Title: Hijack
“Is it really time for me to die now?” I am sure this question floats through the mind of any innocent victim of terrorism. You never want to be the deciding factor as to whether some one lives or dies but in the situation of terrorism losing a smaller amount of life is better than risking the life of billions. Would I personally, if the decision was left to me, decide to give our United States criminals in exchange for that of terror victims, I would not. In the greater scheme of things to give into terrorist, even one time, would likely cause more destruction to United States property, more wars, and more loss of American life.
Looking at the where the Twin Towers once stood would only confirm my decision not to give in to terrorist. The amount of destruction caused to the heart of the United States on that faithful day is inconceivable. There are reasons that we have policies such as that of counterterrorism and that’s because policies such as these keeps us a country just a little safer. I can only imagine the amount of damage that could be caused on United Stated soil if we were to give in to terrorist every time they took a hostage and demanded something in return. In my opinion it all goes back to a saying we have all heard before, “If you let them get away with it once, they will do it again”.
As for the wars that we have overseas, can you imagine them being here? We will always have war just hopefully not in the United States. I believe this would be one of the thoughts of mine in making the decision not to save a plane full of human lives in exchange for criminals. Not only would I be allowing the terrorist to get away with such nonsense but I would be handing over bad guys to the bad guys! That just does not make sense in a world where we strive on our countries laws.
In any term that you choose to look at this particular situation lives would be lost. Even if I was to give into my beliefs and give into terrorism eventually it would come back around to haunt me. I would have to take into account that if I did trade our criminals for the hostages on the plane the terrorist would likely come back with even greater demands. Who’s to say that they would not kill the hostage no matter what I chose to do. I would however have heartfelt sorrow for the victims and even for the terrorist who, for some reason, have chosen to do something so horrible.
To let the United States become vulnerable to terrorism is something I could not allow myself to do. We as citizens of the U.S. tend to say this is a free country but people loose their lives everyday so that we can have the freedom to live out lives the way that we choose. In order for this to remain a free country there are tough decisions to be made daily. My decision would be based upon saving as many lives as possible and I can not see how giving into terrorist would save lives in the long run.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
I Choose Morals
Title: Right or Wrong
A relativist believes that everyone’s points of view are equal; for me, this is not the case. Throughout my life, my decisions have always been based upon my morals and the way that I view different situations. To be a relativist is just not the right decision for me. Therefore, I am more of a moral absolutist. Cases such of such as those of child sex predators, Elizabeth Smart, and Andrea Yates, are all the more convincing in my decision not to be a relativist.
Child sex predators are one of the many reasons I believe in my morals. I can not, in any sense, bring myself to believe that it is okay to take advantage of a child. Obviously, I am not the only human being that feels this same way. Recently, John Walsh helped to pass the Adam Walsh Protect Act in memory of his son, who was murdered by a child predator. This act will help to protect our nation’s children from violent sex crimes. Just one more reason I can appreciate being a moral absolutist.
The case of Elizabeth Smart is another good example of the views I have. While reading the book, “Bringing Elizabeth Home”, I was shocked to learn that Elizabeth’ captors actually thought that the crime they were committing was for God. The captors held Elizabeth for many months and even changed her name. According to my reading a relativist would have been more open to the ideas of Elizabeth Smarts captors. This due to the fact they believed in what they were doing and that it was for God. In my opinion, God or not kidnapping is not morally correct.
Finally, there is the case of Andrea Yates; though it was a little different it was still not morally sound. In this case Mrs. Yates murdered all of her children by drowning them. In court, the deaths of her children were blamed on post-partum depression. The idea of this disease is that new mothers often fell depressed and overwhelmed. I do believe that women suffer from this post-partum depression but not every woman suffering from this disease murders their children. Take the case of Brooke Shields, she chose to seek help and it all worked out for her.
Morals for me will always prevail, in any decision that I am forced to make. I would like to think that I am a fair person but in situations as those above it makes it hard. Was it fair for any of these children to go through what they suffered? Not to me. I am happy with my choice to be a moral absolutist. It is the right decision for me.
A relativist believes that everyone’s points of view are equal; for me, this is not the case. Throughout my life, my decisions have always been based upon my morals and the way that I view different situations. To be a relativist is just not the right decision for me. Therefore, I am more of a moral absolutist. Cases such of such as those of child sex predators, Elizabeth Smart, and Andrea Yates, are all the more convincing in my decision not to be a relativist.
Child sex predators are one of the many reasons I believe in my morals. I can not, in any sense, bring myself to believe that it is okay to take advantage of a child. Obviously, I am not the only human being that feels this same way. Recently, John Walsh helped to pass the Adam Walsh Protect Act in memory of his son, who was murdered by a child predator. This act will help to protect our nation’s children from violent sex crimes. Just one more reason I can appreciate being a moral absolutist.
The case of Elizabeth Smart is another good example of the views I have. While reading the book, “Bringing Elizabeth Home”, I was shocked to learn that Elizabeth’ captors actually thought that the crime they were committing was for God. The captors held Elizabeth for many months and even changed her name. According to my reading a relativist would have been more open to the ideas of Elizabeth Smarts captors. This due to the fact they believed in what they were doing and that it was for God. In my opinion, God or not kidnapping is not morally correct.
