Sunday, October 12, 2014

‘Everybody that Plays Frisbee Golf Smokes Weed’

 I was really hoping to avoid having any of my articles originate from social media. However, I was perusing my Facebook news feed when I came across this little beauty. The title alone was just too good to pass up. Whotv13 in Iowa reported that a police officer attempted to search a vehicle he had pulled over. After confirming that the motorist had been playing Frisbee golf he asked "why is it that everybody that plays Frisbee golf smokes weed?" The officer was attempting to find weed in the car based on this assumption.

I think we would all agree that the police officer has made a hasty generalization here, lumping all Frisbee golf players into one category. The Story reports that after the officer posed the question cited above, the motorist said "“No, it’s not everybody,” Then, that officer responds, “It’s everybody, man. You can’t tell me you never smoked weed,” This is similar to the example Prof. Young has used that all Mormons are polygamist.

As we have all learned over the last 3 weeks, there are always 2 sides to every story. Every morning, It seems like I get stopped by the same red light on my way to work. I know it doesn't happen every time but it has happened enough that it causes me to believe that it never fails, no matter what, I get stopped by it. This may be what has happened to this particular officer. For some strange reason, some or even most of those who have played Frisbee golf at that particular location have also been found to use drugs. Maybe his experience with one or two individuals has led him to believe that there is a correlation between the two. I don't know, I am of course speculating here. Whatever the case may be, it is ridiculous for the officer to make such an assumption and use that as a reason to search this individual's car. The police department has since issued an apology statement on behalf of the officer.

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Feds Wonder Why Fat Girls Can’t Get Dates

On the way home from work I was listening to a the radio when I thought to myself  "my time could probably be better spent, maybe I should peruse the AM dial and see if I can find a story for my next assignment." After scanning the dial for a few minutes and hearing several news reports, I stumbled upon a radio show hosted by two guys who were talking about a report from The Washington Free Beacon. The piece was about how the National Institute of Health (NIH) was awarded almost a half a million dollar grant to perform a study as to why obese adolescent girls have a hard time getting dates. At first, I found this story to be a little silly but I was also intrigued to read about some of the findings of the study. After reading the article, I realized that the title of may have a little misleading. The article was no so much about dating as it was about the sexual behavior of obese vs. non-obese adolescent girls.







The NIH claims that overwhelming evidence proves that "obese adolescent girls engage in more sexual risk taking behaviors compared to non-obese girls." Not using a condom would be an example. The purpose for the additional funding and study is to attempt to get behind why this is. These studies have been overseen by Dr. Aletha Akers, an assistant professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences at Magee-Womens Research Institute. These are not the only funds she has received. Between 2011 and 2012, Akers received $359.417 to study how an adolescent’s weight affects their sexual behavior. I question the facts she was able to gain or not gain from the initial study that warranted additional government funds. The NIH claims that the reason this is beneficial to public health is because "the results could be used for sexual risk-reduction interventions and sexual negotiation skills building programs."






 I applaud Akers' argument that these studies will be able to help explain why obese adolescents may have a higher rate of sexual risk taking than non obese girls. Hopefully she will do some good with the results of the study. Especially in a world that continues to objectify women and encourage promiscuity and immorality. However, I do not think the federal government should be spending money on them. For one, this in not government's place. Two, with the national deficit sky-rocketing, I think we would be better served by not spending money on these types of studies. If this exists, what other types of things out there are being funded by federal resources and how many of them could be eliminated?

Do Professional Athletes Really "Deserve" Every Penny They Make?



Today in America a great debate exists whether or not those in seemingly unimportant professions such as professional athletes "deserve" their high salaries. There is no question that many athletes make a fortune and do it in a short period of time.

According to sportsinteraction.com, online sports betting site, and as reported on the Huffington Post, the average salary of professional athletes is far from average. For example, the average NBA salary is $5.15 million over 4.8 years totaling $24.7 million. The average for MLB athletes is $3.2 million over 5.6 years totaling $17.9 million, followed by NHL, NFL, and MLS salraries respectively.

The economic diamond-water paradox analyzes that while diamonds, or something that cannot sustain life, can be held in such high regard, water, or a necessity can be purchased cheaply. Following this model, many argue that professional athletes contribute little to society and therefore should make less than teachers, policemen, or physicians.

