Find and read an editorial from any paper or news magazine. Post your response to the article, with a link to the article so others can read it. In your responses, be sure to start using some of the AP language we've begun to develop over the summer. You can challenge, qualify, or support the claims made in the editorial.
It's fun to use local news, try the free lance star: http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/opinion
21 comments:
Stephanie Floyd
Courage Enshrined
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/072008/07272008/396702
I think that the new courage memorial in Capitol Square is a good one. It's important that we recognize the people who fought to make the U.S. a fair socitey. Not only does it recognize men who fought for a better world, but the article states that, "it is the first monument to women and/or non-whites on Capitol Sqaure." I'm sure the monument will be a reminder to anyone who looks at it to fight for what is right and to remember the people who fought for the equality we have today.
Stephanie Floyd
Big Tobacco, Meet Big Philanthropy
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/opinion/29tue4.html
According to this article there is already $20 million a year being spent on anti smoking campaigns in poor and middle income countries. And now Bill Gates and the Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, are investing over $125 million each in order to have $500 million dollars in the next few years to contribute to this campaign. The article states that the money is spent to "promote strategies whose effectiveness has already been proved to the satisfaction of the World Health Organization." Well, I'm wondering whether the World Health Organization thinks hunger is very healthy.
These low income countries (a lot of them in Africa) are starving and (obviously) very poor. The fact that they can't get enough to eat every day is going to kill them off quicker than smoking will. I think it's a little ridiculous to put so much money into, not a bad campaign, but a campaign that could probably wait a bit. Atleast until the world hunger rate is down some more. It just seems like a tremendous amount of money to be spending on advertising when it could be buying food for the starving people in Africa, the Middle East, and for the others in low income countries.
Danny Holland
"Free The Drivers!"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/
FLS/2008/072008/07302008/397646
I disagree with the conclusion given in this article. Yes, it is dangerous to solicit on the public roads, but collecting money in this way is very efficient when charity workers are trying to support a cause. The mood of this article made charity workers who solicit on the sides of the streets seem like bad people who are aggressively trying to make you feel intimidated so you will support their cause. I think that the writer of this editorial only pointed out that there were cases of aggressive soliciting so that the reader would be more open to accepting the writer's claim, which was that soliciting on the side of roads should be banned.
I do believe that soliciting on the sides of roads is dangerous, but maybe there could be a compromise. They could just ban soliciting along the side of an intersection with more than one lane going in the same direction. This could stop some of the confusion which drivers get while people are trying to collect money. It would keep solicitors out of the middle of the road and keep the drivers safe as well.
In conclusion, I do not believe that roadside soliciting should be banned, but I do believe that there are possible ways to compromise this situation so that roadside charity workers can still collect money without sacrificing the drivers' or their own safety.
Cecilia Bulzomi
"Beach Report"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/082008/08012008/398843
I definatly agree with this article. I love the beach and i never think about if the water is poluted or not i just jump in and have a good time! When people are told that the water they have been enjoying all summer long may be causeing a great risk to their health they are going t be very angry. It makes it worse whne the problem is, as always, caused by us. People really should think of the environment before themselve. We live here and will be here forever if something goes drastically wrong with any part of the earth we will be in big trouble.
Greg Baugher
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/28/voight/
I honestly didn't agree with one thing Jon Voight had to say in this editorial. However, I think he did a fantastic job in trying to persuade the reader to take his position on political views.
He starts by making predictions that Barrock Obama will "demoralize this country and help create a socialist America." He then moves to saying all democrats are wrong, and cites situations from the 60's.
However, the agrument I agree least with is the next one he makes. He references Republican hopeful John McCain, "whose suffering and courage in a Hanoi prison camp is an American legend."
I really had to stop and question his logic at this point. Wasn't John Kerry, a democrat, also a decorated Vietnam veteran? Does Mr. Voight put him in the same group as McCain, or Obama?
He then makes one last statement to help his argument by saying that we need a untied and strong country, which is true. However, Mr. Voight finishes his editorial by saying that if Barrock Obama becomes president "our country will be weakened in every way."
