Reforms Regarding Easements In The UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Reforms Regarding Easements In The UK - Essay Example es of space per person even in office space, it so follows that it would probably be only natural for someone from England demanding justice if a neighbour came to fish in his or her pond, swim in a backyard pool, or use the lavatory at one’s whim. As such, it can be very difficult to actually define an easement, especially if the person using the easement does not want to formally admit that he or she is using the other person’s property illegally. Also, the dominant may not want to admit that there is an easement between both the dominant and the servient, as the dominant may feel that, legitimating that relationship might therefore give the servient some type of rights or ownership to his or her property—which it does, but that is almost entirely beside the point. The person who holds the easement doesn’t exactly own the property. It’s more like, they are borrowing it or using it for a certain time and then won’t be there anymore. Usage of an easement is, for the majority, not continuous. Thus, these facts should be taken into account when one is considering either making an easement formal or doing something in order to make the process of acquiring an easement possible. In all circumstances, paperwork should always be filled out so there is no misunderstanding between the dominant and the servient. This is essential for the relationship. III. What Can Be Done with an Easement (500 words) Although an easement itself is defined by four strict necessities by law, what can be done with an easement should definitely be clarified. It has been said that â€Å"†¦an easement is extinguished if the dominant and servient tenements come into the same ownership†¦Ã¢â‚¬ 2 That may be true, but unless it was expressly written into the law in such a like manner, one might... When someone encroaches upon another person's legal boundaries—no matter how enlightened the dominant—the servant always has the potential to face problems, due to the territorial nature of people. It only makes sense, then, that legally, there must be clear grounds where easements are concerned, for all parties involved—even if the easement is an informal agreement between two neighbors that one can fish in his pond with or without stipulations. Whatever the agreement, it must be something that can be sealed with a handshake if a verbal agreement, and agreed on paper with a signature if the dominant requires it from the servant. In any case, paperwork is only there to protect both parties from any kind of liability. Easements are definitely difficult problems to tackle, but worthwhile. That having been said, it is both the owner and the servant's best interests to know what they want, respectively, and that each party can then have boundaries which are to be fol lowed. This really helps everyone with the idea that the property is to be shared, and it encourages a sense of community between the dominant(s) and servant(s). It is hoped that, in the future, easements will be able to be more readily available without having to finagle through a long and difficult legal explanation about what it constitutes. The law should definitely be made simpler to explain these concepts well to the general public. Through clear extrapolation of the law, this is possible. Discussing easements can be quite a complicated task.

The white progressives in the 20th century Essay

The white progressives in the 20th century - Essay Example The imperialist inclination of the white progressives of the early 20th Century is seen in their support for the acquisition of territories. One such territory according to Pestritto and Atto was the Territory of Alaska. This territory was bought from Russia, a move that was strongly rejected by many citizens. The progressives supported imperialist ideologies because they advocated for the repeal of the Canadian Reciprocity Act. This act sought to establish free trade between the United States and Canada. In its place, they demanded the instigation of tariffs that would strengthen the competitiveness of the United States. According to them, the present tariff policy was hindering the industrial and commercial advancement of the United States. White progressives’ support for imperialist ideas is also exemplified in their emphasis for declining any treaty between the United States and any other country that did not recognize the superiority of America or expatriation. This demon strates their amplified perception of the country and their unfair view of other nations. Finally, the concept of the progressive party is another proof of their imperialism. In its search for support from citizens, it invited affiliation with outright disregard for potential supporters’ affiliation to other parties. It spoke in a way to show that all other parties were flawed and there was no implication that the party could cooperate with other parties in its quest to execute the principles it popularized.

