Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

AmbivalentEye

Regulars
  • Posts

    144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AmbivalentEye

  1. "Someone also mentioned teenagers being sad. I was a depressed teenager once, but I knew that once I left home and went to college life would change. Although I was depressed and on the brink of suicide, the obvious potential of the rest of my life prevented me from taking my own life. A situation that warrants suicide is a permanent one, it is one the denies value to you for the rest of your life...yes...like Socrates. " Yes, I'll add to this and include myself as well. I mean, everyone has their moments of doubt, but usually it takes very little to change my mind. :-) I had a friend once who met me after swimming practice and we somehow ended up discussing the topic of suicide. She told me, "You know, it's probably impossible to get me to actually commit suicide. I mean, I think of it occasionally as any person does, but I guess my metality is that if I feel like commiting suicide, then I always have the option to call one of those Teen Hotlines. So I would callone of Hotlines and it would go on as follows: (ring, ring) (please wait while we connect you to a counselor) Counselor: Hi my name is Susan, how can I help you? Me: Hi, umm.... I keep thinking I should take my own life. Counselor: But dear, if you took your won life, do you realize that you would never see flowers again? Me: Really??? No Flowers!?!? Counselor: No....not one Me: Ok, then I guess I change my mind. (Hangs up) >>>> Ok, I know this is extremely stupid but I couldn;t help but laugh because I'm sure if I called a hotline and they said something like that to me, I'd probably change my mind too. Usually when I'm on the verge of suicide, I'm so depressed that my mind closes itself off to any good concept. Just being reminded of a single good thing I enjoyed in my life would keep me alive at least for a couple more minutes. Basically, anything good helps. We just have to be reminded of our values. I also agree with another essay I read last week about a woman with multiple sclerosis. She wrote about a time that she had been asked by her doctors if she would sign off on a legal permission to be "terminated" in the case that her illness got so bad that she could no longer move or speak. She said she simply could not sign it. Let me try to quote it directly: "Gradually I came to understand that the Nancy who might one day lie inert under a bedsheet, arms and legs paralyzed, unable to feed or bathe herself, unable to reach out for a gun, a bottle of pills... was not the Nancy I was at present, and that I could not presume to make decisions for that future Nancy, who may well not want in the least to die. Now the only provision I've made for the future Nancy is that when the time comes, she is not to be treated with machines. If she is unable to communicate by then, I hope she will be satisfied with these terms. My life is a lesson in losses. I learn one at a time." I think I would feel the same way. I couldn't make a decision for someone I will someday be. It feels the same as it would to intrude on the choice of someone else.
  2. I'm sorry, but at this point in my life I am firmly stuck to the belief that LIFE itself IS a value. No life should be unjustly taken away and I don't think it can ever be justified to take your own life because as an idealist I always retain a belief in Hope and Possibility against all odds. I wouldn't want people saying during my comma, "oh, he's a vegetable so we mightas well get rid of him". It's simply too sad ti think about lifes being taken away when it isn't a person's time. (and by "time", I mean that the body has not yet exhausted all of its ability, I'm not refering to God or predestination). He does this because it isn't right for her to be tortured or his sake. He is willing to face the pain and take whatever comes in order to preserve the principle that life should not be at the expense of others. It isn't necessarily suicide. I know I just refuted these at the begining of my post, but I actually like your argument. It seems more clear to me now even though I still cannot ethically support a suicide. I think if I were in a situation where I could no longer live to achive new values or produce anything for myself any longer, I know there are hundreds of people in my life that look to me for support because, I guess like Rand's characters, I've always represented something greater for them. I think I'd keep myself alive simply to preserve that. I'd keep myself alive in the torture simply because of my conviction that "IT IS POSSIBLE. AND IT'S WORTH LIVING FOR". LIFE is an end in itself, as I am. I do not need anything else to justify my desire to live.
