McKenzie Fink
North County Times
"CARLSBAD: School Officials Update Budget"
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/carlsbad/carlsbad-school-officials-update-budget/article_09b2b09b-04d6-5760-9ec8-79b08a8f41fc.html
The new budget for Carlsbad School District
This article is about the new budget that has been decided by the Carlsbad Unified School District. They have come up with a different budget than originally planned in June. So, now the school have a budget of $83 million, $1 million less than last year but the same budget as the 09-2010 school year. Sadly, although that seems like a lot of money, the budget is not actually that large for the bulk of the budget, $51 million, goes towards salaries and another $18 million goes to employee benefits. That only leaves about $14 million for school supplies, activities, etc.
This connects to what we are studying in class because we learned that very few children were able to go to school. However, in the New England Colonies, towns of 50 families or more had to, by law, hire an instructor for their children. Towns of 100 families or more were forced to build a school. Also, parents were asked to support the school with supplies like money, vegetables, firewood, or anything else it needed. A lot of the time land was set aside as "school-meadows" or "school-fields" which were rented out to raise money for teacher salaries. As you can see, schools back then were not given budgets, they had to get everything by donation and/or the money they had.
This connects to my life because I attend a school in the Carlsbad School District which means that I am being indirectly affected by the budget cut. Schools and everyone involved with them are affected by the smaller budgets, even though they are giving the schools a little more than they had originally planned in June, in many ways. Schools are losing money, not to mention teachers, because they don't have enough money to be able to support the activities, supplies, and decent teacher salaries (which they don't pay anymore) the way the schools used to be able to.
My opinion is that the government officials that are cutting off the schools funds because they are just greedy is absolutely ridiculous. The money spent on JUST the government campaigns could probably feed all of the hungry people in the world! So, they should be able to spare a few million dollars for the schools! Our government is so self-centered they don't care enough about giving children the proper education for they are not providing schools with enough funding. If schools could just make a deal with the government to make sure the president sets aside a larger portion of money for the schools each year I think a lot of problems would be solved.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Should The Rights of Illegal Immigrants In Escondido Be "Killed"?
McKenzie Fink
Article 5
North County Times
ESCONDIDO: Demonstrators hold candlelight vigil for civil rights
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/escondido/escondido-demonstrators-hold-candlelight-vigil-for-civil-rights/article_b49bcf43-3c65-5dd8-b2d7-29dd9ab50ee6.html
How Escondido City Council and police are "killing" people's (specifically Latino's) civil rights
This whole article is about the candlelight vigil, "walk for justice" with an "altar de los meurtos" for citizen's lost rights due to policies and practices of the police and city council. People believe this is directed especially towards Latino's in recent years. "These rights are temporarily dead, largely due to the (Escondido) City Council and police," says Kevin Keenan, the executive director of the ACLU in San Diego. "I think it's inevitable that we will win back these rights, but every year that the current leadership pursues these policies is damaging to Escondido and its residents." A lot of people in the Latino culture are believing this is true right now because of some recent events. For example, a Latino woman called the police claiming that she was beaten by her boyfriend and supposedly they were both arrested and turned into immigration. Also, practices such as E-verify and traffic checkpoints have been creates Latinos now believe they cannot tryst the government.
This connects to what we are studying in class for many reasons. We have learned about the Bill of Rights First Amendment and this article is a direct representation of it. First of all, this story was printed in the first place, which is the right to freedom of press. Second of all, these people are fighting for their rights in the first amendment by assembling peacefully. Finally, these people were there to try and stop the government from discriminating people of different cultures and according to the Constitution, the government is not allowed to do that.
This article does connect to my life in a very indirect way. For one, I have read many stories on how Hispanics and Latino's who believe their rights have been violated. For example, I have heard about Latino's that have been sent straight to immigration by a police officer even though they go to the officer for help. Also, many people I know have many different views on the subject of possible illegal immigrants retaining rights. Finally, this connects to my life because Caucasians are no longer the majority of the population in California. So, I know that if a bill is left for a vote by the public on this matter, the majority vote of possible illegal immigrants having rights will win.
