Many of you may have noticed my tendency to feel very strongly one way or another, generally unwaveringly. This particular bill however has me somewhat stumped. It again has to do with immigration but it is an extremely creative bill to say the least. While most bills against immigration or for cracking down on immigration are to strict, invasive and destructive for my personal views, I do see that there is a problem that needs to be dealt with. According to State Representative Lois Kolkhorst's new bill, lawmen that have an illegal immigrant in custody would be allowed to leave the immigrant at the doorstep of any State Senator or Representative's office doorstep.
Lois Kolkhorst says that she hopes this would get a message along the lines of "we don't know what to do with them. Do you?" to the State Senators and Representatives.
While I don't see this law as being very practical, I do have to commend Representative Kolkhorst for her ability to be creative and to think outside the box, qualities I feel are lacking in many State officials, perhaps especially those of the state of Texas.
My biggest issue with the law is that it would only push for strict and harsh punishment for illegal immigrants and for those who give them jobs. However, another issue is that it is, as I said, "impractical". In more ways than one. First of all, I can not possible imagine this law actually getting passed, I think that if nothing else then self interest will keep lawmakers from passing it. Other than that I have to imagine the actual outcome would be somewhat chaotic. What, in fact, would the offices do with those immigrants? While these kinds of shenanigans work well in movies, I do not see them working out in "real life".
Perhaps it will take a Hollywood-esque hi-jink to get the ball moving though? Who's to say? Either way I would be very curious to see this bill make its way into a law.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Texas is as Predictable as Always
Texas has tried more than once to deny women the right to abortion and as it is still legal today they have failed. Now, however, they are trying their hardest to get as close to denial as possible. They have decided to defund Planned Parenthood because they perform abortions and to shift the funding to other programs.
Again, Tommy on Texas has hit upon a subject which I am very passionate about. And while The Cross-Eyed Bear does not think this is a problem and that Texas is not denying women their rights by doing this because the law still says it is legal and there are other places to go, I disagree with her. See, the cool thing about RIGHTS is that we are born deserving them; we shouldn't have to fight for them and we shouldn't have to pay more than necessary and it shouldn't be hard to gain access to them. However, if Planned Parenthood does in fact stop giving abortions, none of these will apply to a woman's RIGHT to have an abortion. It will become more expensive. It will be harder to find a place to go to. And while I don't want to go straight into the over-dramatic, horror stories of women going to Mexico or trying to do these things at home do come to mind.
We live in Austin and in Austin it might not be so hard to find a secondary source but what about in smaller more close-minded Texas towns? What previously could be done secretively in one day's drive to the nearest big city will now require research, phone calls, and other things that in a small town where word gets around could mean more than just being socially outcast (which even that shouldn't be happening in this day and age).
To sum it all up I think that Texas should stop being so damn predictable and should start trying to modernize itself rather than attempting to regress and cling to beliefs more popular before the 20th century.
Of course, this is only astudent's WOMAN'S perspective
Again, Tommy on Texas has hit upon a subject which I am very passionate about. And while The Cross-Eyed Bear does not think this is a problem and that Texas is not denying women their rights by doing this because the law still says it is legal and there are other places to go, I disagree with her. See, the cool thing about RIGHTS is that we are born deserving them; we shouldn't have to fight for them and we shouldn't have to pay more than necessary and it shouldn't be hard to gain access to them. However, if Planned Parenthood does in fact stop giving abortions, none of these will apply to a woman's RIGHT to have an abortion. It will become more expensive. It will be harder to find a place to go to. And while I don't want to go straight into the over-dramatic, horror stories of women going to Mexico or trying to do these things at home do come to mind.
We live in Austin and in Austin it might not be so hard to find a secondary source but what about in smaller more close-minded Texas towns? What previously could be done secretively in one day's drive to the nearest big city will now require research, phone calls, and other things that in a small town where word gets around could mean more than just being socially outcast (which even that shouldn't be happening in this day and age).
To sum it all up I think that Texas should stop being so damn predictable and should start trying to modernize itself rather than attempting to regress and cling to beliefs more popular before the 20th century.
Of course, this is only a
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Equality, please!
The fight for homosexual, bisexual, transsexual, and metro-sexual rights has been going on for quite some time but has recently made some progress and had even more set backs. While recently or semi-recently a handful of states (Massachusetts, Vermont, Iowa, Connecticut, and New Hampshire) have legalized same-sex marriage, some have gone out of their way to make sure it was in the state's constitution that it was illegal. (Texas, I'm talking about you!) For me, this particular fight has always been something I've felt very strongly about and is one of the only things that keeps me interested in National, State, or Local politics.
