Barack Obama: Obama opposed the War in Iraq since day one. Back in 2002 he warned of “an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.” Obama intends to remove troops from Iraq immediately. Every month he will remove either one or two brigades. Within 16 months Obama plans to have all of the combat brigades out of Iraq. Nevertheless, he will keep some troops in Iraq to protect the US embassy and diplomats.
Hilary Clinton: Even though Hillary mistakenly voted yes to the war in Iraq, she too wants to end US military interference in Iraq’s civil war. She plans to bring our troops home. In her first 60 days of office Hillary Clinton plans to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, her National Security Council, and her Secretary of Defense in efforts of directing them in conducting a feasible plan to bring the troops home. She also intends to direct the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to prepare an inclusive plan to provide the best health care and benefits to every service member.
John McCain: McCain on the other hand doesn’t mind if US troops stay in Iraq for another 100 years. One of McCain’s first goals is to build an Iraqi army because he thinks that will ensure Iraq’s ability to govern properly. McCain wants these troops to play a key role in keeping Iraq secure. He does not want to withdraw US troops until Iraq is stabilized. McCain believe that a withdrawal of US troops from Iraq would merely condemn Iraq to civil war.
I think Barack Obama’s proposal was the strongest solution oriented one because it’s the most pragmatic, and you can tell by his devotion, perseverance, and speech that he truly wants to make a change. Barack beautifully states that “we will come together because we believe that in the face of war there can be peace. In the face of despair we believe there can be hope. And in the face of a politics that’s shut us out, told us to settle, that’s divided us for too long, we believe we can be one people reaching for what’s possible.”
A fallacy that I came across was how Hillary Clinton continues to say “I oppose the Iraq war” when in reality she voted yes to the war! She keeps using the excuse “I trusted Bush to be responsible but he abused the trust”. I can not say anything negative about Barack Obama. Every word that he utters is golden. Every notion that he engenders is sheer ingenious. McCain’s remark about the Iraq war saying he will keep the troops in Iraq for 100 years more if he has to was uncalled for. He gave off the impression that he was abusing his authority with such remarks.
First first question goes to Barack Obama: Do you have a back up plan if your plan to withdraw US troops from Iraq within the first 16 months of your presidency fails?
Second question goes to Hillary Clinton: Why do you keep saying that you bring “experience” to the table and belittle Obama by saying he brings “speeches”?
I joined the facebook group “One Million Strong for Obama” a year ago after Senator Barack Obama’s first visit to George Mason University. Since then, I consider myself an “Obama advocator”. This group keeps us up to date with Obama’s campaign events and we learn more about his movement for change. You too can join this group; it is only a click away.
Michelle’s discussed the big issue of health care. She pointed out that Hillary and Barack have relatively similar approaches to withdraw US troops from Iraq. McCain wants the patients themselves to be able to make decisions and carry on more responsibility. Michelle introduced the GMU College Republicans or Democrats groups that provide many opportunities for persons to take action.
Noor discussed the Iraq war. She seems to be so passionate about this topic and deliberated it exceptionally. She explained how Obama wants to withdraw US troops from Iraq immediately but not completely.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
To Pirate or not to Pirate? That is the quesiton!
Hassanah El-Yacoubi: Hello everyone! And thank you for tuning in today. Our guests for the day are Jason Shultz and Scott Mathews disputing such a controversial issue on file-sharing ,illegal downloading, and the “steeling” of unauthorized files such as music downloads and/or videos. People who download music illegally without paying for it or acquiring legitimate authorization do not know that they are being watched and could potentially be sued for piracy. Let talk to our guests about this and see what they have to say. Scott, how did file-sharing stir up such a controversy over something we seem to think so little”?
Scott Matthews: Hassanah, thank you for having me. Let’s get right to it. It is simply against the law to pirate. And those who will disobey shall be punished whether they are college students or adults. What these people are failing to see and acknowledge is the fact that these recording companies and producers are working extremely hard at what they do. In the end the amount of income they should be obtaining is virtually cut in half do to illegal downloading and file sharing. Do you think that is fair?
Hassanah El-yacoubi: No not at all, but I myself never knew the severity of this issue. Jason how can you argue this?
Jason Shultz: Hassanah, I’m sorry but no matter what Scott says about “punishing those who disobey the law” pirating is something that will continue to reign until the end of time. It is literally impossible to track down the thousands of people who file share and download illegally. Although I do agree that it is not fair to record companies because some computer wiz has found a way to sell them short of their efforts. That is why I propose a comprehensive license that allows people to attain music and movies from many different sources. As for students they are poor enough. They do not need superfluous charges held against them and unnecessary law suits to add the pile of bills that they are already paying for. It just isn’t right.
