What age should teenagers be able to take on a lover? My first reason is I agree with the relationship of the two teenage lovers cited in the book”Huck Finn” that I read in class. Secondly if you’re deeply in love than you should go against your parents will, and last but not least what’s my definition of love. Also a lot of people have a different perspective of love.
I believe that “Huck Finn” is a very controversial book! In chapter 17 and 18 of the book their two teenage lovers and their names are buck and emmeline are I love, but their only 14 years old. I think they are in love and they should be able to what they want to do. Even though their parents are feuding amongst one another, doesn’t mean they can’t be in love. So if anybody feel some type of way about teenage love, then tell those to remember back when they were teenagers.
Do you think your parents should be able to choose who you love? I feel as though it shouldn’t an age limit on love. Also people are not going to stop loving each other because their parents said so. They will sneak out to do whatever it takes to be with the person they love. As a teenager, I think love can be at any age.
What’s your definition of love? Well I think that love is about sex, confidence, and trust. When a person actually get to know one another in a time period, and than they start to have trust in each other to be the best couple. Next they have social engagement and build up on their confidence. Finally they say that one another are all they wish for in a woman/man and they have sexual intercourse. The statement I just gave was my definition of love.
I just want to wrap everything up by saying don’t ever put one definition on love. Also my reasoning’s are first relationship between the two characters, second reason is don’t listen to your parents about love, and finally what the meaning of love. Plus love can come in all signs. For intense, love at first sight.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Should Huck Finn be taught a CHS!!
Huck Finn is the craziest book I read so far this yea1 the complications that I found in this book that I want to address is first the language. Secondly, the book shows kids the wrong things to do and last but least it has racial slurs in it. So I advise people to read this book and it should be taught in schools. Plus it’s a lesson learned.
A lot of people get frustrated when they read improper grammar! In the story Huck Finn shows poor grammar in the whole first chapter. For example "But per'aps it we keep them till they're ransomed." so if children See how they write in this book they might think it’s correct, but its not.
This book should be taught in schools. The children are doing all the wrong things and not the right. They are smoking/drinking underage. So this may influence younger children to do these things, but now and day’s children are smarter, and they would do the opposite. There’s a part in the book that indicates violence which says” if anybody done anything to anybody in the band, whichever boy was ordered to kill that person and his family must do it”. I feel as though violence is the answer to everything.
As being an African American we struggle from racism. This story is very racist because Huck Finn uses foul language. For intense Huck Finn uses the word “nigger”. That word indicated what Caucasian people use to call African American people when they wanted them to do something for them. Here’s another example from the book a lady name Mrs. Watson had a black slave name Jim to do what she told him.
In conclusion, I have 3 main key points that I’m focused on, so as language, showing kids the wrong thing to do and racism. People should read this book it’s a lesson learned. I think this story is real difficult to read and understand because of the sentence structure. How about you?
A lot of people get frustrated when they read improper grammar! In the story Huck Finn shows poor grammar in the whole first chapter. For example "But per'aps it we keep them till they're ransomed." so if children See how they write in this book they might think it’s correct, but its not.
This book should be taught in schools. The children are doing all the wrong things and not the right. They are smoking/drinking underage. So this may influence younger children to do these things, but now and day’s children are smarter, and they would do the opposite. There’s a part in the book that indicates violence which says” if anybody done anything to anybody in the band, whichever boy was ordered to kill that person and his family must do it”. I feel as though violence is the answer to everything.
As being an African American we struggle from racism. This story is very racist because Huck Finn uses foul language. For intense Huck Finn uses the word “nigger”. That word indicated what Caucasian people use to call African American people when they wanted them to do something for them. Here’s another example from the book a lady name Mrs. Watson had a black slave name Jim to do what she told him.
In conclusion, I have 3 main key points that I’m focused on, so as language, showing kids the wrong thing to do and racism. People should read this book it’s a lesson learned. I think this story is real difficult to read and understand because of the sentence structure. How about you?
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
GRADUATING 2011
Why do you think you'll be graduating in the year 2011? I know I'm graduating in the class of 2011 because these many reasons.my first reason is because I'm intellectual,secondly i stay out of trouble, and last but not least i want to be employed. Also it's very important to pay attention although grade school because you will and going to use your knowledge in everyday life experiences.
I think that I'm very intellectual because all through grade school i received magnificent grades.I will continue to strive towards my goal of academics.Furthermore i will not let anybody distract me on being a successful young black women.By becoming a teen statistic, and let people bring me down by their negative thoughts.That's why I'm going to stay focus, and stay out of trouble.