It seems to me that Mr. Voight was just out to soil the word "democrat" by writing this article. He doesn't really make any reference to republicans at all. I must give some praise to Mr. Voight, though; it must have taken hours of research to find all this information and to put together his argument. He makes a case for why his side is right, and sticks to it the whole editorial. He repeatedly appeals to the patriotic side of everyone by bringing up soldiers and the fact we need a united country. Although, he also keeps making predictions about what would happen, should Obama become president. However, he cites little to no facts about why these things would happen; and unless he has a crystal ball, I'm not buying into anything he has to say.
Cecilia Bulzomi
"Billions to the Rescue"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/072008/07292008/395511
I disagree with the message of this article. I dont think what we should be vindictive, we should be happy thgat our government is trying to fix the problems that are iun our country. We dont actually know that it is the governments fault that the housing market is so bad. At least they are trying to fix it we really dont need to dwell on how the problem came about we just need to solve it and move on.
Danny,
I agree with you on this issue. I don't think it would be as dangerous if the solicitors were one the curb and not inbetween the different directions of traffic. when they go out it shows tat they are dedicated to their cause and when they get money it shows others support them. As long as they aren't forcing anyone to give money it really shouldn't matter. Good work Danny!
Greg,
You did a good job with your article. You made your opinions clear and backed it very well. I agree with what you said that man was just out to get the democratic party. Another great job
Jenny Wheeler
"4th Down on 'Jesus'"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/072008/07312008/397800
If you are a true Christian, no matter what denomination you are, you should always pray in the name of Jesus. I agree with the reasonings of Mr. Turner to invoke the use Jesus in Council prayers. Rev. Turner said, "The Bible instructs me to pray explicitly in the name of Jesus, and my opinion on the subject is as good as anyone's, be he saint or seminarian. Additionally, no good Baptist expects a pewmate to rebuff his soul's conviction."
A Christian lives by the words of the Bible, therefore a Christian lives by a Christian law. Justices claim to use "non-sectarian" prayers, but as Rev. Martin Marty states, "There is [no] such thing as generic prayer. Usually what's called generic prayer is a Christian prayer with Jesus' name chopped off."
I know that there is a wide variety of race and cultures in America today, and with them comes various religious backgrounds, but why is that these days there only seems to be a problem when the prayers or opinions are rooted in Christianity?
Brittany Murphy
"Just A Date?"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/072008/07302008/395418
I did not really have any problem with this article until I got to the very end. The author wrote: "alarmingly, data reveal that early sexual activity appears to fuel dating violence and abuse among teenagers".
While I do agree that the two variables might have a connection, I do not agree that early sexual activity fuels dating violence and abuse. Instead, I think it's the other way around; dating violence and abuse fuels early sexual activity.
Looking at it from a girl's point of view, if there is violence and abuse in a relationship, the girl's self esteem will drop, and she will be more likely to consider engaging in sexual activity with her partner to try and please them. (The situation could be turned around where the guy's self esteem is dropped, but I think it probably more common for girls.)
Greg,
I definately agree with your response to the article. The author did do a very good job at trying to persuade the reader, but you're right when you say that he was just out to soil the word democrat. Personally, I think that both parties have their faults and both parties have their strong points, so it isn't fair to attack one side of an issue just because it doesn't go along with your political party says it should.
Very good job! =]
-Brittany
Cortney Berry
"Billions to the Rescue"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/072008/07292008/395511
I agree with this editoial about placing the blame on, and getting the adequate accountability from, the right agencies in regard to the financial crisis created by the subprime lending in the housing market. America is quick to blame the mortgage lenders and the unqualified borrowers, when in reality the blame lies with the agencies who should have been overseeing the industry, and making sure that many of the loans were denied in the first place. This article did a good job of pointing the finger in the right direction, and bringing attention to the administration that is truly at fault for the housing crisis.
