Abortion

Even though I am Catholic I have such mixed feelings about whether or not abortion should be legal or illegal. I don't think that abortions are moraly right. But think about if abortion is illegal how many kids would be thrown in the trash, or how many parents would be abusive, or not provide the necessary needs of the child. I know that adoption is an option, and there is so many people wanting to adopt children. But i think after a women carries a child for so long they have a harder time to give it away, even if they know they can't take care of the baby. According to huffington post Oklahoma has some of the strictest abortion laws in the country by forcing women to anwser questions about race and their relationships, and to listen to a doctor talk them through an ultrasound. Oklahoma did this to see what causes people to want an abortion. I think that this is disregarding freedom of making your own decisions. It is hard for me to think of a world where abortion would be illegal, Just because people should be able to decide what they want to do with their own body. I definitely am against tax-funded abortion. I agree that abortion is not health care. I think that if somebody does not want a baby then they need to be more careful of what there doing. On lifenews.com they quote President Obama saying that people that oppose abortion are terrorist. I don't understand how that even make sense because the people that are pro-life are agianst killing of innocent children and when I think of the word terrorist I think of someone who is agianst everyone and wants to hurt people. So where I stand on this topic is that abortion should not be made illegal and health care should not pay for abortions, I think it should be your choice, even if i don't agree with abortion.

President Obama and Nobel Peace Prize

I found a blog on The Smirking Chimp written by Sherwood Ross. The argument is basically saying that President Obama does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. The author of this blog is only speaking of other Presidents and their actions, and President Obama's previous jobs. In the blog the author seems like they wrote this blog out of anger, because President Obama addressed all nations. I think President Obama said the right things. The author is saying that Obama has not been president long enough to be awarded and does not deserve it. This article does not persuade me to think that President Obama does not deserve the Nobel Peace Prize. I think it is great that he hasn't been President for a long time and is already being rewarded. That just goes to show how much change he has already made.

Facebook's online poll crosses a line

The Los Angeles Times posted an opinion stating that Facebook reacted properly to a President Obama assassination entry. The social networking site is used by "more then 340 million users" mainly college students and middle age adults. To attract the audience the subject is extremely negative no matter what your views are negitivity sales. the argument is that Facebook made the right decision to take the poll down from the site. The assumptions the argument relys on is that "Facebook cannot police all of its users," so "It's appropriate for Facebook to give users the tools to police themselves." The L.A. Times is basically saying that people should not put up death threats whether real or insinuated, and that Facebook should act against these acts if possible, but it's not their responsiblity. The argument is supported by facts saying that people can report unethical behavior through links provided by Facebook. This argument I feel is not successful in convincing its reader. I personally agree with the argument, but if I didn't it would not convince me, because it did not seem to be a strong argument to one side, it seemed wishy-washy. At the beginning of the argument it talks about how Facebook did the right thing, but people should monitor themselves. In the end of the argument it seems like what the L.A. Times ment by monitoring themselves is to hide it, they said "Facebook should do a better job teaching its users how to guard their privacy against the risk posed even by seemingly innocuous application." So now they are saying the poll is harmless. If the poll was harmless why would Facebook take it down?