This topic is hit upon by "Tommy On Texas" on his blog and in his article "Texas VS. The Supremacy Clause". In this post he mentions that even though the Supreme Court has ruled that it is unconstitutional to persecute same-sex couples, Texas still has laws that make it a misdemeanor to partake in "homosexual conduct". He points out that there are bills to have this law removed but that they are getting little attention and are not being taken seriously because of the overwhelming amount of conservative politicians in Texas.
I definitely agree with Tommy on all of his points. This law desperately needs to be removed. However, at the same time, I don't think it's a big enough step towards the ultimate goal. I want a REAL change and I want it REAL soon. I have none of Tommy's patience (though I wish I did). I think this fight has gone on long enough and it needs to end.
But I do see that this law needs to be removed, even if only as a sign to people that we are moving forward. And I do think we are moving forward, even if at a rate much slower than I would like.
As this is a topic I tend to get very passionate about, I shall cut myself off here before I start going into an angry rant.
As Always, astudent's citizen's perspective.
This topic is hit upon by "Tommy On Texas" on his blog and in his article "Texas VS. The Supremacy Clause". In this post he mentions that even though the Supreme Court has ruled that it is unconstitutional to persecute same-sex couples, Texas still has laws that make it a misdemeanor to partake in "homosexual conduct". He points out that there are bills to have this law removed but that they are getting little attention and are not being taken seriously because of the overwhelming amount of conservative politicians in Texas.
I definitely agree with Tommy on all of his points. This law desperately needs to be removed. However, at the same time, I don't think it's a big enough step towards the ultimate goal. I want a REAL change and I want it REAL soon. I have none of Tommy's patience (though I wish I did). I think this fight has gone on long enough and it needs to end.
But I do see that this law needs to be removed, even if only as a sign to people that we are moving forward. And I do think we are moving forward, even if at a rate much slower than I would like.
As this is a topic I tend to get very passionate about, I shall cut myself off here before I start going into an angry rant.
As Always, a
Friday, April 1, 2011
Not Anti-Gun, Just Practical
A new Bill in Texas has passed the senate hurdle and is heading to the floor. This bill supports licensed concealed carriers having their guns on college campuses. Hopefully after this bill goes to the floor, it stays there.
I would like to say, first of all, that I am not against guns in general. Indeed, I believe people with licenses have earned the right to own and carry their guns, have them in their own homes, and to use them in order to protect their family, their property, and themselves. I believe this despite the fact that my mother, who raised me, was hesitant to allow me to even own a pocket knife and has never supported guns, even in individuals homes, much less on an individuals person.
I believe this sets me apart from many who oppose the bill who are against guns in general and therefor oppose the bill almost blindly.
However, as a student, I would not feel safe knowing other students may have guns on their person. While some college students my be mature enough to handle this responsibility, infinitely many are not. There is also a difference in being able to learn how to use a gun and how to handle a gun and passing a test with that knowledge and then going out into the world and actually applying the knowledge. I fear some might use this as a threat.
My biggest worry though, and the one that I believe is the most obvious and most practical and should be easily seen by even the proudest gun totin' Texan: there is an undeniable liquor problem on most college campuses. While it is easy to be responsible and wise while sober, when a young person is drunk and has a gun, loaded or not, one can only imagine the chaos that might break out.
As always, this has been from a student's perspective.
I would like to say, first of all, that I am not against guns in general. Indeed, I believe people with licenses have earned the right to own and carry their guns, have them in their own homes, and to use them in order to protect their family, their property, and themselves. I believe this despite the fact that my mother, who raised me, was hesitant to allow me to even own a pocket knife and has never supported guns, even in individuals homes, much less on an individuals person.
I believe this sets me apart from many who oppose the bill who are against guns in general and therefor oppose the bill almost blindly.
However, as a student, I would not feel safe knowing other students may have guns on their person. While some college students my be mature enough to handle this responsibility, infinitely many are not. There is also a difference in being able to learn how to use a gun and how to handle a gun and passing a test with that knowledge and then going out into the world and actually applying the knowledge. I fear some might use this as a threat.
My biggest worry though, and the one that I believe is the most obvious and most practical and should be easily seen by even the proudest gun totin' Texan: there is an undeniable liquor problem on most college campuses. While it is easy to be responsible and wise while sober, when a young person is drunk and has a gun, loaded or not, one can only imagine the chaos that might break out.
As always, this has been from a student's perspective.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Hitting Home: The Last Latin Student
This Commentary by Thomas G. Palaima over on the Austin American Statesman website struck a chord with me personally and hit on something I've been fuming over for a few weeks now so forgive me if this critique includes a bit of my own commentary on the matter as well.