Scott Matthews: You see Jason that’s what you do not understand. Even if they are students, that doesn’t make them indifferent to abiding by the law. These students or who ever are doing the crime and therefore they must do time. File sharing and illegal downloading can result in up to $250,000 in fees and 5 years in jail. This is how serious it is. I suggest these students look at the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) website to fully broaden their understanding of what constitutes piracy and finding other ways around it.
Hassanah El-Yacoubi: Well, now we have a better understanding of file-sharing and I’m sure we will think twice next time we download music illegally. That’s all the time we have today folks. I’d like to thank our esteemed guests for being with us today Jason Shultz and Scott Matthews. See Ya!
Scott Matthews: Hassanah, thank you for having me. Let’s get right to it. It is simply against the law to pirate. And those who will disobey shall be punished whether they are college students or adults. What these people are failing to see and acknowledge is the fact that these recording companies and producers are working extremely hard at what they do. In the end the amount of income they should be obtaining is virtually cut in half do to illegal downloading and file sharing. Do you think that is fair?
Hassanah El-yacoubi: No not at all, but I myself never knew the severity of this issue. Jason how can you argue this?
Jason Shultz: Hassanah, I’m sorry but no matter what Scott says about “punishing those who disobey the law” pirating is something that will continue to reign until the end of time. It is literally impossible to track down the thousands of people who file share and download illegally. Although I do agree that it is not fair to record companies because some computer wiz has found a way to sell them short of their efforts. That is why I propose a comprehensive license that allows people to attain music and movies from many different sources. As for students they are poor enough. They do not need superfluous charges held against them and unnecessary law suits to add the pile of bills that they are already paying for. It just isn’t right.
Scott Matthews: You see Jason that’s what you do not understand. Even if they are students, that doesn’t make them indifferent to abiding by the law. These students or who ever are doing the crime and therefore they must do time. File sharing and illegal downloading can result in up to $250,000 in fees and 5 years in jail. This is how serious it is. I suggest these students look at the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) website to fully broaden their understanding of what constitutes piracy and finding other ways around it.
Hassanah El-Yacoubi: Well, now we have a better understanding of file-sharing and I’m sure we will think twice next time we download music illegally. That’s all the time we have today folks. I’d like to thank our esteemed guests for being with us today Jason Shultz and Scott Matthews. See Ya!
Thursday, March 27, 2008
This is the Real Deal
1)What is your opinion on concealed weapons being allowed on college campuses? Would you mind if students in your class were carrying guns? How do your personal background and beliefs influence your answer
I think that that allowing concealed weapons on college campuses has its pros and cons. I can not say that allowing students to have concealed weapons on campus would be a horrible idea because it could in fact be beneficial to a certain extent. If something severe were to ever occur at a college campus such as the tragic Virginia Tech massacre, the student or students would be more prepared in this kind of scenario. These students/faculty could potentially decrease the amount of victims that do get injured by using their weapons at the appropriate times. Although, I must admit that I wouldn’t feel so comfortable with having my fellow classmates carry guns around. Even though I am an indigenous American my father was from Palestine. In Palestine there is not a single soul that doesn’t carry concealed weapons on them, and that is why you never know what you could encounter. It is a scary feeling of everlasting fear and apprehension that I’d like to avoid if I can.
2) If guns were allowed on the George Mason campus, what criteria would you want met before the student would be allowed to carry a gun?
I would want an extensive background check on everyone. Anyone who has been convicted of a felony or has a record of misdemeanor should not be permitted to carry a concealed weapon and not even allowed to apply for one. I think anyone responsible college student with a clean record should be eligible to “apply” for a weapon.
3. Using the materials I have provided, what are the strongest arguments in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus? The weakest? Cite specific examples.
I think the strongest argument in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus is David Seelly’s testimony. David graduated from University of Utah and use to carry a concealed weapon on him. He said: "And not just shootings, but [serial killer] Ted Bundy did some of his crimes at the University of Utah campus". (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). This shows the fear that these students are living in. It also demonstrates how these students have no means of protecting themselves and it frightens them.
The weakest argument in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus would be Casey Matheny’s statement, "I would just keep [them] in my car for target shooting." (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). If Casey keeps his guns in his car what good would that do in protecting him or his classmates? He would never have the time to run out of class and quickly go to his car and get his gun if somebody bombarded his classroom. By that time God knows how many students would have been dead already. It doesn’t make sense to keep the gun in the car. Either you have it on you at all times so you can be prepared for worst case scenarios or you don’t carry one at all.