Don't let anyone bring you down by getting involved in all the negativity! See me, i don't tolerate that type of behavior and i won't.I have things to do in life instead of being disrespectful to adults and just people in general. another thing is why would you be going out in the streets starting trouble, and wasting your education, instead of giving it to others that would love to have the same opportunity as you.Plus, I don't have time for the non-sense because i want to be employed in life.
By the time i hit 18 years old, i want to be an successful young woman! I'm looking forwards to a career in becoming a lawyer, and forensic science, but in order for me to do that i have to meet all the criteria that need to be met to attend college.Meanwhile,i will do internships for law firms, and crime scenes.Also colleges will look at history of my schools, and the high school i go to is based on student government.In addition, i will have a better chance of getting a job because i will have at least some experience in those fields required.
I know i will be graduating in the year 2011 ,and my reasons are because I'm intellectual, i stay out of trouble,and i want to be employed.Also now and days government expect children to fail in life,but I'm going to be one less because I'm going to show them by appearances and etc. Plus, i don't let anyone put me down and I'm going to strive forward to my goals until they are reached.
Dear Reader,
I chose this piece graduating in the year 2011 because i really meas something,and i liked this essay out of one other.I think you should grade me on these three thing such as, sentence structure because my sentences are strong sentences,details because i specifically point out what im going to be talking about in the paper, and transitions because i have more than 5 and i used them correctly.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
**NANO TECHNOLOGY(LAWYER)**
In my physical science class we had to be in a group of 3 for our project, and the project is very similar to our constitution class because in that class it was an i chip that was new to technology and you could do things like access the Internet using the mind, yet in the stimulation it violated peoples rights as citizens, and everybody was against the i chip in constitution class. So, in science we had to be for the ichip, and within your group you had to take the positions of an marketing rep.,Bio-medical engineer, and lawyer. So i took they job as the lawyer and my job was to make sure they have a patent for the product,it's totally safe, include the rights that citizens have from the u.s constitution, and etc. Here's below is how i represented my company.
Today I will be representing the company “Brain of the future”. They just invented a new I Chip. It’s not the one from the Ideal society. The one from the ideal society was unconstitutional because the government could track your destination, and read your thoughts. Plus, it violated peoples 4th amendment rights that stated “The right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”.
The company knows that their product is safe, because in order for the product to get put on the market it has to go through the FDA (food, drug, administrations), and they have to inspect the product than tell them if it’s safe enough to be put on the market. It also has to go through human resources saying its No Health risk pertaining to the product. Plus, in article II the government must let it pass through the department of human’s health before during anything else.
Also human resources gave the company an patent for there product and one of the patents says the version of the patent is an optional function of “track” or “no track”, which was upholding peoples 9th amendment right that states “The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. So I’m telling you to go out and buy the ichip “center of science” at your local stores like best buy, Amazon online, and the company store “Brain of the future”. “The center of science” ichip only runs about $2, 060, but it comes with benefits like $100 gift certificate from clothing stores(twice a month), and free car insurance(if you have an vehicle.)
Whoever gets the “center of science” ichip will have to sign a waiver stating that the product is totally safe and there are no side effects pertaining to the ichip. In the first waiver it states there can be a tracking device but it only can be used for “future references in case the person gets a disease where though they can’t remember anything.” There is also another waiver that says it has “no tracking device inserted in the ichip” and the “government can’t tap inside the human mind and read its thoughts anytime they feel like It.” In result it has been pass by the government, FDA, and the human resources.
I feel as though the I Chip is very important because it can be used for many good reasons. For one it makes human advantages greater by controlling things by the brain. Plus, the people with the I chips have more advantages because they can work much faster than the humans without it. Plus, it’s just something new in technology for people to try out.
The reason my company thinks our ichip is good for the society is because in the ideal society their ichip was created for all wrong reasons like tapping into people brains anytime they liked, and just control their mines. However, our ichip is used for tracking down lost children, expand the human knowledge, and just to experiment something new to our technology. Plus, the people with the I chips have more advantages for better jobs because they can work much faster than the human beings without one.
Today I will be representing the company “Brain of the future”. They just invented a new I Chip. It’s not the one from the Ideal society. The one from the ideal society was unconstitutional because the government could track your destination, and read your thoughts. Plus, it violated peoples 4th amendment rights that stated “The right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”.
The company knows that their product is safe, because in order for the product to get put on the market it has to go through the FDA (food, drug, administrations), and they have to inspect the product than tell them if it’s safe enough to be put on the market. It also has to go through human resources saying its No Health risk pertaining to the product. Plus, in article II the government must let it pass through the department of human’s health before during anything else.