Ethics of Marketing to Schools in America Essay Example for Free

Ethics of Marketing to Schools in America Essay Public schools across America are struggling with their budgets and looking to outside corporations for help. Conveniently, private corporations realize the potential buying power of students and have decided that elementary schools are the best channel to reach them. It has become routine for corporations to market there products in schools, and in exchange these schools receive various financial benefits. This new partnership has become the focus of much controversy as 80% of Americans feel that corporations should have no place in schools (). The two most cited concerns are the health of children and the growing commercialization of schools. This paper looks at this issue in detail by answering the following two questions. Is it ethical for corporations to market products in schools? What is the most socially responsible course of action for corporations to take? This paper will use a utilitarian and distributive justice framework to prove that marketing in schools is unethical and propose that the most ethical arrangement is to make schools commercial-free zones. This paper will also discuss the issue of corporate social responsibility through shareholder and stakeholder lenses to prove that there is a strong business case for corporations to? Children in schools are marketed to in a variety of ways. Schools can participate in incentive programs where a school receives funds to take part in a specific activity such as collecting box tops (). Some corporations offer free educational materials to schools that promote their corporate message. Pepsi encourages a thirst for knowledge on a popular textbook cover(). Each year over half of the students in schools in the United States receive free textbook covers(). McDonalds, Burger King and Dominos sponsor reading projects in schools with free meals(). Other schools receive free electronic equipment like computers and satellites for participating in programs like channel one. This is an arrangement where school receive free electronic equipment for having their students watch a 10 minute broadcast of which 2 minutes are corporate sponsored commercials (). All of these marketing techniques pose there own unique ethical dilemmas, however the most controversial type of marketing in schools today is the use of exclusive agreements. This is when corporations give schools a percentage of their profits in exchange for the right to be the sole provider of a product or a service(). The most prominent example of this is the soft drink company, Coca-Cola and their exclusive distribution rights with schools. As a result, Coca-Cola advertisements have become the most visible types of advertisements in schools today (). A US National School Health Policies study found that students could purchase soft drinks in 60% of elementary schools and 83% of middle schools (). Of these schools over 85% were under an exclusive contract with the Coca-Cola company (). For the aforementioned reasons the remainder of this paper will use the soft drink giant Coca Cola as a symbol to make it easier to understand the larger debate of marketing in elementary schools. A deontological framework can not determine whether this issue is ethical or unethical. In 1990 under $100 million was spent on advertising targeted at kids, just a decade later that number was up more than twenty times to over $2 billion (). This large increase in spending indicates that there is a strong motivation for corporations to market to youth. One way to determine if marketing in schools is ethical is to deconstruct these motivations through a deontological framework. The motivation for companies to market in schools could be a philanthropic opportunity to contribute to education. However, I do not believe this because companies like Coca-Cola make schools sign exclusive agreements, which means that they block competition and are profitable. I believe the main motive for companies to market to youth is to make money. Marketing to students in schools is an effective strategy as it reaps both short and long term rewards. Children in elementary schools have a lot of spending power. Kids ages 4-12 spend $40 billion each year (). Furthermore, these same kids influence $600 billion of household spending (). It is wise for companies to try to earn a share of this large market. Surprisingly, the sales of sodas in schools account for a miniscule slice of soda sales worldwide, less than 1 percent of sodas 66billion dollar industry (). Clearly profit in the short run is not the main motivating factor for companies like Coca-Cola. Marketing in public elementary school promises long run benefits. Soft drink companies can create brand loyalty with their consumers at an early age. In other words, they foster and retain a captive audience for its products. If you consider the cutthroat competition among soft drink makers for customers, this brand loyalty becomes a vital business pursuit. A deontological framework can better help us deconstruct the ehics of marketing to youth purely for financial reasons. Specifically, this paper will employ some of W. D. Ross duties. It can be argued that marketing in schools violates the duty of non-malefiicence (to do no harm). Some children will substitute a nutritious meal for a sugar laden soda. That is harmful to their health. Marketing in schools also violates the duty of gratitude. It does not thank customers for their business by protecting their health. Instead, companies like Coca-Cola continue to aggressively market their unhealthy product to vulnerable youth. On the other hand, if one considers a corporation a person, then a corporation fulfils Rosss duty of self-improvement by marketing in schools. It improves its own condition by increasing its profits in the