In response to the U.S. Supreme Courts decision to fore go voluntary desegregation in the public schools, it will be seen as a discriminatory event, even if the decision may not have been intended as such. We as a society have an obligation to educate our children as best as we can and it has been shown that there is a disparity in our education system when it comes to education among the individual races in this country, which in some areas are getting worse with each generation.
We should not be looking at race as a factor in education, rather we should be we need to be looking at what the deficiencies are in each community with emphasis on the individual deficiencies in the individual schools. We also need to be attracting good teachers that are willing to teach at schools that have such deficiencies in an effort to turn the schools around. When it comes to getting students to attend specific schools that maybe out of their neighborhoods, electives should be taught at these schools that would draw a diverse student body rather than having an elective course which appeals to a specific race, gender or religion.
When dealing with the schools that have deficiencies, we cannot just look at the school system as a stand alone problem when it comes to educating the children, we also have to look at the communities that these schools are in and find ways of getting the communities to take a proactive role in education rather than a reactive role. What is needed is to find out why individual communities are allowing the degradation of their communities and why they are helping to perpetuate the downfall of their communities.
When it comes to race,gender and religious relations in our society in general, each race has members with in their ranks that help to perpetuate the stereotypes that cause the discrimination that as a society we seek to eradicate. As long as each race, gender and religion helps to perpetuate the stereotypes which causes the discrimination onto them we will continue to see things like racial, gender and religious inequality especially in our education system, which to some degree is charged with teaching us to be better people all around. It does not help that each race, gender and religion tends to self segregate by nature, for which we have to get past to further our education system.
I have in the past sent to politicians, ideas I have had regarding education that have from what I have seen gone unanswered and would be willing to send these ideas to anyone who is willing to read them and forward them to other politicians (as long as proper credit is given) if the people thought they would help stimulate a positive response to fixing our education system.
We cannot just tell our government officials that enough is enough we have to get it through to the members of the communities that enough is enough when it comes to directing educational resources to each community. It cannot stop there either we have to do the same for other resources directed at helping communities. As a society we cannot afford to idly sit back and whine about what others have and we don’t, we have to take our futures into our own hands and not let others dictate what our place in life is, regardless of what resources are out there.
As a society we cannot move forward, until we can learn to take responsibility for where we go in life and how we get there, instead of letting society guide us to where society wants us to be. To do this we have to be proactive in getting positive things done in our communities, that benefit ourselves, our children and our communities overall without looking at race, gender or religion.
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Gay rights and Gay marriage
With regards to the gay rights movement and the gay marriage debate, both sides of these issues are very passionate in their fight to win their point, sometimes getting violent in their efforts.
When it comes to the people who oppose any gay issue, they are sometimes dead set against giving any type of equal rights or equal treatment to anyone who happens to be gay, with the reasoning being completely valid in their eyes. The primary reasoning behind not wanting to give gays equal rights is the individuals religious beliefs citing that religious states that it is wrong to be in such a physical relationship.
The people who do not want to give gays any rights or treat them equally also cite that, that lifestyle is dirty and that they don’t want their children or their families exposed to that lifestyle. Beyond the fact that they cite religious beliefs and not wanting to expose their families to the gay lifestyle they can not show any legitimate reason why we as a society should treat gays like inferior beings not worthy of respect.
At the same time, on the opposite side of the issue the people who believe that gays should be treated equally, cite that gays are productive members in our society at all levels and all they want is to be treated like straight people who have worked just as hard to attain the same positions in life. When it comes to citing religious beliefs, the people wanting equal rights for gays cite that religion teaches tolerance of others regardless of what they are doing and of the fact that God has reserved judgment for himself for which we are being hypocritical on both accounts.
This has been proven true by the fact that many people are not tolerant of people who they know are gay and we take it on ourselves to judge them based solely on religious doctrine. When it comes to religious doctrine the whole issue is a paradox due to the fact that under religious doctrine we are not suppose to be in such a relationship, while at the same time we are suppose to be tolerant of others.
When it comes to society in general, gays live in and are active in the communities that they live in and in some cases are integral parts of the communities they are apart of. When we project our religious beliefs out onto the communities, we tell the gays in our communities that it is fine for them to be leaders of our companies and our nation but we do not trust you on a personal level due to your sexual orientation for gays, this is perplexing and is spiteful.