My opinion on this subject is that police are doing nothing wrong in Escondido. The only reason it seems as though they are focusing on Latinos is because there are many illegal immigrants that must be found as a part of police officers' jobs. I am not saying in any way shape or form that LEGAL immigrants should not have rights. I am arguing that people who illegally enter our country and pretend to be a citizen to not deserve to have rights. They are not a LEGAL U.S. CITIZEN and that is what is wrong in the whole picture. They didn't do the work necessary to become a U.S. citizen so they shouldn't get the payoff for being one either.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Illegal Immigrants May Have A Better Chance To College Than American Citizens. Fair or Not?
McKenzie Fink
Article 4
North County Times
Effort to repeal state Dream Act underway
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/article_dceb404c-7298-5a8b-b929-b56931110787.html
The fight about the California Dream Act law.
This whole article is about the fight over the California Dream Act. This controversial legislation signed by Governor Jerry Brown helps illegal immigrants take from state funds to pay for college. Local immigrants that do agree with the Dream Act say they plan to defend the new law. The California Dream Act, unlike the federal bill, also named the Dream Act, does not provide a path to citizenship. Some people believe that this bill will not succeed because it is only a "frustrated effort by those who believe that qualified immigrant students should not have access to a college education..." Donnely, the person who first proposed the law, must get at least 505,000 signatures to qualify for the referendum.
This connects to what we were studying in class for many reasons. First of all, we have learned about the three branches of government. So, we learned that the legislative branch (Congress) proposes laws, just like this bill has been proposed and then signed by California Governor Jerry Brown. This also represents amendment 10 because each state has its own government and powers reserved from the national government. For example states can make their own laws.
This article also connects to my life for many reasons. For one, I know for a fact that many American citizens can't afford college so it saddens me there is not a chance given to them. I am going to be going to college one day too! And because of this bill, it would make it so much easier for people who have illegally entered our country to go to college than it would be for me to go to college.
I don't believe that this bill should be passed for many reasons. Although it is a kind thought, it is completely unfair! There are many American citizens who can not afford to go to college and yet people who have illegally entered our country are given a better chance. It is completely ridiculous because these are people who didn't even do the work to enter our country are given a chance for college. Unlike the immigrants who worked hard for so long to get in the United States, illegal immigrants, who didn't have to do any of the work, are being served college on a silver platter. My hope is that this bill will not be passed so that way illegal immigrants have to do at least some work in life.
Article 4
North County Times
Effort to repeal state Dream Act underway
http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/sdcounty/article_dceb404c-7298-5a8b-b929-b56931110787.html
The fight about the California Dream Act law.
This whole article is about the fight over the California Dream Act. This controversial legislation signed by Governor Jerry Brown helps illegal immigrants take from state funds to pay for college. Local immigrants that do agree with the Dream Act say they plan to defend the new law. The California Dream Act, unlike the federal bill, also named the Dream Act, does not provide a path to citizenship. Some people believe that this bill will not succeed because it is only a "frustrated effort by those who believe that qualified immigrant students should not have access to a college education..." Donnely, the person who first proposed the law, must get at least 505,000 signatures to qualify for the referendum.
This connects to what we were studying in class for many reasons. First of all, we have learned about the three branches of government. So, we learned that the legislative branch (Congress) proposes laws, just like this bill has been proposed and then signed by California Governor Jerry Brown. This also represents amendment 10 because each state has its own government and powers reserved from the national government. For example states can make their own laws.
This article also connects to my life for many reasons. For one, I know for a fact that many American citizens can't afford college so it saddens me there is not a chance given to them. I am going to be going to college one day too! And because of this bill, it would make it so much easier for people who have illegally entered our country to go to college than it would be for me to go to college.
I don't believe that this bill should be passed for many reasons. Although it is a kind thought, it is completely unfair! There are many American citizens who can not afford to go to college and yet people who have illegally entered our country are given a better chance. It is completely ridiculous because these are people who didn't even do the work to enter our country are given a chance for college. Unlike the immigrants who worked hard for so long to get in the United States, illegal immigrants, who didn't have to do any of the work, are being served college on a silver platter. My hope is that this bill will not be passed so that way illegal immigrants have to do at least some work in life.