  3. I hate how everywhere I go, when the topic of communism arises for whatever reason, someone ALWAYS says: "Oh, but communism isn't bad. It's horrible in practice, but the theory behind is is actually very great." AHHHHHHHH!!!!!! How can I possibly get it into people's heads that this is wrong? Isn't this the primary issue? The reason why communism always has a chance of coming back is because there are thousands that still believe it is a very noble idea to make everyone equals and have governments regulating the distribution of goods. Everytime someone says something like this I just want to scream. Most of the people that make these comments are alsoreligious, so they use altruism as an excuse, then suddenly I feel like stabbing a Bible because of it's notion of "Love your neighbor more than yourself". Someone please help me.... -J
  4. I'm actually very glad you posted this. I always saw Ayn Rand's characters as "natural objectivists", they were born that way. They had those priciples to begin with and built upon them their whole lives. I've been wondering if this is only possible because they are fiction characters? Can someone really be born as an objectivist? Can a 5 year old really stand on the tracks of and intercontinental railway and see the prospects of existence and feel that sense of promising fulfillment or happiness. How could you tell if an infant that says "WOW!" when he sees a skyscraper is really just delighted, shckoed, or if he actually perceives a principle? Do you understand what I mean by this? Ever since I read Atlas Shrugged, I felt like I was Eric (was his name Eric? Dagny's assistant?). Like I could see all these great things in the world around me, but I still had to establish my standards and incorporate those principles into my life. So are we really all like that? Learning as we go? or are some people just born into it? -J
  5. >>>Exactly! I mean, I understand that it is wrong to sue illegal medicine but come on! It's your life! I know if I was in the situation, I could care less if it was donated by the mafia, I'd just want to keep myself alive. It was never implied in the post that only 4 out of the 5 could survine because of a limited amount of antibiotic. Therefore, he wouldn't be sacrificing someone else for the sake of himself. He basically died with a possibilty to live right there within his grasp. Yes....it is illegal, but I honestly don't care. Puritans used to burn families for denying the existence of God, that was a law for them. Not all laws are right. The only reason the black market is illegal is because of its economic implications. It's like crossing a desert, finding a lake and being told you can't drink from it because it's "private territory" owned by the state. Do you understand why I disapprove of this? I don't think this would be one of those principles worth dying for. How is it at the expense of someone else's life? He didn't die to save someone else. He died to preserve the law. And why is the medication illegal anyway. Why is that specific antibiotic banned from entering the country? I guess I can't grasp this entire situation. It seems absurd to me. "Oh, I'll risk my death because I would prefer not to take some tylenol that was snuck in from Cuba." Come on!! ok, I'm just going to stop because I know you guys will be attacking me on all this as it is. Ok, I can agree with this. At least someone understands some of my reasoning. I know one cannot really vindicate or rationalize an immoral act, but how is self-preservation immoral?
  6. " I find it a bit ironic that these groups came over here in the 1600's, to avoid persecution. Then as soon as they established themselves some of those groups immediately began persecution of others. Specifically the widespread witch burnings of the 1600's. I believe this was isolated to a few specific groups in the New England colonies, however." Yes, you are right. it was with the Puritans. Puritans established the Massachusetts Bay colony saying that they would have religious freedom, but in fact, they were only referring to themselves. Puritans often exiled pilgrims and spent their time burning Quakers. Puritan ideals were always very strictly enforced in the colonial era and I believe ore than 2/3 of the religious conflicts during this time was due to their plans to "purify" society.