Professional athletes make high salaries because people with their skills are scarce. The supply and demand for people in various occupations determines the salaries in question—not the “importance” of the job to society.  Why then, do athletes make so much, is it fair and do they deserve it?

There are a handful of players in professional sports we refer to as super stars. Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, and Alex Rodriguez just to name a few . In other words, there are some that excel over and above their peers. In most cases, these individuals make more than the average player and their salary is usually in proportion to what they contribute to the team or organization- not just in athletic ability, but monetary draw as well. Many team owners get huge returns on these players through the ticket and merchandise sales they generate.  This is not the norm. Most players are not worth their salaries and do not deserve what they make.

Some definitions to consider: The National Basketball Association and Major League Baseball have guaranteed contracts. This means, players are paid what they sign for regardless of performance or missed games due to injury. In the National Football League, there are no guaranteed contracts but the signing bonuses or an initial payment for signing a contract with the team are guaranteed. In this way, NFL players can make hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars before playing a single down. In professional sports, a salary cap is an agreement or rule that places a limit on the amount of money that a team can spend on player salaries. The limit exists as a per-player limit or a total limit for the team's roster, or both. Several sports leagues have implemented salary caps, both as a method of keeping overall costs down, and to ensure parity between teams so wealthy teams cannot entrench dominance by signing many more top players than their rivals. In the NFL, if a player is released for any reason, they do not have to pay that player the remainder of that contract. However, that money still counts against that team.

There is an epidemic that exists among many people both inside and outside of sports that high payed professional athletes have a sense of entitlement. In a recent ESPN Perspectives radio program, host Prim Siripipat, interviewed a number of people in the sports industry on the entitlement of athletes. Dr. Greg Dale, a sports psychologist at Duke University, argues that this sense of entitlement starts at a young age as athletes become popular because of their talents on the field. Dale says that this encourages their since of entitlement because greater talent equals greater tolerance. In other words, misconduct or bad grades are more likely to be overlooked if someone is popular due to their talents on the field.

This is most prevalent in collegiate sports. For many division I schools, major football, and basketball programs are the biggest money generator for each institution. Because this is the case, colleges want nothing to get in the way of this steady stream of revenue. In a recent CNN investigation, entrance exam  scores for football and basketball players from 37 public universities across the country were petitioned. 21 of the schools cooperated. Some that did not, said they would submit the records "after" football season had ended. The results proved that 10% of the athletes read at or near a 3rd grade level. One of the universities that received scrutiny was the University of North Carolina. UNC academic counselor Mary Willingham went through test scores over an 8 year period from 2004-2012. She found that 25% of athletes did not have the skills to take classes at a community college, let alone a university. She found that 8% read below a 4th grade level and 60% were between a 4th and 8th grade level. CNN also looked into the data Willingham discovered and found that many players at UNC were enrolled in classes that required little or no work. In the 1960's my father was in a class at Weber College in Ogden, Utah. The school had a great basketball team that year and ESPN was there to do a story on them. When the cameras came in the classroom where a couple of the star athletes were, before the cameras rolled, a textbook and pencil had to be placed on the desk to create the illusion that they had been there and been used before. It is hard to justify that so many individuals who obtain such little education can make so much money.

Some athletes do great things with the money they make and are mature enough to handle the fame that comes with being in the lime light. Many athletes become millionaires over night. For the average person, there are different phases to life. There are the learning years, the sacrificing years, the years where your wealth matures in your 30's or 40's as you build your nest egg, and then finally, there is  retirement. Professional sports are the complete opposite. Billy Corben, director of ESPN's 30 for 30 documentary "Broke",  examines the reason so many professional athletes quickly lose their fortunes as well. Corben's film calls it the sudden wealth effect and says sports is the ultimate meritocracy. Many players come from poverty, are young, and have little or no accountability. For some, they aren't even quite sure what to do with their first paycheck as they have never had to manage a bank account of their own. This is the first time for some they are introduced to taxes. This fascinating documentary highlights many other reasons why players go broke. Players think that because they have made so much money, they are invincible. But in many cases the old adage, more money=more problems is the norm. Some see wealthy star teammates living large and want to do the same even though they make far less. For these, keeping up with the Jonses' is a real temptation. For others, opportunities to make more money are enticing to them but end up making bad decisions and have investments go bad. Often times, players become every one's best friend. Family and friends come out of the wood works asking for money or for them to invest in various things. Corben also highlighted many athletes who have gone through expensive divorces or owe extensive child support bills each month; things that do not go away after retirement.  Then, there are those who simply live beyond their means and do not plan for the future. According to a 2009 Sports Illustrated article,  78% of NFL players file for bankruptcy or are in financial distress by the time they have been out of the game for 2 years. 60% of NBA players go broke by the time they have been removed from the game for 5 years. In the modern era, there have been 60 former athletes file for bankruptcy. Now what do they do? Who is going to hire them? What schooling or skills do they have? How has the money they have made been beneficial?

