JRHS Writing BLOG

Monday, November 19, 2007

Toy Recalls Because of High Lead Counts

The Mattel Toy Company has recently had to recall over 18 million toys from their stock, world wide. Many figurines were a huge problem. Many children’s toys were being recalled because of high amounts of lead either in the paint or under the surface.

Lead can enter your body by getting it in your mouth, breathing it in, or absorbing it though your skin by touching something with lead present. Lead poisoning can have many symptoms, such as: anemia, nausea, muscle weakness, confusion, blindness, or coma. These are not things you want your child encountering, especially through their toys! Toys such as Dora the Explorer, Sarge (from the movie “Cars"), Sesame Street, Big Bird, Elmo, Diego and many other common children’s toys were recalled by Mattel for unhealthy amounts of lead in the paint. 

These toys were toys made in China and sold in America. The paint used in China was obviously made in various places in China. That paint was lead based paint. Mattel had a contract with places in China. Mattel said specifically which places they could use paint from. One of the subcontractors, Lee Der Industrial Company, drastically violated Mattel’s standards. They used paint from an unapproved third-party paint company in Southern China. Chinese officials banned that toy company from shipping toys for a while, because of the toy recalls in America. Shortly after, the co-owner of Lee Der Industrial Company (Zhang Shuhong) committed suicide at one of their warehouses.

With Christmas fast approaching us, buying toys is a scary thing for many people, and rightfully so. If people had no idea that those toys on the shelf were contaminated with lead, how are we going to know about others? No system can be perfect. Some will slip through the holes. Mattel realizes this and has formed stricter rules. They will now be testing every new batch of paint that comes in, to almost completely guarantee clarity from lead. The steps that are becoming mandatory aren’t going to fix everything, but it will substantially reduce danger to the children of America.

Sources
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119445657913685394.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.wral.com/5onyourside/story/1980879/
http://www.mattel.com/safety/us/
http://www.parents.com/parents/slideshow/slideShow.jsp?slideid=/templatedata/parents/slideshow/data/1189784528834.xml&ordersrc=google7toyrecall_slide&cobrandId=ww5&s_kwcid=toy%20recall|485699002
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/mattel-toys-lead-paint-testing.html?OVRAW=Toy_Recalls&OVKEY=toy%20recall&OVMTC=standard&OVADID=15909759011&OVKWID=124355342511
http://www.bestwaytoinvest.com/mark-mcqueen-august-16-2007

Massachusetts banning dirtbikes/ATV

Massachusetts is trying to ban dirt bikes and ATVs because they are smoky and they kill the environment. I understand why they are banning them; they do give off deadly smoke that does not smell very nice. But there is no reason why they should ban them completely just because people think they are noisy.

Massachusetts people are too concerned about trying to make every thing perfect. They have perfect houses and perfect lawns. When there is one dirt road people will find a way to pave it over and build houses on it. Nowadays the trails to ride on are getting minimized more and more. Even if there are still trails in Massachusetts they may be banned to motorized vehicles. People are complaining that kids have nothing to do after school and they just hang around doing nothing. Well, maybe if they let us have fun and ride our ATVs and dirt bikes, we would stay off the streets and actually be doing something.

Because the dirt bikes and ATVs are so expensive and our parents are being nice and buying them for us, we should be allowed to ride them on trails to have fun.  Riding on trails is good for us because we are not on the streets doing drugs or hanging out with the wrong crowd. We are getting fresh air, and exercise, we also are building our future because riding on dirt bikes and ATVs gives us confidence that we can fulfill our dreams. And if you take that away from us you are also showing us not to fulfill our dreams. By fulfilling our dreams we feel successful in our lives.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Potter: As Bad As Everyone Thinks?

The latest news has been released, and is causing an uproar in churches everywhere. Dumbledore, a beloved main character of the famous Harry Potter Series, is gay. This is just the type of thing needed to throw some people over the edge about the book series. Christians have been saying for a long time that the book series is bad, and promotes witchcraft, and now, homosexuality. Now books are being banned left and right in Christian schools, but is this the right choice?

