Sometimes Death is Necessary

Death is the most powerful, unavoidable, necessary force that exists in our world. Although terrible in a lot of situations, tearing families apart and causing much grief, death is a force that can better our society as a whole. Sometimes death is required in situations like abortions, euthanasia, and war to benefit society as a whole.

                Abortion uses death in a necessary manner to allow women the right to choose what happens to their body. The controversy over abortion is whether or not women should have the right to choose to terminate their own pregnancy. Some people believe that abortion is a murder, and they shouldn’t take place because the baby has the right to live over the mother. They believe that the mother has a moral obligation to the embryo to sacrifice her body for their future child’s life. I believe that women should have the right to choice, and that you have an obligation to yourself and not to the embryo. In the situation of abortion I believe that bodily integrity is the most beneficial to society. A woman should have the right of bodily integrity, but at a certain point so does the fetus, when the embryo has developed into the features of a child then the pregnancy has gone to terminate. I believe that the woman should have the right to abort up to 24 weeks into the pregnancy, because by then the baby could sustain itself out side of the womb, and adoption should be their only option to revoke responsibility as a parent. Conflict arises when people have different morals and try to impose their morals onto other, giving people the right to choice over their own bodies allows for each individual to follow their own morals. Any fertile woman is capable of having a child; however it takes more than the ability to have a child to raise it. In an article published in 2001 by John Donohue and Steven Levitt, these social scientists stated that when abortion was legalized in 1970, eighteen years after this law passed crime rates dropped significantly because unwanted children that would potentially be more exposed to gangs and crime were no longer being born. Along with the decreased crime, abortions provide a safe way for women to stop pregnancy instead of illegal home procedures with fatal consequences. In the reading “A Defense of Abortion,” by Judith Jarvis Thomson, she opens her argument of killing an innocent human being is not always wrong by showing an example. Thomson example was a hypothetical situation symbolizing abortion where she asks you to imagine yourself in a position where you have been kidnapped and you wake up in a hospital connected though machines to a professional violinist. The violinist cannot live on his own, Thomson goes on saying that you might allow the violinist to use your body out of kindness, however you are not obligated to do so and you may rightfully pull the plug on him if you choose. I agree with Thomson’s view on abortion, a woman does don’t have an obligation to the fetus, she could allow the fetus to use her body out of kindness however she has the right to abort. Abortions benefit society in more ways than allowing people to act upon their own morals, they reduce the numbers of unwanted children and therefore reducing the affects that happen when a child is born unwanted and uncared for.

                 Much like abortion, euthanasia is a controversial issue dealing with choices between life or death. Euthanasia is a direct choice to death. Some people view the choice to kill themselves as a mental illness, and in some cases it’s true; however, I believe that for the greater good of society euthanasia should be legal. People have the right to their body in health reasons. Not everyone in any state of mind should be able to euthanize themselves, if a person is not diagnosed with any illness wants to be euthanized their mental state should be checked and help should be given to them, however if after they still don’t want to live, they have the right to die. If euthanasia wasn’t offered to them they would most likely still find a way to kill themselves. Death is feared by many, the fear of the unknown and the uncontrollable. Being able to control your death would set ease to many people. Euthanasia allows people to have a good death, at the time they want. If a person is terminally ill and in severe pain and suffering they should have the right to control the manner in which they die. According to Exit International, they believe a peaceful death is everybody’s right, so far euthanasia is legal for terminally ill patients or patiens with no hope in Oregon, Washington, and soon to be Montana. They cannot control their body with regards to the illness, however they should be able to control the way they die.  Along with a terminal illness, I believe that if a person has pre-decided that if they were ever to be on life support with a slim to no chance to ever come out of it the same person they were then their medical guardian should have the right to euthanize them. Euthanasia is for the betterment of society, the money spent on trying to keep them alive without suffering could be better spent, along with the resources being used by them could be better invested and used. In John Hardwig’s essay, “From Is There a Duty to Die,” he talks about the being a burden to love ones and how nobody ever wants to put a strain on the people they love. Although death is very sad in some situation where a person is completely dependent on others feels they have become a burden to the ones they love and would like to be euthanized they should have the right to, it would bring them happiness knowing their loved ones could live their life not having to worry and stress out because of them. Death dealing with abortions and euthanasia should consider the quality of life, the quality of life for the mother and the child if the baby were to be born and the quality of life a terminally ill patient. Abortion and euthanasia greatly affects the quality of life of the human that died, however it also benefits the quality of life of the people around them. When death brings more joy then living I believe a person should have the right to die as they choose. Both abortion and euthanasia uses death for the betterment of society, if a person doesn’t want to live anymore who are we to force them to?