4. What are the strongest arguments in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus? The weakest? Cite specific examples from your own research.
The strongest argument in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus in my opinion is one of the students testimony. She says: “"I feel less safe knowing that a stranger sitting beside me in class may have a gun in his or her backpack” (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). This shows that students are going to live in fear no matter what the case is. If they get to carry concealed weapons on campus they are still scared of what others will do. If they don’t have any means of protecting themselves they are still scared.
The weakest argument in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus in my opinion would have to be Amanda Covington statement, “We are worried that it may affect their [students' and teachers'] willingness or desire to go to or teach a class on campus," (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). Although Amanda makes a valid point I think she fails to look at the bigger picture. These teachers are getting paid to teach, and these students are paying to come to school. Whether you decide to show up or not, that is not going to prevent a maniac from putting every student at gun point.
5. Should teachers be allowed to carry, but not students? Why or why not?
No, students and teachers should be allowed. What would happen if the shooter just happened to attack a class right after the teacher stepped out to get a drink or use the bathroom? That is not fair. Everyone should have the right to depend and protect themselves in all cases.6. Do some research on the Second Amendment. What are the predominant interpretations of it? In your answer, note whose interpretation you are referencing (for example, did the interpretation appear on the National Rifle Association website?).
The Second Amendment ambiguously states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” (answers.com). These words have struck substantial controversy concerning the ongoing debate over gun control. Some say that the amendment was meant to protect the rights of states to maintain militia units. Other opponents say that it was intended to protect an individual right. This is the interpretation from answers.com.
7. In making the decision about whether to allow concealed carry weapons on campus, what factors other than the Second Amendment need to be considered? Or, is the Second Amendment sufficient reason to allow students to carry concealed weapons?
Since the Second Amendment tends to be ambiguous in the sense that many people interpret it in their own ways, I think that there she be a “friendly amendment” attached to the Second Amendment clarifying that every individual is entitled to defend themselves at all places and at all times. This way we can put a stop to all the different interpretations and we can stop running into trouble.
I think that that allowing concealed weapons on college campuses has its pros and cons. I can not say that allowing students to have concealed weapons on campus would be a horrible idea because it could in fact be beneficial to a certain extent. If something severe were to ever occur at a college campus such as the tragic Virginia Tech massacre, the student or students would be more prepared in this kind of scenario. These students/faculty could potentially decrease the amount of victims that do get injured by using their weapons at the appropriate times. Although, I must admit that I wouldn’t feel so comfortable with having my fellow classmates carry guns around. Even though I am an indigenous American my father was from Palestine. In Palestine there is not a single soul that doesn’t carry concealed weapons on them, and that is why you never know what you could encounter. It is a scary feeling of everlasting fear and apprehension that I’d like to avoid if I can.
2) If guns were allowed on the George Mason campus, what criteria would you want met before the student would be allowed to carry a gun?
I would want an extensive background check on everyone. Anyone who has been convicted of a felony or has a record of misdemeanor should not be permitted to carry a concealed weapon and not even allowed to apply for one. I think anyone responsible college student with a clean record should be eligible to “apply” for a weapon.
3. Using the materials I have provided, what are the strongest arguments in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus? The weakest? Cite specific examples.
I think the strongest argument in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus is David Seelly’s testimony. David graduated from University of Utah and use to carry a concealed weapon on him. He said: "And not just shootings, but [serial killer] Ted Bundy did some of his crimes at the University of Utah campus". (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). This shows the fear that these students are living in. It also demonstrates how these students have no means of protecting themselves and it frightens them.
The weakest argument in favor of concealed carry weapons on campus would be Casey Matheny’s statement, "I would just keep [them] in my car for target shooting." (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). If Casey keeps his guns in his car what good would that do in protecting him or his classmates? He would never have the time to run out of class and quickly go to his car and get his gun if somebody bombarded his classroom. By that time God knows how many students would have been dead already. It doesn’t make sense to keep the gun in the car. Either you have it on you at all times so you can be prepared for worst case scenarios or you don’t carry one at all.
4. What are the strongest arguments in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus? The weakest? Cite specific examples from your own research.
The strongest argument in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus in my opinion is one of the students testimony. She says: “"I feel less safe knowing that a stranger sitting beside me in class may have a gun in his or her backpack” (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). This shows that students are going to live in fear no matter what the case is. If they get to carry concealed weapons on campus they are still scared of what others will do. If they don’t have any means of protecting themselves they are still scared.
