Abortion

In my women studies class, we talk about women’s rights and the pressures society puts on women. A common topic that is often brought up in my class is the discussion of abortion. This topic is very controversial. In my class it always seems to be that the people that raise their hand to speck either feel very strongly about one extreme or another. Yet abortion is not as simple as a yes or no answer. There are many other variables to this topic that make it complicate and hard to determine. For example if a mother wants to get an abortion, when is it acceptable for her to get it? At what time is an abortion no longer moral? These questions are just a few of the questions that make this topic so hard to determine. Many people feel very strongly for one side or another, and much of it has to do with your personal beliefs and values.

The Wikipedia definition of an abortion is the removal or expulsion of an embryo or fetus from the uterus, resulting in or causing by its death. Nowadays abortion is becoming a very heated topic. From all of the technology and medicine that is being developed it is easier now than ever to get an abortion.

In the abortion debate many women either side with the pro-choice movement or the pro-life movement. The pro-life movement believes that each woman should have the rights and privileges to do whatever she wants with her body. They believe that each woman’s situation is different, and it is only up to that individual to determine what the right thing to do is. They also believe that women should have access to safe and legal abortions, and should be protected from forced abortion. On the other hand people those that support pro-life believe that abortions should be against the law. They believe that a fetus or an embryo is a living human being, and deliberately killing a human being is wrong and unethical. They also oppose certain contraceptives such as hormonal contraceptives like ECP’s.

An abortion is a very private and serious topic. Yet I believe that every woman should have the right to decide what happens to her own body. Having a baby is a life altering decision, and I believe that if Congress passed a bill banning abortions than it would have an adverse effect on the safety of women in society. For example nowadays women can get an abortion safely from a doctor, but if the doctors are banned from performing abortion on women then it could cause some women to find other, more extreme and dangerous alternatives. I believe that if Congress were to ban abortions women would get illegal get abortions from phony physicians, and could result in serious health hazards to not only the mother, but the fetus as well.

Also I believe that it is unfair to have a congressman tell me what I can and can not do with my body. Every woman’s situation is different, and I believe that it is only right for each particular person to determine what is best for them. For example what if a woman was raped and then is impregnated by the man that raped her. If she wants to get an abortion is it wrong or unmoral? Many members of the pro-life movement would argue that the woman should give it up for adoption, yet that still does not solve all of the problems. Nowadays the world is extremely overpopulated, and the rates of children in foster care are increasing. And although I have never personally been in foster care, I have had people tell me that growing up in foster care is hard and lonely. The debate on abortion is very complicated and controversial, but I believe that every woman needs to make that choice for herself.

Stick It In Cheer

As a freshman the first thing that I realized when arriving here, was how many traditions Virginia Tech has. Football games are were many of these traditions are established and embedded into the Hokie Nation. As you enter the football stadium on a camp day, all you will see are people wearing orange and maroon from head to toe. The whole stadium is packed, and cheers are constantly being chanted. Girls are being thrown in the air, by groups of boys trying to imitate the number of points that the football team had scored. Keys are rattling and the “wave” is in full motion around the cheering crowds in the stadium. Yet recently there has been a major controversy about a cheer that is often chanted in Virginia Tech’s stadium.

The “stick it in” cheer has recently been under much scrutiny from the faculty and staff at Virginia Tech. Traditionally the cheer was chanted as Tech’s offense was within striking range of the end zone. The band and the cheerleaders would gyrate and dance along with the cheer, and it has become a famous cheer among many Virginia Tech fans. Yet because of the recent events that took place, many members of the administration believe that Virginia Tech is under a microscope, and any negative actions that take place are a representation of Virginia Tech.

The “Stick It In” cheer was created ten years ago, and was a pun that refers to the ‘stick’ for the drumline’s drumsticks. The administration no longer allows for the band to play this cheer, and the students at Virginia Tech are outraged. There is now a facebook group called “Save the Stick It In Cheer”. It was created by Marching Virginians member Greg Bringhurst, and already has over 2,500 members.