We as a society have chosen not to pay attention to some religious doctrines while insisting on holding others to other religious doctrines. As a society have become a society that believes that we can force others to do as we say and as we do as individuals and it is prevalent in the way we handle religious doctrine.
When it comes to the people who oppose any gay issue, they are sometimes dead set against giving any type of equal rights or equal treatment to anyone who happens to be gay, with the reasoning being completely valid in their eyes. The primary reasoning behind not wanting to give gays equal rights is the individuals religious beliefs citing that religious states that it is wrong to be in such a physical relationship.
The people who do not want to give gays any rights or treat them equally also cite that, that lifestyle is dirty and that they don’t want their children or their families exposed to that lifestyle. Beyond the fact that they cite religious beliefs and not wanting to expose their families to the gay lifestyle they can not show any legitimate reason why we as a society should treat gays like inferior beings not worthy of respect.
At the same time, on the opposite side of the issue the people who believe that gays should be treated equally, cite that gays are productive members in our society at all levels and all they want is to be treated like straight people who have worked just as hard to attain the same positions in life. When it comes to citing religious beliefs, the people wanting equal rights for gays cite that religion teaches tolerance of others regardless of what they are doing and of the fact that God has reserved judgment for himself for which we are being hypocritical on both accounts.
This has been proven true by the fact that many people are not tolerant of people who they know are gay and we take it on ourselves to judge them based solely on religious doctrine. When it comes to religious doctrine the whole issue is a paradox due to the fact that under religious doctrine we are not suppose to be in such a relationship, while at the same time we are suppose to be tolerant of others.
When it comes to society in general, gays live in and are active in the communities that they live in and in some cases are integral parts of the communities they are apart of. When we project our religious beliefs out onto the communities, we tell the gays in our communities that it is fine for them to be leaders of our companies and our nation but we do not trust you on a personal level due to your sexual orientation for gays, this is perplexing and is spiteful.
We as a society have chosen not to pay attention to some religious doctrines while insisting on holding others to other religious doctrines. As a society have become a society that believes that we can force others to do as we say and as we do as individuals and it is prevalent in the way we handle religious doctrine.
embryonic stem cell research, politics and religion
When it comes to medical research, more specifically embryonic stem cell research and presidential politics, the current president is playing to what our country calls the “Christian Conservatives” and their views on religious beliefs. The problem with that is the fact that some issues that the “Christian Conservatives” rather than looking at all beliefs they run with a specific belief on an issue that they either agree or disagree with and try to have a one sided debate with it.
The current president has made it a point to side with the “Christian Conservatives” on the embryonic stem cell research debate even though there are beliefs that to some degree contradict their stance.
Stem cells from my understanding are the cells that designate what is what in our body and we can use these stem cells to recreate pieces of that specific type of tissue. Embryonic stem cells are unspecified stem cells that haven’t been assigned a specific type of tissue to make and therefore have the ability to be told to create any type of tissue in the body. This gives us the opportunity to learn how stem cells work in general before they become specific to a type of tissue and to see what can and does go wrong in the creation of the different types of tissue so we can learn how to correct it.
The problem isn’t the research itself but rather the mentality of the people setting the public policy in government concerning medicine and research. These people who include the president try to put medicine and religion at odds with each other even though they go hand in hand due to religious doctrine. Religion states that it is our duty to heal the sick, which is were medicine comes into play.
It is understandable that many of the “Christian Conservatives” take a stance against embryonic stem cell research based on their religious beliefs. This is due to Christianity stating that life begins at conception and that we are not supposed to kill. At the same, there is a flip side to those as well. Religious doctrine not only states that we are not supposed to kill religious doctrine also states that we are supposed to learn, to heal the sick and to gain wisdom.
We cannot gain the wisdom needed that comes from learning if we place restrictions on what we learn or how we learn due to it going against one specific religious belief. By placing limits on what we learn and how we learn it when it comes to medical research we are hindering our ability to allow the medical community to do its job and in some cases we essentially are killing the people who we are in charge of healing because we are choosing to stand around and watch them die rather than learning how to heal them.
