religious controversy of our time

 REVERSING MORAL DECAY

NEW ATHEISM


two contrasting articles. We have talked about new atheism in class before and it is interesting. It is based on the terrorist attacks that religion is dangerous and should be expelled from society. It has been said that religion is primitive and full of superstitions (Einstein- yet he still believed in God). However, the reversing moral decay article suggests that to be civilized, religion is a pre-requisite. Personally, religion is a guiding factor to my life. It is a huge part of history for one- it lead countries to conquer others, had people rebelling for religious freedom, inspired people to move towards a manifest destiny. And depending on which side you were on, religion was good or bad. The Aztecs went around sacrificing people of neighboring tribes to their gods, and then Cortes came in and massacred a ton of indigenous in the name of Christ. But if there was no moral code, what would people have built their constitutions and laws around? And where else would they have learned the moral code? It is very interesting to consider both sides of this argument.

Inescapable race and Security's misfortune

Back to school for my last year! Already I am learning and experiencing again only one week into it. Terms are great in that they get right to the point. It feels more rigorous, as a school should be. I would quit my job if semesters were as rigorous as the terms. I totally would do it too. Great challenge.

Anyhow, as much as I have tried to not be racist and ignore the blatant racism and elitist mindsets around me, I was reminded once again of the ignorance and naivety of others. One student in my Spanish class from the east coast, a background of knowing communities of whites and blacks, often separated still, a sprinkle of Mexicans, and maybe an occasional Asian, came to Hawaii and had his eyes opened to the world of the Polynesians. While I know the islands are easy to overlook and many people are unaware of their existence still (at least besides Hawaii), his harsh bias in thinking with only life experience in the east and with his mission in Mexico proved his mouth a premature speaker. Our break time conversation outside of the classroom lead to stereotypes of cultures and how many cultures become offended when mistaken for another. It started with Indonesians and Malaysians. I thought to myself about how Spanish don't like being mistaken for Mexicans, and how Samoans and Tongans aren't just one mesh of brown. However, this albeit young man made it known his insensitivity in how much the past can matter, or patriotism mattered to anyone but him as a white American. No, he didn't say this, but its what I got. He didn't become offended, he said, when others thought his dialect of English wasn't as proper or intelligent and so other people should be offended when they are mistaken for another. While it would be ideal to forget about the past and build a peaceful future, your accusations of that way of thinking as being stupid and insignificant is what makes peace impossible. History accounts for beliefs of a society, and society accounts for beliefs of individuals. You MUST be sensitive to these subjects to understand people and to build meaningful relationships with them. He continued to criticize the Haka, and how Maori's are too sensitive. And told a "joke" of how when the English arrived in NZ, they must have thought the Haka was weird and stupid and just shot them... as he laughed at the picture in his mind. Ignorance is bliss, clearly. Still, he had not finished. He went on to criticize all Polynesians for adopting the Haka as "their thing" when it was only the Maori's. I was close to boiling over. Cultures are different, but adopting a dance or some other form of expression as a cross cultural symbol for all of polynesia is quite the same as music representing "Latinos" or even latinos unidos. Its the same idea. Anyways I don't want to dwell anymore after this rant on the stupidity of mankind.

There is a book I want to read eventually http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Brothers_Karamazov
The Brothers Karamozov. We had an excerpt of this read to us in class today because we have been talking about the concept of security. When conquerors came to other lands and offered protection, they also took away some of their freedom. This book talks about an "inquirer" who talks to Christ and lectures him about how when he brought more freedom to man, of choice, he made it infinitely more difficult for him because there was no security net of being told exactly what to do. Here I am in my dorms, new rules every year, said to be for my "security" however taking away some of my freedom at the same time. Yet the scriptures say that man should do much good by their own free will. I can't choose good anymore, I just must always do what is good. I can't even decide what is good, these people are telling me what is good for me. Self imposed parents? How am I to live in a world of choices after not being able to do anything. And people wonder why soldiers go crazy after they come back from deployment? It isn't just post traumatic stress from war. Think about having a tight schedule every day. You are told when you can pee and drink and relax your stance. Come home and suddenly you can do whatever. How do you know what to do? I came to an environment thinking I would be with people who choose to do good. Instead, I have placed myself in a well disguised moral prison. While I appreciate the security, I think I prefer freedom. At least I can appreciate that more when I leave.

