Not Because- littlecow24

Posted on November 14, 2021 by littlecow24

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Revised: Coats was accepted to use marijuana, a legal drug, for a legitimate purpose because of a prescription, but was fired for violating workplace policy.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

Revised: A person taking the correct medication to help their anxiety will be protected from being fired by their employer.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Revised: Colorado has legalized marijuana, leaving employees to freely use it and alcohol after work and be safe from being fired.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Revised: Coats should be safe from termination as he is legally treating the pain he endures daily.

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

Revised: Coats is able to ease his pain of multiple spasms using marijuana, which is a fair use of the legal drug.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Revised: Coats was smoking the marijuana on his own time, keeping the people at his job safe from harm.

BACKGROUND FOR 7-10: The director of the Secret Service ordered an internal review of its security procedures around the White House after a man armed with a knife who jumped the fence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on Friday night managed to make his way through the front door of President Obama’s home before being stopped, officials said Saturday.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

Revised: the swift actions of the Secret Service agents prevented Omar Gonzalez from getting too deep into the White House.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

Revised: A response from the Secret Service about their actions responding to the breach of the White House was not pushed, only how to breach occurred being questioned.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

Revised: The incompetence of Secret Service chief Julia Pierson may cause her to be fired, her testimony before Congress being acceptable.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

Revised: The intruder carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade stopped the Secret Service Agents from using deadly force against him.

Posted in Not Because | Leave a comment

Rebuttal Rewrite- strawberryfields4

Posted on November 14, 2021 by strawberryfields4

Not A Simple Fix

In recent years teenage eating disorders have emerged as a mental health issue of epidemic proportions. The harsh reality is that anorexia accounts for the highest mortality rate among all mental health issues. While public schools have been increasingly burdened with more responsibilities, the delicate subject of anorexia often has been neglected in the wake of another plight—obesity. It is undeniable that childhood and adolescent obesity rates in the United States continue to remain at an all time high. However, the solution to this epidemic must not be the relentless encouragement to restrict caloric intake and the glorification of a thin physique, as this merely fuels the anorexia epidemic—the deadliest of all mental health issues. Proponents of the belief that a public health education should prioritize the war against obesity, which undoubtedly continues to plague our youth, are sorely mistaken. In order to teach “healthy” dietary habits to children, it first must be acknowledged that obesity can stem from a plethora of circumstances beginning early in a child’s life. Advocating for a low calorie diet to battle obesity will certainly have a negative impact on the emotional health of these children, and a possibly deadly impact on those struggling in the opposite direction. It must become sound teaching practice to teach children that all foods fit, and personal caloric intake greatly varies among individuals.

Helen Skouteris highlights the Nurturing Care Framework from the World Health Organization, in regards to properly addressing childhood obesity issues. This framework suggests that emphasis on caregiver nurturing during the developmental years is key to preventing childhood obesity. It explains that “…child[hood] obesity prevention must be based on a deep understanding of the layers of influence surrounding the child as they transition across the ages and stages of development that occur in the first 2,000 days.” It seems unlikely that an overweight child sitting in a health education classroom surrounded by judgemental peers will be significantly impacted by an isolated lesson on “proper” caloric intake. According to the World Health Organization framework, childhood obesity stems from a deeply rooted lack of nurturing that occurs early in a child’s life. Perhaps the child has grown to depend on food as a source of comfort that was not provided by their caregiver. Surely, simply telling these troubled youth to limit their caloric intake will not “cure” them of their need to seek refuge in food. With this knowledge that the lesson will not be beneficial to its intended audience, it is foolish to expose children who are susceptible to restrictive eating disorders to this toxic dietary advice that could result in tragedy.

Another contributing factor to childhood obesity emphasized in the World Health Organization’s framework is the impact that socioeconomic status has on the prevalence of obesity in children. Skouteris explains the relationship between high obesity rates that are common among low-income minority groups. The lack of access to healthy food options and quality healthcare, aggravated by negative childhood experiences often result in the inability to maintain a healthy weight. It is abundantly clear that a child in such a circumstance would not benefit from a health class lecture, as their issues stem from substantial burdens that cannot be remedied from limiting their caloric intake. Rather, a thorough understanding of each child’s unique experiences throughout their developmental years is necessary to even begin to help them address their obesity issues. Clearly, this is not a realistic goal that can be achieved in a classroom setting, and therefore the subject should not be incorporated into the curriculum. 