The NFL and NBA recognize that this epidemic exists in their sports too. They now have many programs such as rookie symposiums. The NBA even passed a rule that requires players to be 19 years old and one year out of high school before they can sign a contract.

Recently there has been much discussion about players, particularly from the NFL who have made bad decisions and their actions have been heavily scrutinized. The other side of the coin is the backlash of how the leagues have reacted with their lack of discipline of these players. In many cases, the league has not reacted until threatened by sponsors or other private groups or individuals. Dr Dale's idea from the beginning of this essay that some athletes can receive special treatment or have their wrong doings overlooked because of their talents and fame could certainly come into play here. Take Ray Rice, the Baltimore Ravens running back who on February 15th was arrested for simple assault for example. It has come to light that the Ravens knew about the situation for months and tried to protect him and didn't want to enforce the rules. A timeline of the events following Rice's arrest has been compiled. The ravens coach and front office immediately came to his defense and tried to sugar coat the severity of his actions and reiterated that Rice would remain the team's running back . John Harbaugh said "The two people obviously have a couple issues that they have to work through, and they're both committed to doing that. That was the main takeaway for me from the conversation. They understand their own issues. They're getting a lot of counseling and those kinds of things, so I think that's really positive. That was the main takeaway." The Ravens' owner promised that the running back would "definitely be back." Then Rice was indicted on third degree aggravated assault charges. A charge that can carry a maximum of 5 years in prison. He then turned down a plea deal that would have spared the running back jail time in exchange for completing probation and undergoing anger management. Instead, he pleaded not guilty and applied for a program for first-time offenders that could clear him of charges in as little as six months. The program would require Rice to stay out of trouble and attend regular counseling. Prosecutors allowed Rice to be admitted into the program, a program that ESPN Outside the Lines reports that was granted to less than one percent of all domestic violence cases in New Jersey between 2010-2013 and is usually reserved for those that commit crimes that do not include violence. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell then suspended Rice for 2 games. The Ravens held a press conference only after further review of more evidence that had come to light. Due to overwhelming pressure put on them, the NFL came out with a new and harsher domestic abuse policy and Rice's punishment was increased. Rice was eventually released by the Ravens and suspended indefinitely by the NFL. I acknowledge that everyone deserves due process but the evidence clearly shows that the Ravens tried to protect their investment and keep him on the field. Would a lesser-known player have received the same treatment?

It has not just been Ray Rice. Other NFL players have also been in trouble off the field with domestic violence issues lately. These names include Greg Hardy, Jonathan Dwyre, and  Ray McDonald. Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson was indicted on child abuse charges. Hardy and Peterson were placed on what is called the Exempt/ Commissioners Permission List.   This is list not often used by the NFL and is not always viewed as a disciplinary measure. Although after being placed on this list, you cannot attend any team activities, it does not count against your contract (years) for the time you spend on it. Oh, and did I mention you still get paid while on this list? Jonathan Dwyre was parked on another list that was created to allow a player to remain on a team and still be paid while they are recovering from an illness. There was another incident that flew under the radar. New York Jets' practice squad wide receiver Quincy Enunwa  was recently accused of domestic violence and was released by the team. Of all the players on this list, only 2 were suspended. So, to argue that the average individuals can fly under the radar when they do something wrong and a popular athletes gets raked over the coals just isn't the case.

