I accomplished quite a bit this week. First I completed my final project for my computer course which included a memo to my fictitious boss expressing the need to improve an IT program that had not been updated in 12 years, spreadsheets of computers, costs, services, etc., so comparable analyses could be done and a power point slide show to present my findings. (As if that weren't enough to give me a headache.) I am someone who doesn't do anything by half measure and began the research on this project weeks ago, finding true and accurate material so that I could draw an educated conclusion from my studies. Yet, this week someone in my class asked the following question, "Do we have to look this information up or can we just make it up as we go?" Imagine my surprise when the professor answered, "You can make it up. The final project is about being able to prepare Excel spread sheets and Power Point presentations, not about the research." Well, F*@& me! Wonder if I'll get extra credit for the research....
My second project was the final draft of my persuasive essay. I was having a rather difficult time coming up with something I needed to persuade others to believe. The night before it was due I remembered the essay we had to read by Jonathan Swift in which he suggested that the Irish eat their young in order to alleviate the famine problem in their country. It was a bit gruesome but a valid argument nonetheless, and led me to begin my exploration in regards to changing adulthood legally to occur at 21 (my previous post). I will not bore you all with my final project but I found more research, I perfected my arguments and I completed my assignment with several days to spare. I find that I do not like spending three or four weeks on one small project such as a persuasive essay. I get bored and lose interest...makes me question whether I could actually be a writer of novels if I can't concentrate on a freaking persuasive essay....
Finally, today, I completed my computer class final exam. It only took me 2 hours and 15 minutes of the allotted 3 and a half hours, but I managed and I believe I did well. Up until this moment I was running on a 100% in that class. I doubt if I made a 100% on the exam, but wouldn't that be a boost to my flailing ego. But even completing the course with an A would solidify my now jellied belief that I AM smarter than this machine.
So I step back from my educational pursuits for a week, taking a much needed cerebral break to recharge and prepare for the next block of courses which include Algebra and Nutritional Science. Heehaw! Now doesn't that sound like fun? If these two classes don't drive me to drink, nothing will!
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Twenty-One, A Government Mandated Age of Maturity
It began in the 1970’s when states took it upon themselves to change the legal drinking age from 18 for wine and beer to 21 for all alcohol. Students and young adults across the nation were angered that this Rite of Passage was denied them after so many years in anticipation of its forthcoming. Petitions were written and protests were formed, both sides having valid and strong arguments for their defense of what they felt was right. These arguments were put forth and have been debated on a regular basis since the first legal limit was changed. But it is my belief that we are fighting to change the wrong law. Let us keep the twenty-one year old drinking age in place and use it as a guideline for everything else. In other words, have the government mandate the age of maturity as twenty-one years and make it law that all adult responsibilities and pleasures are limited to only those who have attained this legal age of permissible adult rights and privileges.
One of the biggest privileges as an adult is the right to vote. To have the honor of choosing our leadership should be limited to mature and responsible human beings. The voting choices placed in front of an individual can be overwhelming especially if the voter is not old enough to fully comprehend or appreciate this heavy responsibility. The drinking law proves that the government presently does not feel an 18 year old is responsible enough to make the right decision when it comes to alcohol (not just wine or beer but any alcohol) so therefore it can be assumed that the government does not feel an 18 year old is responsible enough to make any major decisions to include voting for an elected official. This is further stressed by our own Constitution that states no one can serve in an elected position until the age of 25. The logical course would follow that even our own government believes only those old enough to make decisions are intelligent enough to make the right decisions. Hence, the 21 years old Government Mandated Age of Maturity (21GMAM) would apply to the legal age of voting and the right to choose any and all elected officials in every State of the Union.
Another grossly debated point made in this continued under-age drinking argument is the fact we have 18 year olds (and younger) serving in the military. Some of these young people have had the sacred honor of fighting (some sacrificing their very lives) in wars in order to keep us and the rest of the free world safe, a grievous burden that should not be placed on the shoulders of these teenagers. And these same young adults who dedicate their lives to the protection of American freedom cannot even partake in a pint of beer after blasting the brains out of our enemy. This problem can be completely eliminated by the 21GMAM which would not allow anyone under the age of 21 to serve in any of the armed forces. That law would work twofold by eliminating the entire old enough to carry a gun but not old enough to drink argument and as well as guaranteeing that only our adults are getting killed serving in our military. Our children would not have to be sacrificed for our freedom. It also may increase the number finishing high school and maybe, continuing to higher education which in turn would make for a more productive and educated adult society decreasing the need for such things as government supported services aimed at those persons under the age of 21.