Where we are taught religion long before we are taught about government and politics we inherently put our religious beliefs into our politics. The people who were trusted to right the foundation of our country knew this and when they were writing the United States Constitution, they tried to limit the influence of both religion and government over each other. There will always be people including politicians who feel that there is no such writing in the constitution and others that feel that religion has no place in government at all.
Presidential politics is about running the country as effectively as the individual can run it given both domestic and international issues that relate to the people and the government, not using the Presidential podium as a pulpit to preach religious doctrine and limiting what we can do based on his own views on religious doctrine. The president if he uses the podium as a pulpit on the subject of embryonic stem cell research, belittles the researchers trying to do their jobs and he is forgetting that at one time many of the medical advancements we have achieved have come about even with religion being against it and how these advancements have helped us everyone including the people who didn’t believe in the advancement of medicine.
The has to be some sort of medium between secularism and religion when making decisions for the country as a whole since the country is a melting pot of cultures and religions rather than treating the country as if there is one culture and one religion.
Yes, in essence religion doesn’t permit us to kill, but at the same time if we choose not to do the Embryonic stem cell research then we are choosing to kill far more people that have illnesses we have no treatment for that may have had a cure stemming from that research.
The current president has made it a point to side with the “Christian Conservatives” on the embryonic stem cell research debate even though there are beliefs that to some degree contradict their stance.
Stem cells from my understanding are the cells that designate what is what in our body and we can use these stem cells to recreate pieces of that specific type of tissue. Embryonic stem cells are unspecified stem cells that haven’t been assigned a specific type of tissue to make and therefore have the ability to be told to create any type of tissue in the body. This gives us the opportunity to learn how stem cells work in general before they become specific to a type of tissue and to see what can and does go wrong in the creation of the different types of tissue so we can learn how to correct it.
The problem isn’t the research itself but rather the mentality of the people setting the public policy in government concerning medicine and research. These people who include the president try to put medicine and religion at odds with each other even though they go hand in hand due to religious doctrine. Religion states that it is our duty to heal the sick, which is were medicine comes into play.
It is understandable that many of the “Christian Conservatives” take a stance against embryonic stem cell research based on their religious beliefs. This is due to Christianity stating that life begins at conception and that we are not supposed to kill. At the same, there is a flip side to those as well. Religious doctrine not only states that we are not supposed to kill religious doctrine also states that we are supposed to learn, to heal the sick and to gain wisdom.
We cannot gain the wisdom needed that comes from learning if we place restrictions on what we learn or how we learn due to it going against one specific religious belief. By placing limits on what we learn and how we learn it when it comes to medical research we are hindering our ability to allow the medical community to do its job and in some cases we essentially are killing the people who we are in charge of healing because we are choosing to stand around and watch them die rather than learning how to heal them.
Where we are taught religion long before we are taught about government and politics we inherently put our religious beliefs into our politics. The people who were trusted to right the foundation of our country knew this and when they were writing the United States Constitution, they tried to limit the influence of both religion and government over each other. There will always be people including politicians who feel that there is no such writing in the constitution and others that feel that religion has no place in government at all.
Presidential politics is about running the country as effectively as the individual can run it given both domestic and international issues that relate to the people and the government, not using the Presidential podium as a pulpit to preach religious doctrine and limiting what we can do based on his own views on religious doctrine. The president if he uses the podium as a pulpit on the subject of embryonic stem cell research, belittles the researchers trying to do their jobs and he is forgetting that at one time many of the medical advancements we have achieved have come about even with religion being against it and how these advancements have helped us everyone including the people who didn’t believe in the advancement of medicine.
The has to be some sort of medium between secularism and religion when making decisions for the country as a whole since the country is a melting pot of cultures and religions rather than treating the country as if there is one culture and one religion.
Yes, in essence religion doesn’t permit us to kill, but at the same time if we choose not to do the Embryonic stem cell research then we are choosing to kill far more people that have illnesses we have no treatment for that may have had a cure stemming from that research.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
In memorium for the 9 firefighters in South Carolina
the following prayer is a prayer firefighters say and thought it would be appropriate given the loss of the 9 firefighters in South Carolina. I would like to give credit to the author but I am unable to since I don't know the author's name.