We all tend to overpay for things from time to time. Many times, circumstances or timing helps us rationalize what we should pay for something. Did you ever think you would spend $1.50 on a bottle of water at the gas station?  Does that water afford us anything that regular tap water could? We are willing to spend the money so bottled water continues to be sold at a premium price. The value of professional sports organizations have sky rocketed. In 2012 the Los Angeles Dodgers organization sold for an astounding $2.15 Billion Dollars. In turn,  player's salaries have also become so inflated to the point that every player thinks they deserve that big contract. Some players get that contract and then underwhelmingly preform. After winning the Super Bowl, quarterback Joe Flacco signed a $120 million contract to reward him. He has underperformed ever since. This example is a drop in the bucket of players who have cashed in and then not held up their end of the bargain. Where else in life can you get away with that? If I badly underperform at my job, I will not still be compensated and if my underperformance is serious enough, I could lose my job.

For these reasons, professional athletes are not worth the money that they make, even by comparison within their own profession.

Monday, October 6, 2014

Football Players and CTE

On The Herd with Colin Cowherd and ESPN radio program, he spoke about a PBS Frontline story regarding the link between football players and CTE or Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy. The PBS study shows that 128 former high school, college, semi-professional and professional football players were tested for the disease. 101, or just under 80%, tested positive. 76/79, or 96%, of the former NFL players tested positive. The studies were done by a collaborated brain bank from the VA and Boston University's CTE center, once the "preferred" brain bank of the NFL. Up to this point, this story seems debate proof. Although no one would argue that there is a definite link between football players and the brain disease, the findings came from a skewed population thus bringing debate to the findings of the study.

The testing was not done at random. All of the samples submitted for testing were submitted by the families of players who had suspected they might have had the disease before their deaths. In this way, Frontline author Jason M. Breslow admitted that the players represented in the study represent a skewed population. There is a good chance that these families were seeking closure or in some cases, compensation.

In July of this year, a federal judge approved a preliminary settlement by the NFL in a case where nearly 4,500 former players sued the organization for allegedly concealing the long-term effects of concussions. Ten days before the judge's decision, the NFL agreed to remove the cap placed on damages they would pay. The original cap was set at $675 million. The Judge said that would not be enough to cover the settlements of all the players who might require aid in the future. The new agreement allows $5 million for league veterans diagnosed with Lou Gehrig’s disease; as much as $4 million for a death involving traumatic brain injury; and as much as $3 million for players suffering from dementia. It includes $75 million for baseline medical exams for retired players and $10 million for concussion research and education.

Many families of deceased players who had CTE and committed suicide, argue that CTE was the cause of the suicide. There have been a handful of players that have committed suicide in recent years. Some of the former players were known to have struggled with depression, which can be a symptom of CTE but CTE is not a difinitive cause of depression in every athlete. According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, there is a suicide committed every 13 min in America. Stock brokers on Wall Street are 38% more likely to commit suicide than the average person. Lawyers, 54%. The profession with the highest rate of suicide is a physician. Most of them have a wonderful life but they are almost 100% more likely to commit suicide. By comparison, football players have a low rate of suicide despite the CTE findings.

Cowherd argues that while no one is refuting CTE studies, no one is talking about the benefits players have been given by playing football that they might not have gotten any other way either. For example, many of these athletes would not have recieved an education any other way than through sports. In a CNN investigation, entrance exam  scores for football and basketball players from 37 public universities across the country were petitioned and 21 of the schools cooperated. Some that did not said they would submit the records "after" football season had ended. The results proved that 10% of the athletes read at or near a 3rd grade level. One of the universities that received scrutiny was the University of North Carolina. UNC academic counselor Mary Willingham went through test scores over an 8 year period from 2004-2012. She found that 25% of athletes did not have the skills to take classes at a community college, let alone a university. She found that 8% read below a 4th grade level and 60% were between a 4th and 8th grade level. CNN also looked into the data Willingham discovered and found that many players at UNC were enrolled in classes that required little or no work. A UNC professor was even indicted for academic fraud over the scandal.

