Giving Christianity a Bad Rep

A couple of weeks ago in class, we did a little survey on what characteristics we think are the most important. "Religion" was one choice that many people seemed to put high up on their priorities list. Another one was "ethics". I think most people are able to practice both simultaneously, as the Bible encourages its readers to love their neighbor like they would love themselves. Many people take the Bible very seriously and really try to be the person the Bible wants them to be. I think this is great because (other than the gay marriage topic) religious people are usually kind and respectful of others.

One woman, Kimberly Lucas, has taken the Bible much too literally. The Bible may have indirectly caused her to murder her previous partner's two year old daughter. She then planned to kill herself and even wrote a suicide note in a Word document on her computer that investigators discovered later. In the note. Kimberly refers to Genesis 22 where God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, to him. In this story of the Bible, God stops Abraham from killing Isaac because this was just a test of his faith. Kimberly took it upon herself to sacrifice her partner's daughter, thinking that it would please The Lord. She claims in her suicide note that her pastor's "sermon really, really touched me yesterday, but God never told me to stop!". This chilling note was also directed at her previous partner's previous partner (the mother of the child), telling her that this was all her fault.

I think this picture accurately illustrates the disagreement there is within religion. Different interpretations cause people to act differently - maybe even in a violent way, a way that was not intended. Here, we see Obama and Osama making the same statement as they terrorize the country of the other. From the reader's point of view both look guilty. I think sometimes (and in the case of this cartoon) people rely on religion as a scapegoat for their horrible actions so they don't lose their status as a leader.

This picture also illustrates the relationship between politics and religion. I think religion largely affects politics, but there is some disagreement as to where we draw the line. Earlier this year, a religious family watched their son die during a seizure because their religion says The Lord will save the ill and medical assistance is not necessary. So, instead of calling 911 and saving their child's life, they prayed. The parents were then arrested for letting their son die. The relationship between religion and politics is a complicated one, and we still strive to strike a balance between the two.

I know religion is very important to many Americans, but instances like this and the actions of the Westboro Baptist Church give religion -Christianity specifically - a bad rep. Though the basic morals of Christianity are not bad, people interpret them in different ways. I think these extremists shine a bad light on religion and the original intentions of it. If things like this keep happening and religion keeps appearing as this evil force that drives people to do evil things, we will eventually have a completely negative view on religion.

Intelligent Streets Coming Our Way

Imagine living in a world where you never have to worry about the negative impacts of coal and oil on the environment. Where there is no pollution in the oceans. Where there are less car accidents. Well, this world isn't as far away as you think. In fact, it's right around the corner! Julie (fun fact: she breeds standard Poodles as a hobby) and Scott Brusaw, two married engineers who met when they were three and four, came up with the idea to create a "solar roadway" which they hope will replace paved and dirt roadways.

Basically, this "solar roadway" consists of solar panel tiles that serve many functions. Not only do they harvest energy from the Sun, but they also have the ability to filter storm water and snow (decreasing the amount of pollution in lakes and oceans), they light up the road for easier and safer nighttime driving, they heat up during winter time to eliminate ice from the roads, they can warn drivers when there is an object (like a fallen tree) in the road, and if they were made into a blacktop they could light up different configurations according to what game people wanted to play (like a basketball court or a four-square court). The manufacturing of these solar panel tiles would also generate more jobs, stabilizing the economy. It would also cost much less than keeping the current roads in the long run because so much money would be saved from not having to repaint and repave roads all the time.

To put it simply, our streets would look like they're from an eco-friendly version of Tron.

These two inventors are entrepreneurs - meaning they don't work for the government. All of their inventions are tested in their own backyard in Idaho. I think this really shows what an "American" is supposed to be like: working hard on their own to make America the best it can be.If this these solar roadways actually worked the way they were intended and were distributed as much as intended, they would produce 3x more energy than Americans use today, which would basically eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels. This seems all good and dandy, right? Wrong. This would put major companies in the oil, coal, and mining industries out of work. These companies basically rule the country and are very heavily controlled by the government.