short and the long run. Additionally, if a company honestly abides by the contract it signs with a school then it is upholding Rosss duty of fidelity. The framework of deontology is inadequate to determine the ethics of marketing in schools because it presents us with conflicting duties and no hierarchy to put them into. There is an incompatible difference between the various duties. However, this situation did not become controversial simply because some believe that a corporation might have bad ethics, instead people are worried about the consequences of marketing in schools. A utilitarian framework shows us that marketing in schools is unethical. Marketing in elementary school is controversial because it offers many direct benefits to schools, but negatively impact students. Through a utilitarian framework this paper will deconstruct the pros and cons of the scenario to determine whether marketing in schools is ethical. This paper will conduct a cost-benefit analysis to determine what results in the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The main players that benefit in this scenario are schools, shareholders of the Coca-Cola company, and employees. All of these players benefit in financial terms. Vending machines are a valuable source of revenue for schools. They support programs that might otherwise go unfunded. Elementary schools have reason to be concerned about their finances, the state of California cut the elementary school budget by $10 billion dollars in 2003 (). If a school district signs an exclusive contract with a soft-drink company it can generate an additional $3 million per year (). School districts receive all of this money for virtually no additional work on there part. This is why the cliche that: one day our schools will have all the money they need, and the Air Force will have to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber could become true (). Company shareholders benefit in the long run if we assume that marketing in schools create brand loyalty among consumers. Company employees also benefit from the sales of sodas in schools, simply because their company is continuing to be competitive in the marketplace and provide work for them. However, the positive impact of selling sodas in schools impacts company employees considerably less than other players in this scenario, because these employees will not be receiving a pay raise as a result of this practice. While there are some positive effects of marketing in schools, I feel that the cons greatly outweigh the benefits. Students bear the burden of the negative effects of marketing in schools. Marketing to youth perpetrates problems of childhood obesity, materialism, eating disorders, violence, and family stress (). This is especially problematic because children are more cognitively immature and prone to believe that products marketed in school carry their schools endorsement. For instance, if a school sells soda it signifies that it is acceptable to consume drinks that are high in sugar and have poor nutritional quality. A childs health is not an acceptable trade-off for increased revenues. Childhood obesity is an epidemic in America. One-quarter of children in the United States are overweight which means they are at risk for lifelong health problems such as diabetes, high blood pressure, and cavities (). Competitors also suffer in this scenario because ? exclusive agreements create a monopoly on a school and therefore promote unfair competition and can charge whatever price they want. The difficulty of examining ethics from a utilitarian perspective is that is impossible to predict the future. It is not clear how much the financial revenue schools gain from executive agreements helps them to fulfill their purpose of teaching. It is also not clear how high the correlation is between marketing in schools and negative outcomes like obesity. What is known is that most of the negative consequences (and there are a lot of them) fall on the shoulders of the students. Having the burden of this issue fall on the shoulders of millions of students nationwide is bad for society as a whole. Children need to be educated in a healthy atmosphere so that they can become productive members of society one day. It is detrimental to the future if children are not provided with the best learning environment possible. The best learning environment possible is one that is free from commercial influences. The Distributive Justice framework shows that monopolies are unethical. According to John Rawls we should determine ethical dilemmas like whether marketing in schools is ethical by making the decision from behind a veil of ignorance. The distributive justice framework tries to ensure that the interests of the worst off in society are considered. According to this theory, students well-being should be put before business interests because students are the most vulnerable group in this scenario. However, there is an inherent conflict of interest within this framework. Corporations believe that marketing in schools is ethical because they are exercising their 1st amendment right to free speech. Everybody has this right, thus they are utilizing the equal liberty principle: equal rights to liberties as long as all may be provided such liberties. The problem is that not even all corporations are being provided the liberty of free speech. As previously mentioned Coca Cola has an exclusive agreement with 85% of elementary schools in America, this is just a nice way to say that Coca Cola has a monopoly on the elementary school market (). Companies that engage in exclusive distributive contracts are trying to block competitors. They can not justify this action on the ground that they need to do this to spur innovation, they want a monopoly so they can control the school market. Thus the difference principle comes into play because