Is The Government Allowed To Have a Say in Managing People's Behavior?

In the article Sugar Wars by Veronica Majerol, it states how Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City, is passing a law banning drinks over six teen ounces. Naturally, this is a major controversy throughout the city. Some wonder whether or not it is the governments responsibility to say what citizens can and cannot eat. This question has been asked throughout the nation as well. In the article, Majerol says, "The sugary-drink debate is part of a larger question about the role of government in managing people's behavior." Many citizens think that it is an individuals right to be able to make his/hers own decisions. However, that has not stopped some states from putting certain bans and limits on things. In Middleborough, Massachusetts they made cursing a public offense, and the governor of Tennessee banned students from sagging their pants. The question is does the government have the right to ban these things?

The author wanted us to think that the government shouldn't be able to ban these things. She does a very good job of staying unbiased. She does this by talking about obesity in New York, and talking about the increase in soda sizes. However, if you look closely you can see her opinion voiced throughout the article. She does this by showing a lot of quotes from people who don't think that the government should be able to ban these things. For example, she quotes Justin Wilson of the Center for Consumer Freedom, he says, "Fundamentally, I don't think we need the government to protect us from ourself."

Personally, I don't think that the government should have that much of a say in what we can eat and do and dress. I think that we as individuals should be able to make our own decisions. If someone want to curse, he/she should be allowed to curse. If someone want to dress a certain way, that person should be able to dress however he/she wants. If someone wants to drink 16 ounces of soda, no one should be able to stop him/her. Although personally, I wouldn't drink 16 ounces of soda, It should be up to the individual to make the decision. 

In conclusion, the article is about the government banning things that some feel aren't up to the government to ban. Also, the author wants us to think that the government shouldn't be allowed to ban these things. I personally agree with the author.

The Armadillo

In the book A Prayer For Owen Meany by John Irving, Owen is really tiny and has a strange voice. One day Own hits a baseball that changes his life forever. That's because the ball hit's his best friend's mother in the head and she ends up dying. I would assume this would change his relationship with his best friend, Johnny, although it appeared not too. Instead, Owen gave Johnny his favorite baseball cards. Johnny returned the baseball cards, then gave Own his stuffed armadillo. Owen gave Johnny back the armadillo, but, he cut off the claws first. I think this symbolizes their relationship.

The armadillo symbolizes Johnny and Owen's relationship. For example, they always used to play with the armadillo. The two boys cherished it. They played with it, and when Johnny went away to visit his cousins, Owen would watch it. When Johnny and Owen got a long, the armadillo was always there. When Johnny's mother died, he stopped playing with it all together. It just sat there, he wouldn't play with Owen for a little bit either. When Johnny gave the armadillo to Owen, I think it symbolized Owen and Johnny trying to repair their relationship. When Owen cut off the claws, it symbolized how there is a part of Johnny and Owen's relationship that will never be repaired. That something will always be missing. It symbolizes how it used to be complete but now it is not. But it also symbolizes how although there is a part that can never be repaired, there is a bigger part that can. It just will no longer be perfect.

In conclusion the armadillo symbolizes Owen and Johnny's relationship. When the relationship is good, the armadillo is frequently played with, the relationship is well. When the armadillo is neglected it's going badly. The claws being cut off symbolizes how a part of their relationship can never be repaired, but it will still work.

Nothing Like Us

The song Nothing Like Us written and sung by Justin Bieber, is both very deep and personal. Although it only came out today, you can tell it is about his recent break up with Selena Gomez. His message is very clear, and he uses many techniques to portray it. Including the lyrics and the way he sings the song. I think that lots of people can relate to the song as well.