Also human resources gave the company an patent for there product and one of the patents says the version of the patent is an optional function of “track” or “no track”, which was upholding peoples 9th amendment right that states “The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. So I’m telling you to go out and buy the ichip “center of science” at your local stores like best buy, Amazon online, and the company store “Brain of the future”. “The center of science” ichip only runs about $2, 060, but it comes with benefits like $100 gift certificate from clothing stores(twice a month), and free car insurance(if you have an vehicle.)
Whoever gets the “center of science” ichip will have to sign a waiver stating that the product is totally safe and there are no side effects pertaining to the ichip. In the first waiver it states there can be a tracking device but it only can be used for “future references in case the person gets a disease where though they can’t remember anything.” There is also another waiver that says it has “no tracking device inserted in the ichip” and the “government can’t tap inside the human mind and read its thoughts anytime they feel like It.” In result it has been pass by the government, FDA, and the human resources.
I feel as though the I Chip is very important because it can be used for many good reasons. For one it makes human advantages greater by controlling things by the brain. Plus, the people with the I chips have more advantages because they can work much faster than the humans without it. Plus, it’s just something new in technology for people to try out.
The reason my company thinks our ichip is good for the society is because in the ideal society their ichip was created for all wrong reasons like tapping into people brains anytime they liked, and just control their mines. However, our ichip is used for tracking down lost children, expand the human knowledge, and just to experiment something new to our technology. Plus, the people with the I chips have more advantages for better jobs because they can work much faster than the human beings without one.
POG II~~Does the constitution effectively resolve conflicts?~~
The essay i chose to be graded on was my philosophy of government II, which indicates Does the constitution effectively resolve conflicts? I think you should grade me on my sentence structure, and my introduction paragraph because i met all the criteria that Mr.Romero gave me;which is my English teacher. so, now I'm asking you to give me an fair grade on my paper,and not what u think i should get for trying.Plus, i have reviewed my essay plenty of times, and multiple classmates.
Philosophy of Government II- Does the constitution effectively resolve conflicts?
My original POG stated that government is necessary, but it should be limitations, so “We the People” still have the freedom of speech; which contains to the first amendment. The U.S constitution does effectively resolve conflicts because during the ideal society, Terrorist “Freedom Fight Club” blew up the NCC (National Constitution Center), and the congress agreed with the president giving them the death penalty, Congress makes laws that can prohibit and prevent such actions as protecting the citizens, and President Khalia said nobody could wear the insignia of the Freedom Fight Club. Also in the ideal society I was apart of the executive branch and we wanted to alter the ichip, but I feel as though the constitution does effectively protects individual liberties because it protects Americans freedom of speech, and limits to those who wish to harm our economy.
All of our history world history washed away! Terrorist “freedom Fight Club” blew up the NCC, and congress agreed with the president to giving them the death penalty. Which, I really didn’t understand because Justice Kelly didn’t have any evidence about the terrorist trying to blow up the building. Plus, using the powers from the constitution in Article3; section3 states “Treason against the U.S, shall consists only in levying war against them or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or on confession in open court.” In result of the death penalty it never really went through with the procedure because the fight club didn’t have a court hearing, and the government couldn’t go against their rights. That’s why laws exist now today.
Does the government follow laws properly? Congress makes laws that can prohibit and prevent such actions as protecting citizens. However, the actions taking by the senates was to make a bill stating that no one is allowed to make a device that have a tracking device that have a tracking because it would be violating the citizens privacy and according to Amendment IV and Article 1;section 7.In order for a bill to occur the congress must make the bill first ,then the president has to sign and approve it, next the president can make the decision to whether veto the bill, and if she does then the congress could vote on the bill again. In comparison the bill got passed, which representatives Bishop and Matthews called a press conference to discuss the content of the new bill. Should there be different treatments for different branches of the government?
A president has a very sophisticated job! President Khalia said nobody could wear the insignia of the freedom fight club. As the result of, all Americans of the U.S have rights, and they shouldn't be abused by anyone. Then the president tried to ban the fight club from wearing their insignia. So, she said that anyone wearing the insignia will be placed in jail. People begin to get upset; so they started protesting, and the executive branch was pissed off so they responded by accosting dissenters. In this situation would the citizens get their constitutional rights employ by the courts to define the 1st amendment clearly? I think that the government treats human beings differently if their not on their level.