the inequality that these companies are creating in the market place needs to be addressed. The most ethical thing to do is to make schools commercial free zones. Marketing in schools is unethical. The most ethical thing to do is to make elementary schools commercial-free zones. Students should be able to pursue learning free of commercial influences and pressures. Eighty percent of adults in the United States agree that schools should be commercial-free zones as well (). While this may be the most ethical course of action, it seems highly unlikely as marketing in schools has become entrenched. Schools continually need more money and the government is unable to provide it. If marketing in schools must continue at the very least it should be regulated. It does not seem probable that the industry will regulate itself, so it should be subject to more government oversight. Right now there is very little the government has done to restrict marketing in schools. Laws forbidding it are perceived to be a breach of the 1st amendment. A study found that only nineteen states currently have statues or regulations that address school-related commercial activities (). This number includes states that have statues that encourage commercial activities. The government should establish an independent commission to regulate marketing in public schools. This agency should make regulations that encourage schools to provide a healthy learning environment for students. The agency could regulate the sale of foods high in fat, sodium, and sugars. For example, it could decide that vending machines can not be stocked with sodas; however juices (100%) and water could still be sold. There would be greater social acceptance of this issue if it were implemented more appropriately. The business case for CSR prevails. This paper has established that the most ethical thing for corporations to do is to stop marketing to students in schools, or at the very least to regulate what they market to children. If a company were to stop marketing to children for the aforementioned ethical considerations it would be following a normative line of reasoning. The company would be interested in doing the right thing for society with little regard for how the proposition would effect its own bottom line. While I would applaud its efforts on a moral basis, this would be a very poor reason to engage in Corporate Social Responsibility. There needs to be a business incentive for corporations to engage in Corporate Social Responsibility. A company has to be successful financially if it is going to survive in the long run. However, there is always a business case for corporate social responsibility with respect to companies that sell consumer products. In the long run the closer a company aligns with the values of society the more successful it will be. Good ethics and good business are mutually reinforcing. In this case 80% of society wants commercial-free schools or at least commercialism that is regulated. It is socially responsible for a company to accommodate the wishes of society because it is in their long run interest to build a good reputation. A company like Coca-cola may be more successful at recruiting, retaining, and engaging with its employees and customers if it demonstrates that it is socially responsible. Critics might argue that this is just mere window dressing. However, a good reputation leads to higher sales in the long run. Both shareholder and stakeholder frameworks would support the business case for corporate social responsibility in this scenario. Milton Freidman is an advocate of the shareholder theory which maintains that a companies corporate social responsibility is to maximize profits without breaking the law or violating basic rules of society. Coca-Cola is not breaking any laws by marketing in schools, it is merely exercising its first amendment right to free speech. It is also not violating any social norms, children get to choose whether they want to buy unhealthy products. On one hand it may seem that Freidman would say that corporations should continue to market in schools because they are making a profit and therefore helping society. However Freidman would agree that companies need to balance there short term gains against their long-term interest. In this case, Freidman would advocate for the restriction of marketing in schools because it is in the long run self-interest of the company because companies like Coca-Cola needs to reassure their customers that they care about them. . An alternative approach to corporate social responsibility is the stakeholder theory. This theory maintains that companies should balance the interests of all stakeholders involved. In this scenario the stakeholders would be the students (customers), parents, teachers, corporations, suppliers, employees, shareholders, and society. Students are harmed by marketing in schools because marketing is correlated with problems like obesity and materialism. On the other hand these same students benefit because their schools are receiving additional funding for programs. Parents suffer because they have less control over what their children are exposed to, and it could undermine their values. Shareholders may benefit in the short run from marketing in schools, but in the long run the values of the company must be aligned with society if it is going to succeed. Therefore, the stakeholder theory would advocate a business case for Corporate Social Responsibility as well: to limit marketing in schools. Marketing in schools is a complex issue with many players. In this case, students are the most important players because schools are public institutions and schools are supposed to make students a top priority. Marketing in schools can not stop on its own, it needs to be either strictly prohibited or at the very least limited by the government.