  7. The actual Bill I wrote that was accepted by congress: A Bill to Provide Amnesty for Immigrant Students and Families 1. Be it enacted by this FFL Student Congress here assembled that: 2. Section I: Amnesty shall be provided for immigrant students and 3. families of students that have resided in the US for 5 years. 4. Section II: Legal amnesty shall be provided on the condition that 5. the student(s) had to have been enrolled in the US Education 6. system for a minimal period of five years. 7. Section III: The student shall also be required to have the 8. sincere intent and determination to pursue post-secondary 9. education within the US. 10. Section IV: The family(ies) of said students shall not attain 11. legalization or amnesty until there is acquired proof of the 12. students enrollment in a US college or university. 13. Section V: This legislation shall take effect within 6 months of 14. being passed by this FFL Student Congress Assembly. 15. Section VI: The US Immigration and Naturalization Agency 16. shall fully assume responsibility for the enactment of lawful 17. permanent resident statuses (LPS) for all the aforementioned 18. eligible undergraduates. The processes shall be overseen and 19. endorsed by the Department of Children and Families. 20. Section VII: All laws or portions of laws in conflict with the 21. provisions of this legislation shall hereby be declared null and void. Respectfully Submitted, -J
  8. Speech Version Two: In the past 4 years there has been an average of 76,000 male illegal immigrants under the age of 16, and 75,300 female immigrants into the United States annually. Why are they here? Because they had no other choice. Statistically, 92.6% of the youth immigrating to the United States each year do so, either without personal consent, or out of resignation to the choices of their parents. In Florida alone, 18% of those 151,300 youths are students enrolled in the US education system. That adds up to roughly 27,000 students in Florida that “don’t exist”, because they lack a nine-digit identification number known as social security. Because of this, at the completion of their high school career, most of them will be doomed to a life of scorn, disapproving odds, and most likely, even deportation back to a country they barely know, just because of the guilt placed upon the decisions of their parents. A child, though hopeless to the choices of his guardians, is endowed with the same legal status as his parents if he is not native born to the states. Is it just me, or does this sound a little too much like the Virginia Slave Acts, which stated that any Negro child born to a slave mother would inherit her status and be fated to a life of servitude? Well, if you choose to disregard this similarity it’s the same nature. The unjust policy currently being enforced, places thousands of prospective students in impossible situations that cripple them from establishing their own lives according to the American ideals they were raised by. Psychological and sociological studies done by a group of Harvard students have proven that immigrant students value school more than native-born. The study showed that 42% of native-born students display negative opinions of their education and their futures, only 20% had good opinions, and the rest had no comment. Likewise for immigrant students, 80% really valued their schools and held hopes in their future, while the rest remained neutral. Immigrant students throughout the past decade have demonstrated a sincere desire and determination to do well in school and the majority hope to pursue post-secondary education. Yet, despite their efforts, the US government is constantly on a quest to deport all illegals, often sending back with them some of the top ranking students of the state. My bill is to provide amnesty for these students who have been in the United States for a minimum of five years. It also includes their families. The Office of Immigrant Archives shows that immigrants make up 12.8% of this country’s workforce, and 40% of them are involved in agriculture, construction, or service occupations. This group is a significant support of the country’s economy, even though diplomats generally choose to ignore this factor. The average annual wage of immigrant workers has been estimated to be between $13,200 - $30,900. That’s less than even teachers make, but you don’t see random immigrants complaining everyday about their wages. Their low wages are the sustenance of their lives, like education is the sustenance of the immigrant student’s. Amnesty would provide identification for all of these people, it would have this “hidden” working class finally pay taxes, and it would open the doors for more promising students with the dream of representing this country as Americans.