Furthermore, children in these low socioeconomic situations tend to spend more of their leisure time engaged in screen activities. This can be attributed to various reasons including the inability to afford participation in organized activities or the need to keep children from being exposed to dangers in an unsavory neighborhood. This further exacerbates the obesity problem. In a study conducted by Joost Oude Groeniger, it was revealed that “[s]creen media exposure may affect body weight by increasing food consumption and exposure to food and beverage advertisements, lowering energy expenditure, and reducing sleep duration.” Obviously, when children are sedentary for extended periods of time in front of a screen, they are not using the amount of calories that would be expended when engaging in virtually any other activity. If circumstances out of their control are contributing to their obesity, it is both useless and detrimental to their emotional well-being to suggest an “easy fix” to their problem—eat less calories.   

Angela Golden, owner of NP Obesity Treatment Clinic in Arizona, maintains the harsh reality that genetic predisposition accounts for approximately 70% of all incidents of obesity. “Genes can predispose individuals to having obesity by affecting appetite regulation, food consumption, metabolism, body-fat distribution, and body mass index (BMI), as well as influencing food preferences, [and] response to exercise…” The role of genetics is an extremely powerful force working against any efforts that an obese child may attempt. The recommendations presented by health educators may be futile and ultimately create an even deeper degree of frustration and depression. For example, a child may have every intent to limit their calorie intake, but their genetically predisposed larger appetite may prevent them from comfortably doing so. Likewise, genetic makeup that controls food preferences combined with a hyperfocus on only consuming low calorie foods, may create another issue. In a child’s effort to only eat low calorie foods, the pool from which they can choose the foods they like and have access to becomes even more limited and may result in an accidental deprivation of much needed nutrients. 

The logic that teaching children to consume less calories in order to combat the obesity that afflicts many seems reasonable. However, these misguided teaching practices ignorantly disregard the true origins that may be responsible for a child being overweight. The issue typically stems from much deeper roots such as an emotional dependence on food for comfort, their socioeconomic status, and their genetic makeup. Addressing a child’s obesity is a highly individualistic process and cannot be done en masse. The damaging words of health educators will not reduce childhood obesity, but rather pose the threat to harm not only the mental health of these children, but encourage restrictive eating disorders among others.

References

Golden, A. & Kessler, C.  (2020).  Obesity and genetics.  Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners,  32 (7),  493-496.  doi: 10.1097/JXX.0000000000000447.

Oude Groeniger, J. , de Koster, W. & van der Waal, J.  (2020).  Time-varying Effects of Screen Media Exposure in the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Background and Childhood Obesity.  Epidemiology,  31 (4), 578-586.  doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001210.

Skouteris, H. , Bergmeier, H. , Berns, S. , Betancourt, J. , Boynton-Jarrett, R. , Davis, M. , Gibbons, K. , Pérez-Escamilla, R. & Story, M.  (9000).  Reframing the early childhood obesity prevention narrative through an equitable nurturing approach.  Maternal and Child Nutrition,  , doi: 10.1111/mcn.13094. 

Posted in Rebuttal Rewrite | 2 Comments

Rebuttal- strawberryfields4

Posted on November 14, 2021 by strawberryfields4

Not A Simple Fix

In recent years teenage eating disorders have emerged as a health issue of epidemic proportions. The harsh reality is that anorexia accounts for the highest mortality rate among all mental health issues. While public schools have been increasingly burdened with the responsibility of addressing the socioemotional well-being of their students, this delicate subject has often been neglected in the wake of another plight—obesity. It is undeniable that childhood and adolescent obesity rates in the United States continue to remain at an all time high, however the solution to this epidemic does not lie in one set of universal dietary guidelines provided in a classroom setting. Proponents of the belief that a public health education should prioritize the war against obesity, which undeniably continues to plague our youth, are sorely mistaken. In order to teach “healthy” dietary habits to children, it first must be acknowledged that obesity can stem from a plethora of circumstances beginning early in a child’s life. Advocating for a low calorie diet to battle obesity will certainly have a negative impact on the emotional health of these children, and a possibly deadly impact on those struggling in the opposite direction. It must become sound teaching practice to teach children that all foods fit, and personal caloric intake greatly varies among individuals.

Helen Skouteris highlights the Nurturing Care Framework from the World Health Organization, in regards to properly addressing childhood obesity issues. This framework suggests that emphasis on caregiver nurturing during the developmental years is key to preventing childhood obesity. It explains that “…child[hood] obesity prevention must be based on a deep understanding of the layers of influence surrounding the child as they transition across the ages and stages of development that occur in the first 2,000 days.” It seems unlikely that an overweight child sitting in a health education classroom surrounded by judgemental peers will be significantly impacted by an isolated lesson on “proper” caloric intake. According to the World Health Organization framework, childhood obesity stems from a deeply rooted lack of nurturing that occurs early in a child’s life. Perhaps the child has grown to depend on food as a source of comfort that was not provided by their caregiver. Surely, simply telling these troubled youth to limit their caloric intake will not “cure” them of their need to seek refuge in food. With this knowledge that the lesson will not be beneficial to its intended audience, it is foolish to expose children who are susceptible to restrictive eating disorders to this toxic dietary advice that could result in tragedy.

