approach to a problem is not guaranteed to yield the best results. Sometimes, it takes the exact opposite to produce those, and that’s just what the city of Vancouver is attempting. Struggling with a heroin problem for years, the city needed to find a solution that works consistently. Traditional rehabilitation works, yes, but only to a certain level and it is not reliable for getting the job done. With this in mind, the city sought to tackle their issue in a different manner. And they chose a way that was slightly…counterintuitive to the norm.

Instead of seeking to cure their addicts, Vancouver chose to accept the addictions that exist and opted to diminish the effect of the drug’s presence in their city as opposed to attempting to eliminate it. Traditional rehab has failed them, so they have created their own form, facilitated by Vancouver Coastal Health. The aim of these new “health centers” is to provide a safe site for heroin users to inject themselves with their daily dose of smack under strict supervision by healthcare professionals. In addition to providing a safe environment for addicts to dose themselves, the facilities also provide clean needles for use, something that is not always a commodity for all users outside of the program. In essence, it is hoped that through continual usage of this program, drug violence in Vancouver will decrease overall and the heroin problem with lower in its potency.

It is commonly worried that these clinics will inevitably have unwanted side effects that could make the problem even larger than it already is. For example, what if these sites, which undoubtedly provide easy access to an otherwise illegal narcotic, actually cause a raise in addiction? A 32-year old heroin user named “Cherie” was interviewed by CTV News Vancouver about her time with the program and revealed some startling news. She said she was indeed a heroin user before being introduced to InSite, but not very regularly because of how hard it was to obtain the drug. However, she says that with how easy InSite made it to get her fix, she became “suddenly addicted” and began visiting the site multiple times each day. This highlights a potential downside of the program, especially considering, “Cherie says she was asked at the door if she was an IV drug user, and she said she was. But she says no one asked her how long she had been using the drug, or if she considered herself an addict.” Many like to believe that this is indicative of a poorly managed program, that InSite lured Cherie into their program only for her to become the type of addict that the heroin clinics were originally designed to prevent. In reality, the program was only doing what it was intended to do: provide a safe atmosphere for addicts to inject themselves. True, the methods used to admit any given individual into the program may require slight manipulation as far as credit and possible documentation are concerned, but in no way is the program actively a detriment to the citizens. If one does not wish to shoot up and become addicted to heroin, they must acknowledge the risks the drug poses and simply not become involved with it whatsoever. InSite has done nothing to provoke this.

In order for a program to achieve maximum effect, it must be operational for a long period of time, causing kinks and bumps to be worked out with time, essentially a trial and error process. The InSite clinics have been in operation since 2003, which is hardly a sufficient amount of time to judge their effectiveness. However, the effectiveness has already been fully criticized by people like Jim O’Rourke, executive director of Vision Quest Society, a recovery society for addicts. He is a firm believer of classic rehabilitation as the sole method for fixing an addiction problem in society. What he fails to acknowledge are the strides that InSite has made as a program in aiding heroin addicts. Just in 2012, there were a recorded 376,149 visits to the site with over 9,000 of those visits being unique. This raw data alone shows that the program is indeed growing as far as attention is concerned and requires more time before it is fully judged on its capabilities. Additionally, there were approximately 400 admissions from InSite into Onsite in 2012. OnSite is a branch off of InSite that deals more with withdrawal management and the recovery process of using drugs. So, the heroin clinics are not addiction traps after all. They are showing an increasing number of patients that are actually recovering from their addictions and making their way towards drug free lives.

Not everyone is guaranteed to make it to the recovery stage. What of those that don’t make it to this step? Are they forever doomed to be heroin addicts for the rest of their lives, stuck in a perpetual cycle of attending InSite centers every single day? Not necessarily. While the choice to overcome an addiction is generally one made by the addicts themselves, life in these clinics is far from a downward spiral. The original goals proposed with the Four Pillars drug program, being the values of harm reduction, prevention, treatment, enforcement, saw that gave InSite one straightforward mission to accomplish. The drugs were controlling the city in a way, causing violence in the streets and an altogether negative reputation to fall on Vancouver. InSite strove to make Vancouver a better place, hopefully lessening the amount of drug life present on the streets. The hope lay within the notion that with addicts not having to focus on where they are getting their next fix, let alone if it will be safe, that they will be able to place focus on other aspects of their life, such as holding down a steady job.

In addition to not having to worry about where or when they are getting their next dosage, addicts enrolled in the clinic program do not have to worry about the potential for disease. Normally, drug use on the street may consist of sharing needles or using other questionable material. “Liane,” another individual taking advantage of the InSite program, says that the program, “relieves the pressure of shooting up behind rubbish bins, or using dirty puddle water…” The sites provide each patient with a clean needle and a safe place to inject themselves. This is essential to providing a happy, healthy environment for recovering addicts.

A key aspect to the eventual success of the program is embedded within the users of the drugs themselves. They are the driving force behind everything, and therefore have the ability to create both success and failure. This being said, the most happiness should be coming from them if a program is truly successful. For if this is true, then certainly something is being done correctly. “Steve,” another addict interviewed this time by CNN, has been using InSite on a regular basis for multiple years. He says that, “It’s still in my hope that maybe I can get clean. I’m only 48. And that’s why these places … it’s just, it’s common sense! When you have a problem that’s grown for whatever reason to the epic proportions that it has in this city, it’s time to come up with a really good solution, and this is it.” Judging by this statement, he is overjoyed with the program and believes it is a real solution. Going so far as to call it “common sense” should signal that at least one party finds some form of success with this program.

The InSite method of establishing heroin clinics is groundbreaking in North America, but it is far from that in other European countries, namely Switzerland and Great Britain. These countries have already seen results on the positive spectrum, in the form of reduced street drug use and related crime. This is only more reason to initiate the program and allocate funding towards its cause. It is almost as if part of the trial and error process, the broad aspect at least, has been accomplished overseas. The results speak for themselves. The only obstacle that remains in the path to success is the Canadian government and their stubbornness to continue with this direction. Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper released a statement in 2005 announcing, “We as a government will not fund drug use.” He makes the broad association that InSite is on the same level as illegal drug use and treats it as such in his release. When in reality, it is obviously serving against illegal drug use. The government’s obstinate behavior highlights why it is difficult to achieve progression. With their hindrance on this movement comes a lost opportunity to find change like what has been found in other countries.

In time, hopefully the public will realize the benefits that InSite and Vancouver Coastal Health are offering. Their program is groundbreaking in nature, and only through time will it be proven as a solid strategy for limiting drug use in Vancouver.

Works Cited

• Campbell, Bradley. “Vancouver Combats Heroin by Giving Its Addicts the Best Smack in the World.” Public Radio International. PRI’s The World, 9 Feb. 2015. Web. 03 Nov. 2015.
• “User Statistics.” Vancouver Coastal Health. Providence Health Care, n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.
• “Four Pillars Drug Strategy.” City of Vancouver. N.p., 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.
• Woodward, Jon. “Heroin Addict Says Insite Trained Her to Use.” CTV News Vancouver. British Columbia, 26 May 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.
• Katic, Gordon, and Sam Fenn. “The Methadone Split: Cracks in Vancouver’s Treatment Pillar.” The Tyee. Gossamer Threads, 19 Sept. 2014. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.
• Maguder, Natasha. “Addicts Shoot up in Safe Haven in Canada.” CNN. Cable News Network, 12 Apr. 2013. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.
• Faure, Gaëlle. “Why Doctors Are Giving Heroin to Heroin Addicts.” Time. Time Inc., 28 Sept. 2009. Web. 03 Dec. 2015.