Personally, I don’t agree with this. I know as well as everyone else does, that witchcraft is wrong, and it says so in the Bible. But I don’t necessarily agree that the Potter books are promoting witchcraft and homosexuality. Most of the Christians that are fighting so hard against the Potter books have never actually read them themselves. In my opinion, the books are entirely about life lessons, and, in short, they are fantasy books, just like Star Wars and Lord of The Rings, and Christians don’t have anything against those series. It’s the typical battle: good versus evil. Just like everything else. There is no proof in any of the books that JK Rowling is actually trying to get anyone to practice witchcraft. People know that the books are fantasy, and not real. They enjoy them because it takes them to a place where they can escape reality, not because they enjoy practicing witchcraft.

Also, by admitting that Dumbledore was gay, I can see how this could cause an outrage. But the fact that there were no gay relations or incidents in the books, or no indications that Dumbledore was at all gay shows that he could have just been straight the whole time, and no one would have known. Personally, I am slightly disturbed by this fact, and I don’t think JK Rowling should have released this information. But that was her choice to do so, and I respect that.

In an article I read, they spoke of how Christian parents aren’t stepping up enough to stand united against the Potter books. I think parents should be aware of what their children are reading, but not to try and choose for them every book their child picks up. The choice of a child over what book to read definitely expresses their creativity and individualism. If you take that away, how will today’s youth express individualism?

The following was the source for my article:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58299

Cloning in 2007

You might have heard, that in the news recently, scientists in the United States have been working intently on cloning. They believe they have finally succeeded in cloning the world’s first monkey embryo. This, they claim, could lead to the eventual cloning of humans. Personally, this has been said several times before, so I am not sure of what to believe.

My opinion on this matter is that cloning should not be allowed, period. It violates the laws of nature, and of God. God is the one who made everything. He is the Creator. So why, then, is man trying to outdo him and make exact replicas of his creations? All humans and animals are created to be different from each other. No two are supposed to be exactly alike. With cloning possibly in the near future, things aren’t looking so good. Man should not at all be allowed to make other living things with science or technology. Robots and such are fine, and even helping couples fertilize eggs to have a baby in a lab is acceptable to a certain extent. Humans should be made naturally, between a man and a woman, through the process of birth, not in a lab.

Why are people so fascinated with cloning, though? Scientists say it’s so they can study the clones and learn more about cells and body functions and such. People are known to be more devious than that. I know that some people will not want a clone of them for science reasons, but also for personal enjoyment. In addition, if clones are supposedly exactly like the person (or animal) that the DNA comes from, how do you think they will feel, having a life as a test subject to thousands of scientific experiments? I would think that life would get very frustrating. Especially if they have the same brain capability as other humans, they would likely go into depression, and have serious social and mental incapabilities. There is also talk of side effects like physical deformities on the clones. It would be completely unfair to put anyone through an ordeal like that. They would be better off not living at all.

In Britain, there are laws against reproductive cloning. Why are there not laws like this all around the world, especially the United States? There are some things that man is just not supposed to know, and I believe one of them is what would happen if we cloned someone.

Source:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071114/ts_afp/healthbiotechcloningprimates;_ylt=AqjL.UtVIzCgnr7yv0qPfTus0NUE

Camouflage Garments in Japan

Fashion designer Aya Tsukioka has come up with a solution to street crime. The November 3rd issue of World magazine features a small tidbit about “camouflage garments” in Japan. Despite the fact that the crime rate is declining in their small Asian island home, Tsukioka has created a few pieces to protect pedestrians from assailants. These pieces include a red skirt that turns into a Coca-Cola machine doppelganger, and a children’s backpack that unfolds to look like a fire hydrant.

