Where Can We Draw The Line?

When does the right to freedom of speech become a burden? In American society, the right to free speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression are assumed from birth. As Americans, these rights are entitled to each and every one of us, but is there a limit? If citizens have an issue, protests and rallies are an effective way to get their voices heard. Many situations can allow freedom of speech but can a line be drawn on an entitled right?

Freedom of speech happens to be one of the major issues being tackled by the US Supreme Court this term. While Albert Snyder mourned at his son Mathew Snyder’s funeral, a Marine Lave Corporal who was killed in Iraq in 2006, he was further victimized by members of a local Kansa Baptist church as they protested at the funeral.

Protesters held signs that said things like “Thank God for Dead Soldiers” while wearing shirts with the phrase “God Hates Fags” printed across the front. This kind of behavior is atrocious especially coming from a religious group. Where is the compassion for others? Where is the tolerance that religion promotes? A man was killed as a part of a collective effort to protect people like them, to keep them safe. Even though they might not have agreed with his lifestyle, the way they showed their opinions was tactless, distasteful, immoral, and not to mention it didn’t portray them as the Christians they would like to be seen as. Albert Snyder sued the Reverend Fred W. Phelps and his followers for intentional infliction of emotional distress and was awarded $5 million but the decision was overturned. The courts ruled that the church was covered by their 1^st amendment right to freedom of speech. Snyder claims, “This is not freedom of speech, this is targeted harassment.” With this I completely agree.

Sue.Me.

Commentary by Kendra Mells


"Freedom Ain't Free"

Freedom of Speech. Freedom to Assemble. Freedom of expression. Free. Free. FREE. These so-called "civil rights" are constantly being debated in modern day society to the point where they should be deemed "civil sources of unrest". The bottom line is, our American government has arranged for its citizens to be granted certain rights- BUT -it is the duty of both the governement and the citizens to ensure that these sensitive civil rights are enforced in such a manner as to not place the rights of any citizen over the rights of another. In fact, the above argument is making appeals to the prejudices of tehe people, rather than the actual situation at hand. Sound complicated? Exactly my point.

Each citizen realizes that he or she is granted these rights, but the government must make sure that the citizens knows that these rights stretch only as far as they can without infringing on the rights of another citizen. True, it was morally wrong of the protestors to infringe on the funeral of Snyder's son, but exactly which civil right of Snyder's did the protestors infringe on? Did they infringe on any rights at all? If no, then surely the courts were justified in overturning the suit, but if yes, then Snyder's award was completely justifiable. The true dilemma at hand, though, is not whether or not morals were in action with either party- it is instead whether not official civil rights were being violated by any party. As much as we all want for the good guys to win all the time, sometimes good or bad is not the issue at hand. Sometimes, the bad guys win, regardless of their moral standings. In other words, of course a line can be drawn on civil rights- it must be drawn to ensure that everyone is granted their rights. That, my friends, is the beauty of democracy!

Hide Ya Kids, Hide Ya Wives

You've all seen it before: any time African Americans must appear on the news, the news anchor seems to find the most ignorant, badly-dressed, incorrect-grammar-speaking African American to blast their story across the 6pm nightly. While everyone deserves their five minutes of fame, I find it personally disturbing when I see African Americans being "ignant" on national television, or any television for that matter; it is truly embarrassing for us as a people...but the fact that society finds it so entertaining makes me wonder: Do news stations intentionally pick out these particular African Americans to broadcast? Or is it happening simply by chance?

The Antoine Dodson story is probably the most embarrassing incident of a display of recent African American ignorance. The story behind Antoine Dodson is that someone broke into his sister's house attempting to rape her, but the public ignored the fact that Dodson's sister was almost raped, and instead focused on Dodson, who was rather "flamboyantly feminine" and made a mockery of him. Dodson's acclaimed fame came as a result of this, and although he may have enjoyed it, I wonder whether or not Dodson's extensive media coverage was intentional as to make a mockery of him or not? Second, I wonder why Dodson allowed this to happen? And third, I wonder if the rest of African American society feels as embarrassed as I do about Dodson's portrayal in the media?

While Dodson is only one example, there are many others and the question at hand is: Why? Why are there rarely any educated, grammatically-correct African Americans featured in our news story? And why do we allow these stories to cover our people, knowing that we'll be made a mockery of? Unfortunately, this is the embarrassment of being black, so while Dodson was made a mockery of, maybe we really should consider "hiding our kids, hiding our wives, and hiding our husbands too" because the media is making a mockery of our people, and we are standing by, allowing it to happen. When will the embarrassment end?