Comparing America And Asias Elderly Care Social Work Essay

Comparing America And Asias Elderly Care Social Work Essay In general, society considers the elderly as persons above the ages of sixty or sixty-five. This is usually the beginning of old age as a person becomes less active in political, social and economic affairs. Though there are elderly persons who are in good health and active members of their communities, majority are the ones whose physical and mental functions are on the decline. Since they are not able to get along on their own, majority of the elderly persons require attention and care from their loved ones as well as friends. Consequently, psychologists use the term elderly care to refer to the personal as well as medical attention that this group of the population receives. It is evident that elderly care takes a variety of forms, ranging from personal care such as feeding and dressing, to medical attention. In addition, the care that a family chooses for its elderly persons will depend on their needs. This is because some of the elderly persons may still be in good health while others may be frail. Consequently, some of them may require home-based care while others may need specialized attention in a nursing home or in a hospital. Whatever the case, the elderly do need some form of care. In this study, I shall focus on the American culture and the Asian culture, and make comparisons between the two, in relation to the aspect of caring for the elderly. For the Asian culture, I shall examine the Japanese. In both United States of America and Japan, the number of elderly persons is on the increase. This means that both governments have to consider and put in place the best mechanisms to cater for this group of the population. Different communities accord the elderly different forms of care, depending on how their cultures dictate. The way a community perceives old age will therefore affect the manner in which it treats the elderly. The responsibility of caring for the elderly in Caucasian and Japanese cultures lies mainly with the woman, because these societies consider her as an innate caregiver due to her maternal abilities and instincts. However, this is also due to the fact that, over the years, the woman has fewer opportunities in the economic scene, and as a result, she remains at home most of the time to take care of her children and the elderly. On the other hand, when the woman is able to access the labor market, she finds herself in positions where she has to provide care for others. Most nurses, school and hospital matrons are women. However, in the above cultures, children also participate in elderly care, as a form of compensation for the nurture their parents gave them when they were young. The American society places a lot of emphasis on staying young. Consequently, as Samovar et. al. (2009) notes we find a culture that prefers youth to old age. (p.71). This negative perception of old age makes the young people avoid staying together with the elderly and caring for them. The older adult population rather than the young adults are the ones taking care of the elderly. This explains why some families in the United States give over their old relatives to nursing homes. This does not however mean that the young cut all their links with their elderly relatives. They do provide support and maintain contact with them. The nursing homes are an option for the elderly people who have no family or relatives to look after them at home. This is especially the case for those who are physically handicapped and require the help of another person to take care of them. Though the nursing homes have become the choice for most families with elderly relatives, they do have their limitations. Some of these institutions for the elderly have become money-making ventures, therefore reducing their emphasis on the needs of the elderly. Poor hygiene and lack of trained medical personnel and quality treatment as well as poor feeding programs are some of the problems the elderly face in these nursing homes. Moreover, placing the elderly in nursing homes limits their freedoms as they have to follow the stipulated program. They cannot choose when to feed, sleep, interact with their fellow housemates and cannot keep their belongings. However, nursing homes for the elderly still remain the option for most American families, as there has not been much success with home-based care. On a positive note, the elderly persons in American society have more groups of friends and neighbors whom they can go to for support, than the aged people in Japanese society. This means that the American elderly are likely to receive care from their friends and neighbors, apart from their immediate family members. However, the Americans usually tend to give special care to their elderly only after they learn that the latter are facing a medical problem. However, since the family is still the main caregiver for the elderly, some of the American families employ professional nurses to take care of their old at home, instead of sending them away to nursing homes. Another reason for this is that, institutions for taking care of the elderly are expensive, and some of these families are not able to afford them. Moreover, some families opt to take their elderly to day nursing institutions, where they receive care throughout the day and then return home in the evening. This is suitable for those people who are working and cannot stay with the elderly relatives during the day as they have to report to work. It is also convenient for working adults who cannot afford specialized care for their elderly ones, either at home or in a nursing institution. In some instances, the elderly person may be able to live in his or her own house, and may be strong enough not to require specialized attention and care. In such cases, the family members of such an elderly person find a house near other aged people, in areas where