The message of the song is that he and Selena were perfect for each other and how he is confused why they broke up. He expresses the message through really strong lyrics. The chorus of the song goes, "There's nothing like us, there's nothing like you and me through the storm." This made me think that maybe this part was just him trying to show how he felt about there relationship. The lyrics that I think really sums up the message throughout the story is, "I gave you everything, baby, everything I had. Girl, why did you have to push me away? Lost in confusion, like an illusion. You know I'm used to making your day." The line really sums up the entire message of the story. When he says, "I gave you everything, baby, everything I had to give. Girl, why did you have to push me away?" It was like him saying that he tried as hard as he could and he doesn't understand why she felt they needed to break up. The line where he says, "Lost in confusion, like an illusion." That is him portraying his confusion throughout the entire break up. When he compares confusion to an illusion, it seems to me like he is saying that the whole thing seems unreal. As if it isn't really happening.

Another thing Justin does to portray his message is the way he sings the song, and the accompaniment. Justin put this song on his album Believe Acoustic, as a bonus track. So, on the record Justin is accompanied by only a piano. He also sings the song very naturally, with no auto sung notes, just purely him. Using this technique he makes the song really deep and personal. It's really emotional and compelling, you can practically here the pain in his voice. Also, this makes it feel like Justin is in the room singing it live in front of you, which helps make it relatable to fans.

This song can be relatable to many people as well. Anyone who has been broken up with can relate to it, Obviously. But, also anyone who had a friendship that ended. I know from experience that it's hard when someone who you thought was your friend, leaves you alone in the dark. I'm sure many fans have dealt with similar experiences as well, whether it be a friendship or relationship that ended.

In conclusion, that is why Justin Bieber's song Nothing Like You is the most amazing song EVER! It has a clear message that is deep, emotional, and compelling. He used strong lyrics and acoustic singing to help portray the message and make it more personal. It is also a song that many people can relate to. I think that whether you are a fan of Justin Bieber or not, it's hard not to like this song.

Non-Fiction Article Revised

In the article, Unsafe Behind the Wheel by Kate Zernike, there is evidence that teenagers are at a high risk of getting in a car accident. States are enforcing stricter rules for teen drivers under ager 21. According to the article, "44 states have prohibited teenagers from driving with more than one other teen." Other states have set aside a curfew for them, saying that they can't drive between certain hours. Also, many states are increasing the age of which you can get your drivers license. Other people, such as Jeffrey Nadel, President of the National Youth Rights Association, are against the teen driving limitations. A report from the American Medical Association states that restrictions against teen drivers may lead to fatal accidents later in life, because they didn't get enough driving experience when they were younger. The article also says that texting and driving is a big reason why states are setting such restrictions on young drivers. Studies show that teens have trouble multi tasking, which could potentially get them into trouble when they are trying to drive and text, listen to the radio, etc.

 The author wanted us to think that teen drivers should be restricted. This is simply because at least seventy percent of the article was why teens driving privileges are being limited. For the most part, she did a very good job of being unbiased, however, if you studied the article carefully you could see a little bit of her opinion portrayed in the article. The author shows her opinion by using a lot of strong statistics. For example she clearly states, "Distracted driving was a factor in at least 3,000 deaths in 2010." She used quotes like these to scare readers into thinking that teens should be restricted from driving because it would likely decrease the number of car accidents. Another strategy that she used was that she took quotes from all different type of people to try and get a wide variety of opinions. She took quotes from scientists, leaders of associations, parents, even teens! This helped better show her opinion by making it seem like practically everyone agreed with her and congress.

Personally, I think that young drivers should not have different laws and restrictions than adults. I think that states are being unfair, instead of restricting teen drivers from driving, why not try to strongly enforce the law of no texting while driving. Increasing the driving age will only cause more accidents when teens get older. Also, the problem of texting while driving doesn't just occur for teens, it's a problem for all ages. What the article so cleverly leaves out is that not once does it specifically say that many car accidents have happened because teens were texting and driving. Nor does it ever say that teens were involved in 3,000 deaths in 2010, where distracted driving was involved. This shows that states are limiting young drivers privileges for basically no reason at all. Reading this article has helped me realize how our government isn't respecting the rights of teens and their driving privileges. Lastly, I would like to know more about how old these people are who have gotten into accidents while texting and driving.

