IAT

I found the IAT test to interesting but ultimately inaccurate and irrelevant. The test was designed to see if you have a preference to white or black people. After taking the test my result was that I showed no preference to either race. I find this result to be inaccurate in not only myself but also anyone who would receive it. I am not a racist, but I am not capable or viewing everyone the same, no one is. Whether conscious or not we all use biases, stereotypes, experiences, and prejudice. Saying that you have no preference cannot be possible because we use our observation, experiences, and subconscious to view every person in our lives. Depending on you race, religion, sex, location, and social status you will always have preferences and biases. You may not know it or realize it but you do. It is not wrong to be this way; it is how our brain works. We take in great amounts of information everyday; it would be absurd to say that one abandons all of their previous presumptions when confronted with preference to race.  I also found the test to be irrelevant because your result is either wrong or right, but either way it does not affect your life. If it is right you probably know that and will continue on with your life. If it is wrong, like mine, I will recognize the error and continue on with my life. This test does not have the ability to change ones preference if there is one. It can make one  conscious of their preference, but consciously changing your behavior to make yourself feel better does not change the preference that you had in the first place.

Conclusion on Eating animals

After finishing the book Eating Animals I have made changes in my awareness and eating habits.  So much of the information I learned is very important to me, but at the same time makes me outraged. There was a ton of graphic upsetting information but nothing sticks out in my mind more than the free-range information. “To be considered free-range, chickens raised for meat must have “access to the outdoors,” which, if you take those words literally, means nothing. (imagine a shed containing thirty thousand chickens, with a small door at the end that opens to a five-by-five dirt patch- and the door is closed all but occasionally.)” (61) There are so many people who would rather remain clueless on where their meat comes from, because they will feel guilty. Then there are those who do care and want to be conscious of where their meat comes from. My family does their best to make conscious choices. We buy cage free eggs and free range meats. It made me so angry to find out that we are ultimately being deceived. It is so irritating to find out that myself and others who are trying to make good choices are given false promises. I never imagined free-range in the way that the author described it. So I went on the Internet and searched it and the description in the book was accurate. I feel puzzled because I am trying to do the right thing, but I’m still supporting cruel, unsanitary living conditions for animals. What is the best way to eat meat ?

Chapter 5: Influence/speechlessness

When the swine flu epidemic was raging I was absolutely terrified. I stayed in a lot, over used antibacterial soaps, and overall acted like a germaphobe. Although this epidemic was dramatically over hyped it was still something to fear. When this was all going on my freshmen year I thought about the illness. I thought about being home sick, missing finals, getting others sick, and what the worst circumstance for me would be. I was not thinking about food. I associated contracting the illness from other people and animals (mainly pig), not from food. While reading Eating Animals I came across information that I never knew, and that makes me sick…literally. “The same conditions that lead 76million Americans to become ill from their food annually and that produce antimicrobial resistance also contribute to the risk of a pandemic.”(141) At first I did not understand this information, but it sounded bad. Then I thought about biology and what I knew. I remember learning that antibacterial soaps are not helpful but harmful to us. They do kill all of the bacteria on our hands, but that includes the good bacteria that we need. It makes us more susceptible to disease. Antibacterial soaps are human made witch chemicals. It freaked me out to think that the food I eat is making me more susceptible to dangerous diseases, and its natural. The example used in the book was H5N1, the bird flu, this disease is fatal in 60% of human cases. The food that I eat to stay healthy could contribute to my death?! Why isn’t this well known knowledge? I know plenty of people who would be terrified by this information and switch to vegetarianism or be more careful with the meats that they do choose to eat. While reading the book a common theme has been lack of public knowledge. There is so much that outrages me that would outrage many others. There is a mask on the face of the meat industry and below it lays a hideous face. If information about meat was regularly on the news I believe a huge movement would start to better the conditions of the meat industry and of vegetarianism. For anyone reading this….how do you feel about eating meat after hearing that it produces antimicrobial resistance?

Chapter 3: Words/ Meaning

    What do I consider myself? I am a person, a daughter, a friend, a sister, a cousin, and a human. Am I an animal? While reading chapter three words/meaning, of Eating Animals I came across a thought provoking conundrum. “In the first sense, humans are members of the animal kingdom. But more often, we casually use the word animal to signify all creatures-from orangutan to dog to shrimp- except humans. Within a culture, even within a family, people have their own understandings of what an animal is. Within each of us there are probably several different understandings.” (45) I believe in evolution. I believe that we evolved from primates. When I think of primates I imagine gorillas, chimps, and orangutans. I would consider all of those primates animals. If we evolved from them and they are animals, why don’t I think I am one? When I think of animals I think of the zoo, the aquarium, pets, and creatures I see on a daily basis. I would say that I consider an animal as a creature without speech. But then I realize that plenty of the creatures that I consider animals have means of speech. Dolphins, whales, and many other animals have distinguished ways of communication. So then I thought that animals are creatures that are “wild”. But I could not find justification in that. Animals have specific characteristics because natural selection selected those traits for survival. They are not acting wild. They are acting in a way that ensures survival. Isn’t that what humans do? Humans give money great importance. Having money insures that one can provide shelter, food and water. That is all we need to survive. Our obsession with money has extended past basic necessity to a craving for luxury items. Maybe this is why we consider ourselves different from animals. Animals do what they need to survive. We do what we need to survive and what makes us happy. Do we think that going above and beyond what we need makes us more civilized? I would argue it makes us more primitive because we are forgetting our basic instincts of survival for instincts of greed and envy. For anyone who reads this…do you consider yourself an animal or something else?

