Eat Your Vegetables

Americans know that a good way to a healthy lifestyle is eating fresh fruits and vegetables. The only problem is that fresh produce is generally consumed raw instead of cooked. Cooking food usually kills off harmful microorganisms like the E. coli found in bagged spinach in 2006. This outbreak sickened more than 200 people and killed three. Meat and poultry producers in the U.S. are highly regulated by the Department of Agriculture, but the government relies on self-regulation by the Food and Drug Administration and farmers themselves to keep fresh produce safe. Facts like these, combined with a few others such as America’s aging population and centralized agriculture have led some Americans to believe that we need one agency responsible for ensuring the safety of fresh produce. Others say that the industry itself can respond faster and more effectively than a federal agency funded by the government and that federal regulation would increase the cost of producing fruits and vegetables. People that are against greater government regulation for fresh produce feel that the increased cost would reverse the effects of a health-conscious America.

I agree that a federal agency is not the answer at this point. After the E. coli scare, bagged spinach sales decreased by 60 percent. This is not something that went unnoticed by agribusinesses. Corrections will be made by those businesses to earn back the trust of the consumer, and if this is done, then no one will have to wait for the government to come up with the money and a plan to fix what is already repaired. Also, if a federal agency is responsible for monitoring fresh produce, then the cost of that produce will definitely increase. This increase in cost will cause a decrease in demand and our economy will suffer along with the health of our citizens. If Americans aren’t eating healthy foods, then America is not healthy, and the population is aging; by 2020, some experts predict, men and women over 65 years old will make up 16 percent of the population. At an older age, one is more likely to get sick therefore we should be eating more fruits and vegetables to stay healthy and we can trust that these will be safe to eat because businesses can’t make any money if their consumers don’t buy their products. Of course, farmers everywhere know this and that is why I do not feel that a federal agency for monitoring the produce of fruits and vegetables is necessary. This view could also be shared by any number of the people, including Hillary Clinton, that signed a letter written to the FDA urging the FDA to solve the E. coli problem. (http://lautenberg.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=266890)

Other blogs with similar issues:

Ensuring Quality Care for Medicare Patients
http://sarahssocialblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/health-care-issue-2-ensuring-quality.html

Comprehensive vs. Incremental Health Care Reforms
http://erintakle.blogspot.com/

Picture Source:

http://tastetourist.com/seasonal-fruit-and-vegetables/

Marriage or ‘Couple’?

President Obama has said that he does not believe in same-sex marriage; however, he also feels that same-sex couples should be recognized as couples and given the same rights and privileges as married people. He feels that marriage should always be between a man and a woman, but he also feels that being homosexual should be accepted because of the values of our country. I agree that this is the perfect compromise for the U.S.

Churches choose not to marry same-sex couples for a few reasons. One: Men and women are physically made for each other and a marriage between two men or two women disrupts the natural order of things. Two: Part of marriage is to create offspring and same-sex couples cannot create offspring. Three: A relationship has different roles and men and women fill these roles according to their gender.

People that support same-sex marriages have an opposite approach. One: Being homosexual is something that one is born with, therefore it is a part of the natural order of things. Two: Not all marriages produce offspring and if those are accepted, then their marriage should be accepted too. Three: The roles of a relationship can be filled by either gender.

The problem with focusing on these arguments when it comes to making and passing laws is that the government is separate from the church. The government’s job is to protect the rights of the people. If every person has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit happiness then the government should do everything they can to ensure the protection of these rights. This should stay true for same-sex couples who want to be treated as a couple by the government. If they cannot get married in a church, that is a completely different issue.





I agree with Obama and say that the government should treat same-sex couples as couples and give them the rights and privileges they deserve. However, the issue of same-sex marriage has to do with one's belief system. Same-sex couples will continue to fight for marriage but all the government has to do is protect their rights as citizens of the United States.