Kendra Mells
                                           


It is indeed true that the media offers everyone five minutes of fame, however it is certainly each person's own choice to stand in front of the news cameras and be apart of  interviews that could possibly portray them as ingorant or highly intelligent. No one forces those people to become apart of those interviews and even when they conduct those interviews, they always have the option of changing their voices and other effects. To simply say that the media intentionally chooses ignorant and uneducated Black people to represent the entire Black community is a fallacy we like to call hasty generaliztion.

As a viewer of the news, I will admit that you often times are forced to see the blatantly uneducated, poorly dressed and down right ignorant image of Black people, however it is not the only image that the news broadcasts. Of course the first person that comes to mind when you think about positive Black people on the news would be President Obama and his inauguration; but for more common people, I can remember myself as well as about forty five other students from my high school being on the news because we raised a quarter of a million dollars to travel to Egypt, Africa.

All of this is to say that though you often times find yourself seeing very poor images of Black people in the media; if you very carefully, you will find that there are some positive images of Black people.

Commentary by: Khyajuanna Cooksey

Education or Exploitation?

Outside of a religious context, the act of being lawfully married to more than one person at a time, otherwise known as bigamy, is illegal and punishable by Utah law by up to five years in prison. Constitutional amendments allow for freedom of religion and freedom of expression. The problem lies when nationally broadcasting such religious beliefs like polygamy that align so closely with breaking the law. The practice of polygamy in Western families was founded on religious terms but I think over the years those terms and beliefs have been stretched to more selfish reasons.

TLC has recently launched a new series titled “Sister Wives” which depicts the life of a polygamist family that includes one husband, three wives, and 13 children. Following the release of the series, an investigation of the family was launched by Utah officials. Legally the husband, Kody Brown, is only married to one spouse but he also refers to his other two partners as his wives. Under Utah law, bigamy is not only limited to marriage but the charge also extends to cohabitation.

In 2001 the state of Utah prosecuted polygamist Tom Green under bigamy charges after “promoting his lifestyle on national TV talk shows.” Green was convicted on criminal nonsupport, child rape and bigamy charges. After 6 years in prison he was released. The Brown family saw the TLC program as a form of educating the public about their lifestyle but that resulted in a criminal investigation that not only affects the parents but the 13 children involved.

Investigating and prosecuting polygamist families is not aggressive unless abuse, sexual assault or fraud is suspected. Similar to same sex marriages, plural families are still very taboo in our society. With such a sensitive topic why subject the children involved to such attention?

Educating others about alternate religious beliefs or alternate lifestyles in general promotes tolerance but where do we draw the line between education and exploitation?

Sue.Me.


Commentary by Kendra Mells

Who Will Be Next?

Polygamy and polygamous families are very “touchy” subjects in general, but once again, the ever-so-popular debate over morals and politics blows everything out of proportion. One may ask, “is this education or exploitation” when dealing with children from a polygamous family, but do they ask that same question when dealing with children from divorced families? Or children from homosexual or bisexual families? Children of swingers? Children of mixed race families? Children with incarcerated parents? Or maybe even children with disabilities or children raised by people with disabilities?

The point that I’m trying to make is that at some point, we must draw the line. America was built as a place of refuge and on a platform of acceptance, yet we continue to poke and prod things at extreme levels so as to not allow anything outside of our “norm” become an acceptable part of society. Polygamous family living is outside of the “American” norm, we all recognize this as true, but it will not become a part of the norm until we learn to leave it alone, and as stated above, Kody Brown is legally married to only one of his “wives”. The entire thing is blown out of proportion- no one ever claimed The Brady Bunch was a sector of child exploitation! Until society stops poking and prodding, we will forever be in disdain….and think about it…for the kids that are members of Brown’s family, the impending investigation and public criticism of their family is possibly the most demeaning exploitation that they have experienced thus far. How would you feel if an entire country was attempting to tear your family apart?

I Will Beat the Skin Off Of You

Imagine coming home from a hot, long and tiring day of work only to find that your son is running around the house like a savage beast, smashing every piece of glass in his way and drawing on every wall in the house with permanent marker. Is it safe to assume that your son, whom you may love with all of your heart and would give the world to, deserves to get a spanking? 