The weakest argument in favor of prohibiting concealed carry weapons on campus in my opinion would have to be Amanda Covington statement, “We are worried that it may affect their [students' and teachers'] willingness or desire to go to or teach a class on campus," (Utah Students Hide Guns, Head to Class). Although Amanda makes a valid point I think she fails to look at the bigger picture. These teachers are getting paid to teach, and these students are paying to come to school. Whether you decide to show up or not, that is not going to prevent a maniac from putting every student at gun point.
5. Should teachers be allowed to carry, but not students? Why or why not?
No, students and teachers should be allowed. What would happen if the shooter just happened to attack a class right after the teacher stepped out to get a drink or use the bathroom? That is not fair. Everyone should have the right to depend and protect themselves in all cases.6. Do some research on the Second Amendment. What are the predominant interpretations of it? In your answer, note whose interpretation you are referencing (for example, did the interpretation appear on the National Rifle Association website?).
The Second Amendment ambiguously states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” (answers.com). These words have struck substantial controversy concerning the ongoing debate over gun control. Some say that the amendment was meant to protect the rights of states to maintain militia units. Other opponents say that it was intended to protect an individual right. This is the interpretation from answers.com.
7. In making the decision about whether to allow concealed carry weapons on campus, what factors other than the Second Amendment need to be considered? Or, is the Second Amendment sufficient reason to allow students to carry concealed weapons?
Since the Second Amendment tends to be ambiguous in the sense that many people interpret it in their own ways, I think that there she be a “friendly amendment” attached to the Second Amendment clarifying that every individual is entitled to defend themselves at all places and at all times. This way we can put a stop to all the different interpretations and we can stop running into trouble.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
My Time To Shine
Song title: “You are Not Alone There’s a Way Out”
Genre: Country
Explanation: This song elaborates on the obesity epidemic in our nation. The song comforts overweight people using phrases like “you are not alone” and “there is a way out.” The country tone of it will give the listeners a compassionate view on this topic and hopefully prevent bashers from being so cruel. The song will embed in listeners that there is a way out as long as you try to help yourself first.
Song title: “Quit it Before it Quits You”
Genre: Metal Rock
Explanation: This song emphasizes the importance of giving up smoking. The loud instruments and heavy metal echo will make this topic all the more serious. With rhetoric like “quit it before it quits you” I am trying to get the message across that if you do not quit smoking now, you will become awfully sick and thus your body can not handle anymore cigarettes. The cigarettes gave up on you before you gave up on them.
Song title: “Who Do You Think You Are?
Genre: Hip Hop/ R&B
Explanation: This song goes out to all those high school bullies. I am trying to put an end to all those insensitive kids who think they have to make fun of other kids to be cool. I use questions like “who do you think you are” to patronize these bullies and let them know how shallow and insecure they really are.
Song Title: “He’s in it To Win it”
Genre: Classical Rock
Explanation: This song is about Barak Obama. This song emphasizes the tremendous influence and dedication this man has to this nation and the world. I used phrases like “in it to win it” to let all those Barak bashers know that no matter how bad you make him look, Barak will find a way to redeem himself.
Song Title: “You Should’ve Thought Twice”
Genre: Hip Hop
Explanation: This song goes out to all the male and female infidels. I also stress the fact that in our society men are virtually allowed to do anything they want without worrying about being looked down upon. I put a hip hop beat to it so I can attract children to people in their late thirties. This song asserts thinking twice about engaging in such a shameful act.
Song Title: “Where is All the Money Going?”
Genre: Jazz
Explanation: This song elaborates on the fact that wealthy people are making so much money and the poorer are getting poorer. Why don’t people want to help out other people? If you have the money then why not indulge in the biggest pleasure in life which is giving? What are they doing with their money? I used a jazz melody to this song to create a more sympathetic tone.
Song Title: “ Build a Bridge and Get Over it”
Genre: Rock
Explanation: This song goes out to all the women in the world who are selling themselves cheap. Unfortunately women are forcing themselves to stay in pathetic relationships solely for the reason that they don’t think anyone else would ever be interested in them, and as a result they never want to end the relationship. This song revitalizes’ women’s whole perspective about how they view themselves and with rhetoric like “you are beautiful and deserve better” it gives them a boost of self confidence.
Song Title: “Environmental Friendly”
Genre: Smooth Jazz
Explanation: This song emphasizes the severe effects global warming will have on us in the future. This song has phrases like “turn off the sink”, “recycle your bottles”, and “you can make a change” to allow oneself to become proactive in regards to this catastrophe.
Song title: “Who Do You Think You Are?