Monday, October 31, 2011
No Matter How Corrupt Our Judicial System May Seem, It Is Way Better Than Other Countries.
McKenzie Fink
Article 3
North County Times
WORLD: American hikers fred from Iran prison
http://www.nctimes.com/news/world/article_0a13e491-9f7e-54e7-bc20-5a1782bdb726.html
The three American hikers that were released, after being held in Iran jail for two years, on suspicions of them spying.
This whole article is about how Iran has finally let two of the three hikers go after two years in the prison. Sarah Shourd, the third hiker, was freed the year before (2010). This is not the first time this has happened either. There was once a reporter named Roxana Saberi, a French Academic named Clotilde Reiss, and a businessman named Reza Taghavi that spent time in Iran jail for being accused of spying or other crimes. It also explains what little to no trust Iran and America have in each other and how it doesn't seem to be getting better anytime soon.
This article connects to what we are studying class for many reasons. Since we have been learning about the Bill of Rights I know that these people 8th Amendment was violated. This is because the bail for both men added up to $1 million dollars, even though they weren't a threat. Their bail did not match up to the crime. We have also learned a little bit about the court system and how it works from the 5th Amendment. Even in Iran, the two hikers were able to get a lawyer, but they were still convicted of a crime they did NOT commit. It was probably a biased jury, if there was even a jury, or the Iran government may not have even had a trial and if they did it was not a fair one.
This connects to my life for many reasons. For one, I have heard many stories about people who are convicted of crimes they didn't commit in other countries all the time. This makes me very sad because people don't get the amount of government protect they should/would have if their trial was in America. I have also hears many stories about Iran wrongfully holding people captive as their prisoners for crimes the didn't commit. This too is very depressing because the people their are probably given poor conditions to live in because they don't have the 8th Amendment to protect them. If I were ever put in that situation, as a captive or a family member of one, I don't know what I would do or whether or not I would be able to see my loved ones again and it's sad that people have had to deal with that.
My opinion on this situation is that the hikers should have never been in jail at all. The Iran government should have set the poor hikers free immediately after realizing they were no threat instead of keeping them for ransom. I also believe that America and Iran have to erase the tension between each other before we end up really causing damage to our countries and their citizens. There have been so many instances in which Iran has kept people prisoner because they are claiming that these people are spies and/or have committed other crimes. These situations can be stopped if both countries work together to at least become acquaintances and not mortal enemies always trying to kill each other.
Article 3
North County Times
WORLD: American hikers fred from Iran prison
http://www.nctimes.com/news/world/article_0a13e491-9f7e-54e7-bc20-5a1782bdb726.html
The three American hikers that were released, after being held in Iran jail for two years, on suspicions of them spying.
This whole article is about how Iran has finally let two of the three hikers go after two years in the prison. Sarah Shourd, the third hiker, was freed the year before (2010). This is not the first time this has happened either. There was once a reporter named Roxana Saberi, a French Academic named Clotilde Reiss, and a businessman named Reza Taghavi that spent time in Iran jail for being accused of spying or other crimes. It also explains what little to no trust Iran and America have in each other and how it doesn't seem to be getting better anytime soon.
This article connects to what we are studying class for many reasons. Since we have been learning about the Bill of Rights I know that these people 8th Amendment was violated. This is because the bail for both men added up to $1 million dollars, even though they weren't a threat. Their bail did not match up to the crime. We have also learned a little bit about the court system and how it works from the 5th Amendment. Even in Iran, the two hikers were able to get a lawyer, but they were still convicted of a crime they did NOT commit. It was probably a biased jury, if there was even a jury, or the Iran government may not have even had a trial and if they did it was not a fair one.