In a society that is so concerned with child abuse and child safety, parents are often times forced to walk a fine line between what's socially accepted as disciplining your child and what is seen as child abuse. Some parents often times wonder if I spank my child with my hand, is that abuse because I am physically stronger than my child; or if I spank my child with a belt, is someone going to say I am physically abusing my child and potentially call child services to report me?

If people were not as consumed with the flaws someone else or what they were doing with their children then parents would be able to prevent many of the unfortunate situations that occur daily within American society. As children get older and mature, disciplinary actions that once worked when they were infants and adolescents no longer give parents the desired outcome and subsequently parents must adjust and develop new actions. But too many times parents are forced to hear the infamous line from Tyler Perry's Madea's Family Reunion, "if you touch me I'm gonna call 911" because children learn early on that all they have to do is tell an authority figure that their parents are abusing them and parents instantly transform into babysitters.

I overheard someone say "most of the problems that we have today is because parents don't discipline their children." If parents are forced to discipline their kids with empty threats because society doesn't think it's acceptable to spank children; or because children are to easily allowed to scream abuse and be taken away from their home, then high crime rates and poor test grades in school should be expected. So the next time someone says "she or he's a 'bad parent' because their child runs wild," think from the perspective of a parent that is a virtual puppet because society confines them to certain methods for disciplining their child.

There is a thin line between discipline and child abuse. Many parents and gaurdians blur this line and the result ends up being that the child's safety and well being are in danger. The definition of discipline may vary from person to person from one extreme to another but instead of resorting to capital punishment there are other alternatives. Spanking your child could become dangerous especially if the parent is angry while doing so.

Discipline doesn’t mean that you have to beat your child black and blue to get your point across. Simply using a time-out method, where you isolate the child for their wrong doing is an effective method. Parents should also consider the future effects of physically punishing their children. Some children grow up to resent their parents for the methods of discipline that have been used on them.

Sue.Me.

The Sound of Music

Imagine this: You’re sitting in class and your professor gives out some vital information, but you just couldn’t quite catch exactly what he/she was saying, so, you lean over to your neighbor to ask for clarification, but your neighbor cannot decipher what your professor stated either. You then lean over to your other neighbor, whom also is clueless, as is the rest of your teenage class… So what are your options? What strange epidemic has caused the loss of hearing in the 20+ students enrolled in your class?

As unfortunate as this event may sound, it is actually happening in schools and colleges across the nation. Hearing loss has increased roughly 30% since 2006, according to a recent study by researcher Gary C. Curhan MD, ScD, associate professor of medicine and epidemiology at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health. Also unfortunate is the source of this hearing loss amongst American teens- technology.

It is not uncommon to travel around town and see children as young as age ten blasting music in their ears; we are, in fact, a technology-driven society. Furthermore, the damage is now beginning to surface before the affected even reach their teen years. That being said, we must note that children of even younger ages than ten are gaining access to these hearing-damaging devices, and it is also pertinent that we examine even the mediums with the best intentions that deliver exposure to the sources. For example: parents.

Adolescents- teens and children, especially, gain access to these devices through their parents. After all, eight-year-old mike has no way of earning the $200 he needs to buy the new iPod touch- of course he’s gaining access to it from his parents, so while some may argue that iPod should take responsibility for damage incurred by its devices, parents should, in fact, take responsibility for furnishing the devices which are ruining the hearing of their children.

Adolescents in today’s era are deemed the “iPod Generation”. “Hours after hours of iPod, television, and radio use seem to be the source of all the hearing loss ‘hoopla’”, said the Boston Herald. “No more than an hour of listening is recommended per day, over-the-ear headphones should be used, and turning down the volume will help keep listeners safe from harmful decibel levels. Over 28 million Americans suffer from hearing loss, and nearly half are younger than 65.”

If this abuse of technology and irresponsibility of its users continues, who knows what the future for the “iPod Generation” holds? Regardless of the paths we take in life, hearing is an important aspect of any state-of-being. So the next time Miley Cyrus wants you to “put your hands up”, make sure you turn the volume down...or you just might miss out on that “Party in the USA”.