This may seem like a brilliant new idea, but will the government let it happen? Will these massive mining companies let it happen? If the government actually lets these solar panels take over the energy industry, how would Julie and Scott's company be affected by it?

Congrats on the Pregnancy! -Your School

In our yearbook here at New Trier, we usually dedicate pages to various sports teams, adviseries, and clubs. Typically, this is how all high schools choose to approach their yearbook. A high school in Arizona has decided to take a different route by dedicating pages to pregnant students.

Two pages, titled "I'm working a double shift", are dedicated to photos of pregnant students or students that have already become mothers.

This is shocking to me. The yearbook is a place where the student body should be recognized for their achievements. Imagine forty years after you've graduated high school you're looking through your high school yearbook with your children, reminiscing about your young days. Suddenly you come across this page and say "Oh yeah, that was Ronnie. She had a kid when she was a junior". What would your kids think? What would you think?

Originally, the pages were supposed to address the hardships and struggles of being a young mother in high school. However, I think that they are (unintentionally) glorifying teen pregnancy by giving these teens 15 minutes - actually more like a lifetime - of fame. Helen Hollands, a Mesa Public Schools spokeswoman, states that "a yearbook is to commemorate the achievements of the students, particularly the senior class. Probably this would not fall into that category". I completely agree with her; teen pregnancy is not something to advertise.

The website that published this article also posed a question: Should high school yearbooks feature photos of expectant students? I thought this would be a no-brainer; no way should a school dedicate pages of its yearbook to pregnant students! I was somewhat surprised when I looked at the results of this poll...

As you can see, the amount of people who think schools should include pictures of pregnant students and the amount of people who don't think they should is about the same. Why do you think this is?

Printing Body Parts

Over the weekend I was surfing the internet and came across an interesting article. Neurosurgeons successfully replace a woman's skull with one produced by a 3D printer. This woman suffered a bone disorder that increased the thickness of her skull from 1.5 inches to 5 inches! This obviously caused many problems for her such as reduced eyesight and painful headaches. Without this surgery, the 22 year old woman would have most likely died "in the near future", says Dr. Bon Verwejj (the doctor who performed this much needed surgery).

This artificial skull, that was put in in place of the woman's actual skull, was made of an unspecified kind of hard plastic. Since her surgery, the "patient has gained her sight back entirely, is symptom-free and back to work". It is extremely impressive that this woman is able to recover as quickly as she did. Within only a couple of months, this woman's life was completely turned around.

As technology becomes more advanced and accessible, more amazing things are happening. If this woman wasn't able to get this surgery, she would've passed away. This artificial skull is able to save countless lives in the future.

Medicine and surgery are becoming far more advanced, extending the lifespan of humans. But, is this going too far? If humans become able to replace almost any part of their body with something produced by a printer, will we eventually become mostly machine made?

American Families Shelter Too Much

It seems like parents spend forever bathing their kids, dragging them out of the mud, and scooping sand out of their mouths at the playground. The mother of a family that I babysit is so paranoid about her kids getting sick from being dirty that she won't let her kids play in their own backyard without taking a bath immediately after. This made somewhat sense to me because I had always heard that infants are most susceptible to disease because their immune systems were so weak, so they should be kept clean and out of the dirt and mud.

I was surprised when I read a recently published article in Science Daily that infants that are exposed to many kinds of household bacteria, pollen, and pet dander are actually less likely to develop asthma and allergies. According to a study "infants who grew up in homes with mouse and cat dander and cockroach droppings in the first year of life had lower rates of wheezing at age 3". Now, all these "cockroach droppings" and "dander" in our homes sounds absolutely repulsive, but they actually improve the average infant's health in ways that you would not expect.