  9. wow, Jen....I can't believe you took the time to actually go through it like that. Thank you so much! I really love most of the things you did to it except for maybe one or two things that begin to cut away at my personal style. It is alright. I am very graeteful for your kindness in revising my speech. But the truth is that it turn out I won't really be using this speech anymore. well, I don't know, maybe you could help me out with a suggestion on how I could best get my point across. This speech is for a Student Congress competition I will be attending on Tuesday, so I still have time to make revisions. The problem is that I spoke to my friend who has been nicknamed the "Debate Nazi", because she's the best person to go to when you need your speech slaughtered for specific details that are weakening it. I read my speech to her over the phone and from what she was able to retain, she basically said it was too emotional for Congress and maybe I should use it for an Oratory event which involves more of a personal stance as well as a social criticism. She told me my speech had to be more about facts because Congress doesn't really care about how I feel about the topic, only about my position and the knowledge I use to support it. Because of this, I wrote another speech that I will post in a moment. Let me know if you agree that the new speech is more direct, credible, and still persuasive. Thank you again. Now in regards to the comments you left me: "The worst part, though, is that you, at first, advocate providing amnesty to the children (who had no choice), and then you sneak in the idea of extending this amnesty to their entire family, which presumably includes adults that DID have a choice. Unless this was intentional (in which case it was dishonest), this ruins your entire speech; the points you were arguing don't apply to the parents." yes, I understand and I actually felt that myself when I wrote it, and it really bothered me. The problem was that my original bill (that I will also be posting momentarily), stated that amnesty would be given to the student's families as well, because it isn't reasonable for a 7th grader to be legal in this country if his parents are still being deported. I just hate to see families torn apart, but I wasn't sure how to incorporate that into my speech because of the fact that the family is not my primary focus at all. My focus is the student. In the second version of my speech I encountered a similar problem because in providing a positive reason for the families to stay as well is because of their imprtance to the economy as a significant percentage of the working class. I feel that point came out too vague. Please let me know after you read it. "As for the idea of your bill in general: I am for it, but then I indicated above that I think immigration restrictions are insane anyway." well, thank you very much, I'm glad there are rational people out there.
  10. That's interesting because I started following objectivism about a month before my 13th birthday. I'm 16 now and I've learned so many great things that I don't think I'll ever "grow out of it".
  11. THERE'S ONLY 3 THAT I GO ABSOLUTELY CRAZY FOR: -Ryan Philippe: Cruel Intentions, Playing By Heart -Ryan Kwanten and my slightly odd one... -Adrien Brody there's just.....I mean he.....well.....ugh.....he's so..... ::: sigh:::
  12. OMG!!! WHITNEY HOUSTON!!! SHE IS SO UNBELIEVABLY BEAUTIFUL! I COULD DEDICATE YEARS OF MY LIFE TO MAKING PORTRAITS OF HER.
  13. I may be one of billions but my favorites are: -Angelina Jolie I like the dark spirit in her. She's sort of evil, but at the same time very confident, strong-willed, passionate. -Shakira She's simply the absolutely most gorgeous woman I know. Obviously this is just my opinion but, when "la tortura" came out. I knew immediately I wanted to go back to Colombia and meet more women like that. -Charlize Theron She's simply amazing. I love her eyes, her voice, her figure....pretty much everything. -Penelope Cruz I never knew I was attracted to her until I saw "Head in the Clouds". She's a different type of interest for me. -Salma Hayek oh, come on......she's.....she's......too much.... -Demi Moore is hot Ok....I think I should stop....
  14. I knot it ought to be Dagny and John or Henry.....but I simply LOVED Francisco! He was.....unbelievable. In fact, I'm certain I'll be more like Francisco than any of the other characters when I grow up.