Sources:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=118997
http://media.barometer.orst.edu/media/storage/paper854/news/2007/05/16/News/Loud-Listening.Ipods.Causing.Hearing.Loss-2904296.shtml
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67H0CJ20100818

Commentary By: Khyajuanna Cooksey

Though the thought of hearing loss has been on the rise since 2006, the issue at hand cannot be blamed on just one party alone. After all, aren't we the ones that chose to place the volume as high as it could go; and aren't companies such as Apple partially to blame as well? It is illogical to only blame parents for the increase of hearing loss because they account for only one portion of the equation and equally so, companies that produce such devices cannot take full responsibility because they give their consumers volumes that they are able to adjust either higher or lower. Though they are not the ones to be blamed, mainstream media does nothing to advocate for people that suffer from hearing loss due to continual use of such loud devices!

As parents purchase ipods and or mp3 players it is your job to  look at the benefits and risks that associate with each product and decide if you are going to purchase such products. With that being said, as a producer of such devices I have to ensure my consumers quality as well as safety. I cannot create such problems and adopt the attitude "I can't be blamed because you chose to use my product, it's right here in my contract!" It's almost as if they were tobacco companies and the consumers were people that suffered from all types of diseases and disorders because of the product!

Such a topic really causes one to think. As a parent, am I to blame for my child's or my own hearing loss because I decided to purchase this device and not make sure that little Mike didn't have it on the highest volume setting? Or as the company that produces these ipods and mp3 players, am I the one to be blamed because I created a product knowing that if a child used my product on the highest volume setting, it could possibly cause damage to his or her hearing? This question cannot be easily answered nor can the problem be easily solved by blaming the entire issue only on one factor of the equation!

Crazy On The Clock

Have you ever been having an amazing day? Then as soon as you turn on the television and get stuck on the news there is some depressing report that just deflates your “good day” bubble? One of the many trends of violence that continues to be broadcasted is violence amongst co workers in the workplace.

In the same way that schools offer open counseling to their students, employers should also consider this option. We are all aware that there are people in our society that may not be as stable as they should. Unfortunately, it is sometimes hard to point out those who are liable to snap from those who aren’t. Even so, everyone would still want security even in the workplace. Over the course of the year there have been several incidents plastered over the news from all over the country concerning violence in the workplace.
In March, an Ohio State University Janitor opened fire on two coworkers killing one and injuring the other and then turned the gun on himself following a bad evaluation report. In April a woman in Tarpon Springs, FL, shot and killed her co worker while he sat in his car after he filed reports against her for working off the clock and threatening him. Although the family of the victim denies this, the suspect’s family claims she was taunted and teased by the victim about her perfectionist work habits. In early August an employee at a Connecticut beer distribution company fatally shot 8 of his co workers before taking his own life after leaving a disciplinary meeting in which his supervisors provided video surveillance of him stealing kegs of beer. In late August a Dallas woman fatally shot her male co worker in the chest who she said was her “closest friend” claiming it was a “sign from god” that told her to do it.

“According to U.S. Labor Statistics the number of workplace homicides decreased by little more than half from 1994, when they were 1,080 to 2008 when they were 517.” (Farlow). Conflict is in human nature but conflict resolution can be learned. Even though the numbers in this area of violence has decreased you can never be too safe. More need to be done to help those who need it and save future victims.

By: Sue.Me.





Commentary by Kendra Mells


When Will We Draw the Line?


Last Thursday, little Mary ate so many Twix bars that her stomach hurt. As a result, she felt ill the next morning and stayed home from school. Now although Mary realized the consequences of her actions as she was filling up on Twix bars, her school thought "hmmm....Mary is not to blame- instead we should sue Twix for her absence"...

Sound fallacious? It should- but virtually the same thing is happening in corporate offices all over America. "Workplace Violence" [as it has been deemed] is "violence or the threat of violence against workers both inside and outside of the workplace (OSHA*)", and while acts of violence are clearly the actions of individuals, businesses are now being held responsible for the actions of employees.

Many argue that employers should offer counseling to their employees to reduce the risk of Workplace Violence, but it seems, rather, that society has just become too comfortable with allowing others to take responsibility for individual actions. At what point will the blame be placed on the acting individual rather than an outside source? It is true that many jobs evoke stress in employees, but in truth, life is stressful in itself.

People are all different and react differently to varying situations, but at some point, someone has to stand up and say "It is my fault and I am taking responsibility". Until that happens, regardless of counseling or any other alternatives to dealing with stress, society will continue to have problems with people committing acts of violence because there is no one to answer to and no responsibility to be taken.

Mary may have eaten herself into illness, but she is less likely to do it again if her school holds her accountable for her actions, rather than twix.



*http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/factsheet-workplace-violence.pdf