As it turns out, only 8 percent of children that suffer from athsma and allergies were exposed to allergens and bacteria in their childhood homes. This means that children that were exposed to what we think of as things that make kids sick are actually MUCH less likely to develop sicknesses.
I find this extremely interesting because it just shows how much parents shelter their kids in America. Earlier this year, we listened to a podcast about how parents these days are much too protective of their children and don't let them take physical risks. We can see that there is an actual health benefit of letting your kids fool around in the mud.

Women Can't Handle Men's Jobs

Recently, the Huffington Post published a piece about a New Hampshire state Rep., Will Infantine (R), who believes that the gender gap between women and men's paychecks stems from the fact that women are "lazier" than men. While debating the Paycheck Equity Act in the New Hampshire House of Representatives, Infantine gave a speech that may have gotten a little too heated. He claimed men are "more motivated by money" and "don't mind working nights and weekends" or "overtime, or outdoors in the elements", and mens' jobs are "more [sic] riskier".  Women have a long history of working nights and weekends and "overtime", maybe not for a paycheck, and they are definitely motivated by money!

This parallels the research that I've been doing regarding my Junior Theme paper about women's rights and marriage. I've found that the cause of this gap between paychecks stems from the fact that men believe women are less capable of working at the high paying jobs like men can. What makes them unequal? I'd like to know. I wonder what the two women senators in New Hampshire and the woman governor think about his comments?

These types of comments are unlikely to draw positive attention from other politicians that are on his side of the debate.  Infantine's party peers are likely to cringe at his comments, and this will probably even backfire on him in his future debates.

Brains Are More Active During Meditation

For thousands of years, people have been meditating. For just as long, scientists have wondered what actually happens in your brain during meditation. But recently, research of meditation has sharply increased. To me, mediation seems like a waste of time. Many more important things could be getting done and I would rather be doing something productive than sitting with my eyes closed.

I recently read this article and it turns out that your brain is actually extremely active during meditation. Jian Xu, a physician researching meditation, states, "I was surprised that the activity of the brain was greatest when the person’s thoughts wandered freely on their own, rather than when the brain worked to be more strongly focused."

Judging from Xu's research, when you just sit thinking, dazing off, your brain is actually doing more than when you're concentrating on solving a math problem. This reminds me of freshman year when KW classes had "relaxation days" where you could just lay in silence. Sometimes I would sleep, and other times I would just lay there thinking. These days would leave me feeling so relaxed and rested. But little did I know that my brain was most active during these "relaxation days".

How will education, test taking, and school in general change now that we know this? It is possible that this newfound research will stimulate schools to incorporate some sort of relaxation/free period into students' schedules. Though this seems bizzare and unlikely, it will probably have positive effects on stress levels of students and, ultimately, their grades 

Further research on the effects of meditation on academics will almost surely take place within the next couple of years and I look forward to the results of this research

Vegetarians Are Taking Over

Last night when I was researching possible topics for my Junior Theme, I came across some interesting information proving that more and more people are becoming vegetarians. My first thought was that there must be some sort of religious shift that requires more people to refrain from eating meat. There is a possibility that this may be true, but in my opinion there hasn't been a large enough change in religion that would cause this. In fact, I think more and more people are choosing to not practice religion strictly. But that's a whole other topic.
After some thinking, I decided that the fast food industry has had the most affect on people's diets. Although some people choose to eat less healthy options now that McDonald's, Burger King, and other greasy fast food restaurants have become more popular, these horribly unhealthy restaurants (to me they're more like toxic waste warehouses) have, in my opinion, actually raised awareness about health.
I'm sure many people at New Trier have seen the movie "Food Inc.". This movie revealed to the public for the first time the disgusting things that go on behind the scenes at McDonald's and the like. Its viewers got a whole new perspective on food, and personally, I decided to become a vegan (though it only lasted for a few days). After "Food Inc." became more frequently watched in health classes, pictures like this>

went viral. This is a before and after picture of McDonald's chicken nuggets. If this doesn't disgust you, then I don't know what will.
I think that after the public was exposed to what they're really eating at fast food restaurants, people have become more conscious of what they're putting in their bodies. Many think that the easiest way to prevent eating chicken-nugget-type foods is to not eat meat at all, assuming that it is most likely processed in the same fashion.