This connects to my life for many reasons. For one, I have heard many stories about people who are convicted of crimes they didn't commit in other countries all the time. This makes me very sad because people don't get the amount of government protect they should/would have if their trial was in America. I have also hears many stories about Iran wrongfully holding people captive as their prisoners for crimes the didn't commit. This too is very depressing because the people their are probably given poor conditions to live in because they don't have the 8th Amendment to protect them. If I were ever put in that situation, as a captive or a family member of one, I don't know what I would do or whether or not I would be able to see my loved ones again and it's sad that people have had to deal with that.
My opinion on this situation is that the hikers should have never been in jail at all. The Iran government should have set the poor hikers free immediately after realizing they were no threat instead of keeping them for ransom. I also believe that America and Iran have to erase the tension between each other before we end up really causing damage to our countries and their citizens. There have been so many instances in which Iran has kept people prisoner because they are claiming that these people are spies and/or have committed other crimes. These situations can be stopped if both countries work together to at least become acquaintances and not mortal enemies always trying to kill each other.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Is Your Maple Syrup Forreals?
McKenzie Fink
Article 2
North County Times
Bill: Felony to sell fake maple syrup as real deal
http://www.nctimes.com/news/national/article_5326a122-af4b-5134-acfe-9fc69e21b637.html
Making a bill that prevents people in Vermont from selling fake maple syrup
This whole article is about why it would be so important to make a bill preventing people from selling fake maple syrup. Making syrup is a key part in Vermont's economy and citizens of the state don't want to ruin their reputation just because of phonies. "Vermonters take pride in the natural products our state produces," says Senator Patrick Leahy. He also added that making fake syrup is a "fraud, plain and simple, and it undermines a key part of Vermont's economy". The article also informs you that other foods have their own special protections. For example, Hawaii requires labels to figure out the percentage of Hawaii-grown coffee in coffee blends. The point is, Vermont wants to protect the integrity of its maple syrup so they created this bill to uphold the good reputation.
This paragraph connects to what we are studying in class for many reasons. For example, we have been studying the three branches of government. We learned the legislative branch (Congress) create bills and this article is an example of that. Both of Vermont's senators and senators from Maine and New York co-sponsor this bill. The executive branch comes in because the president can veto the bill. Also, we have learned a little bit about the President's cabinet and one of the cabinets is the Food and Drug Administration. This part of the cabinet makes sure people are getting food and medicine that is safe to ingest so they would execute the law. Finally, this represents the Judicial Branch because they are going to make sure the law is Constitutional.
This connects to my life for a couple of reasons. First of all, this bill could make sure that people are no longer eating fake syrup. I have had fake maple syrup before and it tastes nothing like real syrup and was a complete waste of money. This also connects because the government is listening to the people so they can make a change for the better. The government often doesn't listen to the people nowadays just like adults don't listen to children a lot of the time. When they do listen though, it can be a great change for the better just like when we wrote our parent letters in english and my parents listened to me. Things became much smoother in our household after that.
My opinion on this situation is that the bill should be passed for many reasons. First of all, it is affecting Vermont's economy and reputation. Syrup accounted for $30 million dollars in sales in 2010 alone."We work very hard to produce a high quality food product that bears the Vermont name that has a reputation to be good," said a sugar maker named Ruth Goodrich, who is one of the owners of Goodrich Maple Farm in Cabot, Vt., who sells a gallon of syrup for $49. "Anytime a food product is adulterated, we really frown on that." Vermont doesn't want frauds ruining its good reputation as explained in the quote. It is really important that people are getting the pure ingredients in their food so this bill needs to be passed.
Article 2
North County Times
Bill: Felony to sell fake maple syrup as real deal
http://www.nctimes.com/news/national/article_5326a122-af4b-5134-acfe-9fc69e21b637.html
Making a bill that prevents people in Vermont from selling fake maple syrup
This whole article is about why it would be so important to make a bill preventing people from selling fake maple syrup. Making syrup is a key part in Vermont's economy and citizens of the state don't want to ruin their reputation just because of phonies. "Vermonters take pride in the natural products our state produces," says Senator Patrick Leahy. He also added that making fake syrup is a "fraud, plain and simple, and it undermines a key part of Vermont's economy". The article also informs you that other foods have their own special protections. For example, Hawaii requires labels to figure out the percentage of Hawaii-grown coffee in coffee blends. The point is, Vermont wants to protect the integrity of its maple syrup so they created this bill to uphold the good reputation.