Another contributing factor to childhood obesity emphasized in the World Health Organization’s framework is the impact that socioeconomic status has on the prevalence of obesity in children. Skouteris explains the relationship between high obesity rates that are common among low-income minority groups. The lack of access to healthy food options and quality healthcare, aggravated by negative childhood experiences often result in the inability to maintain a healthy weight. It is abundantly clear that a child in such a circumstance would not benefit from a health class lecture, as their issues stem from substantial burdens that cannot be remedied from limiting their caloric intake. Rather, a thorough understanding of each child’s unique experiences throughout their developmental years is necessary to even begin to help them address their obesity issues. Clearly, this is not a realistic goal that can be achieved in a classroom setting, and therefore the subject should not be incorporated into the curriculum. 

Furthermore, children in these low socioeconomic situations tend to spend more of their leisure time engaged in screen activities. This can be attributed to various reasons including the inability to afford participation in organized activities or the need to keep children from being exposed to dangers in an unsavory neighborhood. This further exacerbates the obesity problem. In a study conducted by Joost Oude Groeniger, it was revealed that “[s]creen media exposure may affect body weight by increasing food consumption and exposure to food and beverage advertisements, lowering energy expenditure, and reducing sleep duration.” Obviously, when children are sedentary for extended periods of time in front of a screen, they are not using the amount of calories that would be expended when engaging in virtually any other activity. If circumstances out of their control are contributing to their obesity, it is both useless and detrimental to their emotional well-being to suggest an “easy fix” to their problem—eat less calories.   

Angela Golden, owner of NP Obesity Treatment Clinic in Arizona, maintains the harsh reality that genetic predisposition accounts for approximately 70% of all incidents of obesity. “Genes can predispose individuals to having obesity by affecting appetite regulation, food consumption, metabolism, body-fat distribution, and body mass index (BMI), as well as influencing food preferences, [and] response to exercise…” The role of genetics is an extremely powerful force working against any efforts that an obese child may attempt. The recommendations presented by health educators may be futile and ultimately create an even deeper degree of frustration and depression. For example, a child may have every intent to limit their calorie intake, but their genetically predisposed larger appetite may prevent them from comfortably doing so. Likewise, genetic makeup that controls food preferences combined with a hyperfocus on only consuming low calorie foods, may create another issue. In a child’s effort to only eat low calorie foods, the pool from which they can choose the foods they like and have access to becomes even more limited and may result in an accidental deprivation of much needed nutrients. 

The logic that teaching children to consume less calories in order to combat the obesity that afflicts many seems reasonable. However, these misguided teaching practices ignorantly disregard the true origins that may be responsible for a child being overweight. The issue typically stems from much deeper roots such as an emotional dependence on food for comfort, their socioeconomic status, and their genetic makeup. Addressing a child’s obesity is a highly individualistic process and cannot be done en masse. The damaging words of health educators will not reduce childhood obesity, but rather pose the threat to harm not only the mental health of these children, but encourage restrictive eating disorders among others.

References

Golden, A. & Kessler, C.  (2020).  Obesity and genetics.  Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners,  32 (7),  493-496.  doi: 10.1097/JXX.0000000000000447.

Oude Groeniger, J. , de Koster, W. & van der Waal, J.  (2020).  Time-varying Effects of Screen Media Exposure in the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Background and Childhood Obesity.  Epidemiology,  31 (4), 578-586.  doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000001210.

Skouteris, H. , Bergmeier, H. , Berns, S. , Betancourt, J. , Boynton-Jarrett, R. , Davis, M. , Gibbons, K. , Pérez-Escamilla, R. & Story, M.  (9000).  Reframing the early childhood obesity prevention narrative through an equitable nurturing approach.  Maternal and Child Nutrition,  , doi: 10.1111/mcn.13094. 

Posted in Rebuttal Archives | Leave a comment

Not Because- strawberryfields4

Posted on November 11, 2021 by strawberryfields4

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Revised: While Coats’ employer found his legal use of prescription marijuana acceptable, he was fired for violating workplace policy.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

Revised: An employee who takes the proper medication to deal with anxiety will be safe from getting fired regarding this issue.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Revised: In Colorado, employees can maintain job security even when they indulge in the legal use of alcohol and marijuana.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Revised: Coats treatment of the pain he endured on a daily basis resulted in wrongful termination.