the amenities they need on a day-to-day basis are readily available. This form of elderly care appeals to the community and involves them in taking responsibility for this group of the population. On the economic front, some of the big corporate organizations have introduced benefit schemes for their employees, in order to help them in caring for their elderly relatives. This is because most companies want to avoid losses in production, due to having employees who have to work while at the same time take care of their elderly relatives. Some companies also provide home-based care services for the elderly, but as a profit-making venture. This however, has a negative side to it as these privatized services are costly and not many families are able to afford them. On the other hand, Asian culture of the Japanese has a positive perception of the elderly. It teaches the children to respect and care for the elderly. The Japanese consider the family as the prime caregiver for their elderly, and in this case, it is usually a female member of the family who carries out this duty. This is because the Japanese believe that it is not in order to take the elderly to a nursing home as this is equivalent to neglecting ones responsibility of taking care of ones parents. This also makes the Japanese families give the required care to their elderly relatives throughout their old age, rather than only when they are facing a health problem. In the case of aged people who are not related to the family, Japanese wives or their daughters are the ones who tend to give their elderly friends the care they need. Sometimes, the daughters-in-law also give care to the elderly, especially if the patient is female. However, if other friends and non relatives are living under the same roof with the elderly persons, they may provide the necessary care to the latter. This is in contrast to the case of the American elderly who receive care from their family as well as friends and neighbors. In Japan, the activity of giving care to the elderly is mainly as an act of duty, rather than voluntary will. The caregiver considers this act as one that he or she has to give, and in most cases, the Japanese wife will provide the elderly attention at her husbands request. The dependence of the Japanese elderly on their immediate family is also evident in the fact that most of them rely on their spouses and their children for financial support. Since the Japanese believe that giving the elderly care is a womans job, the men usually leave this task to their wives. However, though the Japanese men are away from home most of the time, they also contribute to elderly care by giving their spouses financial as well as emotional assistance. Again, by participating in looking after their children, they allow their wives to find time to take care of the elderly members of the family. Elderly care in Japan still remains largely in the hands of the family, especially for those who are not sickly and in need of specialized medical attention. However, caring for the elderly at home is no longer the only option, and families have begun taking the old to nursing homes. This is due to a number of reasons such as the aging of the family members providing the care as well as the increasing involvement of the Japanese women in formal training and employment. Moreover, Japanese families are not living in large numbers as they did in the past. However, the number of nursing homes for the elderly and professional caregivers is on the decrease because of the Japanese belief that it is the immediate family which bears the responsibility of taking care of their elderly relatives. The elderly who are in need of very little personal and health care remain at home, but get visits from personnel who attend to them. This happens either a few times a week or every day depending on the needs of the elderly person. Due to the rising demand for health caregivers for the elderly, Japan has sought the help of care personnel from the Philippines. These caregivers are more experienced and are willing to work at a low pay. Due to the increase in the elderly population, financial resources have not been enough to allow families to put their relatives under specialized care at home and in nursing institutions. It is due to this situation that hospitals in Japan have offered to accommodate the elderly who are in need of both personal as well as medical attention. This way, the elderly in Japan can access long-term care. Though on a small-scale, the Japanese elderly engage in volunteering programs where they offer services to the community and in turn, they receive personal as well as medical care. There are however some similarities in the aspects of elderly care in American and Japanese cultures. Care for the elderly is still one of the concerns of both the United States and Japanese governments, though they differ in their policies. America gives priority to provision of medical attention, pension for retirees and shelter, while the Japanese government came up with policies to put in place insurance for every citizen including the elderly, for a long-term period. In both countries, the increase in aging members of the population has put a lot of pressure on the medical as well as retirement schemes. However, technological advances in medicine have increased and they are being used to improve the life-expectancy levels of the American and Japanese aging populations. Again, since women are increasingly going into formal employment, the men in both countries are also becoming more and more involved in elderly care. In conclusion, due to lifestyle changes, many people have started living in smaller groups and families, and are also located far from each other. Consequently, caring for the elderly can no longer be the responsibility of the immediate family alone, but has to be a prerogative of governments, non governmental organizations as well as private institutions.

