Sexual Abuse, and the LAUSD's overreaction

As soon as you read the title of this article, you can notice something a little bit different about it. Saying that there's an overreaction to sexual abuse? Is that possible? Well according to this article about a recent sex abuse scandal at a public elementary school, it is. After one of the teachers was accused of multiple accounts of sexual abuse of his students, the school took obviously needed and sought after regulations to help the community feel protected. Some of these regulations did seem reasonable and justified, such as pulling all the normal teachers from the school and replacing them with substitutes while the investigation was going on. Now however, the USD has continued placing restrictions on teaching methods that resemble anything to do with the abuse. Blindfolding is no longer allowed in the school, despite the curriculum using blindfolds to teach children about the senses. Now kids can't experience the fun and educating lesson of making butter. Teachers have also been told to avoid comforting grieving children with a hug.

When I first saw this article, I wondered what the author could be thinking for obvious reasons. Overreaction isn't usually a word you hear when you talk about child abuse. But as I read the article, I realized that the author was right in his claim, banning blindfolding and butter-making isn't going to stop or prevent sexual abuse. All the USD actually did with these bans is made it impossible to abuse children in these specific ways. These new regulations will just make abusers more careful and witty with the methods they use. Ultimately all that's suffering here is the children's education, and that's something that's unacceptable.




http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-blindfold-20120306,0,6703148.story

Birth Control, Bishops, and Religious Authority

This article was interesting for several reasons. First, the author is a Catholic philosopher. That in and of itself is an interesting combination when you consider the topic being written about. This is a hot topic, and Gary uses statistics about polls from Catholic women on their views about birth control. According to the statistics 98% of Catholic women use birth control, and 78% think that it's perfectly alright to do so, despite the teachings of the Bishops. Even though the overwhelming percentage of Catholics share these views, the Church still teaches that birth control is morally wrong. This strong stance was highlighted by the backlash from the Obama administration's ruling that all Catholic hospitals and universities have to provide birth control to patients.

An interesting point Gutting brings up in the article is a question he poses: Who has the power to decide what the Catholic Church stands for and against? As he notes, no one has had a credible meeting with a divine being for thousands of years, so how can anyone possibly know what he/she feels about current issues that weren't around in the time of Christ? Do the Bishops get the power to blindly guess about these matters by default? Our government can't regulate the preachings of the Bishops because of separation between Church and state, so its up to each individual to decide for themselves what they believe.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/birth-control-and-the-challenge-to-divine-authority/?ref=opinion

Alabama's immigration law: Denying children food stamps

This article was about how Alabama's new law, HB 56, recently went into effect. HB 56 was aimed to push illegal immigrants to self-deport by things like making it illegal for illegal immigrants to do business transactions. The law hasn't quite worked out the way anyone planned; the illegal immigrants have just gone into hiding, and now all latino people, whether illegal or not, feel judged. One of the biggest problems   latinos face with this law is the fact that "business transactions" can be as simple as getting a library card. Imagine having to show proof of citizenship to go to the John Curtis Library and check out a book. This really demonstrates the extent of what these people are deprived of by this new law. Children of illegal immigrants, despite their immigration status, are denied food stamps by officials, also because of HB 56.

I think this article was mainly written to show the effect the law is having to the people who don't feel it's immediate impact. The fact that it effects people that are in America legally is horrible and wrong. I think this article was in part written to persuade the reader using pathos and logos that this law should go. Particularly persuasive is the use of quotes from latinos living in the area and feeling the full effects of HB 56, even if they are legal and shouldn't be.

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2012/02/alabamas-immigration-law-denying-children-food-stamps.html

Calculating gender equity's universal benefits

This article was interesting because it talked about sexism, which is something you don't hear much of these days. Or at least in Hanover you don't. A recent study conducted by Jonathan M. Kane and Janet E. Mertz on male vs. female math scores in different countries shows that when girls preform better in math, so do boys. Still, many people find reasons and excuses as to why this is. They're convinced that there is no way girls can be as smart in STEM subjects as boys; they say the countries that showed this statistic stacked the schools with exceptionally smart girls during the study. This study uses variety in culture and countries to give more diverse data, which still proves girls improvement doesn't negatively affect boys. So all the people who believe girls can't be as smart are disproven, and all the people concerned that girl's success will conflict with boy's success can stop worrying, because that was proven by the study as well.