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

Revised: It is only fair for him to ease the pain of his multiple spasms through the use of marijuana.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Revised: Coats smoking marijuana on his own time, outside of work, was harmless.

BACKGROUND FOR 7-10: The director of the Secret Service ordered an internal review of its security procedures around the White House after a man armed with a knife who jumped the fence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on Friday night managed to make his way through the front door of President Obama’s home before being stopped, officials said Saturday.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

Revised: The swift actions of the Secret Service agents prevented Omar Gonzalez from penetrating deep into the White House.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

Revised: The response of the Secret Service to the breach of the White House was freely accepted, however the breach itself is under question.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

Revised: While her testimony before Congress yesterday was acceptable, Secret Service chief Julia Pierson may lose her job for her incompetence.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

Revised: The 4-inch blade carried by the intruder prevented the Secret Service agents from using deadly force against him.

Posted in Not Because | Leave a comment

Not Because – Lily4Pres

Posted on November 11, 2021 by Lily4Pres

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Coats was fired not for his use of a legal drug, marijuana, with a prescription, but rather for violating workplace policy.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

An employer is able to fire a person with anxiety, but not for taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Employees do get fired, but not for the use of legal drugs like alcohol and, in the case of Colorado, marijuana.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Coats should have been fired, but not on the basis that he was trying to treat the pain he has endured.

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

Discrimination of Coats is not fair since his marijuana use eased his pain.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Coats was using marijuana on his own time and not at work, meaning he was not harming anyone at his job.

BACKGROUND FOR 7-10: The director of the Secret Service ordered an internal review of its security procedures around the White House after a man armed with a knife who jumped the fence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on Friday night managed to make his way through the front door of President Obama’s home before being stopped, officials said Saturday.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

Omar Gonzalez penetrated the White House, but not too deep due to the swift action of Secret Service agents.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

The way the Secret Service responded to the breach is not under question, rather how the breach happened is under question.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

Secret Service chief Julia Pierson may be fired, not due to her testimony before Congress yesterday though, rather her incompetence.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

Since the intruder was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade, the Secret Service agents did not use deadly force.

Posted in Not Because | Leave a comment

Not Because-Levixvice

Posted on November 11, 2021 by Philip Ebenezer

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Coats was fired for violating the workplace policy, but never for the legal purpose of marijuana with a prescription. 

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

The person is taking medication to deal with anxiety, so the employer cannot fire him.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Employees that go out to have a few beers after work don’t get fired as alcohol is legal and so is marijuana in Colorado.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Coats was treating his pain that he endured on a daily basis and was fired, which he shouldn’t have been. 

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

Discriminating against him for using marijuana to ease the pain of multiple spasms isn’t fair.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Coats was smoking marijuana on his own leisure rather than on work and wasn’t harming anyone at his job.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

Omar Gonzalez was captured by the Secret Service through swift action after previously going into a white house. 

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

The secret Service had not compelled to explain its actions in response to the breach of the white house but rather how the breach occurred.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

The chief of the Secret Service, Julia Pierson’s incompetence might cost her job, nevertheless isn’t fired through her testimony before congress yesterday.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

The Secret Service never used deadly force against the intruder as he was carrying a 4-inch bladed knife.

Posted in Not Because | Leave a comment

Not Becuase-RowanAnnouncer

Posted on November 11, 2021 by RowanAnnouncer

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

-Coats was fired, but not for the reason of using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

-An employer can fire any of their employees, but they are unable to fire a person who has anxiety that is taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

-Employees must maintain a healthy lifestyle with their free time no matter if alcohol or marijuana is legal, or they may run the risk of getting fired.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

-In the attempt to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis, Coats was unjustifiably fired.

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

-The discrimination against Coats because he was able to ease the pain of his spasms by using marijuana is undeniably immoral.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

-Coats was only smoking marijuana on his own time, so he was unable to harm anyone at work.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

-The Secret Service agents were able to stop Omar Gonzalez with swift action before he was able to penetrate deep into the White House.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

-With the breach still under question, the actions of the Secret Service agents will be the least of the concern considering how close Gonzalez got to the White House.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

-Julia Pierson, the Secret Service chief, will likely be fired for her incompetence, but her testimony before Congress will be out of that reflection.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade

-There was no need for the Secret Service agents to use deadly force because the intruder was carrying a knife withe a 4-inch blade.