There are probably more practical solutions to street crime. But Tsukioka reasons, telling the New York Times, “It is just easier for Japanese to hide. Making a scene would be too embarrassing.”

Though wanting to protect your fellow countrymen (or women) is always a good thing, I’m not so sure this would be effective. World magazine says the life-sized vending machine-skirt would come in handy when running down the street, fleeing from a strange man. But, I think that if you were trying to get away from a possible rapist, you wouldn’t really have time to stop and unfold your skirt.

New Basketball for NBA

There is a new aurgument which has popped up in the NBA.  The old leather Spaldings which the NBA has used for over 20 years might be replaced by a new microfiber composite basketball, which Spalding created.  According to scientific testing these new type of balls provide a more constinent feel, don;t get as slick and handle better in cold northern arenas. 

“The new ball features Spalding’s Cross Traxxion™ technology, a union of revolutionary design and breakthrough material. The design is comprised of two interlocking, cross-shaped panels rather than the eight oblong panels found on traditional basketballs. As a result, there is more material coverage. The material is a microfiber composite with moisture management that provides superior grip and feel throughout the course of a game. Additionally, the new composite material eliminates the need for a break-in period, which is necessary for the current leather ball, and achieves consistency from ball to ball.” (NBA)

But alot of the players are complaining and their position:  Why change a good thing?  This is what Shaquille O’Neal says about the new compositite ball “"It feels like one of those cheap balls that you buy at the toy store—indoor-outdoor balls,” (World magazine) I have read the review for this ball and what the players have said about it.  Some players like Paul Pierce back up this ball, while other players like Shaq dissaprove. 
Here is my opinion: NBA has been useing the leather balls for over 20 years without a problem, if the ball gets way to slick, it can be replaced during the game.  Why ruin a good part of basketball history by moving to a more high tech basketball? 

http://www.nba.com/news/blackbox_060628.html
http://www.worldmag.com/articles/12377

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Rampage in Nigeria

(The following article is a student response to “Christians Targeted,” an article in World Magazine written by Edward E. Plowman.)

During the final weekend of September, Muslim youths, fueled by anti-Islamic rumors, embarked on an immensely destructive killing spree, murdering at least nine Christians. Along with the slaughters, Churches were burned to the ground, and businesses and homes of Christians were destroyed during these two long days in Nigeria. It was also reported that many people were driven from their homes or seriously injured.

Perhaps the most powerful aspect of reading these words is the fact that we have grown so accustomed to them. It is hardly a shock anymore when we read about Muslims killing Christians or a Muslim extremist leader putting a political cartoonist on the “hit list” because of his so-called “blasphemies” to Islam. We have truly grown desensitized towards such horrible things to the point where some people don’t even care anymore.

So why, you may ask, are we so unsurprised by this kind of atrocity? It is hard to come up with any other reason besides the fact that it happens so often. Muslim extremists have gotten away with an absolutely unbelievable amount of crimes, afterwards turning around and pointing their fingers at us for labeling them murderers simply because of their faith. If we don’t start acting soon, it would be no great surprise to find the middle east in an even more hostile state then it is now, as hard as that is to imagine.

Those of us trying to stop these violent outbreaks are literally stepping into a political minefield, having to overcome accusations of racism, stereotyping, disrespect for others’ beliefs, targeting the minorities, and so on. This is possibly the largest obstacle for the opposition o f violent Muslim extremists. We have put so much effort into tendering to the care of every single minority that we have lost
all common sense - could this micromanagement be the end of world order? It may not be a crisis yet, but it’s far from impossible. It’s
time for us to start looking outside the box and thinking about the big picture rather than catering to an absurd amount of requests to
ensure that no one gets their feelings hurt.

This is not an issue of religion - it is not an issue of Christians being any better than Muslims or Muslims any better than Christians -
this is murder, plain and simple, and no matter what the motivation is, no one should be allowed to get away with it because they are part of a minority.