Academically Adrift

Academically Adrift; Limited Learning on College Campuses by Richard Arum and Josipa Roska

This was the book of the semester for Honors Colloquium Winter Semester 2011. This took my feelings of school and backed it up with data. There is something wrong with the data though because they won't openly share any more than they have included in the book. One of the professors at my school emailed them and they refused due to "privacy issues". My professor believed that this meant some info may have been taken out of context.

However, the idea remains. They tested over several colleges not for intelligence or knowledge in any subject but for growth in skills such as written communication, complex reasoning, and critical thinking. Across all campuses, there was little to no improvement. A lot of the reasons are because of the present day attitudes of the purposes of universities.

Many professors are more concerned about their own research than about the quality of learning their students obtain. They make their classes easy so that the students will rate high therefore ensuring that they keep their jobs. All the professors then have to lower the bar to remain employed. Another problem is that students do not value learning so much as they want to steadily keep up good grades and obtain a diploma. If there is any intellectual value behind that diploma, they don't care. Also, because of how many universities there are, parents and students go "shopping" with the idea in mind of the quality of the facilities, percent of graduates, and how much financial aid would be able to cover the costs of university life. No one is really thinking about learning and the employers of the new graduates are less than impressed.

Some problems people will have in improving the situation is that professors can use their high status and knowledge of writing to speak out against any changes that would give them more responsibilities or a larger work load. It is not only the students that are trying to laze about. Students need to have a love of lifelong learning so that they actually put in effort to their classes whereas right now they don't have a sense of purpose. They aren't looking for what would be meaningful in life, but instead on what will help them to be well off financially. Guess which major had the lowest gains in learning? Business. Highest? Science and Math, closely followed by HUMANITIES/ ARTS (take that king arthur). Anyways here is an example of that generation that I so dispise

"I don't really have any goals for my future. What's the big deal about that? It would be fun to travel. I'd like that, especially if I could get someone to pay for it"

Talk about boomerang generation. In some of their surveys, most students had never taken a course that cumulatively required them to write 20 pages or to read 40 pages a week. Not even 400 level clases. Instead a lot of the classes with titles relating to race, gender, sex, cinema, film or movie is what students were drawn towards.

The sad thing is that Universities used to be so much different. Dorms were built so that students would be able to live in a community where they are constantly enriching each others intellectual endeavors. All of student life was built around education. Now days, it is all about social life. How sad is that? It is fine for there to be activities and to give yourself a break, but if you are socializing more than you are studying, that is NOT what a university is all about. Thats what this retarded generation is about though. How sad.

what you have become

I am really annoyed right now with a friend of mine who turns down jobs because they dont pay enough. I can see that if you were looking for a better paying job, but as he doesn't have one in the first place and is living with his parents... not doing a whole lot with his life, I think less money and some work is better than no money and being a freeloader. And he has for some time. It is more dignifying to work at Mcdonalds and bring in a bit of income instead of sitting there and letting your mom spoon feed you applesauce.

This got me to thinking. People who are "educated" think that merits them a well-paying job, but have you seen some of the kids on college lately? You know the "copy and paste" generation? but I guess this IS what the world wants. Have you seen the office? Its funny because its true. There is so much work delegation that people can slack and talk SO MUCH. In the more manual labor type jobs, there is no time for that. These people work their butt off and get maybe half the pay their bosses do. And this because the boss does the paperwork. Well sip on your lemonade mista overseer! I'll come an rub your legs right after I'm through harvesting your crops and doing your laundry, and cooking your dinner.

I have a lot more respect for people who work hard every day to SURVIVE instead of those who sit back and "make decisions" (they dont even have to be good ones *cough* king arthur) to live luxurious lifestyles. Dear Lord, Law of consecration PLEASE. Its a little communist sounding but I'm really sick of rich pricks and lazy bums.