The commentary starts off as a summary of education in America with a prose-like sound to the words. Perhaps not prose, exactly, but literature, at the very least. The commentary does not get to the "juicy stuff" and actually become a commentary until the last several sections of the commentary. This author hits on a subject I took in high school, Latin, and even uses my personal high school, LASA, as one of the main examples and arguments for keeping this subject in schools. LASA, which is technically no longer part of LBJ but is its own high school (but is still on the same campus and in the same building as LBJ...), is the magnet academy for Liberal Arts and Science which I graduated from in 2009 with my foreign language credit being in Latin. Mr. Browne, the Latin teacher there, is one of the most dedicated, thorough, strict, successful, inspiring, and all-around awesome (I might even say bad ass) teachers I have EVER had the joy of being taught by. Needless to say, when I heard that not only his job, but that of Mrs. Browne, his wife who is the head of the Spanish department at LASA, was on the line I was furious not only for their sake but also for the sake of the future LASA students who would no longer get the experience I was able to have. This has been a tender issue with all Latin student graduates from LASA ever since we heard the news. In fact, many of us showed up at a meeting the school had to attempt to argue for the job of Mr. Browne. I was not present but I can not imagine the impact was enough.
Now that I've gotten that out of the way, onto the actual commentary. Thomas G. Palaima is a regular contributor to this portion of the Statesman's website and it is clear in his writing. A quick google search shows that he is not only a good writer, but also the perfect person to be writing this particular commentary: He holds a Ph.D in Classics, is a professor of Classics at UT Austin and holds a chair in the Classics department at UT Austin. Needless to say, I believe he is more than qualified to write this commentary.(And that is not just because I agree with him with my entire heart and soul).
As far as his evidence or fact checking the statistics he lists, specifically for LASA, I lived most of those statistics, I do not need to fact check. Yes, ALL of the Latin students that took the AP exam scored AT LEAST a 3. Most students who obtained a 3 were disappointed in that grade and in fact most students made HIGHER than a three. Yes, Latin not only has increased my vocabulary and overall reading skills but also my ability to learn, read, and understand other foreign languages.
As for his intended audience, hopefully anyone who is able to read would see the sense in this article however I believe it will only truly hit home with other scholars, teachers, and students that are already familiar with, and angry at, this particular budget cut.
P.S. Why cut Latin rather than Japanese? I have been a Japanese student in my past, I love the language, and I don't WANT it to get cut, however I can honestly say it has not helped me nearly as much as Latin has. I'm simply pointing this out.
As always, this has been a student's perspective. (However in this case I believe this makes me more credible rather than less credible.)
The commentary starts off as a summary of education in America with a prose-like sound to the words. Perhaps not prose, exactly, but literature, at the very least. The commentary does not get to the "juicy stuff" and actually become a commentary until the last several sections of the commentary. This author hits on a subject I took in high school, Latin, and even uses my personal high school, LASA, as one of the main examples and arguments for keeping this subject in schools. LASA, which is technically no longer part of LBJ but is its own high school (but is still on the same campus and in the same building as LBJ...), is the magnet academy for Liberal Arts and Science which I graduated from in 2009 with my foreign language credit being in Latin. Mr. Browne, the Latin teacher there, is one of the most dedicated, thorough, strict, successful, inspiring, and all-around awesome (I might even say bad ass) teachers I have EVER had the joy of being taught by. Needless to say, when I heard that not only his job, but that of Mrs. Browne, his wife who is the head of the Spanish department at LASA, was on the line I was furious not only for their sake but also for the sake of the future LASA students who would no longer get the experience I was able to have. This has been a tender issue with all Latin student graduates from LASA ever since we heard the news. In fact, many of us showed up at a meeting the school had to attempt to argue for the job of Mr. Browne. I was not present but I can not imagine the impact was enough.
Now that I've gotten that out of the way, onto the actual commentary. Thomas G. Palaima is a regular contributor to this portion of the Statesman's website and it is clear in his writing. A quick google search shows that he is not only a good writer, but also the perfect person to be writing this particular commentary: He holds a Ph.D in Classics, is a professor of Classics at UT Austin and holds a chair in the Classics department at UT Austin. Needless to say, I believe he is more than qualified to write this commentary.(And that is not just because I agree with him with my entire heart and soul).
As far as his evidence or fact checking the statistics he lists, specifically for LASA, I lived most of those statistics, I do not need to fact check. Yes, ALL of the Latin students that took the AP exam scored AT LEAST a 3. Most students who obtained a 3 were disappointed in that grade and in fact most students made HIGHER than a three. Yes, Latin not only has increased my vocabulary and overall reading skills but also my ability to learn, read, and understand other foreign languages.
As for his intended audience, hopefully anyone who is able to read would see the sense in this article however I believe it will only truly hit home with other scholars, teachers, and students that are already familiar with, and angry at, this particular budget cut.