  15. OH COME ON PEOPLE!..... I mean I'm sorry, but I'm one of those that treats my Ayn Rand book like it's some sort of Bible so I guess it's hard for me to believe someone would actually ask this. :::sigh::: The whole thing about the Dean being uncomfortable is very symbolic to the book. I remember that when I read the book, I didn't necessarily start liking Roark until he was in his meeting with the Dean. The whole mood of the scene makes it quite clear that there is a very striking difference between Roark and the rest of society. As a reader, I remember a feeling of uncertainty over whether I was drawn by Roark's contrast to the universe around him, or if I was drawn by the fact that it could very well be me in that same situation one day. Both concepts intrigued me because on the one hand I was begining to know this unbelievable entity that appears to be insinificant because of the low approval he gets from others, but who is at the same time vital for the preservation of something in his character that makes him very appealing (this is defined later). The Dean feels uncomfortable because Roark can't help but radiate that essence of inviolable ego that he has. It's incredible. Most of Ayn Rand's main characters have that quality, and they all make the people around them uncomfortable. It's like every time that Dagny walked in at a party during Atlas Shrugged, or when Francisco walked in to a crowd, or even Dominique's character at her job. He is uncomfortable because Roarks confidence and integrity seems to threaten his own high standing and I don't think that Dean ever in his life felt like he was below on of his students. He tries to assert himself by the fact that he runs the university and that it is his office, but the great thing about Roark is that when he looks at you he makes you feel like either you don't exist, or that you are the center of existence. Either of which puts people in an intellectual state of panick. There's more philosophy to all of this, but I'm very young and I honestly don't know how to use all the terminology. I hope I was of some help any way. -J
  16. call me overemotional, but I swear I felt like my heart leapt out of my chest when I finished that book. The last two pages alone were heart wrenching for me. Actually, of all of Ayn Rand's writting I have read, which I've read every single one of her books except the one on capitalism, I would say that the last paragraph in "We The Living" is the one that will remain imprinted in my thoughts. :: sigh::: The Ayn Rand books have always been so powerful for me, I get consumed by them, and I feel overwhelmed by every sentence. I've tried to express that ever since I started posting here about 2 years ago, but either it never comes out right, or maybe people didn't feel it as intensely as I did. I know someone, somewhere did. Whenever I think of her books I always have to take a deep breath because I know that they always drain so much out of me. It's like nothing I have ever felt before. That's why I knew I had to learn all of the objectivist principles and have now incorporated them into every aspect of my life.
  17. The English Colonies of North America Beginning in the late 16th century and carrying into much of the 1600’s, English colonies were rapidly developing and going through extensive changes that would serve as the basis of the New World. Early on, these colonies commenced as economic prospects of Europe, but later developed as outlets to resolve much religious turmoil in the mainland. Therefore, while the original interest was in the possible profits of commerce, the settling of British North America came to be mainly due to the religious concerns of the people. These gave rise to the many diverse Protestant communities of the New World. Beginning in the early 1600’s, the Virginia Company held high hopes in expanding commerce to the New World, so they received a Royal Charter from King James to establish Jamestown in 1607 along Chesapeake Bay. Of all the English colonies established throughout the 17th century, Jamestown was the only one made purely out economic interest and supported by the profits of the tobacco industry of John Rolfe. All other colonies following this time period arose from some connection to the religious unrest taking place in England at this time. The core of the conflict began when Queen Elizabeth passed away and King James I claimed authority of the throne. Upon doing this, he ended all of Elizabeth’s policies of religious tolerance and since she had been Protestant, and he was deeply Catholic, he, along with his son Charles, who later succeeded the throne, started a movement of religious repression of Protestants in Europe; most specifically, Puritan groups. All this conflict, hatred, and prejudice resulted in the Great Migration, which was a movement of Puritans to the New World between 1629 and 1643. This group, led by John Winthrop, was able to attain a Royal charter for the Massachusetts Bay Company to start a colony in Chesapeake Bay. The New World soon came to be known as a haven for Protestants and other groups of differing religious beliefs. In this manner, the English monarchy succeeded in reducing their “Protestant problems” in Europe. In September of 1620, William Bradford also led another religious group known as the Pilgrims, a Separatist group that thought the Anglican Church to be corrupt and wished to create religious establishments of their own. They accomplished this in Plymouth colony. Their colony, unable to sustain any profitable crops was unable to benefit from exports and rather turned to fishing and lumbering. This was the same for many of the northern colonies that had to sustain harsh winters that would destroy crops. As a result, the majority of the later colonies of northeastern North America would be seen primarily as religious havens for various groups of people. This also meant that the Puritans, which