Wednesday, November 07, 2007

The “no-matter-what” Factor

World's October 20th issue features an article entitled "The 'no-matter-what' Factor", with the headline "Negative images may keep today's front runners out of the White House." The author of the article, Joel Belz, states that some voters, when asked to explain why they won't vote for a particular candidate, simply repeat the mantra, "No matter what..." Despite the fact that Hillary Clinton is now the front-runner among presidential candidates, there are many who will absolutely not vote for her. When asked to explain, opposers rattle out: "No matter what, I will never vote for Hillary." This doesn't seem like too good of a rationale, but Belz writes that there may actually be hidden reasons as to why. It may be because she's a woman, because of her personality, because of who her husband is, etc., etc. There is a whole myriad of reasons why people wouldn't vote for Hillary, even though she has a fantastic campaign and her opponents are a little on the weak side. Belz also lists some reasons why young Barack Obama may not be the next leader of the USA. These listed negative traits are as follows: Youthfulness (lack of experience is not mentioned, but is one of the reasons that people say they wouldn't vote for Senator Obama), because his name sounds like the name "Osama bin Laden", and also because he would be the first African-American president. Though these are not very good reasons to deny a candidate a vote, the World reporter says that they're definitely there, whether or not anyone would like to admit it. The article goes on to list the negative traits of all other campaign runners. But since Clinton and Obama are the front runners, and are in fact the most competition for one another, in the campaign and in the Democratic party, the other contestants will be omitted from this particular article. The first paragraph of "The 'no-matter-what' Factor" says that though voters search for the best and most positive qualities in a candidate, the negatives tend to be more influential in our perception of a specific runner. The positives are important, of course, but the negatives are more so. A candidate can rise and rise in the ranks, but at a certain point, they will not be able to rise any higher, due to their negative image. Their negative image is the reason why a voter will not pledge their vote to a candidate: "No matter what..." And this is the reason negative images have the capacity to run the front runners right out of this race, and out of the White House.

Profane Music

There is substantial commotion going on at this point in time over profane music. Parents are worried about the swears and inappropriate messages blasting through their children’s headphones, and many are saying that it’s time to take a stand and fight profane music by banning it or severely handicapping its influence. What do I think about this issue?

Well, I think that there aren’t any more steps that can be taken that haven’t already. Any more filtering of such music would be unconstitutional. If parents would spend the time to make sure what they’re buying for their kids is appropriate for them, then there would be no problem – and record labels have made it fairly easy. There are stickers on the CDs of music ridden with curse words and the like warning parents of their profanity, and even radio stations play filtered music with curse words beeped or completely muted out.

While we shouldn’t be too quick to allow our culture to descend into vulgarity, it is vital that in America, artists are able to say what they want to say, so long as we don’t have to hear it if we don’t want to. No one is forcing profane music down our throats, despite its obvious existence – so I see no reason to hunt it down and prevent it from being released.

Ultimate Fighter Championship

Ultimate Fighter Championship

WWE is/was one of the most popular fighting shows to watch in America.  Viewers watched men wrestling, but this was a twisted type of wrestling.  Some opponents would be hit in the head with a chair while others would be thrown onto tables below the ring.  Even though this was popular to watch, all those moves were fake, no one really got hurt.

Now WWE has been replaced with a new fighter show, called Ultimate Fighter or else known as UFC.  This is what Plugged In says about UFC:

It is essentially a serialized infomercial for the Ultimate Fighting Championship, the hottest combat sport organization in the country. The show takes 16 wannabe UFC athletes, divides them into teams and has the men fight each other for team pride and individual glory. The last man standing each season receives a six-figure UFC contract. Meanwhile, the contestants share a house where they all live, eat and party together before beating each other up.” (Plugged In)

“All of that testosterone takes its toll on their posh digs as well. Contestants break windows, throw fruit at each other and toss mattresses into the pool. Add alcohol, and things get even more out of control. One contestant gets drunk during a season-ending party, spends the night in the bathroom and wakes up to find his head partially shaved.” (Plugged In)