Who Should Be the Determining Factor? Essay -- Gay Marriage Homosexual

Who Should Be the Determining Factor? In today’s society more people are getting engaged in gay marriages and becoming more open to society. From our society changing from a highly conservative rate to a more liberal state, this will increase the amount of open mindedness towards gay marriages. These two short arguments represent the pros and cons of gay marriage; and why gay marriages should be allowed. Andrew Sullivan will be discussing why gays should be allowed to be married. In contrast to Sullivan, William Bennett wrote a response to give a heterosexual perspective. Throughout this paper there will be numerous summarizing and synthesizing for the two arguments. Because there is two such different points of views this helps the contrast of both. In my synthesis there are topics that relate to Bennett and how he doesn’t have a strong enough back up to say who should and shouldn’t get married. In the essay, â€Å"Let Gays Marry,† by Andrew Sullivan, there were a few main arguments stated. In the document, Sullivan claims that gays and lesbians want the government to enable the law so it lets gays get married. They presented themselves in front of the Supreme Court and in fact, this was the first time they actually got some acknowledgment. Gays and lesbians are going to want to be together (some are lucky enough to meet that special someone), basically why not give them the right to be an equal citizen? The fact that churches do not want them to get married is not the focus; the difference is that Sullivan wants the government to take action. He’s simply asking for the government’s approval to allow a civil marriage. No one has the choice to be white, black, female, male, gay, hetero, etc. As a response to Bill Bennett,... ...on different scenarios. In the beginning half of the paper there is a summary of both stories, â€Å"Let Gays Marry† and â€Å"Leave Marriage Alone.† Basically in â€Å"Let Gays Marry,† it discusses how gays feel towards the society and how they don’t want to be second- class citizens. Also, it explains you cannot choose to black, white, gay, etc... In â€Å"Leave Marriage Alone,† Bennett believes that it will hurt the heterosexual marriage institution. Within the essay the focus was mainly on how same sex unions go against Church and God. Lastly, based on a 4,000 year tradition nothing should be adjusted. I believe that the contrast and summarizing was the main outcome of the essay. Clearly this represents two people who have very strong and different perspectives/personalities. In the end there will be the good/bad aspects of gay marriages, people will always feel uncomfortable.

The Death Penalty :: essays research papers

The Death Penalty Is the death penalty just or unjust? It has been argued that capitol punishment is imposed merely to gratify a desire for revenge. Whether or not a punishment is legal depends upon whether or not it serves a valid goal or purpose of a policy. The death penalty is usually defended on two grounds; is useful and that is just . Is capitol punishment moral or immoral? Is the death penalty moral? Capitol punishment is imposed to spare future victims of murder by carrying out the threat of execution upon convicted murderers. The death penalty punishes them not for what they may or may not do in the future but what they have already done. It's unclear that the murderer has the same right to live as their victim. " Our ancestors... purged their guilt by banishment, not death. And by so doing they stopped that endless vicious cycle of murder and revenge." (Euripedes, Orestes 408 B.C.) By 1500 in England only major felonies carried the death penalty. Reform of the death penalty began in Europe by the 1750's. By the 1850's these reform efforts bore fruit. Michigan first abolished the death penalty in 1847. Various public opinion polls report that more than 70% of Americans favor the death penalty for murder. By 1991, some 2,350 persons were under the death sentence in 36 states. The death penalty should be moral because, " a life for a life." Is the death penalty immoral? Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is a realistic alternative for the small number of offenders who are likely to be executed in any given year. Justice does not demand death but justice does demand that murderers be punished. If punishment is justifiable as for restoring justice and the moral order, it does not necessarily follow that capitol punishment is moral. " The death penalty only allows us to extend the pain. It allows us to continue to blame one another, to turn against one another, to learn to hate better" . Many people think that by executing some criminals, we will deter others. The cost to send a murderer to a death penalty is about 3 million dollars. The cost is dramatically lower to keep a criminal in for life imprisonment without the possibility for parole. The death penalty is just " cruel and unusual punishment." Personally, the death penalty is moral and just. If you take a life you should have yours taken. It is here to show that the death penalty punishes the murderer for what they have already done.

