Initial Thoughts on Abortion

Abortion is one of the most, if not the most, complex issues in modern America.  I often find myself straddling the fence when it comes to this issue, so I took a look at the websites of the leading organizations on each side,  NARAL-Prochoice America and National Right to Life.  Immediately upon glancing at each site, their displays were quite contrasting.  NARAL almost had the layout of a school website: professional and organized.  National Right to Life's website, on the other hand, to me, looks somewhat unprofessional, a step above blogging.  Its layout is not very appealing, but all of the white on the website is probably meant to resemble a theme of life.  I guess it's contradictory that I say that, because on their home page is a disgusting list of abortion methods that doctors use.  It makes me reconsider my viewpoints.  Overall though, I like NARAL's website more, and I also believe that they go more in depth on their side of Abortion.  National Right to Life has noticeably less information, and to compensate they give you a list of several websites.  I don't think many people want to go searching all over the Internet for pro-life information; rather, they would look at one website that goes in depth, like NARAL.  Although there are less subtopics on NARAL, their information is more detailed and more accessible for information-seekers.  Therefore, because of their organization and detail, I believe that NARAL seems to be winning the debate on abortion.  I also believe that Illinois is headed in the right direction when it comes to abortion.  There are still a few laws though that I do not support and would rather have abolished, such as TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) and spousal consent.

As a seventeen-year-old high school student, I think of abortion as a personal issue rather than a political issue.  The only thing that makes it political is the government's choice to permit or prohibit it.  I believe the government shouldn't even be involved in something as personal as abortion, so I guess I call myself pro-choice.  Like I have said in previous posts, the more government becomes involved in an individual's personal life, the more inclined they are to be even more involved.  This is America, a country of freedom, a glorious place where individuals can make their own decisions (as it should always be).  It is a pregnant woman's decision whether or not to abort her unborn child that resides within her individual self.  However, after taking a look at the second/third trimester abortion methods on the National Right to Life site, it makes me wishy-washy on my viewpoints...is this moral?  What constitutes life?  When the fetus develops its nervous system, or when it is a cell, the smallest building block of life?  This question of morality is substantial because, though people will claim that these arguments are religious, our society has developed a sense of right and wrong from religion or from elders that have been religiously educated.  However, in the end, it is still up to the individual to make the decision and she will have to live with the consequences for the rest of her life.  I also believe that since a pregnant teenager planning to abort is still a dependent to her parents, she is obligated to inform them, but her parents cannot make the decision for her; she is an individual.  The same goes with the father being notified of the abortion.  Since she is the one with the baby inside of her, it is the mother's choice whether or not to notify the father of the abortion, and the father cannot decide whether or not she should follow through with it.

Nintendo's Great Achievement

For those who do not know me, I am a fairly big fan of video games, and my favorite video game series is The Legend of Zelda.  Ever since Ocarina of Time (on Nintendo 64), I have had an intense obsession with these games.  The adventure aspects within them are wonderful; you (Link) start out with virtually nothing, then you gain new items and equipment that come in handy as you continue your quest to vanquish evil.  The gameplay, especially the swordplay, is superb in every Zelda game, and it keeps getting better in the newer Zelda games.  Each enemy has a certain weakness that you need to decipher through experimentation, and you receive this small feeling of satisfaction after successfully taking down one of them.  The plot in each game is very unique, and often they tie with the other games in the series.  I'm sometimes inclined to play Zelda because I get so immersed in the beautifully constructed plot.

Well, Nintendo, you've done it again.  You've managed to satisfy a bunch of gamers out there, including me.  A day ago, Nintendo released the new installment to the Zelda series: The Legend of Zelda, Skyward Sword.  Man, is this game breathtaking.  Link's new home, Skyloft, is high in the sky (literally).  When his friend, Zelda, is sucked downward to the surface (the world below Skyloft, possessed by evil), Link is thrust into a mission to retrieve her.  However, he soon learns that the main purpose for his descent to the surface is to vanquish the evil that bewitches the land.  Link is accompanied by a strange goddess named Fi that gives him advice on his journey, and Link also has the ability to return to Skyloft at any time he pleases.

I would have to say that the greatest new feature of this game is its revolutionary swordplay.  Skyward Sword requires Wii MotionPlus, an apparatus that is attached to the bottom of the Wii-mote, just for the swordplay.  Every single movement you make on the Wii-mote is replicated by Link on the screen.  If you want to do a side slash, you swing the remote sideways.  For a stab, thrust the remote forward.  For a spin attack, swing both the nunchuck and Wii-mote.  This new set of controls for the sword creates a whole new aspect of swordplay: positioning the sword to hit the enemy.  Enemies may block upward, sideways, or downwards, so you need to compensate by swinging the sword in the open spots.  It's amazing, so amazing to the point where sometimes I feel like I'm Link.  Anyways, enough sounding like a total nerd... Let me finish this post by saying: If you have a Wii and you like adventure, I highly suggest buying this game!