This type of fighting is totally different from WWE. Opponents use over 74 fighting styles ranging from Kickboxing to Greco-Roman wrestling to Jujitsu.  Many young teens and adults watch this show and more than 1 million customers watch it. In one year UFC “broke the pay-per-view industry’s all-time record for a single year if revenue with $222,766,000”.  (World magazine, pg. 32)

In 1996 when shown a tape of action in UFC, Senator John McCain condemned it as “human cockfighting” and wrote to all 50 governors to ban UFC events.  In the end 36 states outlawed “no-holds-barred” fights, this caused UFC to create stricter rules.

Some fighters use their publicity to share their Christian testimony, Rich Franklin quotes Psalm 144:1 “Blessed be the Lord my strength, which teacheth my hands to war and my fingers to fight.” King David wrote this psalm when he was in war, and hand combat was almost the only way to fight.  But Franklin puts this verse out of context, twisting it for his own use.  Do you think that God wants us to share our faith by beating up others for the fun of the fans? 

In the end UFC is summarized like this: it is a violent show which appeals to the audience’s lust for violence.  What type of message will this send out to young viewers if they see that people (especially those who profess their Christianity) can beat others up and get away with it? 

Plugged in: http://www.pluggedinonline.com/tv/television/a0003369.cfm

World: Bergin, Mark. “Lord of the Ring.” World Sept. 2007, 32-33

Abortion Rights In New Hampshire

In New Hampshire any girl can get an abortion without parental consent. The Parental Notification Law was passed in 2003 but never enforced. Now in 2007 it is completely gone in New Hampshire. Even in emergency births the court must keep the birth, and the pregnancy, confidential. If a girl doesn’t want a parent to be notified she will receive access to a judge around the clock. Things we must consider in regards to this is the girl’s financial ability to pay for a good procedure. For a child under 18 to have enough money to pay for an abortion of an unplanned pregnancy is highly unlikely, so she will have to receive less than “perfect” care, that then opens up more changes to problems and complications before and after the procedure. Things like infection, and permanent physical and mental trauma is at a high risk even in “high class” procedures. The ironic thing about all this is that any girl under 18 in New Hampshire can get an abortion, however (also in New Hampshire) a child under 18 can’t get a body piercing or use a tanning booth without parental consent. There is definitely something wrong with that.

Friday, November 02, 2007

Today’s Young Girls of America

Have you ever watched shows meant for young girls or young children, aged anywhere from five to about thirteen? Shows on Nickelodeon or Disney Channel, perhaps? Well, what you don’t realize is, that, although these shows may seem fine for your children to watch, (and they undoubtedly are) it’s not only the show itself that matters, but also the behavior of the actors/actresses outside of the show.
Take most recently, for example. One of the main actresses from the hit movie “High School Musical” was caught posting highly inappropriate pictures of herself online. Just imagine what little girls all across America think upon hearing things like this. Either they are horrified that their heroine would do something like this, or they think that it’s okay to do things like this, because a famous person did it. And what became of these pictures? They’re still all over the internet for everyone to see.
Another good example also comes from “High School Musical”. The other lead female in the movie just landed a singing contract. She just launched a new music video, which features her wearing revealing clothes, and dancing in a potentially rather inappropriate manner. Lots of people wouldn’t call this inappropriate, and I would agree with them, but when it comes to all of her 6 and 7 year old fans that hero-worship her, just look at the example she’s setting.
That’s where this type of acting becomes inappropriate and influential. Little girls think that it’s okay for them at that age to dress and act like that, because that’s what they see their favorite TV show character doing on the news and online. It doesn’t help that Barbies and Bratz dolls are dressed in little clothing, and girls admire their style, too.
I was at a friend’s house the other night, and we were watching videos online. We came across this video of a show called “Britain’s Got Talent”, and on the clip, there was a six year old singing ‘Somewhere Over the Rainbow’. We watched as the audience went wild after the song was over. I got to thinking, and it wasn’t just because the six year old had a phenomenal singing voice, that people absolutely adored her. It was because she was dressed in a sundress, and had an adorable smile too. She wasn’t dressed in flashy clothes or expensive name brands or anything, it was just her and her voice that mattered the most. Essentially, she dressed and acted like she was 6, not 16, like the rest of modern girls do. If something as simple and innocent as this can capture the hearts of America, then why don’t all girls act like that?