I feel as though the constitution does effectively protect individual liberties because it protects Americans freedom of speech, and limits those who wish to harm our country. For intense, terrorist “fight club” blew up the NCC, congress makes laws that can prohibit and prevent such actions as protecting the citizens, and president Khalia said somebody could wear the insignia of the fight club. In the constitution it simply lays out the powers of the judicial and legislative, which checks the powers of the executive branch. That’s why I’m glad that there is a U.S constitution to back the citizens up.
Philosophy of Government II- Does the constitution effectively resolve conflicts?
My original POG stated that government is necessary, but it should be limitations, so “We the People” still have the freedom of speech; which contains to the first amendment. The U.S constitution does effectively resolve conflicts because during the ideal society, Terrorist “Freedom Fight Club” blew up the NCC (National Constitution Center), and the congress agreed with the president giving them the death penalty, Congress makes laws that can prohibit and prevent such actions as protecting the citizens, and President Khalia said nobody could wear the insignia of the Freedom Fight Club. Also in the ideal society I was apart of the executive branch and we wanted to alter the ichip, but I feel as though the constitution does effectively protects individual liberties because it protects Americans freedom of speech, and limits to those who wish to harm our economy.
All of our history world history washed away! Terrorist “freedom Fight Club” blew up the NCC, and congress agreed with the president to giving them the death penalty. Which, I really didn’t understand because Justice Kelly didn’t have any evidence about the terrorist trying to blow up the building. Plus, using the powers from the constitution in Article3; section3 states “Treason against the U.S, shall consists only in levying war against them or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or on confession in open court.” In result of the death penalty it never really went through with the procedure because the fight club didn’t have a court hearing, and the government couldn’t go against their rights. That’s why laws exist now today.
Does the government follow laws properly? Congress makes laws that can prohibit and prevent such actions as protecting citizens. However, the actions taking by the senates was to make a bill stating that no one is allowed to make a device that have a tracking device that have a tracking because it would be violating the citizens privacy and according to Amendment IV and Article 1;section 7.In order for a bill to occur the congress must make the bill first ,then the president has to sign and approve it, next the president can make the decision to whether veto the bill, and if she does then the congress could vote on the bill again. In comparison the bill got passed, which representatives Bishop and Matthews called a press conference to discuss the content of the new bill. Should there be different treatments for different branches of the government?
A president has a very sophisticated job! President Khalia said nobody could wear the insignia of the freedom fight club. As the result of, all Americans of the U.S have rights, and they shouldn't be abused by anyone. Then the president tried to ban the fight club from wearing their insignia. So, she said that anyone wearing the insignia will be placed in jail. People begin to get upset; so they started protesting, and the executive branch was pissed off so they responded by accosting dissenters. In this situation would the citizens get their constitutional rights employ by the courts to define the 1st amendment clearly? I think that the government treats human beings differently if their not on their level.
I feel as though the constitution does effectively protect individual liberties because it protects Americans freedom of speech, and limits those who wish to harm our country. For intense, terrorist “fight club” blew up the NCC, congress makes laws that can prohibit and prevent such actions as protecting the citizens, and president Khalia said somebody could wear the insignia of the fight club. In the constitution it simply lays out the powers of the judicial and legislative, which checks the powers of the executive branch. That’s why I’m glad that there is a U.S constitution to back the citizens up.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Censorship of blocking websites
Dear readers,
I think in a way certain websites should be censored and some shouldn't. I think that websites should be censored because now and days there are a lot of perverts online; They try to get people, mostly children to come and meet them strange places where there is not a lot of people to interact amongst one another. In addiction, there should be an parental block on websites for younger children, so they won't give anyone any information about where they live, what school they go to, and etc. That's just my opinion about what I think of the whole situation. So I’m going to leave you readers with a question, DO YOU THINK CERTAIN WEBSITES SHOULD BE BLOCK?
I think in a way certain websites should be censored and some shouldn't. I think that websites should be censored because now and days there are a lot of perverts online; They try to get people, mostly children to come and meet them strange places where there is not a lot of people to interact amongst one another. In addiction, there should be an parental block on websites for younger children, so they won't give anyone any information about where they live, what school they go to, and etc. That's just my opinion about what I think of the whole situation. So I’m going to leave you readers with a question, DO YOU THINK CERTAIN WEBSITES SHOULD BE BLOCK?
~~Philosophie of Government~~
I learned a lot during my philosophie of government project. I learned that their are two main philosophers and they are john locke and thomas hobbes, but both of the philosophers address the characteristics of human beings and natural law. Hobbes states that humans beings life are solitary,poor,nasty, and brutish, and locke believes that people are willing to unite unfer the form of government and they should perserve their lives,liberities, and there properties.Also i learned that some human beings state Thomas Hobbes theory, but mostly they state john locke theory.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