Genre: Hip Hop/ R&B
Lyrics: Do what you want, say what you feel just know that I have no fear of you. You walk these halls like you own this place, sucker I got news for you, you aint nothing. I am not afraid of you but I cant help but to listen to what you say. Maybe I’m not good enough. Maybe you’re too good? No no, that can’t be it nobody even likes you. Why do you bully people? To gain popularity? Obviously that’s not working for you so I suggest you find another hobby.
CD COVER: it will have every color you can think of. Every dark, light, shaded, and gray tone to it to represent the variety of songs (issues) I talk about in my album. Also the color will catch the eye of most everyone, so that will encourage them to buy my album. There will be a question mark to represent all the enigmas in the world and then a finger pointing at the viewer just to make the viewer feel like they need to be more proactive.
Genre: Country
Explanation: This song elaborates on the obesity epidemic in our nation. The song comforts overweight people using phrases like “you are not alone” and “there is a way out.” The country tone of it will give the listeners a compassionate view on this topic and hopefully prevent bashers from being so cruel. The song will embed in listeners that there is a way out as long as you try to help yourself first.
Song title: “Quit it Before it Quits You”
Genre: Metal Rock
Explanation: This song emphasizes the importance of giving up smoking. The loud instruments and heavy metal echo will make this topic all the more serious. With rhetoric like “quit it before it quits you” I am trying to get the message across that if you do not quit smoking now, you will become awfully sick and thus your body can not handle anymore cigarettes. The cigarettes gave up on you before you gave up on them.
Song title: “Who Do You Think You Are?
Genre: Hip Hop/ R&B
Explanation: This song goes out to all those high school bullies. I am trying to put an end to all those insensitive kids who think they have to make fun of other kids to be cool. I use questions like “who do you think you are” to patronize these bullies and let them know how shallow and insecure they really are.
Song Title: “He’s in it To Win it”
Genre: Classical Rock
Explanation: This song is about Barak Obama. This song emphasizes the tremendous influence and dedication this man has to this nation and the world. I used phrases like “in it to win it” to let all those Barak bashers know that no matter how bad you make him look, Barak will find a way to redeem himself.
Song Title: “You Should’ve Thought Twice”
Genre: Hip Hop
Explanation: This song goes out to all the male and female infidels. I also stress the fact that in our society men are virtually allowed to do anything they want without worrying about being looked down upon. I put a hip hop beat to it so I can attract children to people in their late thirties. This song asserts thinking twice about engaging in such a shameful act.
Song Title: “Where is All the Money Going?”
Genre: Jazz
Explanation: This song elaborates on the fact that wealthy people are making so much money and the poorer are getting poorer. Why don’t people want to help out other people? If you have the money then why not indulge in the biggest pleasure in life which is giving? What are they doing with their money? I used a jazz melody to this song to create a more sympathetic tone.
Song Title: “ Build a Bridge and Get Over it”
Genre: Rock
Explanation: This song goes out to all the women in the world who are selling themselves cheap. Unfortunately women are forcing themselves to stay in pathetic relationships solely for the reason that they don’t think anyone else would ever be interested in them, and as a result they never want to end the relationship. This song revitalizes’ women’s whole perspective about how they view themselves and with rhetoric like “you are beautiful and deserve better” it gives them a boost of self confidence.
Song Title: “Environmental Friendly”
Genre: Smooth Jazz
Explanation: This song emphasizes the severe effects global warming will have on us in the future. This song has phrases like “turn off the sink”, “recycle your bottles”, and “you can make a change” to allow oneself to become proactive in regards to this catastrophe.
Song title: “Who Do You Think You Are?
Genre: Hip Hop/ R&B
Lyrics: Do what you want, say what you feel just know that I have no fear of you. You walk these halls like you own this place, sucker I got news for you, you aint nothing. I am not afraid of you but I cant help but to listen to what you say. Maybe I’m not good enough. Maybe you’re too good? No no, that can’t be it nobody even likes you. Why do you bully people? To gain popularity? Obviously that’s not working for you so I suggest you find another hobby.
CD COVER: it will have every color you can think of. Every dark, light, shaded, and gray tone to it to represent the variety of songs (issues) I talk about in my album. Also the color will catch the eye of most everyone, so that will encourage them to buy my album. There will be a question mark to represent all the enigmas in the world and then a finger pointing at the viewer just to make the viewer feel like they need to be more proactive.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Tisk Tisk Tisk
1. After considering the arguments, how do you respond to the visual rhetoric of this shirt? Is there a middle ground? How does your exposure, participation, or lack of participation in a spiritual faith influence your decision?