And to continue on the decreasing need theme, the driving age should be changed to 21 as well. Insurance premiums for teenage boys 18 to 21 are higher than those of adults (though it usually decreases for both sexes at 25). Why not save money and expense across the board and not allow anyone under 21 behind the wheel? This would limit insurance companies’ abilities to set premiums due to age and sex as 21GMAM would verify adulthood and responsibility for both males and females. This law would also rectify a plethora of other issues to include (but not limited to) fewer vehicles (all those driven and/or owned by teens) on the highways, teens talking on cell phones while driving, teens laughing and chatting with other teens in the vehicle while driving, teens searching for the songs on iPods and radios while driving, teens texting teens while driving, and teen drivers racing vehicles against other teen drivers. Circumstances such as these are factors resulting in the following statistics; “motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for 15-20 year olds” and “77% of teen crashes involved avoidable driver errors” (as posted on the Arizona Driving School website). These types of fatalities can be completely eliminated under the 21GMAM Law. And finally, this law would prevent teens from using their vehicles to partake in sexual activities.
This works as a great segue into another issue that is rampant in society today and could be eliminated with the 21GMAM; underage sex and its financial and social ramifications. These would be decreased if only individuals of legal adult age could partake in the pleasures of the flesh. It should become law that no one under the age of 21 be allowed carnal knowledge of another without the threat of physical incarceration of the teen and monetary fines to be paid by a teen’s parent(s). Any child conceived from such an illegal means should be put into homes sponsored and paid for by Pro-Life and/or religious organizations. This would lower teen pregnancies, would slow the advancement of STDs among the younger generation, and therefore have a positive effect on the population, sexual health and moral problems plaguing society today.
I realize that the 21GMAM would mean that we would need special facilities to house these types of criminals; after all, one does not want to put an underage drinker or sexually promiscuous teen in the same facility as a hardened, violent criminal. But I feel they could be put into the public housing being utilized by those welfare adults and their families who refuse to find employment that are burdening our society. The orphanages, now sponsored by pro-Life non-profit organizations, can reopen to house the children born to those giving birth under the age of 21, which in turn would provide jobs and housing for the unemployed who used to live on food stamps and welfare in the government housing now being utilized by criminals. The children in these facilities can be raised to take low-income employment (construction, manufacturing or leisure hospitality jobs) which would eliminate the illegal immigration problem that is rampant in our country. It is true that the automobile industry as well as the oil industry would suffer as the number of vehicles on the road would decrease drastically, but the result would be lower toxic emissions in the atmosphere and a greener America which would put a smile on the faces of the left-wing liberals who would probably find issues with the 21GMAM law. And finally, our children would not be dying on foreign soil in a war begun by a leadership voted into office by legal, mature, responsible, twenty-one year old adults.
One of the biggest privileges as an adult is the right to vote. To have the honor of choosing our leadership should be limited to mature and responsible human beings. The voting choices placed in front of an individual can be overwhelming especially if the voter is not old enough to fully comprehend or appreciate this heavy responsibility. The drinking law proves that the government presently does not feel an 18 year old is responsible enough to make the right decision when it comes to alcohol (not just wine or beer but any alcohol) so therefore it can be assumed that the government does not feel an 18 year old is responsible enough to make any major decisions to include voting for an elected official. This is further stressed by our own Constitution that states no one can serve in an elected position until the age of 25. The logical course would follow that even our own government believes only those old enough to make decisions are intelligent enough to make the right decisions. Hence, the 21 years old Government Mandated Age of Maturity (21GMAM) would apply to the legal age of voting and the right to choose any and all elected officials in every State of the Union.
Another grossly debated point made in this continued under-age drinking argument is the fact we have 18 year olds (and younger) serving in the military. Some of these young people have had the sacred honor of fighting (some sacrificing their very lives) in wars in order to keep us and the rest of the free world safe, a grievous burden that should not be placed on the shoulders of these teenagers. And these same young adults who dedicate their lives to the protection of American freedom cannot even partake in a pint of beer after blasting the brains out of our enemy. This problem can be completely eliminated by the 21GMAM which would not allow anyone under the age of 21 to serve in any of the armed forces. That law would work twofold by eliminating the entire old enough to carry a gun but not old enough to drink argument and as well as guaranteeing that only our adults are getting killed serving in our military. Our children would not have to be sacrificed for our freedom. It also may increase the number finishing high school and maybe, continuing to higher education which in turn would make for a more productive and educated adult society decreasing the need for such things as government supported services aimed at those persons under the age of 21.
And to continue on the decreasing need theme, the driving age should be changed to 21 as well. Insurance premiums for teenage boys 18 to 21 are higher than those of adults (though it usually decreases for both sexes at 25). Why not save money and expense across the board and not allow anyone under 21 behind the wheel? This would limit insurance companies’ abilities to set premiums due to age and sex as 21GMAM would verify adulthood and responsibility for both males and females. This law would also rectify a plethora of other issues to include (but not limited to) fewer vehicles (all those driven and/or owned by teens) on the highways, teens talking on cell phones while driving, teens laughing and chatting with other teens in the vehicle while driving, teens searching for the songs on iPods and radios while driving, teens texting teens while driving, and teen drivers racing vehicles against other teen drivers. Circumstances such as these are factors resulting in the following statistics; “motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for 15-20 year olds” and “77% of teen crashes involved avoidable driver errors” (as posted on the Arizona Driving School website). These types of fatalities can be completely eliminated under the 21GMAM Law. And finally, this law would prevent teens from using their vehicles to partake in sexual activities.