Football has been a gateway to opportunity and success. Football has helped student-athletes that otherwise could not have been accepted into college have a better quality of life. They have football to thank for that. Specifically to those at UNC, Willingham said, "there are athletes who are reading at a third- and fourth-grade level.... there is no way for them to succeed in a college classroom; the only place they can succeed is on the football field."  The benefits of underqulified athletes being accepted into academic programs and given opportunities for education should not be overlooked. While sports, specifically football in this case, can be viewed as being detrimental to some because of CTE, it has been beneficial to thousands just through educational opportunities alone.

The PBS special about CTE is based on a skewed study and overlooks the educational benifits provided to athletes.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Constructive Argument: The Value of a Viewing

Pink: Prof. Young’s outline

Red: My interpretation of the outline
Black: My first constructive argument


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Introduction - The rhetorical demand, justifies the topic and its relevancy.  
WHY THIS TOPIC IS RELEVANT/IMPORTANT:

In 2010, the CDC reported that 2,515,458 people died in the United States.  This means that many of the exponential numbers of family and friends of those 2,515,458 people were faced with the decision of viewing their deceased relatives before cremation or burial of the body. According to Howard C. Raether, “there is almost daily confirmation...in the news media...that viewing the remains of a deceased loved one is psychologically important”  (The Wilbert Updater). With death as such a prevalent part of life, it is important that Americans understand how important a viewing of the deceased is.



Thesis Proposition - Declarative sentence, neutrally phrased, indicating direction of change from status quo.  
MY TOPIC AND ARGUMENT ABOUT IT 
(I don’t understand how an argumentative thesis should be “neutrally phrased”):


Americans may underestimate the value of viewing their deceased loved ones before burial or cremation. Clinical psychologists argue that a viewing assists in the grief process by providing healing opportunities and closure that cannot be achieved without one.  More bereaved survivors should take advantage of a traditional viewing.


Define key terms
WORDS YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND:



  • Embalming sanitizes and preserves the body, retards the decomposition process, and enhances the appearance of a body disfigured by traumatic death or illness. Embalming makes it possible to lengthen the time between death and the final disposition, thus allowing family members time to arrange and participate in the type of service most comforting to them such as a viewing. When done properly and coupled with some restoration, it can give people a positive lasting impression of their loved one.



Issue A: A Significant Phenomenon exists.
THE PROBLEM THAT MY THESIS & ARGUMENT SOLVES:


More Americans are choosing to forgo traditional viewings.  They underestimate the value of viewing deceased loved ones before burial or cremation.  As cremation has increased dramatically over the last decade, the number of viewings have significantly decreased.


Claim 1:
HOW MY THESIS & ARGUMENT SOLVE THE PROBLEM:
The grief process is halted in a unhealthy way without a viewing
facilitated by embalming. In 1969, American Psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross wrote a groundbreaking book on death and dying in which she outlined five stages of grief. Denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. This model is widely used and considered when dealing with death still today. Although it may take some time to move through the steps, viewing the deceased body can help us move towards the fourth and final step of acceptance.


Warrants: Evidence. ( Tell us the reason the claim is true. Link the evidence with the claim.)
WHY MY ARGUMENT SOLVES THE PROBLEM:
When we see the deceased in a pleasant manner, we are more likely to
accept the fact that our loved one has died. Thus, our denial, converts to acceptance.  Viewings help mourners progress through the stages of grief.


Grounds 1:  
SUPPORTING IDEAS/EXAMPLES/FACTS FOR MY CLAIM:


In a personal experience, one grieving widow who chose not to view her late husband before cremation lamented: "are you sure he was dead? I never really got the chance to say goodbye." A viewing, public or private would have given her a medium to calm her fears and to properly say goodbye prior to his cremation.


A Viewing provided by embalming provides formal time for mourners to accept the reality of death. Most people have a "see it to believe it" mentality. This is especially true when it comes to death. A viewing allows the gathering of community to support the bereaved survivors and provides a formal time accept death.


According to the stages of grief, immediately upon the death of a loved one, a grieving person may be in denial. This is not all bad and helps us get past those first initial hours and days. This can be detrimental however if not moved past. Denial can cause one to not want to do anything or just want it to be over with as soon as possible. This does not allow time and a medium to properly grieve. This may satisfy one's short-term needs but will give them nothing to draw from down the road when the thought of their loved one re-surfaces. Long term denial can inhibit our ability to completely recover from the loss of a loved one.


