Blog 6? Sexual Morality

     Let's all face it! We all want "to get it on" regardless of our orientation. Sexuality is a staple of our modern global society, even the hiearchy of Maslow indicates that sexuality is a natural essential for humans and animals in order to survive. Nowadays liberals and the conservatives in a nonpolitical and even political spectrum battle on the terms of sexual morality.

     Good old media and other lefties tell us all that sex is ok and you don't need to marry and as long as you use protection and such. The other chicken little known as the conservatives and religious authorities tell us that sex is great only when you get married and that sex should only be used for the purpose of procreation and so on...

     The two readings "Sexual Morality"(Scruton) and "Plain Sex"(Goldman) discuss the views on sexual morality. Scruton favors sexual morality and gives us the Nichomacheanic viewpoint of sexual morailty. Scruton argues that morailty is something to be taught to as a child and such teachings can prevent people form engaging in sexually immoral acts. Another concept Scruton gives us that education is key to virtues.

     Scruton argues that traditional sex education(known to all of you as Sex-Ed) has pursued sexual virtue. This shows that this piece of educatinon teaches a person to regard their bodies as an important treasure and such things arise from the fears of the obscene and so forth.

     I will really not go into both lectures because the topic of sexual morality is not something for me to taking a position. Truly the issue did not create any impact on my beliefs and principles, my pendulum does not swing either sides because sexuality is a natural thing.

     We are all born with a sexual desire, as in the desire to "get it on" or to do something sexual, academia is a great example, most likely in those dorms students are watching online porn or hooking up. But we do need some sexual morals to make sure society doesn't go out of control, like it is gross for man and animal making love, but overall when it comes to sexual morals we can't force these things entirely. Let them be!!

I commented on Catherine's blog! http://catherinedba.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-7.html?showComment=1335837757740#c7058001877137322260     

Capital Punishment blog

     Capital punishment or the death penalty is an issue that has all those who follow my belief especially under a big clash. This topic does impact on what I believe. Christianity is one of the faiths split on this issue, those that oppose believe that it is immoral because the only being that controls life and death is God himself. The other that is pro-death penalty will argue that it is moral because of the Old Testament concept of "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth."

     The reading of Stuart Mill argues that the death penalty isn't essential because he is tired of society being dragged around with the price tag of corrections expenditures. He argues that putting murderers strips away of all hope in reforming them and that reforming these prisoners is futile. Mill defends this penalty as retaliation to atrocious cases but he is also aware on the opposition and sees good points despite his support.

    Mill mentions that one of the main reason of the opposition is the wrongful execution clause and praises this ironically as Mill mentions that there is nothing more grisly that having judicial error bring the execution of an innocent being.

     I had to nominate Mill's reading as my pick and I do have the argument against his praise for capital punishment. Besides my Christian stance against it, my major argument is that does not work at all. Many countries have capital punishment as an effort to deter crime. Unfortunately this method is very very futile. Civil Liberties advocates tend to attack capital punishment stating that it is an assault on one's freedom.

     Locke and Jefferson have mentioned that all beings are entitled to LIFE,LIBERTY and/or the pursuit of happiness, private property. Capital punishment is a counterattack against these principles and as for my stance is very well based on common sense economics.

     We are definitely spending much more executing as well as the process itself leading towards the death penalty and news reports throughout a quarter of the century indicated that states who favor and exercise capital punishment have higher crime rates.

     The real way to deter crime is to use our taxpayer funds to create employment, invest in new surveillance technologies, increase police forces in cities where violent crime is pivotal and create programs that rehabilitate drug abusers. All this will reduce crime in the long term, there is always a link between poverty and violent crimes.


I commented on Ashanti's Blog http://ashantijones.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-6-death-penalty-kill-for-kill.html?showComment=1335218848911#c5698439251198721917

Blog #5

     The readings regarding the issue of Abortion is somewhat very mixed. It is very difficult to find out what being  living is. Opponents say that life begins once the sperm and egg become one zygote, other say life begins once the fetus begins responding to its environment(womb).

     Warren's stance on Abortion mentions anti-abortion stances stating that it is wrong to kill fetuses. But the question is..Is a fetus a human being? is it a living thing? Locke, Jefferson mention early on that all beings deserve the right to LIFE, liberty and pursuit of happiness/property. My relation to anti-abortion is linked to anti death penalty.

     Either way My faith plays little role in my opposition to abortion. The reason being of my opposition is involved with life being a freedom and not a privelege. But sometimes I might have to play Devil's Advocate because yes.. what if the female's health is threatned or what if she is raped or fallen victim to incest?

     Another Devils Advocate situation could be what we talked last class reagrding a court case regarding a couple that sued a hospital for failing to detect a genetic disorder during the early stages of the pregnancy. These are some things that one has to consider. Although a woman has the right to choose do not forget she too can have long term conseqeuences of her own. Consider psycholigical effects, not all women fall to psychological downfall after abrotion but it has to be considered.

     Warren clearly states her point on her anti-abortion stance and uses great examples such as the space explorer and the alien and such. Infants are well valued to society and Warren prefers that society is to be taxed to help find these infants a home and links infanticicde with abortion. Yes I do beleive that placing the unwanted baby for adoption is a great alternative to abortion.

     Although i support the right to life, It is very best to support and allow unobstructive access to contraceptives, the reason why there are abortion is because men and women do not have proper access to contraceptives. Remember, contraceptives is not abortion but a detterent to it.


I commented on Becks Bradley's Blog!!  http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5.html?showComment=1334615984421#c4460239450128669693

Blog 4

     The fourth blog is in concern about a contemporary issue known as human cloning. This contemporary issue has me very baffled and I have not decide yet on whether I am actually for it or against it. My religious belief of Christianity is in concern about the problem of human cloning because of its creationistic concept. Such belief tells those that no one is able to create or destroy life and that God itself is in charge of that. By the way even though the odds are slim to having twins at birth let us know that when a women is with twins, her reproductive system just cloned its own ovum naturally. The reading have given me something to think about but overall it didn’t create any stir but I really enjoyed all four readings.

     As a believer I do take that in good consideration. But in the readings regarding human cloning, I may have to slightly agree with the reading “Moral Status of Human Cloning” by Tooley and other readings. One major concern that the writer has a very good point is in regard to organ transplants. Human cloning at the time it was popular was being experimented for the possibility of creating organ banks and such organs can be donated w/o the worry of consuming anti-rejection cocktails.

     This is the highest bright side of human cloning but I also concern about what it means of “self” being. We are always told to “be yourself” and not imitate and Ralph W Emerson said something similar. Don’t we all think that society is an original community?

     Like Journalism there’s a line between public safety and free press, in this case if we are all in for human cloning then let us all make sure that the project itself is to benefit mankind for the long run through producing children for sterile couples, creation of rejection free organs and other lifesaving procedures. But if a total sicko being wants to clone Unabombers and Bin Ladens to birth an army of terrorist clones then forget about it, do take safety in concern when it comes to cloning, there are sick people in this society. Once again to me, I may go with human cloning ONLY if it is in the hands of sane biologists and it serves as a long term cure for our modern day health problems. The real obstacle with human cloning is trying to sway Big Pharma to favor it.    

I COMMENTED ON.....
http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-number-four.html?showComment=1334068922636#c7742933647336565821