Posted in Not Because | Leave a comment

not because – frogs02

Posted on November 11, 2021 by frogs02

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Coats was fired but not because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription, but for violating workplace policy.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

An employer is allowed to fire you, but not for having anxiety that you are taking the correct medication to deal with this issue. 

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Employees can get fired, but not for going out and having beers after work because alcohol is legal, but so is marijuana in Colorado.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Coats was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis and should not have been fired for that. 

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

He was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana, he should not be discriminated against.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Coats was harming people when he was smoking marijuana on his own time, not at his job. 

BACKGROUND FOR 7-10: The director of the Secret Service ordered an internal review of its security procedures around the White House after a man armed with a knife who jumped the fence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on Friday night managed to make his way through the front door of President Obama’s home before being stopped, officials said Saturday.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

The Secret Service’s swift actions were not the reason for Omar Gonzalez’s penetration of the White House.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

The Secret Service is being compelled to explain its actions about how the breach occurred is under question not because of the way it responded to the breach of the White House. 

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

Secret Service chief Julia Pierson might get fired because of her incompetence, not because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. 

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

The intruder was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade, that is why the Secret Service did not use deadly force against him.

Posted in Not Because | 1 Comment

Not Because-lokiofasgard

Posted on November 11, 2021 by lokiofasgard24

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Revised 1: Coats was fired for violating workplace police, regardless of his prescribed drug use.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

Revised 2: A person who is taking the correct medication to deal with anxiety cannot be fired by its employer.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Revised 3: Marijuana, similar to going out for a few beers, is legal in Colorado, therefore employees don’t get fired for it.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Revised 4: Coats was just trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis, he should not have been fired.

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

Revised 5: He was able to eased his pain and its not fair to discriminate him because of that.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Revised 6: Coats did this on his own time, not during work, to avoid harming anyone else

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

Revised 7: The Secret Service’ swift actions was not the reason for Omar Gonzalez penetration of the White House.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

Revised 8: The Secret Service is questioning how the breach occurred in the White House, they dont feel obligated to explain the way they responded to the breach.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

Revised 9: The incompetence of Secret Service agent, Julia Pierson, may cost her, her job. Her testimony before Congress will not get her fired.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

Revised 10: The man was carrying a 4-inch blade, so they did not use deadly force.

Posted in Not Because | 1 Comment

Not Because-Minutemen

Posted on November 11, 2021 by minutemen14

1. Coats wasn’t fired because he was using a legal drug, marijuana, for a legitimate purpose for which he had a prescription. He was fired for violating workplace policy.

Coats was fired, but not for using a legal drug, marijuana for which he has a prescription for. He was fired due to violating workplace policy.

2. An employer isn’t able to fire a person who has anxiety because they are taking the correct medication to deal with the issue.

An employer is able to fire you, but not for having anxiety and taking the correct medication for the issue.

3. Employees don’t get fired for going out and having a few beers after work because alcohol is legal, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

Employees can go out for a few beers after work because alcohol is legal and not get fire, but in Colorado so is marijuana.

4. Coats shouldn’t have been fired because he was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis.

Coats was trying to treat the pain he endured on a daily basis and should not have been fired for this.

5. It’s not fair to discriminate against him because he was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms by using marijuana.

He was able to ease the pain of his multiple spasms with marijuana, which is not a fair reason to discriminate against him.

6. Coats wasn’t harming anyone at his job because he was smoking marijuana but he was doing so on his own time and not at work.

Coats was harming people on his own time with his marijuana smoking, but he never was harming anyone at his job.

BACKGROUND FOR 7-10: The director of the Secret Service ordered an internal review of its security procedures around the White House after a man armed with a knife who jumped the fence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue on Friday night managed to make his way through the front door of President Obama’s home before being stopped, officials said Saturday.

7. Omar Gonzalez didn’t penetrate deep into the White House because of the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

Omar Gonzalez made it to the front door of the White House, but wasn’t able to penetrate deep into Obama’s home due to the swift actions of Secret Service agents.

8. The Secret Service isn’t being compelled to explain its actions because of the way it  responded to the breach of the White House, but how the breach occurred is under question.

The Secret Service is under question for how the breach occurred, but is not compelled to explain how they responded to the breach.

9. Secret Service chief Julia Pierson won’t be fired because of her testimony before Congress yesterday. Her incompetence might cost her her job though.

The incompetence of Secret Service chief Julia Pierson might cost her her job, but this has nothing to do with her testimony before congress yesterday.

10. Secret Service agents didn’t use deadly force against the intruder because he was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade.

Secret service saw that the intruder was carrying a knife with a 4-inch blade, so they did not use deadly force against him.

Posted in Not Because | 1 Comment