had always valued enterprise and hard work were able to benefit from its many merchants, entrepreneurs and commercial farmers. Puritans and Pilgrims weren’t the only groups that were persecuted in England and forced to colonize North America. Believe it or not, in the 1630’s there was a large group of Catholics that also sought escape from the religious turmoils of Europe and crossed the Atlantic to settle in Maryland. Maryland, which was established by the Calverts, granted religious freedoms and a representative government to its people. Another similar establishment was New York, started by the Duke of York who was given the land by his brother, King Charles I. In New York, Englishmen also hoped to build a community free of all the troubles taking place in Europe. The last of these persecuted nonprotestant groups were the Quakers, who believed in a personal relationship with God and an “inner light”. The Puritans and their strict theocratic ways of governing voraciously oppressed these groups of Quakers. William Penn led the Quakers, also commonly known as the “Society of Friends”, and they started a proprietary colony in Pennsylvania, which was the only colony to also accomplish long periods of peace with its surrounding Native tribes. Finally, the last massive population that must also be accounted for are the New England communities of dissent. Some of these included Thomas Hooker, who established religious freedoms in Connecticut in 1636 after being persecuted by Puritans. Anne Hutchinson and Samuel Gorton were also victims of this Puritan oppression community and they moved to Rhode Island in 1638. Here, Roger Williams who believed in the separation of Church and State, joined these aforementioned people to attain a charter in 1644 in order to establish legally the proprietary colony of Rhode Island with full religious tolerance for all people. Thus, with the European expansion to the New World, there wasn’t only the many prospects of economy or commerce, but most intrinsically, there was now an open haven for a great variety of peoples with differing religious ideals. From the Chesapeake colonies, to each individual New England settlement, groups such as the Puritans, Pilgrims, Quakers, Huguenots and even Catholics, finally had a place to practice their beliefs at their will and with common liberty. These diverse communities are what constituted the backbone of American society.
  18. “With the dawn of the 16th Century, there came together in Europe both a motivation and the means to explore and colonize territory across the seas” This statement is in every respect true. At the beginning of the 16th century a variety of developing influences, such as the spirit of the Renaissance and the establishment of Prince Henry “the Navigator’s” institute for the studies of better seafaring technology and methods of exploration, helped to spur the interest and motivation of a wide and potent European population seeking to expand its boundaries and power to foreign lands. This was the age for expansion, for discovery, and daring to wander the unknown. Though it had been dreamt of and sought out for many decades, it was the commencement of the 16th century that finally opened up the doors of possibility to those that were willing to face the challenge. We may rightfully say that the fuel or source of all this westward expansion was due primarily if not significantly to the effect of the Renaissance period in Europe. With commercial expansion, the flourish of trade and the spread of ideas, the Renaissance was born as a time to celebrate human possibility. “Possibility”, that was the fundamental premise behind it all. The people of Europe looked to the Atlantic Ocean with anxiety and dread created by the thousands of uneducated peoples who for so many centuries believed that the Earth was flat or that the Ocean led ships nowhere, but it was this specific point in time that inspired a widespread curiosity for the unknown and its many possible wonders. This very natural and human curiosity is what nurtured the future explorations of the Americas. That may have been the basis for the motive, but the means came from a very different source. As I have mentioned already, the beginning of the 16th century was marked by a growing commerce, prosperous trade and a stable economy, all as an effect of the technological breakthroughs that had originated in the Middle Ages, strengthening the agricultural system as well as society as a whole. With all of these promising prospects, Prince Henry of Portugal felt compelled to unite the superior and talented minds of the world in an institute of scientific knowledge with innovative scientific goals and purposes. He assembled geographers, instrument makers, shipbuilders and other intellectuals and succeeded in producing the caravel, a new ship that would be faster, stronger and would be capable of lasting extensive and rigorous voyages. Thus, with all of this at the disposal of several of the most powerful nations in the world at that time, it was only matter of time before the race for westward expansion would begin and bring along with it all of its amazing new discoveries. Spain was quite luckily the very first to attempt these feats but never imagining what a trip, intended to uncover safer and more efficient routes to the trading posts of India, would truly unfold for the rest of humanity. Consequently, though it could have been anybody else of any other European origin, Christopher Columbus made his way across the Atlantic and was miraculously intersected with what came to be known by all as the New World. Therefore in retrospect to the aforementioned facts, it is clearly evident that the statement/quote above is indeed true, for it can be supported by innumerable evidence in history. There was a vast hope and anticipation with the dawning of the 16th century, for many knew that it held the promise of mane new things.