Personally I do not see what the big deal is. This cheer has been around for ten years, and until now the administration did not seem to have a problem with it. Nowadays I would think that a cheer like this would be more acceptable than it would have been ten years ago. For example nowadays, kids are exposed to scenes and images on television way earlier than they were ten years ago. Girls in music videos and magazines are more explicit than they were many years ago. But yet because of the incidents that happened this past April, the Virginia Tech administration seems to be overly concerned about the image of the school.

I do understand that this cheer is probably not the popular cheer among much of the administration, but what do they expect. The “stick it in” cheer is a tradition, and goes along with the whole experience of attending a football game. The football games are always very intense and exciting, and it is because of these traditions and cheers that students and alumni are able to join along and be spirited. It was stated that Lane Stadium was voted the best home field advantage in college football in 2005 by rivals.com. It was voted this, because of the enthusiasm and pride that Hokie fans have. The “Stick It In” cheer is more about spirit and tradition than it is about anything else.

Although the cheer is banned, students are beginning to fight against the administration to “bring the Stick It In cheer back”. If you walk around campus on a game day you will see many students wear the “Stick It In, Stick It In, Stick It In” t-shirts proudly along the campus.

Roadside Memorials Thoughts

The definition of death, “is the permanent end of the life of a biological organism”. Yet to most people death is a little more complicated than that. I began to think about death and mourning after I read the articles, “Roadside Memorials”. Although I am fortunate enough to never have personally grieved about a death related to a car accident, I do know people that have been permanently affected by these situations. In my hometown a group of kids that went to my high school were involved in a car accident, and one out of the four kids died.

It was the summer and they had all just graduated from the high school that I attended. They were preparing to head off to college, and it seemed that they had their whole lives in front of them. One of the girls was driving one night, after they had been drinking and doing drugs. The girl that was driving the car was the only one with a seat belt. It was late at night and they were driving on a curvy, narrow, and unlit road, when the driver swerved off the road and collided with a tree. The driver is the only one that died. The other three were severely injured, but survived.

This incident completely took my community by surprise. In the following days a memorial was put up to honor her death and the accident that took place there. A huge white cross was placed next to the tree where the car had collided, while pictures, flowers, cars, posters, banners, etc. surrounded the trunk of the tree. I never realized the other side of the argument about roadside memorials till I read this article. I can see the opposing side to the argument, but at the same time how do you tell someone that they are not allowed to put up a memorial of their loved one. I know that if someone I loved died in a car accident, I would immediately put up a memorial to honor them, where the accident occurred. And if someone told me that I had to take it down, I would probably be really offended. Yet from the opposing side if I had no relationship to the person that died, I can see how these memorials actually have an adverse effect on drivers. When the girl in my hometown died, I would constantly drive past her memorial. I would slow down and look at the latest items people had left or the signs people had made. I did not realize it then, but by doing that I could have potentially gotten into an accident myself. When I was driving I was more focused on the signs than I was on the road. I slowed down to get a better look, but I did not realize that I was putting myself and other cars in danger.

In the article it brought up a valid argument about how roadside memorials can actually be beneficial by showing, “people what can happen when you drink and do drugs and don’t pay attention to the road signs”. In the case of the girl from my high school her actions were impaired my alcohol and drugs. And although what happened was an awful incident, I think that it served as a wakeup call for of my peers. It really shocked my community, and sent a clear signal to everyone that attended my high school, that doing drugs and drinking alcohol is stupid.

Although I do not know the right answer to this controversy, I think that roadside memorials are extremely sensitive topics, and I believe that state officials need to deal with these memorials with great care. I think that no matter what state officials decide to do with these roadside memorials, they need to first tell the families, and make them aware of their decisions. Car accidents are extremely common, and although it is necessary to grieve, it is also important to think about the safety of the people in the community.

Roadside Memorials

The argument that is being presented in this article is that along it is important to mourn the death of someone killed in a car accident; memorials along public roads can sometimes have adverse effects. The author argues that by putting up religious memorials it, “use[s] public property to endorse religion”. And can also have an adverse effect, by becoming a traffic hazard for drivers observing the memorials on the road. The writer portrays his argument by using past examples of people that have been killed in car accidents, and memorials that have been put up in honor of them. He also describes some of the United States policies about memorials, and what actions do they take when they see a memorial along the highway. The author’s argument is clear and convincing. It was interesting for me to read this article, because I have never really thought about roadside memorials in this way before. I never really thought how a cross along the side of the road would affect other religions or distract other drivers. Yet after reading this article, I can see the negative sides to having a religious memorial along the side of a busy highway. Personally whenever I drive by a roadside memorial, I slow down to get a better look. However, when drivers stop paying attention to the road, the memorials can be hazardous and dangerous.