In conclusion, the article I read is about teens driving privileges being restricted to try to decrease the amount of car accidents that happen. The author does a good job of expressing her opinion by using strong statistics that scare people into agreeing with her. She also using a wide variety of the type of people she quotes. However, the author failed to persuade me to agree with her opinion that, teen driver's privileges should be limited. I think that states are being unfair by limiting the rights of young drivers.

Citation:  Zernike, Kate. "Unsafe Behind The Wheel? With Car Crashes The Leading Cause of Death For Teenagers, States Are Placing Greater Restrictions on Young Drivers." New York Times Upfront Magezine 8 Oct. 2012: n. pag. Print.

Restricting Privileges of Young Drivers: Yes or No?

In the article, Unsafe Behind the Wheel by Kate Zernike, there is evidence that teenagers are at a high risk of getting in a car accident. States are enforcing stricter rules for teen drivers under ager 21. According to the article, "44 states have prohibited teenagers from driving with more than one other teen." Other states have set aside a curfew for them, saying that they can't drive between certain hours. Also, many states are increasing the age of which you can get your drivers license. Other people, such as Jeffrey Nadel, President of the National Youth Rights Association, are against the teen driving limitations. A report from the American Medical Association states that restrictions against teen drivers may lead to fatal accidents later in life, because they didn't get enough driving experience when they were younger. The article also says that texting and driving is a big reason why states are setting such restrictions on young drivers. Studies show that teens have trouble multi tasking, which could potentially get them into trouble when they are trying to drive and text, listen to the radio, etc.

 I think that the author wanted us to think that teen drivers should be restricted. This is simply because at least seventy percent of the article was why teens driving privileges are being limited. For the most part, she did a very good job of saying unbiased, however, if you studied the article carefully you could see a little bit of her opinion portrayed in the article. The author shows her opinion by using a lot of strong statistics. For example she clearly states, "Distracted driving was a factor in at least 3,000 deaths in 2010." She used quotes like these to scare readers into thinking that teens should be restricted from driving because it would likely decrease the number of car accidents. Another strategy that she used was that she took quotes from all different type of people to try and get a wide variety of opinions. She took quotes from scientists, leaders of associations, parents, even teens! This helped better show her opinion by making it seem like practically everyone agreed with her and congress, although I found that deceiving.

Personally, I think that young drivers should not have different laws and restrictions than adults. I think that states are being unfair, instead of restricting teen drivers from driving, why not try to strongly enforce the law of no texting while driving. Increasing the driving age will only cause more accidents when teens get older. Also, the problem of texting while driving doesn't just occur for teens, it's a problem for all ages. What the article so cleverly leaves out is that not once does it specifically say that many car accidents have happened because teens were texting and driving. Nor does it ever say that teens were involved in 3,000 deaths in 2010, where distracted driving was involved. This shows that states are limiting young drivers privileges for basically no reason at all. Reading this article has helped me realize how our government isn't respecting the rights of teens and their driving privileges. Lastly, I would like to know more about how old these people are who have gotten into accidents while texting and driving.

In conclusion, the article I read is about teens driving privileges being restricted to try to decrease the amount of car accidents that happen. The author does a good job of expressing her opinion by using strong statistics that scare people into agreeing with her. She also using a wide variety of the type of people she quotes. However, the author failed to persuade me to agree with her opinion that, teen driver's privileges should be limited. I think that states are being unfair by limiting the rights of young drivers.

The Pressures of School

In the story It's Kind Of A Funny Story by Ned Vizzini, the main character, Craig, suffers from depression. In middle school, Craig is one of the smartest kids in school. After getting into his dream school, Executive Pre-Proffessional High School,  he realizes he's not as amazing as all the other kids. The pressures of the school get so hard that eventually he almost tries to kill himself. This action causes himself to be checked into a mental hospital, where he can finally take the time to think about where all the stress is coming from. I think that the pressures of school got so great, and that was the reason Craig tried to kill himself.