Claim 2: (The phenomenon is significant)
WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM WITH MY SOLUTION/THESIS/ARGUMENT:


Warrant 2: (There are commonly two warrants here: short term, long term.) Immediate harms include..., long reaching harms include… BAD STUFF THAT HAPPENS IF MY SOLUTION/THESIS/ARGUMENT IS NOT ACCEPTED/ACTED UPON:


Often times, family members have had a front row seat to witness the debilitating effects of a long-term illness. A viewing can sooth and even repair memories of suffering loved ones before their death.


Grounds 2: (There should be figures and stats here, research with specific examples, narratives about impacts or social issues.):  
SUPPORTING IDEAS/EXAMPLES/FACTS FOR MY CLAIM


Many times I hear the phrase, "I just want to remember them the way they were." While acknowledging that there are many manners of death and that death preys upon both the young and old, for many people, the "way they were" was sick in bed and miserable. In this way, the embalming process allows the physical effects of illness to be erased. This often causes bereaved family members to exclaim, "thank you, he/she hasn't looked that good or peaceful in years!" A viewing is the only way to achieve this. A viewing provided by embalming and restoration, when done correctly, offers a positive memory for the bereaved survivor.


Opponents may argue that when death comes by way of accident or some other
traumatic event, viewing the body "as is" may not be a positive thing for the family. The embalming and restoration processes can correct many minor effects of an accident and allow victims to be seen in a state of peace. It is in these unfortunate instances that family members often request to hold the hand or arm of a loved one as a means to some closure. A viewing can consist of a partial viewing of the body of the deceased.

We has humans have the innate desire to acknowledge others when we see them and in turn embrace and say goodbye when they leave. Why should this be different with our deceased loved ones. It's not wonder that many times, especially after an unexpected death of a young person, the families first question is "when can we see him/her?" Again, the need to view the body is illustrated.


There have been several instances in my career that a family has been entertaining the idea of having a closed casket. It is not until they see the deceased that they end up wanting the casket open for the viewing and are delightfully surprised at the appearance of their loved one in a state of peace.


Issue B: The phenomenon's cause can be identified.  
WHY IS THIS PROBLEM HAPPENING?


Claim 3:
With cremation on the rise, the formality of traditional affairs and etiquette are on the
decline, and an overwhelming lack of interpersonal connections happening face-to-face, more survivors of deceased Americans are choosing to forgo viewings than ever before.


Warrant 3: There may be multiple causes and they should have their own warrants with appropriate grounds for each, ie; W3a-G3a, W3b-G3b, etc.
EXPLAIN HOW THESE THINGS HELP CREATE THE PROBLEM:


  • Americans may not realize they can have a viewing AND cremation.


  • They underestimate the value of a communal gathering of survivors.


  • Increase in the use of technology for communications has led to the devaluation of face-to-face interpersonal connections, especially within younger generations.


Grounds 3: Evidence, testimony.
SUPPORTING IDEAS/EXAMPLES/FACTS FOR MY CLAIM:
  • The number of viewings is decreasing as the number of cremations is rising.
  • Instead of thought of as therapeutic, the very act of planning the funeral service or a formal viewing event may be viewed by some as a forced obligation to communicate, make decisions, and interact with others.


Underview or Conclusion: Summarize keys points, relate back to the thesis and show that you've made your point. Close with a statement of significance. NO VALUES, NO SOLUTION HERE. That comes in the second constructive. Draw an objective conclusion about what the facts reveal.
CLOSING REMARKS/SUMMARY:


The choice to have viewing can lead to other healthy mediums to grieve. One of those is a funeral.


The Funeral (and viewing): Helps confirm the reality and finality of death. Provides a climate for mourning and the expression of grief. Allows the sorrows of one to become the sorrows of many. Is one of the few times love is given and not expected in return. Is a vehicle for the community to pay its respects. Encourages the affirmation of religious faith. Is a declaration of religious faith. Is a declaration that a life has been lived as a well as a sociological statement that a death has occurred (The Funeral From Ancient Egypt to Present Day America).