Firefighter's Prayer
When I am called to duty, God, Wherever flames may rage,Give me the strength to save a life, Whatever be it's age.Help me embrace a little child before it is too late,Or save an older person from the horror of that fate.Enable me to be alert and hear the weakest shout,And quickly and efficiently put the fire out.I want to fill my calling, to give the best in me,To guard my friends and neighbors and protect his property.And if according to my fate I am to lose my life,Please bless with your protecting hand my children and my wife.
Firefighter's Prayer
When I am called to duty, God, Wherever flames may rage,Give me the strength to save a life, Whatever be it's age.Help me embrace a little child before it is too late,Or save an older person from the horror of that fate.Enable me to be alert and hear the weakest shout,And quickly and efficiently put the fire out.I want to fill my calling, to give the best in me,To guard my friends and neighbors and protect his property.And if according to my fate I am to lose my life,Please bless with your protecting hand my children and my wife.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
U.S. political system is broken
The U.S. political system is broken. What is worse is the fact that the people who we have elected are willing to take any hard stance on making real change, the very change that is needed to bring us back to the checks and balances that are fundamental to our government.
we have people and politicians who would have us believe that the U.S. courts have overstepped their legal boundaries, when making decisions like the Roe Vs. Wade ruling in the U.S. Supreme court or the gay marriage ruling in Massachusetts. That isn't really the case though, we actually had no laws on the books limiting or banning either but we went around acting as if we did, until the courts, to make a long story short basically stated that until such time that there is a law limiting or banning them, then they are technically legal.
we also have a sitting president that blatantly disregarded article 6 of the constitution so he could get re-elected and has also asked for laws that act completely outside of the United States Constitution, that diminish our constitutionally guaranteed rights and protections, siting national defense without asking the people to give up those rights and protections.
we have people and politicians who would have us believe that the U.S. courts have overstepped their legal boundaries, when making decisions like the Roe Vs. Wade ruling in the U.S. Supreme court or the gay marriage ruling in Massachusetts. That isn't really the case though, we actually had no laws on the books limiting or banning either but we went around acting as if we did, until the courts, to make a long story short basically stated that until such time that there is a law limiting or banning them, then they are technically legal.
we also have a sitting president that blatantly disregarded article 6 of the constitution so he could get re-elected and has also asked for laws that act completely outside of the United States Constitution, that diminish our constitutionally guaranteed rights and protections, siting national defense without asking the people to give up those rights and protections.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
blogger reviewed my blog
blogger reviewed my blog and determined that it was not a spamming blog and the word verification restriction has been removed.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
somehow my blog ended up listed as a ...
based on some criteria that is used for search engines my blog fit the criteria for a spam blog, I don't know how or why but it did. I know this due to the fact I started having to do word verification each time I posted to my blog and did some searching to find out why. Now each time I do post I have to do the word verification twice in order to post due to the server not recognizing the first verification even though I typed it in correctly.
second letter of mine published in 2004
the following letter is a letter of mine that was published in a Boston paper on October 28, 2004 the paper is Metro.
During this presidential campaign ther has been a lot of mudslinging from both candidates and their vice presidential running mates. I have done my share of and heard a lot of complaining when it comes to the presidential candidates.
I plan on taking my complaints to the election booth on Nov. 2 and voting onw whom I think should be in office. I am doing this for two reasons; first of which is that I was taught that if I choose to complain, then I have to vote to be taken seriously.
Secondly, I feel that anyone can be a Monday morning quarterback with regards to complaining but it takes people who are willing to stand up and take the heat for what they believe in and to do what they think is right.
The people who choose to take a stand and do it in politics end up taking a lot of heat from a lot of people- some of whom can do something to make a differencebut choose to complain instead.
During this presidential campaign ther has been a lot of mudslinging from both candidates and their vice presidential running mates. I have done my share of and heard a lot of complaining when it comes to the presidential candidates.
I plan on taking my complaints to the election booth on Nov. 2 and voting onw whom I think should be in office. I am doing this for two reasons; first of which is that I was taught that if I choose to complain, then I have to vote to be taken seriously.