P.S. Why cut Latin rather than Japanese? I have been a Japanese student in my past, I love the language, and I don't WANT it to get cut, however I can honestly say it has not helped me nearly as much as Latin has. I'm simply pointing this out.
As always, this has been a student's perspective. (However in this case I believe this makes me more credible rather than less credible.)
Friday, February 25, 2011
Texas Textbooks are at it Again
According to this editorial at the Austin American Statesman's website, Texas has taken it upon itself to rewrite history. While this does not shock me after Texas's past reputation with education, I do wonder how much research this unnamed author has done exactly. The target audience of this editorial is obviously other liberal persons like the author. As far as the author's credibility, I personally would say it is questionable at best. Not only is the author unnamed (as far as I could see anyway) but they also included a link at the bottom of the editorial to backup their research. The link, however, was not only in a "tinyurl" format, which simple does not seem professional to me EVER but it easily could have been embedded into the text. Heck, I can do it, why can't they?
The author of this editorial argues against Texas's censored textbooks, at least as far as the subject of history. According to this author "The board ignored the experts and instead adopted a hodgepodge of wishful thinking, distortion, exaggeration and fantasy dressed up as historical fact." It is hard to discern exactly what all that means, especially with the oh-so scholarly use of the word "hodgepodge", but it sounds pretty bad, right? The hidden meaning behind all of that is that Texas is once again censoring their Text books and in this case putting certain spins on some of America's history and entirely leaving out other parts.
All in all, though I can not say I was very impressed by this editorial, I do agree with the main point and I have been annoyed by the censorship of textbooks in Texas in the past.
But all of this, as always, is just from a student's perspective.
p.s. For a little laugh read through the comments on that editorial.
The author of this editorial argues against Texas's censored textbooks, at least as far as the subject of history. According to this author "The board ignored the experts and instead adopted a hodgepodge of wishful thinking, distortion, exaggeration and fantasy dressed up as historical fact." It is hard to discern exactly what all that means, especially with the oh-so scholarly use of the word "hodgepodge", but it sounds pretty bad, right? The hidden meaning behind all of that is that Texas is once again censoring their Text books and in this case putting certain spins on some of America's history and entirely leaving out other parts.
All in all, though I can not say I was very impressed by this editorial, I do agree with the main point and I have been annoyed by the censorship of textbooks in Texas in the past.
But all of this, as always, is just from a student's perspective.
p.s. For a little laugh read through the comments on that editorial.
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Kyle's Mayor Gives Me Hope
In the article "Kyle Moves to band synthetic marijuana" on Statesman.com, Patrick George reports on the efforts of the Kyle City Council to make the sale of a "pot substitute" illegal. This "substitute" is called K2 as well as Spice and is "an herbal product" (like marijuana?) "sprayed with chemicals". Side effects may include " vomiting, hallucinations, elevated blood pressure" and the vague "other health problems". I know of video game levels with similar side effect warnings and at least one episode of Pokemon that caused seizures. Personally I don't think any of these side effects are anything to get too worked up about.
Fortunately, Kyle City mayor Lucy Johnson agrees with me. She would prefer the council to focus on "real drugs" and I agree with her. Johnson doubts that K2 is problematic in the city and again, I agree with her. As a college student in a larger city (a group which is among the most frequent of drug users) I had never heard of either K2 or Spice which leads me to believe it is not as rampant as the Kyle City Council would have you believe.
I would suggest this article for several reasons. For one, George does an absolutely wonderful job of reporting unbiasedly, leaving the reader to decide whether the council is overacting or not and also gives good information on the drugs along with both sides of the story. Another reason I would suggest this article is because I believe it is a prime example of not only Texas politics but also US politics in the possible overreaction of the Kyle City Council. I also enjoyed this article because it gave me some hope that some politicians, such as Mayor Johnson, are still focused on what needs to be focused on, such as the "real drugs".
But that's just a student's perspective.
Fortunately, Kyle City mayor Lucy Johnson agrees with me. She would prefer the council to focus on "real drugs" and I agree with her. Johnson doubts that K2 is problematic in the city and again, I agree with her. As a college student in a larger city (a group which is among the most frequent of drug users) I had never heard of either K2 or Spice which leads me to believe it is not as rampant as the Kyle City Council would have you believe.
I would suggest this article for several reasons. For one, George does an absolutely wonderful job of reporting unbiasedly, leaving the reader to decide whether the council is overacting or not and also gives good information on the drugs along with both sides of the story. Another reason I would suggest this article is because I believe it is a prime example of not only Texas politics but also US politics in the possible overreaction of the Kyle City Council. I also enjoyed this article because it gave me some hope that some politicians, such as Mayor Johnson, are still focused on what needs to be focused on, such as the "real drugs".
But that's just a student's perspective.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)