The Human Cost of an Illiterate Society

          In the article "The Human Cost of an Illiterate society", Jonathan Kozol explains how people who are unable to read have problems with everyday situations. Those who are unable to read have problems with the simplest situations. Illiterate parents are unable to read to their children. If parents are unable to read a simple 5 year old book, they are certainly unable to read any kind of complicated documents, such as bills or contracts. Even jobs that dont require education do require reading skills. The reason that uneducated jobs require reading skills is for the employee to follow directions. Reading is very important, reading comes in handy when going to the store or when trying to read directions. Reading is very important even when someones life is in danger. For example when someone calls for an ambulance the first question asked is your location, being able to read the street name is the key to help the ambulance find your location. Kozol is trying to communicate that reading is the key for everyday life.
          The article "The Human Cost of an Illiterate society" was very interesting. It made me understand that reading is very important. I honestly didn't see reading as all that important. Maybe because I am able to read i was unaware that illiterates have it rough everyday, even when doing the grocery shopping. My parents are not very good readers, but are still able to read streets and signs. Kozol's article informed me that illiterates will always have problems with the simplest everyday tasks.
         

Postconviction DNA Testing Should Not be Encourage

       In the essay "Postconviction DNA Testing Should Not Be Encourage", Peter Rof believes that DNA testing should not be encouraged. Rof has a strong opinion that DNA testing is not always automatically true. Other evidence should be used as well to prove a case. To Rof reopening an old case because the science has changed is not a right. Reopening a case puts a doubt on people, which may increase over time. DNA may sometimes put more doubt than proof. To Peter Rof, DNA testing is not a very good piece of evidence because its not always true.


      At first i agreed with DNA testing, but Peter Rof's points made points that made me agree that DNA testing should be encouraged. DNA can be wrong many times. DNA testing can give false impression because a criminal may use gloves and someone else can be mistaken and put in jail. Also reopening an old case is very time consuming. Not only is reopening an old case time consuming, but also costs money. Rof's point to not encourage DNA testing are very strong that it made me really agree to not encourage DNA testing.

Postconviction DNA Testing Should Be Encouraged

      In the essay "Postconviction DNA Testing Should be Encouraged", Tim O'brien has a strong point of view about encouraging DNA testing. Many people are accused of crimes. Sometimes people are convicted when in reality they are innocent. Larry Youngblood was accused in 1988, of raping a child. He was sentence to to spend years in jail. In 2000, due to a DNA testing done in Tuscan Youngblod was proven innocent. There are many innocent men and women who are in jail. If DNA testing were done during investigations the results would be different. Many times because prosecutors resist to to reopen an old case, no DNA testing is done . O'Brien believes if DNA testing is done, many innocent people wouldnt be in jail.

     I agree with Tim O'Brien's opinion that DNA should be used to prove a case. DNA testing can be a very powerful piece of evidence that can save a person from jail. Maybe reopening an old case is time consuming but can help prove someone innocent. I do believe that DNA testing is important but I've learned that it may not always be so accurate. So when using DNA  testing, they should consider other evidence as well. 

America Must take Stronger Measures to hault Illegal Immigration

         In the essay "America Must take Stronger Measures to Halt Illegal Immigration" Micheal Scott has a very strong opinion that illegal aliens should be deported and kept off the US. Scott is outraged at the millions of dollars spent by tax payers each year for immigrants, He believes that enforcing the laws to get rid of illegal immigrants will get rid of a lot of problems in America. Closing the borders will end stress to the people who live near the border. They go through headaches because they find trash, property damage, and killed animals. By closing the borders and getting all the illegal aliens out, Scott believes it will end many problems. He doesnt care that Many Americans may be called racist as long as America improves. Scott says that its not true that Americans wont do the hardship job that illegal immigrants do. If immigrants are deported there will be an opportunity to raise the salary for those working hardship jobs. Scott claims if no action is taken to get rid of immigrants, America will go through a wage depression.

        When reading "America Must take Stronger Measures to Halt Illegal Immigration" I agreed with some of Scott's opinions. I do believe that when immigrants come to the United States illegal they should respect peoples property and not damage it. Because by immigrants damaging others properties, they are making a bad impression already and no legal citizen is going to want them in the US. I do believe that Scott may be a little racist and which is why he expresses himself so ruthless. Scott has his own opinions and even though many may not agree with him, his points are very strong. 

Im not willing to settle for crumbs

             In the essay “I’m not Willing to Settle for Crumbs” Kim Severson discusses that gay marriage should have equal marriage rights as people who marry the opposite sex. Kim Severson describes her own experiences about living with a gay couple. Kim is in love with Katia, her partner and wishes to have a traditional wedding someday. Because not every state in the United State legalizes gay marriage, Severson knows she cant be married legally in every state. As soon as a gay couple leaves the state they got married, their marriage is no longer legal. Severson hopes that someday same sex couples will have all the rights straight couples have. Same sex couples should have the same legal rights as opposite sex couples.
                I really liked the essay “I’m not Willing to Settle for Crumbs” because I believe same sex couples should have the rights to marry whoever they wish. In the United States we have the right of pursuit of happiness, which is why I don’t understand how gay people don’t get the right to pursuit their own happiness and marry who they wish. I believe its sad that gay people may never get the chance to experience a traditional wedding.

We are Training Our Kids to Kill

        In the essay "We are Training Our Kids to Kill" Dave Grossman speaks of how the media has an affect on children. Grossman believes that violent video games and TV has an impact on children. Children are being train to kill. Grossman is an expert in the field of "killology". He travels sharing his experiences, training medical, law enforcement, and US military personnel about the realities of war. Grossman informs them the strategies the military use while they training them to kill. He also explains how the media uses similar tactics to train children to kill, even though children don't know they are being trained to kill. Grossman mentions how many people don't like killing others, which is why they train them to kill and try to show them to like killing others. Grossman believes that the media has a great influence on how children become violent, and that they are being trained to kill.
       The essay "We are Training  Our Kids to Kill" had a very strong argument about how media has a strong influence on children. At first i really didn't believe the violence had much influence on children. But reading Grossman's essay it made me change my mind. Video games that have guns are training children to aim and fire. I did not see any harm in that before, but the fact is that video games with such violence encourages children to be violent. Even though children are killing fake people on a video game, they enjoy killing them and may find it natural and not wrong. Media is encouraging violence and children are learning to be violent.

How Bingeing became the new College Sport

              In the essay "How Bingeing became the New College Sport" Barrett Seaman claims that college students are abusing alcohol. Students from the ages of 18-20 abuse alcohol. Seaman mentions that "students are hospitalized- or worst yet, die from alcohol poisoning, which happens about 300 times each year." (491) Students abuse alcohol to the point of their own death. Seaman believes that tighter reinforcement, and the minimum drinking age of 21 is part of the problem. Having laws and reinforcements for drinking, makes drinking alcohol forbidden for student. Students love that drinking is forbidden and will go their way in order to defy their authority. Lowering the drinking age may be the solution. It is possible that students will abuse their freedom to drink at first, but students may learn to handle drinking like adults.

           I did not completely agree with Barrett Seaman's opinion to lower the drinking age. I do believe that students love drinking because it is forbidden to them. If college students are given the freedom to drink they will abuse it. Seaman believes that if they are giving the freedom to drink they will learn to handle drinking like adults. Many adults who drink become alcoholic. If students already abuse alcohol, i believe it will be worst if they are given the freedom to consume alcohol freely.