Secondly, I feel that anyone can be a Monday morning quarterback with regards to complaining but it takes people who are willing to stand up and take the heat for what they believe in and to do what they think is right.
The people who choose to take a stand and do it in politics end up taking a lot of heat from a lot of people- some of whom can do something to make a differencebut choose to complain instead.
Monday, June 11, 2007
a political letter of mine Published in 2004
The following letter is mine that was published in the Boston Edition of Metro on september 27, 2004.
During this political campaign, all we have to choose from is a person that appears to be a liar and a person that appears to flip-flop on issues. One of my co-workers told me not to listen to any politics at all. I ended up telling him if I want to vote I must listento what they are saying. I also told my co-worker that the presidential candidates don't want you to lishen to what they have to say; all they want you to hear is "vote for me."
What I don't understand is that both candidates are obsessed with the war on terror and what happened during the vietnam era. The media is feeding those obsessions and not forcing the candidates to say anything on record that would show where they stand.
All of the media outlets should stop feeding into what the presidential candidates want you to hear and take a stand. What I mean by that is, they should make a more concerted effort to show what issues the candidates stand for and then try to match the statements to how they have handled themselves on those same issues in their respective offices.
-----------
it is now 2007, it may be early yet in the presidential campaign but the last paragraph in the above letter is as relevant as three years ago at this time.
During this political campaign, all we have to choose from is a person that appears to be a liar and a person that appears to flip-flop on issues. One of my co-workers told me not to listen to any politics at all. I ended up telling him if I want to vote I must listento what they are saying. I also told my co-worker that the presidential candidates don't want you to lishen to what they have to say; all they want you to hear is "vote for me."
What I don't understand is that both candidates are obsessed with the war on terror and what happened during the vietnam era. The media is feeding those obsessions and not forcing the candidates to say anything on record that would show where they stand.
All of the media outlets should stop feeding into what the presidential candidates want you to hear and take a stand. What I mean by that is, they should make a more concerted effort to show what issues the candidates stand for and then try to match the statements to how they have handled themselves on those same issues in their respective offices.
-----------
it is now 2007, it may be early yet in the presidential campaign but the last paragraph in the above letter is as relevant as three years ago at this time.
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
an opinion on Iraq
Regardless of what went on concerning Iraq and the months leading up to our Invasion of Iraq, I feel that the decision to invade was forced down the Senates throat. I have thought that from the start of President Bush pushing for the war with Iraq based on CIA information that had been presented to him concerning Iraq. If the media outlets are correct and I stress if they are correct then the CIA had asked President Bush to hold off on asking for a declaration of war so that way the agency could verify the intelligence in the report that went to his desk.
Now that we have been there for four years there is no easy way out of Iraq because the innocent people trying to live their daily lives don't deserve to have their country occupied but at the same time there are people who are hiding behind the dominate religion there and they are also perverting it to get people to do their bidding that would seize control of the country.
If you notice the masterminds behind the perversions that they are perpetrating onto the religion are not the ones going off and killing themselves to prove their point they are using the people hat they had sucked into the mess to kill themselves after getting them to believe that it is the only way to attain the goals of the masterminds behind the attacks.
I do not blame the religion, I blame the individuals that are perverting the religion to fit their agenda's. We cannot resolve the issues unless we can negate the religion factor in the whole situation.
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
The presidential candidates on debating
Each of the presidential candidates instead of grandstanding and belittling what others have done should be focused on actually debating each other on the issues that are currently relevant to the voters that they are trying to woo. Each candidate needs to actually stick to the facts on each issue in regards to how each candidate including themselves has handled the personal and political aspects of the issue when it comes to how they intend on dealing with each specific issue.
Each candidate should also submit to a survey that is specific to each issue that they are likely to face during the campaigning and the debates and put the answers in an easy to read document format that is also easily accessible to the public. Each question should be written so that way there can not be any straight forward yes or no answers only commentary in their own words and also be designed not to allow the candidates to omit their views on each issue and how to handle the issues.
The questions should be something like these if not these specific questions:
- Explain your stance on education and explain how you intend on dealing with bringing our education system up to par with the other countries within the industrialized world?