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

First Hike of the New School Year!

Last Friday, the school hiked Mt. Osceola to kick off the new school year. Despite some van trouble along the way, we made it to the Waterville Valley region and set off on our 3.2 mile trek up the mountain around 10:15. The school was broken into several small groups, diverse in both age and ability. My group ended up moving pretty quickly up the trail, and we talked and joked along the way. The trail was never incredibly steep, but was still a challenge at times, especially since it was such a hot day. Although the hike was estimated to take about two and half hours, most of the school reached the summit of Mt. Osceola in just two hours.

Despite some haze, the summit still afforded us all a beautiful view of the region which served as reward to each hiker that persevered along the trail and reached the top. Although hiking can be quite difficult and tiring, nearly the entire student body was able make it to the summit! For some, this was their first mountain hike and they were able to see a mountaintop view for the first time! Such an accomplishment and such a reward! After a nice, long lunch break, all of the hikers from school headed back down the mountain. Hiking down with all the gratification of accomplishment, we were left only to consider the greater hike that would await us the next week: Mt. Washington!

Monday, June 11, 2007

Muslims Want More Rights

Muslims in America call for special privileges. For example, many Muslims want veils to be allowed on their women. However, this causes great controversy. First of all, many other religions are kept out of public places. Christians cannot bring Bibles into many public schools. What makes these people any better than the Christians who are told to keep quiet about their beliefs? If one group is privileged, then all should be privileged. Likewise, if one group is prohibited, then all should be prohibited. (I say with the assumption that these said groups are all safe, cooperative religious groups. Radical Muslims should never be forced to abuse women in America, but the women should be allowed to wear their veils.)
The veils do propose several issues that pertain to security. For example, what is to be done about identification? If one’s picture is covered by a veil, what good does the ID do? I feel that it is more important to keep our national security strong than to satisfy the needs of some minority group. So, I think that the solution is to allow the Muslims to practice as they do normally, but also make it clear that laws will not be bent or broken just to satisfy the Muslims. Muslims can practice within the law, and that is it.

Judaism: Nation or Religion

The Jewish people are a group I find fascinating in a way. There are so many different kinds of Jews. First, there are the Orthodox Jews. These are the most conservative of the Jewish sects. They attempt to follow the Jewish practices as exactly as they can. Then there are the Reform Jews. These have “reformed” the Jewish religion so that it may be followed without having so many restrictions as the Orthodox Jews must maintain. This group is very liberal compared to their Orthodox counterparts. The Conservative Jews are a sect which creates a happy medium between the two extreme sects.
It seems quite odd to me that so many Jews in America don’t really care about their beliefs yet claim to be Jewish. Many celebrate Hanukah and Passover, yet the fail to understand the importance of their God. They discard their religion yet keep the label of Jew on them. To me, this seems somewhat wrong. The Jews are a nation, though, so it is understandable that they remain Jewish in name. It is really just no different than people who grow up in a Christian household and say that they are Christian, yet their lifestyle is completely secular. For example, I once had a Jewish friend whose mother said that they didn’t really believe in Hell, but they believed in the Old Testament. I understand that many people in America are ignorant on some level, but its people like this that just make their religions look bad. It would be better if they just said, “Yeah, we don’t really care” than if they proclaim to the world that they follow a faith which they do not understand at all.