Finally, there is the case of Andrea Yates; though it was a little different it was still not morally sound. In this case Mrs. Yates murdered all of her children by drowning them. In court, the deaths of her children were blamed on post-partum depression. The idea of this disease is that new mothers often fell depressed and overwhelmed. I do believe that women suffer from this post-partum depression but not every woman suffering from this disease murders their children. Take the case of Brooke Shields, she chose to seek help and it all worked out for her.
Morals for me will always prevail, in any decision that I am forced to make. I would like to think that I am a fair person but in situations as those above it makes it hard. Was it fair for any of these children to go through what they suffered? Not to me. I am happy with my choice to be a moral absolutist. It is the right decision for me.
Monday, January 15, 2007
The World As I See It
Topic: Perception
Knowledge of ones self, is a power that I feel is very strong. Evidently, from what I have learned Socrates felt the same way. Though, Gorgias had some of the same ideas he also had some incredibly different beliefs. I happen to find the beliefs of Gorgias a little more interesting that those of Socrates. With that said this is the way I see the beliefs of the certain sophist in today's world.
Gorgias believed that persuasion was of the highest importance and greatest value. As a child, when you are told "No", about anything that you may want at the time you usually begin with the more than common "I will do anything, even clean my room". At this point, you have already began to learn the power of persuasion. I happen to agree with the sophist Gorgias for a multitude of reasons. One of those reason being that persuasion, if you think about it, is used on a daily basis in the United States. It was at the root of George W. Bushes election into presidency and all the presidents before him. President Bush has by far not been my favorite electoral candidate but somehow, he convinced me through all of his speeches, that I should vote for him. In order to be elected all candidates of any electoral race have to give us reasons on why we should give them our vote thus, the power of persuasion.
I also feel that we are subjective to the beliefs of our parents and those who closely surround us. For instance, I like my mother was raised in a baptist church with baptist beliefs. My husband on the other hand was raised in a catholic church with catholic beliefs. Changing your beliefs to another persons, is not as easy as it may seem. This is where I feel I am most subjective especially to the beliefs of my family. Gorgias argued that only being exist. Could this possibly mean that there is no reason to believe in religion? If that which most of us know as God does not exist, then what is the point of religion at all?
The important thought to remember is that Gorgas, Socrates, and all great sophist never agreed about all of the same ideas. This is what makes each of them stand out in history. I am sure the same could be said for you and I because we probably do not agree about all the same beliefs. This is what makes the world so interesting for if we agreed on everything in my opinion it would be and extremely boring world.
Knowledge of ones self, is a power that I feel is very strong. Evidently, from what I have learned Socrates felt the same way. Though, Gorgias had some of the same ideas he also had some incredibly different beliefs. I happen to find the beliefs of Gorgias a little more interesting that those of Socrates. With that said this is the way I see the beliefs of the certain sophist in today's world.
Gorgias believed that persuasion was of the highest importance and greatest value. As a child, when you are told "No", about anything that you may want at the time you usually begin with the more than common "I will do anything, even clean my room". At this point, you have already began to learn the power of persuasion. I happen to agree with the sophist Gorgias for a multitude of reasons. One of those reason being that persuasion, if you think about it, is used on a daily basis in the United States. It was at the root of George W. Bushes election into presidency and all the presidents before him. President Bush has by far not been my favorite electoral candidate but somehow, he convinced me through all of his speeches, that I should vote for him. In order to be elected all candidates of any electoral race have to give us reasons on why we should give them our vote thus, the power of persuasion.
I also feel that we are subjective to the beliefs of our parents and those who closely surround us. For instance, I like my mother was raised in a baptist church with baptist beliefs. My husband on the other hand was raised in a catholic church with catholic beliefs. Changing your beliefs to another persons, is not as easy as it may seem. This is where I feel I am most subjective especially to the beliefs of my family. Gorgias argued that only being exist. Could this possibly mean that there is no reason to believe in religion? If that which most of us know as God does not exist, then what is the point of religion at all?
The important thought to remember is that Gorgas, Socrates, and all great sophist never agreed about all of the same ideas. This is what makes each of them stand out in history. I am sure the same could be said for you and I because we probably do not agree about all the same beliefs. This is what makes the world so interesting for if we agreed on everything in my opinion it would be and extremely boring world.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
All About Me
My Name is Brandi, I am 23 years old. I have been married for two years to my wonderful husband Chris. Chris and I live in Bonaire, with our two Siamese cats and a spoiled rotten Yorkshire terrier. I guess you could say that we are stationed here but I grew up in Macon most of my life. I work at the Enlisted Club on base part-time in the bingo program. Working in the program has been one of the best jobs I have every had. My favorite thing in life is my quarter horse, Lightning. When I am not at school, studying, or at work you can usually find me at the barn. It is one of my favorite places to be. I love school but, I am a little obsessive-compulsive about my grades. When I truly want something I strive for it and college is one of those things I truly want. Hanging a diploma on my wall will be one of the greatest days in my life!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