                In regards to abortion and euthanasia death is based on the right of bodily integrity and it is a choice that controls the manner in which death occurs, however in war soldiers give up their right to bodily integrity and the manner in which they die. In today’s society war is inevitable, and with war comes death. For the greater good of society death must be allowed in war, it benefits society in the aspect of security and power. Death in war between soldiers is not right; however it is also not wrong. When a person becomes a soldier they are aware that there is a possibility they might die for their country, and therefore they give up their rights of bodily integrity forfeiting their choice of how they die. In war, the only deaths that are morally alright are the deaths between soldiers or in self defense from civilians that attack, however the death of innocent civilians is wrong. The innocent civilians did not choose to go to war, and did not choose to be put in harm’s way and killing them is wrong. In BBC’s “In an ethical war, whom can you fight?” it states the general rule as “it is unjust to attack non-combats” and “it is unjust to attack indiscriminately, as non-combats may be killed,” which parallels my view on attacking civilians. According to the Civil War Casualties, more American lives were lost during the civil war than any other war, they died for a reason they died fighting for what they believed in. Their deaths were necessary for the betterment of our country; it took force in order for progress and death was unavoidable. Unlike abortion and euthanasia, for the most part death in war is unwanted and doesn’t bring joy, however like abortion and euthanasia death is necessary for the betterment for the overall betterment of society.

                Death is not only necessary in the cycle of life but in some situations it is necessary for the betterment of society. Abortion, euthanasia, and war are circumstances where it is better for society if people die. Everybody has the right to do with their body as they please, in abortion women should have the right to choose if they want their body to support the fetus, in euthanasia people should have the right to choose if they want to die, while in war soldiers have forfeit their right to choose if they want to die or how they die. Death is feared and will come to all of us, it is something that nobody is exempt from.

 

 

“Civil War Trust.” Civil War Casualties. Civil War, n.d. Web. 28 May 2013.

“Death with Dignity in Oregon, Washington & (soon to Be) Montana.” Euthanasia and the Law in the United States of America. Exit, n.d. Web. 28 May 2013.

“In an Ethical War, Whom Can You Fight?” BBC News. BBC, n.d. Web. 28 May 2013.

 

Donohue, John J., III, and Steven D. Levitt. “The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime.”The Quarterly Journal of Economics CXVI.2 (2001): 380-420. Web.

Mercy killings

Euthanasia:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJsbefxfVsg

With all of the medical advancements the average life span has become greater and greater. However with the medical advancements some lives have been prolonged and the quality of life should be thought of. Jack Kevorkian, known as Dr. Death, is a medical pathologist that helped dozens of terminally ill patients end their suffering.  He was arrested for second degree murder in assisting with a suicide for one of his patients.

I believe that when someone is terminally ill or brain dead the patient or their guardian should have the ability to choose what they want to do with their bodies. The quality of life should be considered, people shouldn’t be forced to live their final days though pain and suffering.

Most when asked how they would like to die, they respond in their sleep. Most want to die a peaceful death in their sleep, not having to suffer. Dr. Jack Kevorkian created a machine that would first put the patient to sleep and then give them a lethal dose of Potassium Chloride which would cause a heart attack. Attached to Dr. Kevorkian’s invention a terminally ill patient could pass away in peace.

Regular suicides are different; people who try to kill themselves because they are not satisfied with their lives should be helped. The difference between a suicide and a suicide through euthanasia on a terminally ill person, is the ability to help.  The lives of the terminally ill patient will never be the same.

I agree with Jack Kevorkian’s belief of personal autonomy, if a patient has a desire and a wish to end his life then it is up to a doctor to use his medical expertise along with logic and common sense to determine if his patient’s desire is medically justifiable.

too much cost and not enough gain

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/02/death-penalty-california-stats-infographic

Death Penalty: Capital Punishment

I do not believe that the United States should exercise the death penalty because it is costly and doesn’t fix any problems. The death penalty is not immoral it is just not very practical.

In California: For one year an average inmate it costs $47,421 compared to an inmate on death row that costs about $175 thousand. On average it takes 25 years from conviction to execution, and about $307,692,308. (Michael Mechanic)

Capital punishment doesn’t fix any problems, there is no evidence to prove that capital punishment has detoured similar crimes form happening.  I don’t think the death penalty is worth the amount of cost it takes to execute an inmate. The inmates sentenced to the death penalty are the scum of society that are not mentally right, killing them doesn’t reach to root of the issue. The death penalty is an easy out, I rather they inmate suffers for a long time then for them to be humanely put to sleep.

Although very small there is still a chance that the wrong person was convicted of the crime. Because of this issue it takes on average 25 years from conviction for someone to be executed and millions in cost of caring for these inmates.

I believe that the money wasted on inmates in death row would be better used on the youth to prevent future crimes from occurring. People are not born killers; events happen in people’s lives that create a killer. I believe that the money is better spent on preventing future killing then on killing a killer.

There are not that many inmates that get executed for this kind of punishment to even be continued. Since 1978 there has only been 13 people executed in California from the death penalty.

Consume Consume Consume

The poverty rate in the United States on November 2012 was calculated as 16% approximately 43.6 million; the rate is calculated by families earning less than $23,050 for a family of 4.

Poverty is seen differently around the world. What we here in the United States see as poverty is seen as luxuries in different countries. Things seen as necessities like cell phones, internet, and running water are seen as luxuries in other third world countries. On the Ecological Footprint Quiz, it calculates the number of Earth it would take for everyone on this plant to live the lifestyle you live sustainably. I took the Footprint Quiz based on my life at home in a family of 4, and it was calculated that in order for everyone on this plant to live like I do there would need to be 4.65 Earths. There are about 7 billion people on this planet most not as “blessed” as we are, however about 20% of the population uses about 80% of this worlds resources.