This paragraph connects to what we are studying in class for many reasons. For example, we have been studying the three branches of government. We learned the legislative branch (Congress) create bills and this article is an example of that. Both of Vermont's senators and senators from Maine and New York co-sponsor this bill. The executive branch comes in because the president can veto the bill. Also, we have learned a little bit about the President's cabinet and one of the cabinets is the Food and Drug Administration. This part of the cabinet makes sure people are getting food and medicine that is safe to ingest so they would execute the law. Finally, this represents the Judicial Branch because they are going to make sure the law is Constitutional.
This connects to my life for a couple of reasons. First of all, this bill could make sure that people are no longer eating fake syrup. I have had fake maple syrup before and it tastes nothing like real syrup and was a complete waste of money. This also connects because the government is listening to the people so they can make a change for the better. The government often doesn't listen to the people nowadays just like adults don't listen to children a lot of the time. When they do listen though, it can be a great change for the better just like when we wrote our parent letters in english and my parents listened to me. Things became much smoother in our household after that.
My opinion on this situation is that the bill should be passed for many reasons. First of all, it is affecting Vermont's economy and reputation. Syrup accounted for $30 million dollars in sales in 2010 alone."We work very hard to produce a high quality food product that bears the Vermont name that has a reputation to be good," said a sugar maker named Ruth Goodrich, who is one of the owners of Goodrich Maple Farm in Cabot, Vt., who sells a gallon of syrup for $49. "Anytime a food product is adulterated, we really frown on that." Vermont doesn't want frauds ruining its good reputation as explained in the quote. It is really important that people are getting the pure ingredients in their food so this bill needs to be passed.
Friday, October 28, 2011
13th Amendment, Can Animals Use Its Protection Too?
McKenzie Fink
Article 2
PETA lawsuit seeks to expand animal rights
http://www.nctimes.com/news/national/article_fbca16a3-7432-5b46-aca2-45d651e2959d.html?mode=story
Are killer whales at SeaWorld getting their 13th amendment violated? And can the 13th Amendment apply to animals too?
This whole article is about how people for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are accusing SeaWorld of not providing their preforming whales in conditions that tread on their 13th Amendment. The case is resting on the fact that the 13th Amendment of prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude does not technically say that it only applies to humans. SeaWorld does not believe that these accusations will uphold in court because they are one of "the world's most respected zoological institutions" and "there is no higher priority than the welfare of the animals entrusted into our care and no facility sets higher standards...". They also state that there are laws and regulations that SeaWorld must abide by and that the "orcas' performances help give the public a better appreciation and understanding of these animals.". Prosecutors say that SeaWorld's profit,"By any definition, these orcas are slaves - kidnapped from their homes, kept confined, denied everything that's natural to them and forced to perform tricks for SeaWorld's profit.". The trial was filed on October 26, 2011.
This connects what we are studying in class for many reasons. One reason is that we are studying the Bill of Rights and this case involves the 13th amendment to the Constitution. Another reason is that we have been learning how the Bill of Rights keeps us protected from government abuse and this case is a perfect example. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are trying to protect the whales from abuse. The Bill of Rights makes sure that the government is punished if it violates a right or protection. This too is demonstrated in the case because PETA is trying to punish the people who are abusing the rights and protections of living things.
This connects to my life as a citizen for a couple of reasons. It mainly connects to my life because every citizen must be sure that if the government, or any power, violates your rights, they can be punished. This is a case that is not as urgent as others but it still causes alarm that people may be easily violating the rights of these poor animals. The other reason it connects to me as a citizen is because I have the freedom to speak my opinion about the case. The right to freedom of speech is listed in my first amendment.