Will Humans and Machines Eventually Converge?

After watching the movie "Her" starring Joaquin Phoenix, I started thinking about our relationship with technology. It is no secret that Americans have become somewhat reliant on smart phones, television, computers, and the like. Will there ever be a time when we are not only reliant on technology but on a higher level of interaction with it? Will we ever become "friends" with technology?

AI (artificial intelligence) expert and Google's leading engineer, Ray Kurzweil, does. In fact, he predicts that by 2029, robots will be able to "flirt, learn from experience, and even make jokes". Now this seems a little far-fetched, but after reading this article, I'm starting to become convinced. In 1990, he predicted that a computer would be able to beat the world champion in chess by 1998. This actually happened in 1997, a year sooner than predicted.

Perhaps the most intriguing of Kurzweil's ideas is that of "the singularity": the prediction that at some point in the future, "humans and machines will apparently converge". Many improvements have been made to robots as we approach "the singularity" such as PetMan, a robot that is able to walk like a human, balance itself, sweat, adjust its temperature, and perform an array of calisthenics similar to that which a soldier would do during war. PetMan is used to test chemical proof suits that will be implemented into chemical warfare.

As you can see from this video, PetMan acts eerily similar to a human. For now, he is only used to test chemical proof suits, but I think this definitely shows how we are on our way to "the singularity" that Kurzweil predicted. Though this might be excellent for Kurzweil because it allows him to save countless lives on the battlefield, many others find it frightening, feeling that this kind of advance in technology is a nightmare. What are your thoughts?

Companies Encouraging Eating Disorders

Recently, body image has become a big issue with teens in the US. I think this is mostly due to the fact that advertisements depict women as having a perfect, skinny body. Health classes have been talking more and more about body image and misleading representations of the female body that companies advertise. Many women in magazine advertisements are starting to look fake, like this Ralph Lauren model:

 

Teenage girls are definitely affected by advertisements like these. After seeing them over and over, the girls start to believe that this is what they should look like when in fact, the models themselves don't even look like this.

 

Jennifer Ouellette from California has a daughter who is recovering from anorexia. She is very invested in not only helping her own daughter recover, but helping other teens in her community recover from anorexia as well. When she came across a sunglasses company named "Anorexxxy" (because of their "slim" shape) she was outraged, claiming that this company is "mocking a deadly disease" and encouraging teens to lose weight as if they are trying to make anorexia trendy.

 

Jennifer got about 15 other moms together, some with daughters that had died of anorexia, and rallied on social media against Anorexxxy. They constantly tweeted on Twitter and posted statuses on Facebook to raise awareness against eating disorders and to alert others of this company's horrible name. Immediately, the Anorexxxy changed its name to "AXXXEXXXY" and claimed that it "never wanted to upset anyone". It is sickening to hear this from a company that was clearly associating its product with an eating disorder. Companies like this and many others are indirectly encouraging eating disorders and body image insecurities through sly (and not so sly) advertising tactics.

Obama Reaches New Audiences

Many people have probably heard of Zach Galifinakis' web show called "Between Two Ferns", but for those of you who haven't, it's basically Zach Galifinakis briefly interviewing celebrities and making passive aggressive jokes about them while sitting between two potted ferns. The celebrities appear to know about these jokes beforehand; the show seems somewhat scripted. This web show generally has a younger audience, an audience that would be more likely to enjoy Zach's humor.

Some of the past interviewees that have been on the show are: Bradley Cooper, Justin Bieber, and Bruce Willis. On the most recent episode, President Barack Obama was brought on as the interviewee. This episode has received a substantial amount of views, 17 million, and has really got people talking.