Americans over consume, since children we have been bombarded by ads and the idea of consumption. Every day we consume some people more than others. In today’s world poverty is a necessity; when some people take so much they leave others with nothing. There are only a certain number of resources on this planet and when consumption is driven by wealth, the poor get scraps. It is sad that people die because they don’t have money for food. Humans prospered because of their ability to stay together and work as a group and caring for  each other, and now when $$$$$ was created basic human needs are not being filled, to the point of starvation.

Is consuming and wasting so much while others are dying of starvation wrong? I believe it is wrong, however not seeing their suffering firsthand and difficulty to help we are able to blind ourselves.

 

http://myfootprint.org/en/

Glamorous Rape?

Glamorous Rape?

 

http://www.thegreatfitnessexperiment.com/2009/06/glamorous-rape.html

In a Dolce & Gabbana ad, they chose to use sex in promoting their product, however this particular ad brought controversy. Sexual Violence is a sensitive subject because it affects so many lives. The Dolce & Gabbana ad focused on a girl being held down by one man in a very sexual manor, while three other men stand watching. In The Glamorous Rape blog post by Charlotte she expresses her views on the “gang rape” ad made to promote Dolce & Gabbana. She writes about an event that she vividly remembers while she was interning, she was a “peer counselor” and received a call about a young who was gang raped at a frat house. Arriving at the call she stayed with the girl all night until she fell asleep, she saw the damage in the girl’s eyes and on her body, rape or any “sexual crimes are vicious, cruel, and damaging.”

Sexual violence has been all over the media, in movies, songs, books, and advertisements. Charlotte wrote in her blog, “the media is selling us an image of rape and domestic violence as being artistic, dramatic, the result of misguided love and – most terrifying – wanted.” This ad has the woman pinned down however not fully resisting, it seems forceful yet wanted in some way.

Sexual Violence is an extremely sensitive subject; many people from different ages and gender are damaged and affected by it. Sexual Violence is not glamorous and it is not what the ad makes it out to be. Media greatly affects society; society mirrors media in many different ways through adolescents and lifestyles. To see sexual violence being “promoted” in a glamorous way it frightens me thinking what could come of it and where society is going to lead us in the future. 

Legalize It

Legalize It

Is Prostitution Right or Wrong?

I don’t think there is a clear answer to if prostitution is right or wrong, it all depends on a person’s morals and ethics. Most wouldn’t be able to live with themselves if they were being paid for sex, however can. Prostitution, legal or not is taking place around the world. Patty Kelly, an anthropology professor at George Washington University, went down to a legal state regulated brothel in Mexico for a year to study and analyze commercial sex.

  “Depending on whose statistics you choose to believe, more than one in every 10 American adult males have paid for sex at some point in their lives. What’s more, in 2005, about 84,000 people were arrested across the nation for prostitution-related offenses.” Paying for sex is common in our culture and legal or not it is not going away, and in my opinion should be legalized. Arresting 84,000 people in one year for prostitution is a waste of time and money, legalizing prostitution would give the government control over prostitution. Regulations could be in place and safety for both the client and the prostitutes would be controlled.

“New Zealand’s 2003 Prostitution Reform Act is perhaps the most progressive response to the complex issue of prostitution. The act not only decriminalizes the practice but seeks to “safeguard the human rights of sex workers and protects them from exploitation, promotes the welfare and occupational health and safety of sex workers, is conducive to public health, [and] prohibits the use in prostitution of persons under 18 years of age.””

I believe that legalizing prostitution would give the government control over what they fear prostitution causes. Reform Acts such as the one in New Zealand gives rights and protects the “lifestyle” and job that these prostitutes choose to have.

 

 

American History X

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9LHJ75GK8k

Whenever I hear about Affirmative Action, I’m always reminded of the movie American History X. In the movie, specifically the dinner scene, where the father was talking about Affirmative Action with relations to his job as a fire fighter. Affirmative Action, was a policy designed to benefit minorities suffering discrimination with employment or education. In the clip the father talks about a couple black men that got the job on the basis that they were black, and he expresses his feeling on how they were other white men that were better qualified that didn’t get the job.

I feel as a minority, being both a women and Mexican, I would want to know that I got the job because I earned the job, and I fairly beat out my competition. However, during the time when Affirmative Action was put into place, and still today, the job competition was not fair. Minorities were not given the same chances as white men, and even today minorities are still discriminated. Affirmative Action gave minorities a foot in the door, however, now has become to be seen as reverse racism.  Everyone should have an equal playing field race, gender, color, or social class should not affect a person, however it does. Either way Affirmative Action or not, their is always going to be discrimination against someone, and someones feelings are going to get hurt.

There shouldn’t be a required amount of different minorities that needs to be fill a quota, however at that time it was necessary, and still necessary to an extent today. In the modern world there are more people being accepted into positions that they are qualified for and the enforcement of affirmative action is not necessary. Prejudice still exists in every aspect of society however has become socially unacceptable to act upon it.