Cortney Berry
"Live and let live, swim in the river if you wish"
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2008/072008/07292008/394976
I disagree with just about every sentence of this letter. It is preposterous to suggest that people should not only be allowed to do anything that they want to do, but also encouraged to engage in dangerous activities because "life is all around you, live and let live".
Sadly, there is more to a death by drowning in the river than the emotional devastation of the family and friends. There are also the safety risks of the rescuers and recoverers, and an enormous financial burden to the various departments (police, fire and rescue) that affect the entire community. Also, because of the large numbers of non-English speaking residents of this area, many people fail to fully understand the risks involved.
Swimming in the Rappahannock river is not only dangerous, it is deadly, and should be banned.
Cortney Berry
Response to Jenny Wheeler
("4th Down on Jesus")
Jenny,
I disagree with your comment about the only problems with public prayer being aimed at Christians. In fact, Mr. Turner was denied only the right to invoke the name "Jesus" at the council meetings. His faith was not put up for public ridicule or examination. In comparison, when the Chesterfield City Council met, they denied the invocation of a Wiccan, and even publicly mocked her religion.
Cortney Berry
Response to Greg
Jon Voight article
Greg,
You did a fantastic job in pointing out why you disagree with this editiorial. I agree with every point that you made, and I especially liked that you used the comparison of John McCain and John Kerry in regard to the war-hero claims of the media. I think that you gave a great deal of thought and attention to this, and I feel that you have a good grasp of the politics in general.
In response to Danny's "Free The Drivers!" comment-
Danny,
I agree with your thoughts on this article. I don't think solicitation on sides of streets should be banned completely because it is a good way to collect money. I believe that there should be a compromise, like you said, and I really liked your idea of banning solicitation along sides of an intersection with more than one lane.
In response to your "Just A Date?" comment-
Brittany,
I see what you're saying about abuse leading to sexual activity because the person getting abused wants to please his or her partner. However, I think that that applies mostly with verbal abuse and not so much the violence aspect.
I agreed with the article when it stated that "early sexual activity appears to fuel dating violence and abuse among teenagers." If someone is sexually attached to another person then it would be easy for he or she to become controlling, which could result in violence and/or abuse.
-Stephanie
Cortney,
(In response to "Live and let live, swim in the river if you wish")
Don't you think that you are overreacting? Yes, it is dangerous to swim in a river. However,I believe that individuals have a right to not be controlled by rules wherever they go. I am not saying that our world should be rule-free, but if people are controlled everywhere they go by rules, resistance would be more likely. I am a lifeguard so I know how dangerous water can be. Swimming in the Rappahannock River should not be banned. Maybe instead of banning swimming from the river, there should be safe designated swimming zones under the survelience of a lifeguard. Maybe only the dangerous areas should be off limits. I just think that by banning swimming in the Rappahannock, it would be taking away the right that people around here have to take in and enjoy their river.
Cortney,
I agree with some of what you have to say, and disagree with some.
You do make a great point when you say that the swimmer is not the only one whose life is at risk; others helping are in a great deal of danger, too. However, I think banning swimming in the river would be a very extreme choice of action. Everyday, people who choose to swim in the river do, and have a great time. Just because some people make bad choices, like going into a river without knowing how to swim, doesn't mean everyone should be punished. I agree with the author of the article on the fact that we can't make peoples choices for them, we can only educate them, so they make informed choices.
Brittany,
I like the article you choose, and your response to it. I also think you're right when you turned the cause and effect line around.
Your arguement made more sense to me then the author's did. The author of the article just threw statistics at me, you actually gave the reasoning behind your thinking, and that made your argument easier to understand.
Brittany,
I really like how you challenged the article. You made perfect sense when you explained that a girl's self esteem drops in an abusive relationship causing them to be more vulnerable to sexual activity. However, I hope that this article wasn't meant to stereotype teenage relationships as always abusive and sexual. For many teenage couples, the relationship works out well and they have very few problems.
I know that the problem exists, but they shouldn't make the mood of the article sound like teenage dating, in general, is a bad idea.
Post a Comment