Here is the web show

The Presidency has traditionally been a ceremonial job with highly controlled media contact, but by participating in this interview, President Obama speaks out with a much more informal tone in a new venue: a web TV show. He knew he was opening himself up to potentially rude jokes and criticisms, things that people typically wouldn't say to the President. Of course the President's critics jumped on this as an inappropriate use of the President's time.  Also the buzz seems to have brought in more views from older people who tend to be less supportive of the president than the younger viewers more likely to support obamacare.

Do you think this was an effective way to get his message out to an intended audience?  Did it backfire?

Teens are Better Behaved Than Ever

I don't know about you guys, but I always hear from the older generation that our generation is lazy and up to no good. It seems like everywhere grandparents are remarking how sexually active and reckless teenagers are. There always seem to be drug scandals at high schools and even in junior highs and middle schools. Just earlier this year, the North Shore witnessed a sexting scandal that caused one girl to transfer schools. Things like this make our generation seem like it fits what older generations say about us.

Actually, our generation isn't the "worst". According to statistics our generation is the "best"! "Best" is kind of a weird word though... What makes a generation the "best"? Well, our teen birth rate is the lowest it has been in quite a while - just 29.4 births per 1,000 women ages 15-19 compared to 89.1 in the 1960s. High school seniors' use of illegal substances has also decreased - only about 40% of seniors drink alcohol compared to 72% in 1980 - and they are barely using cocaine at all. Although marijuana use has increased slightly within the next past 10 years, it is still much lower than it was in the 80s. So what are kids doing instead of drugs? Exercising. 29.7% of students meet federal exercise guidelines compared to just 18.9% in 1998.

So the next time anybody tells you that teenagers nowadays are all corrupted druggies, you can prove them wrong and tell them that their generation was actually worse behaved than ours.

Should Snowden Return Private Documents?

I'm pretty sure everyone out there right now knows about Edward Snowden, the man who publicized to the American people what they didn't know about the government. He made everyone aware that the NSA has been spying on billions of innocent Americans. For the most part, the American citizens think of him as a kind of "hero" for telling them what they should know.

The US government, however, has not been so happy with him. This past Wednesday, the head of the U.S. intelligence community called Snowden in and requested that he return all the documents that he has not made public yet.

After reading a recent article, I have found out that Snowden has received sharp criticisms from many government employees saying that by releasing private information he has: caused allies to cut off cooperation with the US, caused changes in communications by terrorist networks, and has put the lives of intelligence operatives at risk.

Here is the link to the official transcript of the hearing.

As citizens, we have lost trust in our own government, but I think it is better to know the truth than to live on our lives in ignorance. The government realizes now that they messed up and are trying to prevent their reputation from getting any worse. There is a possibility that Snowden hasn't even released the worst of it yet, and that is why the government is so nervous about the rest of the information being released. But who knows?

This relates to the Vietnam War presentation today with regards to freedom of information and the Pentagon Papers. The government was extremely angry at Daniel Ellsberg for releasing private information to the public, but the public was glad to finally know what was really going on in the Vietnam War. After the conversation we had in class, do you think it was "patriotic" for Edward Snowden to reveal the government's secrets? Should Snowden return the unreleased documents?

Elves Are Influencing Icelandic Government

We have recently finished The Crucible and having discussions about it. One of the last points someone in the class made was that they were surprised that so many people believed in witchcraft back during the Salem Witch Trials. Mr. O'Connor compared that to the fact that a lot of people believe in angels today. Even though I am Christian, I believe, like Mr. O'Connor, that angels do not exist. 

I recently came across an article that I thought was just completely over the top. This article claims that more than 50% of Icelanders believe in invisible elves. And I thought it was unusual for someone to believe in angels! Even though this data was taken in 1998, these beliefs have been around for centuries and it is unlikely that the percent of the Icelandic population's opinion would change much in a decade. 

According to the Icelanders, elves have their own community similar to that of humans. Elves have different types of jobs like humans, typically live in single floor houses, and attend church. If one disturbs an elf's home, the elves become "fierce" and serious consequences may arise such as the spraining of an ankle, mechanical breakdowns, or in some cases... a cow may die. There was even a case when the people of Iceland persuaded the government not to move rocks because it was "The Troll's Pass". 