Article Source:



http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c040.html





http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/11/obama.gay.rights.reax/index.html#cnnSTCText





Picture Source:



http://robertsravings.wordpress.com/2009/01/

Gang Rape. Why would anyone just let it happen?

“Homecoming 2009 for Richmond Highschool students will be a night that will never be forgotten, but not for the right reasons.” This is a quote from Claire Illies in an article she posted on her blog http://claireilliesblog.blogspot.com/ on the gang rape that occurred at the high school in California. The victim was 15 years old. At least 10 people witnessed this awful event and did nothing, and security personnal did not do their jobs correctly to prevent this from happening just outside the school during the homecoming dance. This might never have happened if the right precautions were taken.

First of all, it is easy to point blame at the people who were supposed to be in charge of the conduct of the high school students during the dance. A very big part of the reason the rape happend, however, was that security was neglecting to patrol outside. Just think, if they had even walked around the school once, the victim and her attackers would have been discovered. It also sounded to me like the students at the high school knew that there wouldn't be anyone patroling the alley way where the gang rape took place. If the students knew this was a hot spot, why weren't there people standing in the middle of it with big flashy signs that said, "Go back to the dance, nice try"?

Second of all, there were students that stood witness to the rape who did absolutely nothing to help the victim or allert authorities. They just stood there and watched. Maybe they were horrified, petrified by shock and fear. Maybe they cheered the young men on. It sends shivers down my spine to think that no one helped her. No one did anything to stop this awful invasion of human dignity. Why?? Why were these kids not taught the difference between right and wrong? Why were they not taught how to take action in high pressure or violent situations? Shouldn't they have been taught these things?

The ironic thing is that the gang rape took place at a school. A school where teenagers should have been taught how to tell if something is right or wrong and what to do about it. Even a class as simple as the D.A.R.E. program would have inspired at least one of those students to DO SOMETHING. Instead, this poor girl was subjected to two and a half hours of torture and then discarded under a bench, passed out cold.

Fortunately, the girl has recovered from her physical injuries. Unfortunately, because of the actions and mistakes of so many, she will never fully recover from her mental and emotional scars.

Article Sources:

http://claireilliesblog.blogspot.com/

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/29/california.rape.victim.friend/index.html?eref=rss_topstories.

Picture Source:

http://studentservices.uthscsa.edu/PC_FAQ.aspx

Six Women’s Lives Could Have Been Saved

Anthony Sowell (pictured at the left) was convicted of raping a woman in 1989. He was imprisoned from 1990 to 2005. He is 50 years old, and, until a few days ago, was living in a home in Cleveland, Ohio.

About one month ago, a woman accused Sowell of rape and assault. The police secured an arrest warrant for Mr. Sowell as well as a search warrant for the house he lived in. When they arrived at Sowell’s residence, however, he was not there. They searched the house and guess what; they found two women’s dead bodies on the third floor, one body under the stairs in the basement, two bodies in a crawl space, and one body in a shallow grave just outside the home, all in varying states of decomposition. Happy Halloween.

That’s six bodies, six women, six families that lost someone dear to them. And why? Because Anthony Sowell was allowed to run free after “serving his sentence” in jail. Police found him just walkin’ around the streets of Cleveland. He has been arrested and is obviously under a lot of suspicion about the deaths of these women.

I feel that convicted sex offenders should serve life sentences. The murders of these women could have been prevented. They would not have happened if Sowell had been kept in jail. It takes a sick person to rape a woman, and it takes an even sicker one to kill six of them and burry them inside his own home, and what kind of a person is the one who let the sick one live in normal society where he is free to do whatever he likes until he is caught? Think of the families that are wondering where their loved ones are. Think of how, when the bodies are identified, fresh grief will be served to them on a platter. Think of how many lives could be different than they are today if sex offenders were kept behind bars.

Article and Picture Source:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/10/31/ohio.cleveland.bodies/index.html?eref=rss_topstories