- Explain your stance on “the war on terror” and how you intend on dealing with the legal aspect of it when it comes to not infringing on the legal protections in the constitution and keeping in line with international rules of engagement regarding terrorist cells?
- Explain your stance on abortion and how you would handle abortion rights given the fact that women will seek them out even if Roe V. Wade is over turned?
- Explain your stance on stem cell research, more specifically embryonic stem cell research and how you would handle federal funding for it?
- Explain your stance on gay rights with emphasis on gay marriage given that on a technical stand point the government doesn’t have any legislation prohibiting it and how you will handle it?
With knowing Article VI of the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment, explain your view on how much or how little of a role religious doctrine which includes ones personal religious beliefs, should play in American politics and why you feel that way? - Explain your stance on taxes, more specifically income taxes with regard to where and when to give tax breaks along with where and when to raise taxes in the different income brackets and why you think they work best where you would like the tax breaks or increased income taxes?
Saturday, June 2, 2007
MBTA's Train and Trolley systems
I grew up in Boston utilizing the MBTA's subway and bus systems on a daily basis. For as long as I could remember, the Greenline has had a seven to one ratio for trolleys going between Park Street Station and points between Lechmere Staion. That is to say even though Lechmere is the end of the line it has only one trolley going there for every seven trolley's that go part way then turn around to go through Park Street Station in the other direction. This happens even during the height of Rush hour.
The Silverline from South Station has on average a three or four to one racio for the electrified/diesel buses they consider a subway system. This is to say that for every one SL2/SL/3 (routes that go between diesel and electricity) there are three to four buses that stay electrified and do a turn around. Like with the Greenline it happens even in rush hour.
With the ratio's for each of these two lines, the last couple trolley's an buses are empty or almost completely empty due to everyone waiting for the one that goes to Lechmere (greenline) or the sl2/sl3 routes (silverline) and by that time there are a number of people who cannot get on due to there being more than the vehicle can hold.
The commuter rail, at least The Fitchburg line has at least from my understanding has had a problem being respected by the MBTA enough to respond to issues regarding that specific commuter line. The two biggest issues that I have been dealing with since I started riding it five years ago, is a lack of service going between Boston and Fitchburg on work days between the morning and evening rush hours, and the equipment being in general disrepair.
The riders have been fighting for more service between the ends of the line for longer than I have been riding the train and even though the company hired to maintain the equipment for the MBTA has started doing a better job in recent months of keeping on top of repairs, still gives the line the equipment that is in need of repairs(i.e. tagged out doors and traps or worse) while giving other lines the equipment that has been fixed. this is on what is called the North Side which is all of the commuter rail lines that go north of Boston. There are always stories of the MBTA getting new equipment for the commuter rail but virtually, all of the new train coaches are double decker coaches that cannot be used on the North Side.
The Silverline from South Station has on average a three or four to one racio for the electrified/diesel buses they consider a subway system. This is to say that for every one SL2/SL/3 (routes that go between diesel and electricity) there are three to four buses that stay electrified and do a turn around. Like with the Greenline it happens even in rush hour.
With the ratio's for each of these two lines, the last couple trolley's an buses are empty or almost completely empty due to everyone waiting for the one that goes to Lechmere (greenline) or the sl2/sl3 routes (silverline) and by that time there are a number of people who cannot get on due to there being more than the vehicle can hold.
The commuter rail, at least The Fitchburg line has at least from my understanding has had a problem being respected by the MBTA enough to respond to issues regarding that specific commuter line. The two biggest issues that I have been dealing with since I started riding it five years ago, is a lack of service going between Boston and Fitchburg on work days between the morning and evening rush hours, and the equipment being in general disrepair.
The riders have been fighting for more service between the ends of the line for longer than I have been riding the train and even though the company hired to maintain the equipment for the MBTA has started doing a better job in recent months of keeping on top of repairs, still gives the line the equipment that is in need of repairs(i.e. tagged out doors and traps or worse) while giving other lines the equipment that has been fixed. this is on what is called the North Side which is all of the commuter rail lines that go north of Boston. There are always stories of the MBTA getting new equipment for the commuter rail but virtually, all of the new train coaches are double decker coaches that cannot be used on the North Side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