A viewing allows us to remember and honor a loved one in a special way.


Some families or individuals may not see the value of a viewing and even view it as a painful experience and just want to avoid it all together. While you may not care what happens to your remains following death, do not deny your family to heal through viewing, funeral or memorialization by telling them to do nothing. If the immediate family wishes not to view, arrangements should be made for others in the family to if they so desire.


When we say to our children, "just put me in a pine box and bury me in the back yard" we can miss out on a great opportunity to pass on our own legacy. Funerals often facilitate the re-uniting of distant extended family members or estranged children.


My point is to simply add a viewing to whatever funeral and/or burial plans exist.


Want cremation? Fine, view the un-embalmed body in a pleasant state before it takes place. Don't want a funeral? Have a memorial service. Don't want a public viewing? Have a private family viewing. But, do something. I realize that funerals are expensive and not for everyone. Just today, I met with a woman wanting to make her own arrangements. Her comment to me was, "send me roses now, not when I'm dead." She has no desire to have a viewing service for herself. Her argument is that her children and other loved ones should express their love to her now, not by spending thousands of dollars trying to do it later on. I have to admit, I don't disagree with her desire for expression now. However, her children may feel otherwise when the time comes and wish to view her or memorialize her. You don't have to be extravagant to do that. A simple memorial service at a restaurant, club house or city park will at least give the living an opportunity to initiate the grief process through a viewing of the deceased.


Google Presentations Slide Show of my Essay: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1LrTLSdXDuVJBWhG1neRSe9jw7WyIBu1jrtYxevdh4r8/edit?usp=sharing

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Should patriotism and good citizenship be promoted in school through history-based materials?

Denver Area Students Walk Out Of School In Protest


Today on the Rush Limbaugh radio program I learned of a story from the Associated Press where students from several high schools walked out of class in protest to a new "conservative-led" school board proposal. The School board of the second largest school district in Colorado proposed that history based education materials paint a positive picture of America. They say a committee should be appointed to regularly review materials to make sure they "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of a free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife, or disregard of the law."

The protest against this proposal was organized by word of mouth and social media. Students believe that what they learn should not be censored and held signs reading "there is nothing more patriotic than protest." There have undoubtedly been some dark days in American History.   Protesters believe these dark periods need to be taught and heard so we can learn from them.

One of the board members conceded saying, "there are things we may not be proud of as Americans," but justified her view by adding, "we shouldn't be encouraging our kids to think that America is a bad place."

 Rush Limbaugh argues that he remembers a time in which it was implied that the truth about our history, patriotism and being proud of our country would be taught. His reaction to the story was that kids are rejecting the teachings of capitalism and a free-market system and "that you would teach the benefits of the free market system, which is how every one of you little skulls full of mush is gonna make something of yourself someday.  The free market system is where they hand out chances for success, by the way.  There isn't a socialist system out there that hands out chances for success unless you happen to be one of the precious very few in leadership positions in socialism, and they don't pass out chances for success."

He was quick to judge that kids would rather learn about socialism and protest than how to be successful. I don't buy that. I would agree that most of them want to be successful in life but might be unsure how to accomplish that as I was at that age. My personal belief is that the free-market system and capitalism is the best avenue for success both on a personal and group level. I would also agree that for some, it was just a way to get out of class. As one student put it while running through the halls, "the protest is still on," and many students got up out of their seats and followed.

These kids have every right to protest but I wouldn't go as far as saying that protest has made America great and built it to what we have become today as some of the students argued. After all, it is a little hard to take some of them serious when they are holding a sign that reads "civil disobedience IS patriotism." To me, there is nothing patriotic about not being civil or not being good citizen of a neighborhood, town, state or country. It is hard for me to see why anyone wouldn't want to teach our young people that it is important to be a good citizen.

For now, the proposal is on hold. Ken Witt, the board president, said that, "some of its proposed language about not promoting “civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law” might be cut. “A lot of those words were more specific and more pointed than they have to be.”  I say leave the verbiage in. Though protest is allowed, there is a right and civil way to go about it. I happen to believe that America is great. Students deserve to hear all important aspects of our nation's history and we have an obligation to teach them the importance of having civility.

I support the school board's desire to "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of a free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights."