Fishing For Blogs

On the Cross

keri0792 — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:17:55 +0000

In the beginning of this argument, I was for the euthanasia of terminally ill patients. However, after more research, I understand more about the topic and have switched sides of the controversy. The terminally ill should not have the choice to live or die. When life support is your only way of “living” then God has already planned for you to go. People argue that it is their body and therefore their decision, when in reality; it’s not your body at all. Life is a gift of God, and just as only God can give life God only can take life away. I am also guilty of arguing that because of the unbearable pain, it is okay to kill the terminally ill if they want to die. …Although, now I disagree… Suffering has a “special place” in God’s saving plan; and has been taught as a “sharing in Christ’s passion,” especially in the last moments of life. After reading a discussion on how God was not responsible for death I realized how crazy it is to “decide” when you are going to die. God has a purpose for everyone. Everything in our life has meaning and purpose. I now agree that euthanasia is suicide and murder. Just because the pain is intolerable doesn’t mean euthanizing is necessary. Jesus died on the cross for us. His limbs were nailed to a cross. No pain is worse than what he went through. … and Jesus wasn’t euthanized. I have never experience pain like those mentioned by a terminally ill patient, but the ill must not give up on life. They have a right to live, murder/suicide is not an option.

Fairy Tale Fatality

keri0792 — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:42:23 +0000

When we are young, we are told many fairy tales and riddles, some of which remain trapped in our heads for a lifetime. One specifically that I remember was called “Try, Try Again.” The message in this catchy tale was to never give up. The intentional death of a terminally ill patient is just another way of giving up. The teams of doctors have decided they have tried everything. The only remaining option is to euthanize the patient; which seems perfectly fine because the “ill” patient is no longer alive they are merely a body lying in bed. The patient’s family loves him/her and wants to extinguish all the pain and suffering. Therefore, “pulling the plug” just seems right.

However, Stanley J. Swierzewski, III, M.D. says otherwise. A comatose person is “still very much alive.” Isn’t euthanizing a “very much alive” person the same as murder? Even though these “ill” patients are not completely functional, they are still living, breathing, people (with help). In fact, a December edition of The Sunday Times mentions forty percent of patients in a vegetative state “may be misdiagnosed.” If a “terminally ill” patient is one of the forty percent then euthanizing them would be nothing less than an execution. These people have the right to LIVE not a right to die (as well as a right to a proper diagnosis).

“If at first [the doctors] don’t suceed, [they should] try again.” …NOT kill off the problem!

Euthanasia…Crime or Care?

keri0792 — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:18:20 +0000

Everyone has the right of choice. To ask the question, “Do the terminally ill have a right to die,” is like asking if the terminally have the same rights as the well. On this note, dying is not a “right,” for everyone dies at some point. The debatable question really is, “Should the terminally ill be euthanized?”

Procon.org mentions that Americans should enjoy a right in which was enforced by The European Declaration of Human Rights. This right “not to be forced to suffer” should take place in the decision of euthanizing a terminally ill patient. Therefore, forced to live with “excruciating pain” when the patient does not “wish to continue” their life should also be a crime.
Assisted suicide enables a doctor injecting the patient of a drug that will “painlessly” cause the ill to die. A definition of “terminally ill” states that for a person to be terminally ill they are expected to live for no more than twelve additional months. Living a life with unbearable pain, with the thought of dying in less than twelve months… Why should it be a crime to “put down” the terminally ill? They are dying and they have to live their remaining life in agonizing pain. Putting a patient at rest, getting rid of all present and future pain, how can this be wrong? Isn’t that what doctors are for anyways, to help the patient, to relieve them of their sickness, and in this case, their terminal illness. Maybe euthanasia is the only way.

Do The Terminally Ill Have A Right To Die?

keri0792 — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 20:20:09 +0000

Claim:
Dying is not a “right.” There is no miracle drug that will give ‘us’ eternal life on Earth, everyone will die at some point, it’s just a matter of when, and in this case, why? The debatable question is, “Are the terminally ill being murdered if their life support is taken away from them?” The decision to “pull the plug” should be relied on the condition of the “ill” and how “ill” they truly are. If the “ill” are in a vegetative state and could donate organs to save someone else, then they should, even if it means “killing” the “ill.”

Evidence (Data):
The definition of living is “in actual existence or use.”

Warrant:
Do you consider lying in a bed, having no function, no thoughts, no senses, no feelings, no awareness of what is going on around you, truly “living?”

Backing:
What if there was a little boy, 6 years old, he hasn’t even begun to live his life. Since he was two, he has been in and out of children’s hospitals, doctors operating on him, scratching their heads in confusion on what could possibly make this boy so sick. On the boy’s last trip to the hospital, one of his many doctors tells him he has only three days left to live…unless…he gets a heart transplant. With the boy’s rare blood type, it will be one difficult task to find an appropriate donor. Meanwhile, a man, eighty-seven years of age, is in the same hospital as the boy. The man is in a coma and has been for several weeks. His family is too attached to let go of the man and wants to keep him “living” as long as possible. It turns out that the “ill” man and the desperate boy have the exact same rare blood type. This man’s heart could save the boy’s life, and allow the boy to actually live his life. The man has been living a long and happy life until now. The boy is “living” what appears to be a short and miserable life. The man will probably never waken from this coma but the family doesn’t want to give up. The boy will die in less than 72 hours. Wouldn’t you say the boy should have a chance at life? The man’s life was great. I believe the coma is God’s way of saying it’s time for him to go. In other words, by killing this old man who lived his wonderful life, you are saving this young child who hasn’t had a life yet.

Rebuttal:
Although miracles do happen…people have been known to wake up from comas that they had been in for years. If you went and “pull[ed] the plug” on a man that had been in a coma then he would never get a chance at that possible miracle. Even though the terminally ill are…well…ill…they are still alive (to some point). Some people have stated, “The direct killing of an innocent person is never acceptable in a civilized society.” I am a Christian and by saying this I am not questioning God, but their chances of waking up are slim. Harshly speaking, they could help save another life, by taking away their own.

Qualifier:
In some cases, the condition of the person’s illness may be well enough to live a life after life support. Although in the cases of people who can not live with out their machine, their bodies are just laying there, useless, when inside the body are organs or blood that might just save another human being.

The Fourth Leaf of Rhetoric

keri0792 — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 22:12:09 +0000

[The Fourth Leaf of Rhetoric]

Finding a four leaf clover may be a strenuous task. At some point in your life, you will, or have, searched for that supposedly lucky fourth leaf. Very few people have found the little green wonders, in fact, statistics say only one in every ten-thousand clovers will have four leaves. Searching for the “rare flower” may get you nowhere; instead, you might want to let the clover find you. Don’t waste time searching. The same goes for rhetoric. Rummaging around for specific rhetorical devices may be difficult. One must understand what rhetoric really is and then the fourth leaf will be found, metaphorically speaking that is. But unlike the four leaf clovers, rhetoric is EVERYWHERE: in movie titles, magazines, commercials, famous speeches, books, billboards and even the Bible. So stop your agonizing search and enjoy what ever it is you are reading or watching, because the rhetoric will always be there hiding and waiting to be found.

Examples of rhetoric:

Anaphora(repetition)- [Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech]
“I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal. “I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Alabama, little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today.”
Alliteration- [Sonic Menu]
Tater Tots
Parallelism- [Sonic Advertisement]
“Big Drink. Little Price”
“Easy On The Pocket. Delicious On The Stomach”
Simile- [Mike Morrell Comment for “The Shack”]
“This story reads like a prayer filled with sweat and wonder and transparency and surprise.”
Personification- [Oreo Commercial]
“Milk’s favorite Cookie”

Plainly searching for a specific rhetorical device is as difficult as searching for that propitious clover, but rhetoric IS everywhere.
Can you find a fourth leaf? . . . and I’m not talking about clovers.

RSS Feed #3 (Greasy Grandpa? Muscular Moma?)

keri0792 — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 04:27:12 +0000

During my search for more RSS feeds, I ran across one that really caught my attention. A news feed in the New York Times was titled, “60-Plus, Ripped, and Natural Competitors.” Disgusted by the thought of “ripped” elderly men and women made me a little curious on whet exactly this news feed was about. Apparently, The World Natural Sports Organization puts on a body building competition for the “chizzled” men and women over sixty years of age. Just picture your own grandfather up on stage, greased, oiled, and in a skimpy Speedo. I’m sure this is not a sight you would be interested in seeing, however these people are no ordinary old men and women. A competitor in the contests had this to say, “Age is a statistic, not a burden and there is no reason a man or woman can’t get into and maintain the best shape of their lives at any age.” However these bodybuilding contests were different than others. These contests required all of their participants to be completely drug and steroid free. Even without the harmful drugs, these people could still be in great shape; especially for their age! This news feed informed the readers that people don’t have to take drugs or any steroids to be in shape, fit, or muscular. The author of this news feed put together a good story, while giving out a great message to people who may believe drugs are essential in being fit.

RSS Feed #2 (Window View Relieving Stress)

keri0792 — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:36:15 +0000

Inside a classroom, no teacher wants their student sitting by the window. The environment inside a class room is to plain and boring. If it wasn’t for the posters on reading and learning on the walls, students would be pretty convinced they were sitting inside a penitentiary. Though most students are easily distracted when it comes to the window seat, teachers may begin to admire this seat for their students. Most teachers will notice that the trouble making student is normally by the window, gazing into the outside world. If teachers would read this news feed I found, then there would probably be more windows in the classroom.

During my daily search for RSS feeds, I came across one that interests me in Scientific American. The title said “Window View Beats TV for Stress.” A report in the Journal of Environmental Psychology said televised nature-scenes are no comparison to an actual window. Hooked up to a heart monitor, each student in the study performed a sequence of complicated mental tests. They placed one group of testing students in a room with a large window, while the other group was sat in front of a huge flat screen television. The television had the exact same view as the window in the other room, recorded by a live camera. Although the students might have been distracted a little more with the window, the study showed them less stressed than the students with a T.V. view. The Journal of Environmental Psychology also had this to say, “Your T.V. may be a window on the world, but it’s no substitute for the real deal.”

The author of this feed organized their information very well. Most news feeds are excruciatingly long and seem to take forever to read, however this one was different. “Window View Beats T.V. for Stress,” was rather short, therefore easier to keep the readers interests. Even though the feed was short, there was plenty of information to show the point in the news feed. By reading this feed, now I will most likely sit by a window while reading, writing, or just thinking. I enjoy reading the feeds on studies people have tested. Therefore I enjoyed reading the content in this feed.

RSS Feed #1 (“the” conflict of “the”)

keri0792 — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:21:52 +0000

While searching for RSS feeds, I skimmed over one that really caught my attention. I am always interested in what is going on in other people’s minds. Because of my curiosity towards people’s thoughts, I spent most of my RSS feed reading in the “Opinions & Columns” section after subscribing to the “L.A. Times.”

Under the category of “Opinions & Columns,” I came across a news feed titled “Only in L.A.|Steve Harvey.” This catchy title made me want to read on. Strangely, this entire news feed was conflict all over the word “the.” Apparently in Los Angeles, when speaking about freeways they say “the” before the freeways number “(i.e. “the” 405).”

The writer of this feed posted comments from people who where concerned on using “the” in their freeway titles. One reply stated, “Adding the word ‘the’ is superfluous and annoying.” ‘The’ topic seemed funny to me, all this controversy over a simple little word, what’s the point, it’s just a word? Some people were more serious on the “the” topic, stating that one man’s son went off to college in L.A. and came back saying “the” referring to freeways. Outraged by what the man had heard come out of his son’s mouth, he told his son that he wasn’t going to tolerate that language in his house! The content in this feed was very interesting, to think that all the problems going on in the world and these people are complaining on the way other people talk. What is this world coming to? However I did enjoy reading this feed.

The writer had a well organized style. Information listed into short paragraphs which kept me reading on and interested, also had pictures to illustrate his purpose in disliking L.A. lingo. The author was humorous with his writing and illustrating. One image was a sign saying “Ramp Closed PERMANENTLY June 16 2008 to August 16 2008.” If it was permanently closed, why would it be back open in August?

In the L.A. Times, figured there would be more interesting feeds like this one, therefore I kept the L.A. Times in my reader. By reading this feed, I’ve decided to make my own writing on more interesting or humorous topics, I found that those are easier and more fun to read.

Summer Assignment 01 . . . (blog essay)

keri0792 — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:08:37 +0000

The internet is a fast way for people to communicate. All over the world, in seconds, people can talk to one another. The internet has many concepts of keeping people in touch, one of which is called blogging. Blogging helps people dish out their thoughts and feelings about a subject, letting people comment or complain on what someone else has said. Blogging is an online journal, free for almost anyone to read. Most people have unique forms of blogging. Some bloggers write on random topics, while others write on specific concerns or subjects. Of all the blogs out there that I have read, these specific ones have, in some way, caught my eye.

One afternoon, I was sitting on the couch watching television. A commercial came on that caught my attention. The ad was talking about a medication that people should take if they had restless leg syndrome. I knew nothing about RLS, but according to the symptoms on the commercial, I had the syndrome. When searching the internet I noticed a blog that was titled “Restless Mind Syndrome.” Curious about what this blog might say, I read the blog. Right away the blog talked about something I could relate to. The writer spoke of the commercial that had caught my attention. Because I could relate to what the writer was saying, I read on. From beginning to the end, I read the blog and was not once ever bored with the information it told. This blog was very helpful to me. At first, I was almost positive I had restless leg syndrome, although the blog informed me that “less than 3% of the population has it.” The blog was very well written but also easy and fun to read. http://restlessmindsyndrome.wordpress.com/

As browsing the internet, I came across a link to a website named, “Color Me Grey”. This random sounding title caught my attention. Because this title was different and not stating a specific topic, I was curious on what might be said in the blogs on the website. I read the blog named “America’s Culture Obsession.” The writer began the blog by writing through the reader’s perspective. The blog stated, “You enter the store, palms sweaty with anticipation, just waiting to catch a glimpse of the toy you saw on TV,” putting a memory, or a mental picture, directly into the reader’s mind. An introduction like that made me want to read on more. As I read, I came onto the real issue of the blog. The writer spoke of concerns of today’s culture, but the only way I know this is because of the title of the blog. Honestly, the blog was way too advanced for me. After almost every sentence was a different citation, distracting me from the actual message. On the other hand, the writer’s vocabulary was too advanced for my reading. This blog seemed well written, but not the kind of blog that I am interested in reading. http://colormegray.wordpress.com/2008/04/21/americas-culture-obsession/

I read a blog titled, “Evolution vs. Creationism.” Even though the blog was shorter than most, the writer still put out a very interesting topic. I enjoyed reading this blog because I understood the point the writer was trying to make. I do not believe that teachers should have the ability to teach evolution in school if they are not able to teach their students that God created man. Therefore, I agreed completely with the writer when they said, “I think that if you can’t teach creationism in school then you shouldn’t be able to teach evolution in school.” In this blog, “Evolution vs. Creationism,” a few people commented the writer. One of the readers commented, “I totally agree with your opinion. If we aren’t going to be taught both sides of debate then we shouldn’t be taught either. Also, I’m definitely with you on the being a Creationist.” The writer of this blog successfully wrote on an important topic that readers could relate to. http://turtle91.learnerblogs.org/2007/11/09/evolution-vs-creationism/

By reading blogs, the readers can learn about topics, as well as comment and communicate with the writer. Because every blog is different, every one is unique. Writing a blog is an easy and effective way to put information on the internet. Blogging is so simple, almost anyone could do it. Since so many people are capable of blogging, some blogs are more enhanced or better than others, causing some not very interesting and others fascinating.

Playing God or God’s Play?

keri0792 — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:20:21 +0000

“Two great moments in our lives are when we are born and when we discover why we were born. We were created for a reason—a divine purpose. Our lives are not accidents or fate. God has a personal plan for each of us.”

(Follow God,2008) God does not procrastinate. His plans for our lives are from the very beginning. Psalm 139:16 says, “You saw me before I was born and scheduled each day of my life before I began to breathe. Every day was recorded in your book.” God has planned our lives; therefore he has planned for acts such as genetic engineering to take place. For example, if God intended a man to have cancer, and he survived because genetic engineering took out the bad gene, then God had planned for that man to survive. The engineer did not change God’s plan by saving the man. God had planned for the engineers to find a way to save him. By saying genetic engineering is playing God, the applications of medicines would also in theory play the same role. If people consider genetic engineering to take God’s part, then medicines as simple as Ibprofin should also be reflected to “play God.” God put doctors on this Earth to help and heal. Why would genetic engineering not be a part of God’s plan too? Therefore genetic engineering is not playing God but more so planned by him. Although, contradicting God’s plan is Satan’s plan. Satan opposes everything God does, trying to get us to turn on God. Satan could be using concepts like medicine and genetic engineering to wean us away from God’s plan and into his trap. So this makes us wonder, is genetic engineering on God’s side or Satan’s?