The author uses mostly logos, and she spends some time in the article negating the possible arguments against the study. I think this aspect of the article is very necessary considering the seemingly large amount of people opposed to the study. This article also uses a bit of pathos, particularly to empower women to realize that they are equal to men intellectually despite what they might hear.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rivers-gender-equity-20120124,0,1897146.story

Florida's Burmese pythons: Will they make a meal out of (gulp) us?

Think back to 5th grade science class. Most people learned about ecosystems. One very specific thing I remember learning is that in an ecosystem, if one species goes the entire food web is thrown off balance. Similarly, if any new creatures are added to an ecosystem they can out-survive the pre-existing species and soon enough you're back to the same outcome. This is what's happening in the Glades, where massive Burmese pythons, descendants of abandoned house pets, have been preying on the local wildlife. Raccoon population, down 99.8%, bobcats down 87.5%, and now the huge snakes are even beginning to go after alligators.

I liked this article because the author didn't take the subject or the writing too seriously. The entire thing was written jokingly and the sarcasm on the part of the author was apparent after reading the title. The humor he uses takes a somewhat serious subject and makes it funny. He didn't seem to have a point, but the article was surprisingly informative and enjoyable to read.

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2012/01/florida-burmese-pythons-everglades-california-wayward-albatross-released.html

Tiger moms vs. "Bebe" moms

Now I'm sure all of you have heard to some degree or another about Amy Chua, otherwise known as "Tiger Mom." Last year her parenting book, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother was a hit, teaching American parents how belittlement and intimidation can raise better children. Now there's a new book out by Pamela Druckerman, Bringing up Bebe which tells about the nonchalant, laid back way French parents deal with their children. French parents teach their children patience from a very young age; they don't rush to pick their children up when they cry at night, and their kids eat only at mealtimes, which cuts back on the annoying crying children in restaurants.
       
This author didn't really seem to have an opinion on whether or not she thought this parenting style was more productive, though she did state she didn't think it would take. She believes Americans are content with suffering and enjoy self-loathing. She got very off topic at one point, going into the problems she thinks Americans have, but at the end of the article she came together to say that she believes the parenting books aren't very useful or well followed in America.

Faith-based tolerance on gay marriage

          This article was an interesting one, and one that I enjoyed. It seemed like the writer had a lot of the same ideas and believes as me, and it was nice to see someone writing about them for a change. Gay marriage is obviously a very controversial topic, and is becoming more and more evident in our society as of late. Recently Washington state's senate had the tough decision: should gay marriage be legal, or not? The bill ultimately got approved, though Washington isn't out of the woods yet. California was at the same place only three years ago, when suddenly the legalization was overturned by Proposition 8. Similarly in Washington many who oppose the bill plan on gathering signatures for the November ballot initiative. If this plan works, only opposite-sex marriage will be legal in Washington.
          This article was about the decision of one senate member to vote "yes" on the bill despite her strict Christian beliefs. Mary Margaret Haugens was a swing vote during the decision, which means her vote could've gone either way. This made her vote very valuable, and because of the stance she took, very courageous. She later blogged about how she made her decision, which was particularly difficult in her conservative state, saying " I do not believe it is my role to judge others, regardless of my personal beliefs... It's about respecting others, including people who may believe differently than I. It's about whether everyone has the same opportunities for love and companionship and family and security that I have enjoyed."  Personally, I think this reasoning makes her so accepting, and she makes very good points people should take away from it.
          I liked this article mostly for the point the author makes. If it had been any longer I probably wouldn't have liked it as much. It used logos when describing the senates decisions and possible plan of action for the opponents of the bill. It used pathos during the quotes from Mary Margaret, and while explaining her decision.