Invisible Children

I love being part of a school with such generosity and big hearts. Every single year Deerfield High School has the opportunity to fundraise for the charity of our choice, for three full weeks. We have endless traditions and strategies for raising large amounts of money. There are many food sales and fun events such as Mr.DHS, a male pageant. School chest creates a community within our school instantly. Everyone is supportive and working to make each year the best. This year our school chest beneficiary is Invisible Children.  Our school had many choices that were narrowed down to two, and invisible children was our final decision. This foundation is dedicated to bringing awareness to the world about the current status in northern Uganda, eliminating rebel leader Joseph Kony from the battle field, helping former child soldiers, and preventing new child soldiers. Joseph Kony is the leader of the LRA, this is the lords army resistance. They are a rebel group against the government of Uganda. Kony’s army is made up of child soldiers. Children are abducted from their homes, immediately desensitized to violence, brainwashed to believe there is nowhere for them to go, and taught how to murder without remorse. The ideal children for them to abduct are children from 6-11 years old because they are big enough to carry a gun, but young enough to mold their minds.  It is absolutely tragic what is happening to the children of Uganda. What is even more tragic is that no one knows about it. If this was happening in any other country it would be big news, but people shut their hearts and eyes to Africa. I strongly believe in the efforts of invisible children.  They are advocating that all people are equal, and they are working to stop an awful terrorist.  This foundation has made great progress due to its immense youth support. I believe this is part of what attracted the students of Deerfield to this foundation.
Although I believe in the cause and the intentions of the foundation, I do not trust that it is our best option for school chest. I fear that all of our money and hard work could be ended in an instant. My biggest issue is that we are not directly helping these child soldiers, we are potentially helping them. We are also potentially endangering them. The money that our school raises is going to be put towards a large radio tower in the Congo.  This radio will send out an FM signal. We have been told that the child soldiers have small radios with them to catch frequencies. If they get in contact with someone they will encourage them to leave, instruct them where to go, and convince them they will be accepted and wanted. We have no way of knowing if this works, and if it does to what measure. If we reached a child solider through the radio and encouraged them to leave we could also be endangering them. They could be killed or maimed for attempting to leave. Also what is to stop the rebels from bombing or shooting the tower? I have been involved with a charity called Free Wheelchair mission. We fundraise money to create wheelchairs and bring them to third world countries where they are not accessible. The wheelchairs dramatically improve the quality of their lives. These are people who have lived in constant pain. They are also people who have been crawling on the floor their entire lives. The help is not potential it is direct, and we have the ability to deliver the chairs and see our impact. I think that being involved in a charity that is so direct with its mission makes me uneasy about supporting a charity that is based on potential and there is a large disconnect between us and the people wish to help. Although this year’s school chest has not been my favorite, I have supported it the exact same amount that I have every year. I hope for the best that our school and the students who work so hard for school chest will be able to see their impact and the people they help.