I think that the pressures of school got so great, and that is what drove Craig to try to kill himself. For example, Craig was always talking about how much homework he had, and how much work. He would say that he would go home, do homework, study, try to eat, and then try to sleep. Also, a problem was that the teachers weren't being very supportive. Craig got an eighty five on a test. Instead, of the teacher trying to help him, the teacher put a frowny face on the test. I think that if maybe the teachers had instead of criticizing Craig, they had supported and helped him, maybe he wouldn't have tried to kill himself.

Another pressure of school, was peer pressure. For example, all his friends were smoking pot. So, Craig started smoking it. I think that if he hadn't been pressured into smoking, he wouldn't have started smoking pot in the first place. Also, maybe not smoking the marijuana, Craig wouldn't have been so seriously depressed. He was also jealous of his best friend because he was dating the girl Craig liked, Nia. Obviously, you can't expect Craig's best friend to stop dating Nia, to stop Craig from being so depressed, but the jealousy was probably a key factor in trying to kill himself.

Personally, I can relate to the pressures of school. I can relate to having lots of homework, cramming for a test, etc. In the past, I have had teachers that I felt like they chastised and criticized  me, instead of tried to help me do bet. Or worse, I felt like they just ignored me. I can also relate to peer pressure. In the past I have felt like I've had to look or act a certain way to fit in. This is similar to the way Craig felt like he had to smoke pot in order to fit in. Of course, none of these pressures have ever been so great that I'd think about killing himself. But, for someone who is depressed, I can understand how these pressure may drive yourself to think these thoughts.

In conclusion, that is why I think Craig tried to kill himself. The pressures of school got to hard for him, and that's what drove him to almost kill himself. I can personally relate to pressures from teachers and peers. I think that if Craig hadn't felt this stress, he wouldn't have tried to kill himself. But, at least he when he was checked into the hospital, he was able to get the help he needed and find the source of his stress.

Crazy, but Relatable

After finishing reading The Madman's Daughter by Megan Shepard, I noticed how deep and intriguing the characters in the story are. The main character, Juliet, used to be rich but after a scandal involving her father, she was forced onto the streets. She finds out that her father has had a secret laboratory on an island near Australia, and she goes to meet him. There she learns that he's been using vivisection to turn animals into deformed humans. In the process she finds herself in a "love triangle" of some sort, with the old servant Montgomery, and the fugitive Edward. I found that some of the characters did some surprising and in some ways crazy things, but I found myself able to relate to them as well.

Some actions that characters did were surprising but at the same time I could relate to them. For example, in the end of the story, the Island is on fire and ll the creatures are being destroyed. Juliet and Montgomery are escaping on a boat, but at the last minute Montgomery leaves Juliet sailing away from the island on the boat, and he stayed on the island. My first thought was, "No you idiot! Get away from this creepy island and escape!" But, as I thought more about what Montgomery did, I realized that I could understand why he stayed on the island. Unlike Juliet, Montgomery had grown up on the island. He even helped create some of the creatures. It must be hard to leave the only thing you've ever really loved. Despite his crush on Juliet, his love and deep interest for the creatures must have been stronger than a little crush. I think that I can understand how caring for something so much that you'd rather die then part from it. However, I think that if I ever did feel that way about something it'd be towards a human, but perhaps since Montgomery grew up on the island the creatures were the only things close to humans.

Another person's action that surprised me was that at one point Juliet risked her life to save her father. Her father had basically abandoned her after the scandal, and when they were reunited once again his love for her wasn't close to as strong as his addiction to his experiment and precious creatures. I honestly wasn't sure if this man was capable of feeling love. But, as I thought more about it, I realized I could understand why Juliet did try to save her father. Although this man had been cruel and was pretty much insane, he was still her father, still her family. Not all her memories of him were bad. even if he wasn't capable of loving her, she can't hide the fact that she still cares about him. If my father was burning on an island full of a bunch of half human- half animal creatures I'd try to save him, whether he was crazy or not.

In conclusion I liked this story because the characters weren't just black and white, or good or bad. They all had flaws and they all had a dark side. Some of their actions surprised me, but, at the same time I could relate to them.