  19. Before I post this, I'd just like to say that I started posting here 2 years ago, at the age of 14. I'd like to say first and foremost that I'm still formulating all my standards, and goals for my life and I don't assume to know everything about every topic. I love speaking my mind, and regardless of the fact that everything I have ever said on this site has been dissected and attacked by every possible view point, I still love joining all the discussions here and learning new things or getting insight on varying perspectives. When you read the following, please take into account that I can't even drive yet so I'm not here to threaten anybody else's opinions on this topic. I'll look forward to any constructive criticisms or opinions you may have: (This was a speech I wrote that I had to present in one of my classes) They come here in search of the American dream. This may sound redundant to a great many of you but the truth is that in most, if not all, of all the other nations in the world we are looked to as an example of a different way of life. For a large population of people, for a vast number of decades, the United States has represented the “Life that could be”, the “New World”, and “The Western Power”. People of innumerable backgrounds have, since the beginning of our colonization, sought the means to enter this country and struggle for a life of possibility and freedom. Back in the 1700’s, the representative assemblies of our 13 original colonies understood the necessities for incoming peoples willing to follow standards and support the economy. Back then, the European settlers promoted the immigration of people from various nations, and those people came with the intent of prospering. Now, at the beginning of the 21st century, our nation is in a state of fear and turmoil, locking it’s doors to so many of the outside world that have invested their hopes and dreams in earning the original title of what it meant to be an American. Illegal immigration has been a problem in this nation since about the 1920’s. Back then, the government attempted to assign quotas depending on nationality stating a specific quantity of people that would be permitted to enter our borders per year. But restricted legal immigration since then has only caused dramatic increases in the level of illegal immigrations. I am not here to say that it is just for immigrants to be breaking the law and forcing their way into this country. I am here in the defense of the foreign youth that has been a victim to this conflict from the beginning, and that deserves a chance to establish their own lives. Every year, millions of illegal immigrants come here with their families and illicitly resign their children to grow up in a country foreign to their own. These children have grown up within our education system, and as a result of this influence, they grow to know no other way of life except that of American standards and principles, and the majority of them have the profound desire to continue their educational careers and invest in a life here as Americans. Despite this, at the completion of their 12th grade year in secondary education, the student is suddenly bestowed with the legal status of their parents, leaving them unable to work any decent job, unable to attend state universities, and fundamentally “nonexistent” to the nation he grew into simply because he is missing the 9 digit identification we call “social security”. My bill’s purpose is to provide amnesty for those students who have been in this country for a minimum of 5 years, and who, out of a personal will, seek to pursue post-secondary education and a life here in the states. Do you really think its fair that an American, dragged across the borders by his parents at an age when he can’t even add, should just be thrown back into a world he doesn’t even recognize any longer, simply because of the fact that he was not born into the American ideals, but rather grew into them? Do you think it is fair that he struggles throughout his entire adolescence to maintain high academic standards and morals, just to be told upon graduation that his fight was in vain and he is being deported? Is that really what this country stands for? We have spent over a hundred years announcing to the world the possibilities and freedoms of the United States. Why is it that now a population of youth that learned to believe in it, is shunned from the prospects of their futures simply because of the decisions of their parents? Granting amnesty or legalization for these students and their families would only be of greater benefit to the American people. The average 12 million illegal immigrants in this country thus far, are unidentified, and lower class labor men that are significantly supporting the economy. Wouldn’t it just be reasonable to provide amnesty for at least a percentage of them and allow them to pay taxes? That is the one population that will have the least complaints on governmental taxes. Immigrants have been coming here to work to the death for a chance to build their own lives. Taxes are not the problem, and neither is employment because they always take on any quality of career or occupation. The problem is that since 9/11 the government has made it increasingly difficult and sometimes even impossible for them to live their lives and benefit their states. The government fears them and wants to push them out because they have no papers, and they remain deprived of an American dream because of the lack of a 9-digit number. Amnesty would open up doors for those prospective students, it would identify the hidden working class, and it would only supplement the ethnic diversity that this nation was built on.