I can’t believe that advertisement has come to a point where they have completely lost their sense of decency. Wearing a T-shirt that has a mockery of the real image of Jesus and calling him “my homeboy” is not only enormously disrespectful, but it is degrading to all religions. It is as if Jesus is your buddy and you go to the club with him on weekdays and get drunk. That is how preposterous the saying “my homeboy” is. I , like Mitchell, believe there is absolutely no middle ground. You do not wear or advertise your piety and deity. One’s religious faith and connection with God is something so sacred and is not to be mad light of. I come from such a religious family that has taught me to give others the respect that I would want. If this is Jesus, whether you believe in him as the son of God (as Christians do) or the Prophet of God (as the Muslims and Jews do) you do not use his name or even image in vain.
2. Use one of Mitchell's quotes to refute his argument.
Mitchell disgracefully said, “Sadly, I even know Christians who wear them.” which means that even some Christians themselves find this T-Shirt rather effective. What kind of message would this shirt be sending out? That we know Jesus and have connections with him to finagle our way into heaven? Come on now, by no means is Jesus anyone’s “homeboy”.
3. If the t-shirt only contained the text, would the impact be less controversial or less persuasive? How would the rhetoric be influenced if the shaded "bubble" letters in this shirt were changed to Gothic lettering?
If the t-shirt only contained the text the impact would be less controversial because it is not as disrespectful and commercial. Without the text the shirt would still be comical but not as degrading If the bubble letters in the shirt were changed to Gothic lettering it wouldn’t make that much of a difference because the statement “Jesus is my homeboy” is where we encounter a problem
4. How would you interpret the image's role in the rhetoric of this t-shirt? Do you see the image as a parody? Consider the way Jesus is depicted, including the halo, facial expression , and his positioning in relationship to the text in your response.
It is too much of a slang and informal phrase that should never be directed or even about someone of Jesus’ spiritual level. I see the image as a parody solely because if a person is wearing a shirt with JESUS on it, could you imagine going into a stall of a bathroom and walking out with Jesus on your shirt? It is just as disgusting when someone doesn’t wash their hands after they use the restroom. Jesus was depicted as some “fella” or some ordinary person that you can “kick it” with. There is zero respect and zero propriety.
5. Would the black t-shirt connote something different than a yellow one with the same text and image? Explain.
No it would not because the problem here is with the image, rhetoric, and text. I don’t think people are paying much attention to the background color although it would be much brighter and conspicuous if it were in yellow. The shirt would still be giving off the exact same impolite, degrading, and ludicrous message.
I can’t believe that advertisement has come to a point where they have completely lost their sense of decency. Wearing a T-shirt that has a mockery of the real image of Jesus and calling him “my homeboy” is not only enormously disrespectful, but it is degrading to all religions. It is as if Jesus is your buddy and you go to the club with him on weekdays and get drunk. That is how preposterous the saying “my homeboy” is. I , like Mitchell, believe there is absolutely no middle ground. You do not wear or advertise your piety and deity. One’s religious faith and connection with God is something so sacred and is not to be mad light of. I come from such a religious family that has taught me to give others the respect that I would want. If this is Jesus, whether you believe in him as the son of God (as Christians do) or the Prophet of God (as the Muslims and Jews do) you do not use his name or even image in vain.
2. Use one of Mitchell's quotes to refute his argument.
Mitchell disgracefully said, “Sadly, I even know Christians who wear them.” which means that even some Christians themselves find this T-Shirt rather effective. What kind of message would this shirt be sending out? That we know Jesus and have connections with him to finagle our way into heaven? Come on now, by no means is Jesus anyone’s “homeboy”.
3. If the t-shirt only contained the text, would the impact be less controversial or less persuasive? How would the rhetoric be influenced if the shaded "bubble" letters in this shirt were changed to Gothic lettering?
If the t-shirt only contained the text the impact would be less controversial because it is not as disrespectful and commercial. Without the text the shirt would still be comical but not as degrading If the bubble letters in the shirt were changed to Gothic lettering it wouldn’t make that much of a difference because the statement “Jesus is my homeboy” is where we encounter a problem
4. How would you interpret the image's role in the rhetoric of this t-shirt? Do you see the image as a parody? Consider the way Jesus is depicted, including the halo, facial expression , and his positioning in relationship to the text in your response.