Realism and Naturalism Essay

Throughout the history of theatre there have been many schools and styles. Theatre is ever changing as a reflection of society and what society wants. But out of all these styles, there are two which, when blended, produce a type of theatre that can always live and flow with society and not drastically alter to fit in with the world’s ever changing ways. These are Realism and Naturalism. When combined, they form a powerful, truthful and powerfully real theatre. The two men who have best managed to best combine these two elements are Konstantin Stanislavski with his â€Å"system,† and Anton Chekov with his dramatic writings and specifically, with his work in The Cherry Orchard The main beliefs of Realism and Naturalism are that the theatre needs to shun melodrama and spectacle and, instead, present something that is real and true to life. They believe that the most influential factors in a person’s life are heredity and environment, and they feel that the characters shown need to be more that two dimensional stock characters. They need to have real motives and emotions and possess all the complexities that go into making a true personality and a true person. Naturalists feel that plays should not be written in any sort of dramatic sequence or structure because that is not true to life. Realists embrace the desire for reality on stage, but also feel that dramatic structure follows the actual structure of life and structure and poetry should be integral parts of drama. Konstantin Stanislavski felt that same need for reality on the stage. He spent the majority of his life searching for how an actor can create truth on stage and, in doing so, he tapped into many of the same veins of humanity that Naturalists and Realists did. He expressed the same desire of Naturalists for a realistic theatre that shows life with its dramatic structure and intrigue. â€Å". . . I was beginning to look for genuine life in [the theatre], not ordinary life, of course, but artistic life† (Bentley, 220). And he went looking for it the same way that realists and naturalists did. He began to look for a natural order for things and to devise a systematic plan from that natural base. He went looking for truth. And, again, he found it in the same place as the Naturalists and realists did. He found that, for an actor to bring full life to a character and full reality  to the stage, he must both create a character with a real soul, and he must not rely on stage tricks t o do so. â€Å"An actor, [Stanislavski] thought, must have some sort of spiritual preparation before the beginning of a performance. Not only his body, but also his spirit must put on new clothes† (222). This type of acting blends perfectly with realistic drama, which contains characters whose souls are inherent to the script. He did not, however, feel that he was subscribing to either school of thought. He stated that he felt that realism and naturalism were not things that needed to be pushed onto the stage, but when a good actor takes on the role and fully builds his character from the inside out and truly lives the reality of the stage, reality will flow from it with out outside help. â€Å"As soon as [the realism] is justified, it becomes either unnecessary or it is not noticed at all . . .† (229). Stanislavski embraced the same ideas of the Realist and Naturalist thinkers, but he didn’t place the emphasis on them. Instead, he felt they would emerge as soon as the actor fully filled the role. And no one wrote better roles for this approach to theatre that Anton Chekov. Chekov was able to write plays that embodied the idea of true, artistic life, and The Cherry Orchard is a shining example of that. He takes a moment that has dramatic appeal and is emotionally charged, and recreates it in a way that is true to life and yet exaggerated at the same time. He creates a reality that is so real, it almost appears fake. However, it is this style of drama that is a perfect vehicle for Stanislavski’s system of acting. As Barrault says in his essay â€Å"Why The Cherry Orchard?.† â€Å"The Cherry Orchard is one of the few plays in which a whole cast could really get so profoundly lost as to cease to believe that they are in a theatre, and believe on the contrary that this family truly exists and that they are in real life . . .† That was Stanislavski’s goal for his actors. That was the ultimate peak to reach. So why is this not Naturalism if the actors create a full reality? Also, he creates this complete reality, yet it is a reality steeped in poetry and lyric. So why is it not Realism if he creates truth through poetry? As Barrault says, â€Å"This play belongs neither to the naturalism of the beginning of the century nor to realism, it belongs to truth, and truth always has two faces, a real one, and a poetic one.† And that is the true form that theatre should take. It doesn’t have to be one way or the other, as the Realists and the Naturalists seem to think. True reality is a blend of both. And Chekov was the master of that form. He so cleanly blended the two ideas that it is impossible to separate them into separate places. And through this masterpiece of dramatic writing, Stanislavski’s systematic method of creating truth can have a fighting chance at reaching the heights that it is capable of. So it is that through a mixture of the two schools of thought and the work of the two men who have mastered it that theatre can reach a point of beauty and truth and can display reality and drama in a way that doesn’t need to adapt with the changes of life because it is based in life. The theatre that emerges from this blend has its roots deep in the heart of humanity and what people truly want, and, consequently, will never die.