This works as a great segue into another issue that is rampant in society today and could be eliminated with the 21GMAM; underage sex and its financial and social ramifications. These would be decreased if only individuals of legal adult age could partake in the pleasures of the flesh. It should become law that no one under the age of 21 be allowed carnal knowledge of another without the threat of physical incarceration of the teen and monetary fines to be paid by a teen’s parent(s). Any child conceived from such an illegal means should be put into homes sponsored and paid for by Pro-Life and/or religious organizations. This would lower teen pregnancies, would slow the advancement of STDs among the younger generation, and therefore have a positive effect on the population, sexual health and moral problems plaguing society today.
I realize that the 21GMAM would mean that we would need special facilities to house these types of criminals; after all, one does not want to put an underage drinker or sexually promiscuous teen in the same facility as a hardened, violent criminal. But I feel they could be put into the public housing being utilized by those welfare adults and their families who refuse to find employment that are burdening our society. The orphanages, now sponsored by pro-Life non-profit organizations, can reopen to house the children born to those giving birth under the age of 21, which in turn would provide jobs and housing for the unemployed who used to live on food stamps and welfare in the government housing now being utilized by criminals. The children in these facilities can be raised to take low-income employment (construction, manufacturing or leisure hospitality jobs) which would eliminate the illegal immigration problem that is rampant in our country. It is true that the automobile industry as well as the oil industry would suffer as the number of vehicles on the road would decrease drastically, but the result would be lower toxic emissions in the atmosphere and a greener America which would put a smile on the faces of the left-wing liberals who would probably find issues with the 21GMAM law. And finally, our children would not be dying on foreign soil in a war begun by a leadership voted into office by legal, mature, responsible, twenty-one year old adults.
Valentine's Day's Symbol of Love and Romance
My daughter and I were discussing Valentine traditions yesterday when a dozen roses was brought into the conversation. Neither of us quite understand cut flowers as being a symbol of lasting love. Yes, they are beautiful and, yes they smell devine (sometimes), but they don't last long. I suggested they were a symbol of romance, which can be fleeting, and not love, which can be lasting. She suggested that people should can the cut flowers and purchase plants that when nurtured, like love, will grow. I told her I would make that suggestion. So, all of you people out there, we are reinventing Valentine traditions which from hence forth will include the giving of live plants (to symbolize lasting love) and cut flowers (to symbolize a quick toss in the hay). You will know what your sweetheart wants by the gift you receive. Please pass it on!
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Another interesting Blog by Mr. Rugare
I was just cruising through my neighborhood blog sites, catching up on my reading and trying to discover interesting tidbits that I could use in my persuasive essay, when I fell into this wonderful, witty bit of thoughtfulness presented by Mr. Tony Rugare. It centers around cliches and their present use and his interpretations of them as well as where some were originated.
An example of his perusing follows:
"Is “ let the wine breathe” a cliché? It is certainly overused and maybe even a questionable practice. Personally I prefer to aid the breathing by applying CPR to a glass of wine. "
Posted by Museful
http://aboutcliches.blogspot.com/
Yes, these are fun. If you have a moment, go on over and check it out. I'm sure it will put a smile on your face as well as an idea or two in your head!
An example of his perusing follows:
"Is “ let the wine breathe” a cliché? It is certainly overused and maybe even a questionable practice. Personally I prefer to aid the breathing by applying CPR to a glass of wine. "
Posted by Museful
http://aboutcliches.blogspot.com/
Yes, these are fun. If you have a moment, go on over and check it out. I'm sure it will put a smile on your face as well as an idea or two in your head!
Monday, February 9, 2009
Higher Education
I needed a college/unversity that would allow me to take only online courses as working at the Bed & Breakfast didn't give me a set schedule and I really wasn't sure where I would be in 6 weeks let alone one year. I was hoping a college such as Mary Baldwin or James Madison would have fallen into this category, but alas, this was not in the cards. So, after much research I chose an online university with the hopes of getting through this education process rather quickly and with as little pain (financially and mentally) as possible but with a degree in an accredited school. So far so good, but I am now questioning my choice.
I am taking a Creative Writing course, not English 101 but something that should be taken after one understands sentence structure and grammer. Yet, I have three, maybe four, students in my class who do not seem to have a grasp of the English language let alone comprehending basic writing and vocabulary skills. And now I am left to wonder what was the point of entrance and placement exams if anyone who can barely read English can take these courses. Worse still, will having a degree from DeVry actually be beneficial? Guess I need to graduate to find out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)