Final thoughts on the Death Penalty

All of my blogs regarding the death penalty have the same opinion. I am 100% against the death penalty. I think the intentions of ridding the world of murderers, deterring criminals from murder, and enforcing punishments are valid. But as of now I do not think we have an accurate way to execute these intentions. Too many innocent people are put to death. Too many guilty people aren’t put to death. The ways in which we execute is cruel and unusual. Until we can successfully fix all of the potential spots for error I do not believe the death penalty should be used. It is extremely difficult and time consuming to eliminate all potential spots for error. The moratorium on the death penalty is just because it is preventing the death of innocent people and allowing the country to try and improve our death penalty so that is it accurate and humane.  Illinois’ governor Ryan, in 2003, declared the moratorium on the death penalty. His view on the death penalty is similar to mine. We both believe in punishment in a humane manner. “I believed that the ultimate penalty for the taking of a life was administrated in a just and fair manner.” Ryan does believe in punishment but it was brought to his attention how flawed Illinois system of convicting criminals was. The lives of 17 wrongly convicted inmates were spared by the research of college students at Northwestern University. “Together they spared the lives and secured the freedom of 17 men - men who were wrongfully convicted and rotting in the condemned units of our state prisons.” It was obviously a big wake up call to the state that college students were able to poke holes right through there system and spare innocent lives. When my class watched a video about this in class I was shocked they are not lawyers, they were not trying to find a flaw in the system, it was simply a class project! They were average looking young adults. It is amazing to look at people my sisters age and realize what a big impact they made.  If that didn’t scream out that there was a huge problem I don’t know what would. I agree with Ryan’s decision because he acknowledged a problem, supported by facts, and acted on it in a mature manner. He took his time and did not rush into a decision and he listened to both sides of the argument. What is most assuring is that he was confident in his decision. “I know that my decision will be just that - my decision - based on all the facts I could gather over the past three years. I may never be comfortable with my final decision, but I will know in my heart, that I did my very best to do the right thing.” I agree that it is just to end a system that is not working properly. Life or death is no joke; we need to ensure accuracy to be able to enforce such a final punishment.  After reading the article from the New York Times, I felt like others agreed with my opinion. The writer of the article, Steve Mills, said “Then, with Porter's case still in the spotlight, plus a series of stories in the Chicago Tribune later that year that illuminated deep frailties in the state's system of capital punishment, the debate over the death penalty was transformed. Suddenly, it was about accuracy. No longer were the mistakes anecdotal. The problems were systemic.” Mills is saying something synonymous with what I am saying. The problem was so obvious and prevalent that something had to be done.  Overall I agree with the decision to put the moratorium on the death penalty in Illinois. Governor Ryan made the right choice to acknowledge and act on a problem.  

Pro-life or Pro-choice and everything inbetween

After reading both of the articles I have side with the NARAL. The main reason that I side with them is that they have more concern for each individual woman. Their concerns lie with women turning to hazardous methods to terminate the pregnancy, women who have low income and will not be able to support a baby, and women who are ill-informed about a medically safe abortion. I do not believe abortions are always the right answer, but my opinion doesn’t really matter. That is why I am prochoice. The choice to have an abortion or not will only affects the life of that woman, so it should be her choice. The other website, National right to Life, seemed to clump all women and babies into the same category. They speak about the health risks for the woman and baby, and that is pretty much it. Yes abortions can be dangerous, but the woman should be able to decide if she is willing to take that risk. Why are these people who are strangers to the woman concerned with her health?  Why do they care about the unborn child? They will never know this child. I wonder if they would be willing to take the child. If they care so much about every baby being born they should open up and adoption agency. To me it seems as if they are just preaching their opinion, they have no legitimate argument. The NARAL has valid arguments. They want to get rid of the bans on safe abortion. These bans are making women chose unsafe methods of terminating the pregnancy. They want to help the women who are already in poverty prevent bringing a child into poverty and setting the women further back. I think that The NARAL is the “winning” side because they are not preaching an opinion, they are leaving the choice to the individual women.

I am an 18 year old girl. I am prochoice. I believe that girls under the age of 18 need their parents’ consent to get an abortion. I believe that girls 18 and older do not need their parents’ consent but their parents do have to be informed of what procedure the woman is going to have. I think that the parents should be involved in the process of getting an abortion because it will affect their lives to. When you are under 18 years old you need moral support. I can’t imagine how it would feel to be in a situation where I was considering getting an abortion, but I can assume it is very difficult. Our parents know us well and want what is best for us. They will always want to protect us. They also have lots of life experience that can help in making the decision or recovering after decision has been made. Getting an abortion is serious business; young women need their parents looking out for them. For women 18 and older they can legally make their own choices, but I think their parents have to be informed about what there daughter is about to do so that they can help her heal mentally and physically. Everyone needs support. Even if the parents do not support the decision they will be informed on an important  procedure that their daughter is taking.

                Although the father is incapable of understanding what it is like to be pregnant, they want what is best for their daughter and should be informed. Having your father informed about having an abortion can be extremely awkward, but they have the right to know because they are your parents.  I think that the father should be informed but if the daughter is 18 or older they do not need his consent.

                When reading the Illinois state laws on abortion it is clear who is writing it. Every fact that is presented is shown in a negative light. The pro-choice movement is the host of the site. They do not agree with the state’s laws surrounding abortion.  Although I do not like some of the laws regarding abortion in Illinois  I understand why they are in place, such as “Illinois law restricts young women's access to abortion services by mandating parental notice.” Like I said earlier, I believe that parental consent should only be necessary for women under the age of 18. But I understand why this law is in place. They are trying to protect women who are seeking a medical procedure. There are risks in any medical procedure along with mental grief. I believe this law is attempting to help women. I do not think that the law requiring spousal consent to get an abortion is trying to help the woman. This law to me is just another way for the state to keep abortion unobtainable. The spouse could have ill intentions for wanting to have a baby. I think that it is outdated to need a man’s approval.  Women are strong and independent. We do not need a man to make our decisions for us.