I liked how the authors were able to support his argument with facts, and was still able to appeal to the reader’s emotions. From this reading I also like how I was presented with three mini articles about the same topic. I was able to get three completely different perspectives on the same issue, and it allowed me to get background information before I read about present day policies.

I really like Jeff Burlew’s final sentence that said, “While I believe in the freedom of religious expression, I don’t think that [it] is fair to promote one religion over any other religion on public property”. I really like his final sentence, because I think that it clearly summarized the argument of his article.

Cell Phone Etiquette

The argument that the author was trying to make was that in today’s society cells phones are becoming a rude annoyance in public. The author believes that although cell phones definitely have a place in our busy society, people are abusing their convenience. Annie Nakao argued that people are using their cell phones everywhere, and usually are rude and do not consider the people around them. Annie Nakao makes her argument by giving specific examples in her daily life that she has experienced. By adding her own personal experience and annoyances, her argument is presented more effectively. Her opinion on the topic is very clear, and convincing.

Yet although I agreed with many of the arguments that she presented in her article I believe that she was exaggerating the moral effects it has on today’s society. I do believe that cell phones have majorly impacted today’s society, but I do not think that, “People abuse cell phones so much, it’s become a moral issue”. There is always an exception to the rule, and there have been occasions where people have been rudely talking on their cell phones, yet these situations are few and far between. It is unfair to put all the people that have cell phones in a category of being rude and disrespectful.

I was also very interested to read many of the statistics that were presented in the article about cell phone users. For example I was surprised to read that, “mostly women who now make up the majority of American cell phone users-are yet to be made in a country that lags far behind Europe and Asia in per-capita cell phone sales”. Yet I was not surprised to read that their studies showed that, “those who don’t own cell phones tend to be more annoyed” by cell phone disturbances than people who own cell phones.

Confessions of an Instant Messenger

The argument that was presented in the article suggested that college students spend too much time on facebook and IM. The writer argues that these are the modern forms of communication, and admits to its convenience. I liked how the writer added many of his own experiences to the article. By describing his own social skills as, “Actually, I shouldn’t speak for anybody else, but I admit that mine have certainty suffered” that makes his argument more convincing. I also liked how he was able to make his argument, and yet was still able to be witty and comical. I really thought that his story about a girl he meet at a party was funny, and relates to the argument he was trying to make.

I was really able to relate to a majority of the arguments that he made in his paper. Everyone that I know has a facebook, and my friends and I constantly use facebook and IM on a daily bases to communicate. I also related to the story that he shared about his experience he had at a party. Whenever I go to a party it is very common to get a friend request the next day on facebook. Additionally it is also very easy to go on facebook to find someone’s Instant Messenger screen name.

The conclusion to his article was also very witty and relevant. I liked how he compared these popular forms of conversation to drugs. He stated that these forms of communication are addicting, and in his last sentence he states that he needs just, “one last fix”. I believe that comparing a form of communication to drugs is a little exaggerated. From personal experience, I do agree that most people check their facebook messages and change their away messages several times a day, but I think that this situation is different for every people. I think that the author is generalizing all college students, and making it seem like a bigger deal than it really is.

Response to Essay

I changed topics while I was writing my rough draft, because I was I thought that I was going to be able to a better focused essay if I had a specific story to tell, rather than having a open ended topic about my mother. So although my story original was about my mother, it is now about my experience in sixth grade. My mother has definitely changed my life in many ways, but I could not think of one particular story that I should write about. This was the best idea I had to a life altering event that has taken place in my life. I really couldn’t think of anything else that had a bigger impact than that. I wish there was a story I could think of that was more exciting or eventful, than my sixth grade experience.

I agree with all of your feedback. I do believe that my first sentence could be strong. It is not the main focus of my essay, and I could probably re-word it much better. I think that my introduction paragraph can be more focused and organized, as well as the paragraph leading up to the climax.