The Wonders of Facebook

Ahh, Facebook: one of many applications out there that is so beneficial yet so detrimental.  Everyone who has one knows what I mean.  

For those uninformed individuals out there, Facebook is a social networking website.  It allows you to keep in touch with friends who live far away (And friends in general).  Anybody, anywhere with Internet can create a free profile on this site, so Facebook exists around the globe.  It is a sufficient alternative to using a phone.  It sometimes brings people together who would normally be distant.  And, of course, it is a form of media and entertainment.  As you can see, Facebook has many advantages, and some may even go further to say that it improves people's way of life.  However, next to those advantages are countless disadvantages.

The main problem with Facebook is despite privacy settings, anything you post on the site will exist in cyberspace forever, even if you delete it.  If you post something personal about yourself and choose to delete it, Facebook (and perhaps the authorities) can still access it.  In addition, if you don't tinker with privacy settings, anyone can look at your profile, even non-friends.  I've heard stories of managers looking at Facebook pages of interviewees to find out more personal information and decide if they are fit for the job.  I've also heard of principals or deans looking at students' Facebook profiles to find an excuse to get them in trouble.  For teens, those cliché "red cup" pictures can get them in major trouble, because it is assumed that the beverage being consumed contains alcohol.  Another problem with Facebook is the addiction factor.  It is very easy for anyone to become addicted to Facebook.  I mean, there's an endless amount of things to do on the site.  You can post on people's profiles, you can play games, you can chat with friends, or you can update your status.  Oftentimes, people will put off their work because they're too obsessed with Facebook.  I can't say that it's never happened to me.  There is also the constant cyber-bullying on Facebook, a whole new level of bullying.  Now that we live in the digital age, most bullies are too lazy to degrade people in person, so with Facebook, all they have to do is type a few words to a person and viola!  they obtain the same "high" as they would if they bullied in person.

Although I myself have a Facebook account, it's hard for me to say that it benefits more than hurts me.  I know I'm being hypocritical here, but if you're considering making your own Facebook account, I would refrain from doing so.  Despite the fact that it allows you to keep in contact with distant friends, it is just a  way for authorities to know more about you than they really should.

Final Thoughts on the Death Penalty

On January 12, 2003 Governor George Ryan of Illinois abolished the death penalty in Illinois.  His reasoning behind the abolishment was that of any typical anti-death penalty individual: there are things more important than bringing closure to the victims’ families, it is morally wrong, there are racial disparities, innocents may be inadvertently executed, and so on.  He also has a personal childhood experience that is used as a way for pro-death penalty individuals to sympathize with him (Governor Ryan was originally pro-death penalty).  I wonder though…did Ryan make this decision because his opinion truly changed, or does he still feel the same way about the death penalty and his associates just pushed him to abolish it?  Near the end of his speech, the governor says, “As I prepare to leave office, I had to ask myself whether I could really live with the prospect of knowing that I had the opportunity to act, but that I failed to do so because I might be criticized.”  My latter hypothesis is entirely possible. Ryan’s right hand men may have swayed him to make the decision by targeting his shame: Ryan would not want to live the rest of his life being criticized by anti-death penalty individuals and having a supposedly bad reputation.  Perhaps Ryan abolished the death penalty more for his own good rather than for the good of the state.  That is actually what I believe.  After reading through his speech, I feel that Ryan’s abolishment of the death penalty in Illinois was unjust, and I also feel that Governor Ryan appeased to his peers rather than making his own decision.  If that were truly the case, it would show his weakness and ambivalence as a politician. 

Governor Ryan’s arguments against the death penalty were substantially valid; however, that does not mean they are right.  He asserts that closure to a case should not be a primary concern: “What kind of victim's services are we providing? Are all of our resources geared toward providing this notion of closure by execution instead of tending to the physical and social service needs of victim families? And what kind of values are we instilling in these wounded families and in the young people? As Gandhi said, an eye for an eye only leaves the whole world blind.”  Tending to “the physical and social service needs of victim families” will do nothing, simply put.  The families will always have in the back of their heads that their murderer is still out there, alive and well.  The only restitution that can be done to these families (and to the victims) is to eliminate the murderer.  By doing so, they can sleep at night knowing that the murderer will never harm anybody again, and that is the largest need of victim families.  In fact, a 1973 study by Isaac Ehrlich shows that for every executed inmate, seven lives are spared.  Robert Macy, District Attorney of Oklahoma City, frankly and rightfully states, “For justice to prevail, some killers just need to die.”