  20. yes, I saw it and really liked the dialogues. I personally feel like that's me at the age of 32. I don't really have much of an analysis of the movie. I thought it was very simple, since not much really happens except for talking, but I still enjoyed it and the intellectual insights of each character.
  21. I'll say some of my favorites and my reson for loving it. -What dreams may come? Their interpretation of heaven is sort of how I visualize things within my own imagination and it is that feeling of surreal wonder that has always fueled my poetry. There are also several lines of dialogue that get stuck in my head and I'm left thinking about them for hours because it touches upon a personal emotion or life event. -City of Angels I love the character of an angel who has "eternity" but isn't capable of any emotion. I love how the relationship between the human and the angel becomes almost impossible but yet she is still able to show him the greatness of being alive... of being able to feel anything, even if only for a second before getting it all taken away. -The Hours It's prettymuch exactly how my mind is in a broad sense. But I can't permit myself to watch it anymore because the character most like myself within the movie, ends up taking a plunge off of a New York building. Surely that's not good for my sanity. -Possession It's how I view the most romantic relationships, aside from the stories in Rand's novels. -The Piano -The Pianist I love pianos and the plot of both movies
  22. + This is not philosophical, but I like the idea of granting teenagers around 16 years old a "quarter vote." Well, that's an interesting idea, but you have to consider the historical implications. In the original version of the Constitution, the only mention of slaves at that time was the "three-fifths" rule, meaning that slaves only counted as three-fifths of a person. You didn't imply that similarity on purpose, but to consider a teenager as only a quarter of a person would create a huge uproar among all age groups. However, it was an interesting idea, like I said.
  23. I guess my highschool experience was very different from your's. In my school all of the 14-16 year old guys were interested in video games, pot, and "getting laid", not world issues and politics. The girls weren't much better. Frankly I'd rather not have people in middle school deciding the fate of the nation. I agree with you for the most part, because that's how it is in general at my school but that doesn't mean there isn't a select few who are informed and do care about the fate of the nation.
  24. wow.....No! I hate that. Not the comment, just the principle it implies. It actually applies to an aspect of my personal life which I wouldn't generally mention here but, it's relevant. A few years ago my family structured itself into a small form of government. It isn't legitimate, but it functions in the basic ways. We have cabinet positions, the movement of money(collecting, saving, investing). There is voting and laws, and it was all -ut together so that my current family of 28 people that see each other every 2 weeks, wouldn't fall apart as it expands. Well the point is that when all of this was first established, the adults were trying to settle a voting age. Many of my aunts and uncles wanted to set the voting age near the low teens so that I could vote back then. The problem was that my sister who is a year older and with a mental disability would not have the rational capability of understanding the decisions being made or how to choose therefore my father wanted to have a right to my sister's vote. I threw an outrage (well within myself), because my dad is the balck sheep in the family and only looks to manipulate minds. In this sense, it's very eveil to think that just because they're your children they're going to have the same opinions as yourself. With me, it's mostly been the opposition. I've g2g. I've leave it on that note.
  25. As for voting age, I tend to think there should be some sort of a test rather than an age limit. Even a simple multiple-choice test on the basic structure and function of government would weed out a lot of clueless people. Wow! I never thought of that, but I strongly agree. Not in the sense of some FCAT- type exam where the fiction storyteller in the school gets a lower grade than the careless suck-up, but something like an IQ test or something that could determine how informed you are and wether or not your views are legitimate and supported by fact, not whim.
×
×
  • Create New...