I personally don't believe that SeaWorld is not at least paying compensation to the whales a good environment and kind trainers."SeaWorld is among the world's most respected zoological institutions," they said. "There is no higher priority than the welfare of the animals entrusted to our care and no facility sets higher standards in husbandry, veterinary care and enrichment." I do believe that SeaWorld is taking good care of their animals not only because of the laws and regulations they must abide by, but they have always been famous for treating their animals with care. I hope, and am pretty sure, that the case will not follow through and stop SeaWorld from bringing awareness to these endangered animals in a fun way everyone can love.
Article 2
PETA lawsuit seeks to expand animal rights
http://www.nctimes.com/news/national/article_fbca16a3-7432-5b46-aca2-45d651e2959d.html?mode=story
Are killer whales at SeaWorld getting their 13th amendment violated? And can the 13th Amendment apply to animals too?
This whole article is about how people for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are accusing SeaWorld of not providing their preforming whales in conditions that tread on their 13th Amendment. The case is resting on the fact that the 13th Amendment of prohibiting slavery and involuntary servitude does not technically say that it only applies to humans. SeaWorld does not believe that these accusations will uphold in court because they are one of "the world's most respected zoological institutions" and "there is no higher priority than the welfare of the animals entrusted into our care and no facility sets higher standards...". They also state that there are laws and regulations that SeaWorld must abide by and that the "orcas' performances help give the public a better appreciation and understanding of these animals.". Prosecutors say that SeaWorld's profit,"By any definition, these orcas are slaves - kidnapped from their homes, kept confined, denied everything that's natural to them and forced to perform tricks for SeaWorld's profit.". The trial was filed on October 26, 2011.
This connects what we are studying in class for many reasons. One reason is that we are studying the Bill of Rights and this case involves the 13th amendment to the Constitution. Another reason is that we have been learning how the Bill of Rights keeps us protected from government abuse and this case is a perfect example. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are trying to protect the whales from abuse. The Bill of Rights makes sure that the government is punished if it violates a right or protection. This too is demonstrated in the case because PETA is trying to punish the people who are abusing the rights and protections of living things.
This connects to my life as a citizen for a couple of reasons. It mainly connects to my life because every citizen must be sure that if the government, or any power, violates your rights, they can be punished. This is a case that is not as urgent as others but it still causes alarm that people may be easily violating the rights of these poor animals. The other reason it connects to me as a citizen is because I have the freedom to speak my opinion about the case. The right to freedom of speech is listed in my first amendment.
I personally don't believe that SeaWorld is not at least paying compensation to the whales a good environment and kind trainers."SeaWorld is among the world's most respected zoological institutions," they said. "There is no higher priority than the welfare of the animals entrusted to our care and no facility sets higher standards in husbandry, veterinary care and enrichment." I do believe that SeaWorld is taking good care of their animals not only because of the laws and regulations they must abide by, but they have always been famous for treating their animals with care. I hope, and am pretty sure, that the case will not follow through and stop SeaWorld from bringing awareness to these endangered animals in a fun way everyone can love.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Pledge of Allegiance, Who do YOU Think Created It?
McKenzie Fink
Article 1
Stories of American Heroes
http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/flag/1bfc_pledge.htmlHow the Pledge of Allegiance Was Created
The article is about how the Pledge of Allegiance was created and became a tradition for people. There are two possible authors of the original Pledge of Allegiance: James Upham and Francis Bellamy. Upham was an employee of the Boston Publishing firm. Bellamy was an educator who served as chairman of the National committee of educators and civic leaders who were planning the Columbus Day activities. To this day no one is sure who actually wrote it but we do know that the first version showed up in the Semptember 8, 1892 issue of "The Youth's Companion"and it has been edited quite a few times since then. In 1892, 1923, 1924, and 1954 the American people cared enough about the words in the Pledge to make necessary changes. Most people now just recite "by rote" and don't even think about what the words mean any more.
This article connects to what we are studying in class for a couple of reasons. It can almost be compared to the Constitution because like it, the Pledge of Allegiance is a living document for it has been "amended" many times. Also, it states a lot of rights for the people and expectations for the government like the Bill of Rights. For example, "...With Liberty and Justice..."means that people of the U.S. are afforded the freedom to pursue "life, liberty, and happiness." Also, each person is entitled to be treated justly and fairly according to proper law and principle. "for All" means that EVERY AMERICAN is guaranteed every right regardless of race, religion, color, or any other criteria. It also states that the government unites us all and we can, should, and will not be divided. Finally, the Pledge talks about what a citizen should do to have good citizenship. For example, promising your loyalty to the flag and the government and making sure to keep united with each other.