As you can see, the Icelanders take the elves very seriously. The elves are occasionally reason for "local concerns" and the Icelandic government says that if a "certain location is cursed, or if supernatural beings inhabit a certain rock, then this must be considered a cultural treasure". Essentially, the government is stating that it respects any cultural beliefs its people have and that the responses of the government officials have been varied (some officials believe in elves, some do not). 

What are your opinions on supernatural forces? Do you think people's beliefs of the supernatural should influence the government like it did in "The Crucible" and Iceland?

King of the World

This morning, I read an article that really shocked me. It was breaking news about America's relationship with foreign countries. There has been a lot of discussion recently about the NSA and what they have the right to do regarding the American people's privacy inside the United States. 

A breaking news story indicates that the US is spying on other countries, specifically China, by surreptitiously inserting tiny USB cards into their computers. This cardinfects the computers with malware (aka spyware) which will allow the US to track what the Chinese do on their computers. Once the Chinese person connects the USB cord to their computer, American spies can tap into their computer.  They put a briefcase filled with gadgets nearby, which are then able to connect to the Chinesecomputers, so the US government can read their computers. To me, this whole process seems kind of James Bond-like. 

Coincidentally, China had been doing the same thing to us. When President Obama found this out, he was infuriated and "protested" this kind of action against the United States. Hmm, doesn't it seem a little unfair that America spies on China, but when China does the exact same thing to us, we get angry and demand that they stop? It does to me. 

That's the whole idea of American exceptionalism - we can do anything we want, but other people aren't allowed to do the same things to us because we're America. In America's world, we're the kings. Sometimes this mindset can be good, and sometimes it can be bad. Do you think the idea of American exceptionalism is beneficial to America or do you think it hurts us more than it helps?

Same-Sex Marriage Deja Vu

Within the past couple of years, love has been more accepted as many states legalize same-sex marriage. Utah was a recent convert after a surprise ruling by a US District Judge which said that the state's ban on same sex marriage violated those couples' constitutional rights. After this ruling, over 1,000 same sex couples were married in Utah.  But just a few days ago the US Supreme Court granted Utah a "stay" on the ruling which allowed the republican Utah Governor Herbert to stop all officials from marrying same sex couples. This puts those 1,000 couples in limbo as their fate is decided. There is a devastating possibility their marriages will be dissolved.

It is bad enough when gay couples are not allowed to get married, but it is worse when their right to get married is taken away from them. They have had a taste of freedom and now it's gone. The citizens of Utah have been left dazed and confused.  One Utah resident who was planning to get married to his partner, but didn't do it in time said "It feels like we are second-class citizens during the stay." Many predict that this will go to the US Supreme Court.

I think that allowing gay couples in Utah to get married then taking that privilege away from them was a bad decision and will only make same-sex marriage more desirable. In the past when this happened in California (2008), same-sex marriage was legalized within the constitution but then banned again by an amendment called "Prop 8". Many people got together and made peaceful speeches and demonstrations in favor of same-sex marriage. Demonstrations were now more passionate than they had been before because the people of California had already experienced the freedom of being able to marry whomever they wanted. This ended up being taken to the US Supreme Court in 2013 and they overruled Prop 8 with a vote of 5 to 4, legalizing gay marriage in California.

Based on what has happened in the past, taking away a privilege from people who have already known what it's like to have that privilege has not worked out well. If the Utah case goes to the US Supreme Court, I think they will legalize same-sex marriage just like they did for California. The Court's decision to grant a "stay" indicates their interest in the case, and the same nine judges sit on the US Supreme Court as did for the decision in Prop 8, so they are likely to vote the same way.

Although the gay community of Utah has lost hope for marriage equality, when we look at the past, we see promising outcomes. Utah is a hopeful case and if we keep our fingers crossed same-sex couples all over the nation will reap the benefits.