Governor Ryan, of course, brings up the argument about arbitrariness with the death penalty.  He asserts, “Our own study showed that juries were more likely to sentence to death if the victim were white than if the victim were black - three-and-a-half times more likely to be exact. We are not alone. Just this month Maryland released a study of their death penalty system and racial disparities exist there too.”  Why does this matter?  Seriously?  It’s like saying the presidential election system is broken because we have only had one black president in office.  This argument is futile; it does not matter.  Just because one race has been executed more than another does not mean that it is discriminatory.  Something to note as well is that Ryan contradicts himself by saying, “Stephen Bright of the Southern Center for Human Rights has taken the position that the death penalty is being sought with increasing frequency in some states against the poor and minorities.”  Whites are not minorities.  Discretion has always been an essential aspect to the justice system; the justice system deems each crime as unique and solitary.  After about fifty years, I believe they have moved beyond judging a crime based off of appearance or background.  Murderers that are black, white, Hispanic, Jewish, Christian, or Islamic are still murderers. 

Governor Ryan’s main argument against the death penalty in Illinois was that the system is broken, and too many innocents are accidentally executed.  He claims, “Our systemic case-by-case review has found more cases of innocent men wrongfully sentenced to death row. Because our three-year study has found only more questions about the fairness of the sentencing; because of the spectacular failure to reform the system; because we have seen justice delayed for countless death row inmates with potentially meritorious claims; because the Illinois death penalty system is arbitrary and capricious - and therefore immoral - I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death.”  Systemic case-by-case review?  How did he review these cases and come to the conclusion that more innocents are executed than the guilty?  Even with DNA evidence, there is no known proof of any innocents being executed.  DNA evidence may show that the deemed murderer may not have murdered a particular victim, but almost all of the murderers sentenced to the death penalty are serial killers, murdering more than one victim, and therefore they all die rightfully.  Most of these murderers confess their guilt anyways; by abolishing the death penalty in Illinois, Ryan may encourage the convicted to not plead guilty.  James McKay, chief of the capital litigation task force for the Cook County state's attorney's office, states, “With the death penalty off the table, there'll be even more trials. There'll be no incentive to plead guilty. I do not believe for one second that taking the death penalty off the table will save the state of Illinois any money whatsoever." Besides, our justice system has a countless number of safeguards and appeals for the death penalty.  Because of the thoroughness of every trial, it is nearly impossible for an innocent to be executed. 

These anti-death penalty claims, along with several others, do spark thought as to whether the death penalty is righteous or not.  In the end, though, I believe that it is a righteous form of punishment, and Ryan’s decision to abolish the death penalty in Illinois is unjust.  The question arises, how will justice be brought to the victim and the victims’ families?  Time and time again, the answer is by killing the murderer.  This is not murdering either, but rather killing as a form of restitution and self-defense, a way for the murderer to give back to the victim and a way to protect people from future harm, respectively.  What if you were a victim of a brutal murder?  How would you feel?

The Bothersome Modern Music

...If you can even call it that.

Simply put, I love music; it is one of my few hobbies.  I'm a huge music geek, not in my music history knowledge but more in my music theory knowledge.  I have knowledge about how music works, chord structures, discerning original pieces of music from the generic ones, etc... A problem with this is that while listening to any song, I pay more attention to the musical/instrumental aspects rather than lyrics.  I have perfect pitch (meaning I know what every note, key signature, and most chords sound like), so I like listening to music that does not have a predictable chord progression.  I also cannot listen to music in which the lyricist is flat or sharp; it clashes with my model of the note in my head, which is quite an unpleasant feeling.  So, can you guess why modern music is bothersome to me? (When I say modern music, I mean the artists in the top charts like Lil' Wayne, Taylor Swift, Justin Bieber, Eminem, Coldplay, etc.)

Almost all of this modern music consists of one of these elements that I really don't like.  All rap in general bothers me.  Okay, it's poetry, which can be substantial, but I can't call it music when the same beat is being played over and over again and the "lyricist" is talking rather than singing pitches.  And since I don't listen to lyrics too much, it can be repetitive and boring for me.  People like Taylor Swift or Justin Bieber, on the other hand, actually sing, which is nice.  However, their music is so recycled; it surprises me that most people even with no musical background cannot see that.  All of their songs sound the same to me, just a four-chord cliche.  I feel musically stupid listening to music like that.  Coldplay is a bit different.  I sincerely enjoyed their earlier stuff, and I even liked most of Viva La Vida.  However, with Mylo Xyoto they're straying in a path similar to Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber; their songs are more cliche.  To boot, Chris Martin's voice can be irritatingly sharp sometimes; I can't even listen to The Scientist because of his sharpness.  I feel like modern music in general is moving in the wrong direction.

Anyway, I just hope there are some people out there that have the same opinion as I do about the music of today.  This sounds ridiculous, but I sometimes feel detached from most people because of my opposing views to today's popular music.  It would be good to know if somebody sympathized with me so they understand my pain.