This article definitely applies to my life as a citizen because we recite it every day in school. The words represent everything our government is about. Whenever we say the Pledge, we are declaring our loyalty and devotion to not only a flag, but a way of life; the American ideal. It is used daily to show our passion for our country and why it is so important for us to stay a single Republic. It is also reminds everyone that every citizen has rights no matter their race, religion, color, or any other criteria. We say the Pledge of Allegiance to remind us of what a citizen is, their rights, what our government and nation is, and what they stand for.
I don't believe that "Under God" should have even been added to the Pledge of Allegiance for many reasons. First of all, not every one in the country is going to believe in God especially because we have the right to freedom of religion. I feel as though adding this to the Pledge almost violates the citizen's first amendment because we are having people that believe in other religions recite something that contains belief about a religion they don't believe in. I also don't agree that Eisenhower should have added it because he believes God "is our most powerful resource." because for people who don't believe in God, they end up saying that their religion is not as powerful as God. It also makes us seem as though our country is favoring one religion over the other, also treading on the first amendment and not applying separation of church and state.
Article 1
Stories of American Heroes
http://www.homeofheroes.com/hallofheroes/1st_floor/flag/1bfc_pledge.htmlHow the Pledge of Allegiance Was Created
The article is about how the Pledge of Allegiance was created and became a tradition for people. There are two possible authors of the original Pledge of Allegiance: James Upham and Francis Bellamy. Upham was an employee of the Boston Publishing firm. Bellamy was an educator who served as chairman of the National committee of educators and civic leaders who were planning the Columbus Day activities. To this day no one is sure who actually wrote it but we do know that the first version showed up in the Semptember 8, 1892 issue of "The Youth's Companion"and it has been edited quite a few times since then. In 1892, 1923, 1924, and 1954 the American people cared enough about the words in the Pledge to make necessary changes. Most people now just recite "by rote" and don't even think about what the words mean any more.
This article connects to what we are studying in class for a couple of reasons. It can almost be compared to the Constitution because like it, the Pledge of Allegiance is a living document for it has been "amended" many times. Also, it states a lot of rights for the people and expectations for the government like the Bill of Rights. For example, "...With Liberty and Justice..."means that people of the U.S. are afforded the freedom to pursue "life, liberty, and happiness." Also, each person is entitled to be treated justly and fairly according to proper law and principle. "for All" means that EVERY AMERICAN is guaranteed every right regardless of race, religion, color, or any other criteria. It also states that the government unites us all and we can, should, and will not be divided. Finally, the Pledge talks about what a citizen should do to have good citizenship. For example, promising your loyalty to the flag and the government and making sure to keep united with each other.
This article definitely applies to my life as a citizen because we recite it every day in school. The words represent everything our government is about. Whenever we say the Pledge, we are declaring our loyalty and devotion to not only a flag, but a way of life; the American ideal. It is used daily to show our passion for our country and why it is so important for us to stay a single Republic. It is also reminds everyone that every citizen has rights no matter their race, religion, color, or any other criteria. We say the Pledge of Allegiance to remind us of what a citizen is, their rights, what our government and nation is, and what they stand for.
I don't believe that "Under God" should have even been added to the Pledge of Allegiance for many reasons. First of all, not every one in the country is going to believe in God especially because we have the right to freedom of religion. I feel as though adding this to the Pledge almost violates the citizen's first amendment because we are having people that believe in other religions recite something that contains belief about a religion they don't believe in. I also don't agree that Eisenhower should have added it because he believes God "is our most powerful resource." because for people who don't believe in God, they end up saying that their religion is not as powerful as God. It also makes us seem as though our country is favoring one religion over the other, also treading on the first amendment and not applying separation of church and state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)