It is too much of a slang and informal phrase that should never be directed or even about someone of Jesus’ spiritual level. I see the image as a parody solely because if a person is wearing a shirt with JESUS on it, could you imagine going into a stall of a bathroom and walking out with Jesus on your shirt? It is just as disgusting when someone doesn’t wash their hands after they use the restroom. Jesus was depicted as some “fella” or some ordinary person that you can “kick it” with. There is zero respect and zero propriety.
5. Would the black t-shirt connote something different than a yellow one with the same text and image? Explain.
No it would not because the problem here is with the image, rhetoric, and text. I don’t think people are paying much attention to the background color although it would be much brighter and conspicuous if it were in yellow. The shirt would still be giving off the exact same impolite, degrading, and ludicrous message.
Monday, March 3, 2008
Build a Bridge and Get Over it!
What are your initial reactions to Kelly's disqualification?
I was appalled not only because I too am Muslim and happen to wear the headscarf (or shall I say hood) as well, but because she is such an amazing runner and something so minor has hindered her dreams and goals. I thought the beauty of living in America was the diverse people and traditions. How come we can’t appreciate the fact that she is a devout Muslim and wears the head cover out of modesty?
2. What is your argument regarding the assertion that Kelly's disqualification constitutes religious discrimination? Does the disqualification of other athletes for non-religious reasons affect your response? If so, why or why not?
If the officials told Kelly to take her head cover off, that is sheer discrimination. Where in the rules does it say no head cover? And do these “rules” accommodate for the handicapped people who might be allergic to the sun so they must resort to hats and head covers? Do you think that there aren’t people like that? There are plenty. The disqualification of other athletes for non-religious reasons was not discrimination that was merely because the rule was only solid colors, but there was no rule that specifically said “no head covers”. If they would have told Kelly only solid colored head scarfs, she would have probably accommodated.
3. If you were to write an argumentative essay on this decision, what further information would you need to obtain to construct a more logos-based argument and counterargument?
I would like to know more about the dynamic of the rules. Also, if history shows that these rules are strictly abided by and implemented. I would also like to see if the athletes are well aware of these rules or if it was written in white ink on white paper on the contract that they signed prior to the race. I would also like to see if the rules accommodate religious and personal needs.
4. How effectively does Rogers defend his stance?
Not well at all. He gave the typical reasoning. He said “Every sport has uniform rules. It has nothing to do with religious discrimination. They were provided with several options that would have allowed her to run without taking off her head covering"”. What “several options” is Rogers talking about? Obviously if there we many other options that Kelly could resort to without taking off her headscarf, she would have.
5. What are some potential solutions to pursue regarding implementing track rules?
The officials need to take into consideration before setting thoughtless rules that infringed on religious and personal regulations. They should reformat their rules and regulations. They should embrace the diversity of this country along with the various religions by not making the uniforms too intricate.
6. If the single solid color rule was implemented so that judges could more easily distinguish the results of a close finish, would this change your response to Kelly's disqualification? Explain your answer.
It would in some aspects. The only aspect I am disputing is the fact that Kelly would have to remove her head scarf. Keeping the wardrobe a certain color to distinguish the results of a close finish sounds fair. If it helps determine a fair win then there is nothing wrong with that. As soon as it infringes on an individuals autonomy that is when it crosses the line.
I was appalled not only because I too am Muslim and happen to wear the headscarf (or shall I say hood) as well, but because she is such an amazing runner and something so minor has hindered her dreams and goals. I thought the beauty of living in America was the diverse people and traditions. How come we can’t appreciate the fact that she is a devout Muslim and wears the head cover out of modesty?
2. What is your argument regarding the assertion that Kelly's disqualification constitutes religious discrimination? Does the disqualification of other athletes for non-religious reasons affect your response? If so, why or why not?
If the officials told Kelly to take her head cover off, that is sheer discrimination. Where in the rules does it say no head cover? And do these “rules” accommodate for the handicapped people who might be allergic to the sun so they must resort to hats and head covers? Do you think that there aren’t people like that? There are plenty. The disqualification of other athletes for non-religious reasons was not discrimination that was merely because the rule was only solid colors, but there was no rule that specifically said “no head covers”. If they would have told Kelly only solid colored head scarfs, she would have probably accommodated.
3. If you were to write an argumentative essay on this decision, what further information would you need to obtain to construct a more logos-based argument and counterargument?
I would like to know more about the dynamic of the rules. Also, if history shows that these rules are strictly abided by and implemented. I would also like to see if the athletes are well aware of these rules or if it was written in white ink on white paper on the contract that they signed prior to the race. I would also like to see if the rules accommodate religious and personal needs.