The Boomerang Generation

Sovereignty

Well history seems to be all about imperialism at times. Very negative. People claim to "discover" places already inhabited by a people. And then they make it their own.
Prime example that I've been learning about...
HAWAII
I could get over it but...
there are still some elitest haoles that think that their race is better
or their race was better, and thats why they "won" possession of the land.
HAHA good one king arthur...
anyways, here are a few things you all should look into











and please read the comments after this article
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/hawaiinews/20110123_Smaller_projects_progress_in_Laie.html

and then tell me that saying "haole" is being racist.

fine designs

i cant help but feel like everyone is just a little bit corrupt and selfish.
everything just points to ideals but nothing that is truly attainable
but should i feel sorry or just shrug it off as part of humanity?
history repeats itself and certain vibes linger on.
i do not affiliate myself with either caucasian or polynesian backgrounds.
i rather see myself as grey. without color.
i do not want to be associated with either for their lack of scholarly motivation.
in high school the polys got a bad rep for that and now
the haoles only come here for beach.
im not either. i dont like being associated as a girl from utah
for their "pious" behavior to the extent of living in a bubble, blind to the outside world.
but its not just them. its not just that caucasians were always conquerors and seeking to increase their own, forcing beliefs and way of life, taking away other cultures...
"business" people at the very least. power struggles have existed forever. and it wasnt always a race, sometimes it was religion. and i dont want to be associated with that. the self- righteous communities. no thank you. i can admit that im not perfect... and i dont close my mind to the rest of the world who is not perfect either. though i dont adopt their doctrines, ill listen and try to understand. its the least i can do, we are all human.
but more than all these religious claims to kindness and charity that are hardly met...
the proud and rich in material things. what do they do?
even those at a lower economic status dont realize how good they have it. or they do and arent willing to share.
why do i have this in mind you may ask
well. spanish class we were talking about legislation in arizona
border laws.
and a girl says "well, i feel bad for them, but we have to keep in mind our own children. we cant let our schools be poor because of them"
Selfish. selfish selfish. i understand that. you must think about yourself to an extent, but havent you heard of sacrifice? its not like your money for your children will go to any good anyhow. they come to college and go to the beach, flunking out and only supplying the king with his share from tuition. what was the point of that? you, girl, who i know just got her hair done recently at a salon, and spoke about your shopping spree at nordstroms... that aint cheap. i grew up on less then you very obviously, and i have learned still to give up what little i have, share a bit. what do you do? go stand on those pillars like those ppl in the scriptures like "thank you lord that i am rich and can live a lavish life instead of being like that homeless person i see below me" ignorant.
i understand. the fear of criminals. the fear of being taken advantage of. i also like worldly things, but its the attitude you have and the efforts to make a difference. you guard your riches like its your life. back in the day, philosophers spoke in public FOR FREE. people home school you know. if you are getting a degree, you can make up for what your children dont have at school. you can donate YOUR extra for that purpose. maybe you can even teach. man thats what teachers do. they know their minds are worth more than they get paid yet they understand the worth of passing on intelligence so it is not utterly wasted.
if you fear criminals, you should fear your government. it is corrupt. there is corruption everywhere. fear yourself. if you dont think you are corrupt now... you very well may be. one day.
stop judging. its pissing me off.
selfish.

"the line"

Liars are thrust to hell...
however,
is it possible for a person not to lie?
does everyone know everything about you?
is omitting truths also lying?
for example, yes, those jeans make you look fat
lawyers often lie to prove cases
corruption... the government lies to the public all the time
false advertising
its everywhere. lying is part of life.
im just a little bit... baffled as to if lies are EVER okay?
like on the show "lie to me"
thats where this kinda started
would you lie to someone or keep something from them if you knew it was going to save your life?
or if made them do their job better which is necessary.
would you lie to protect your family from going to prison?
would you lie and tell the detective their boyfriend was okay (when reality they were in the hospitol) so they could concentrate and finish the case?
if you started developing feelings for your boss and you knew he was into you too, would you "lie" to yourselves and each other to keep it professional AND more importantly, to stay loyal to your spouce EVEN if your spouse was a recovering cocaine addict with whom you have problems with daily?
Ethics ethics ethics. maybe i need to take that class. or read some articles:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/lying/
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v6n1/lying.html
http://olinethicist.blogspot.com/2006/03/is-lying-wrong.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/02/us/the-ethics-of-lying.html

ill maybe do a follow up after i do some reading myself
but i will finish with that idea.
they said there was a line where investigators have to decide when to cross it...
where they know what the other person doesnt want them to know
and they have to decide whether or not to exploit it or even bring it up.
when you know the other person is lying, or you know there is something there.
the elephant in the room if you will...
do you acknowledge it?
im kinda in this situation right now. *shrug*
figure it out with time i guess.