4. How effectively does Rogers defend his stance?
Not well at all. He gave the typical reasoning. He said “Every sport has uniform rules. It has nothing to do with religious discrimination. They were provided with several options that would have allowed her to run without taking off her head covering"”. What “several options” is Rogers talking about? Obviously if there we many other options that Kelly could resort to without taking off her headscarf, she would have.
5. What are some potential solutions to pursue regarding implementing track rules?
The officials need to take into consideration before setting thoughtless rules that infringed on religious and personal regulations. They should reformat their rules and regulations. They should embrace the diversity of this country along with the various religions by not making the uniforms too intricate.
6. If the single solid color rule was implemented so that judges could more easily distinguish the results of a close finish, would this change your response to Kelly's disqualification? Explain your answer.
It would in some aspects. The only aspect I am disputing is the fact that Kelly would have to remove her head scarf. Keeping the wardrobe a certain color to distinguish the results of a close finish sounds fair. If it helps determine a fair win then there is nothing wrong with that. As soon as it infringes on an individuals autonomy that is when it crosses the line.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
My turn to shine
Shark Lunch
1) “This is not Funny”
2) My audience would be everyone who is living of all ages, shapes, and sizes
3) Although the tone of the image was humorous, I would not make a joke about this. I would use a more pathos-based tone solely because could you imagine a more brutal death than to be viciously eaten up by so easily by sharks because of the effects of global warming?
4) The introduction style would be presenting an overview of what exactly global warming is, and what will happen if it perpetuates.
5) I would love for this article to be published in Times Magazine along with the Washington Post. That way this topic can’t escape anybody!
Greenhouse Effect
6) “Don’t think this wont happen because it will!”
7) Everyone in general
8) The tone would be logos-driven because the effects of greenhouse gases are real and many studies can back it up. You don’t even need studies to prove it, you can just look at a map of the world 60 years ago and now, and then you will believe.
9) The intro style would be in second-person pronoun (you) solely because I want people to read my article and really feel like they need to be the ones to make the change and stop depending on others to do it. If they keep depending on others to make the first move then there will be a stagnate situation because everyone depends on the other.
10) This is such a serious topic that I would love for my article to be published in public school text books and in college texts.
KEY AND FORK
the title would be “Believe it or Not”
my targeted audience would be the elderly crowd because I know they would be more concerned about their health and what surprises the future holds for their children.
the tone of my essay would be humorous only because who would of thought that what you eat can effect greenhouse gas emissions?? And by making light of that, people will never forget the SERIOUSNESS of this topic and walk away with a good laugh then quickly say “my god who would have thought”
I would first start off by defining all the terms I would be using like “greenhouse gas emissions” just to insure that my audience understands precisely what I am talking about. Then I would present an overview of the issue I’m discussing. I want to shed light upon how important this topic is and what could happen.
I would like my essay to appear in the New York Times because almost all elderly people read that.
1) “This is not Funny”
2) My audience would be everyone who is living of all ages, shapes, and sizes
3) Although the tone of the image was humorous, I would not make a joke about this. I would use a more pathos-based tone solely because could you imagine a more brutal death than to be viciously eaten up by so easily by sharks because of the effects of global warming?
4) The introduction style would be presenting an overview of what exactly global warming is, and what will happen if it perpetuates.
5) I would love for this article to be published in Times Magazine along with the Washington Post. That way this topic can’t escape anybody!
Greenhouse Effect
6) “Don’t think this wont happen because it will!”
7) Everyone in general
8) The tone would be logos-driven because the effects of greenhouse gases are real and many studies can back it up. You don’t even need studies to prove it, you can just look at a map of the world 60 years ago and now, and then you will believe.
9) The intro style would be in second-person pronoun (you) solely because I want people to read my article and really feel like they need to be the ones to make the change and stop depending on others to do it. If they keep depending on others to make the first move then there will be a stagnate situation because everyone depends on the other.
10) This is such a serious topic that I would love for my article to be published in public school text books and in college texts.
KEY AND FORK
the title would be “Believe it or Not”
my targeted audience would be the elderly crowd because I know they would be more concerned about their health and what surprises the future holds for their children.
the tone of my essay would be humorous only because who would of thought that what you eat can effect greenhouse gas emissions?? And by making light of that, people will never forget the SERIOUSNESS of this topic and walk away with a good laugh then quickly say “my god who would have thought”
I would first start off by defining all the terms I would be using like “greenhouse gas emissions” just to insure that my audience understands precisely what I am talking about. Then I would present an overview of the issue I’m discussing. I want to shed light upon how important this topic is and what could happen.
I would like my essay to appear in the New York Times because almost all elderly people read that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)