Supreme Court Same-Sex Marriage Debate

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/26/us-usa-court-gaymarriage-idUSBRE92P04820130326

Yesterday began the two-day Supreme Court debate over the legalization of same-sex marriage. While throngs of people stood outside the court house, confidently supporting their sides of the cause, the Justices weren't so sure. Some of the nine Justices seemed hesitant, even afraid, to make a decision. One Justice, Anthony Kennedy said, they were weary of diving into 'uncharted waters'. Today, they will be discussing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a policy that refuses federal benefits for same-sex married couple, and decide whether or not it should be overturned.
While I firmly believe same-sex marriage should be legalized, I can understand the Supreme Court Justices' hesitation in their decision-making. If gay marriage was to be legalized, it could open up a whole new window for discrimination and hate crimes upon other issues. But, marriage is decision made only between two people and preventing it would just be cruel. Same-sex marriage would not affect anything in the country other than have more people get married.

Sex Ed in Kindergarten?

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/chicago-proposes-sex-ed-start-kindergarten-article-1.1275328

As an area with the highest rates of sexually transmitted diseases in the country, Chicago recently proposed a policy to start sex education at an early age. Beginning in kindergarten, 5 year-old kids would learn about things like sexual orientation and gender identity. Then through second to fourth grade, they would learn about body growth, puberty, and HIV.
The policy is wrong in so many ways. Children should be able to enjoy their innocent lives for as long as possible before delving into the world of sex education. Being aware of sexually transmitted diseases is important, but pushing it onto kids at such an early age is simply crossing the line. Children are naturally curious beings. Teaching them about things like this would only lead to more curiosity which would result in 'experimenting'; the exact opposite of what anyone wants for their kids. Besides, if I was a 5 year-old learning things like 'good touch vs. bad touch' I'd be super weirded out, also resulting in social awkwardness, which, again, isn't something anyone wants for their kids.

New Pope Elected

                                 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/world/europe/new-pope-theologically-conservative-but-with-a-common-touch.html

Cardinal Bergoglio was elected as the new pope on March 13, 2013 after the previous Pope Benedict XVI resigned. Basically, this article gave a brief history of Bergoglio, now Pope Francis's, past; what he did for the poor, the controversies that revolved around his beliefs, ...etc. A journalist said this pope is expected to be 'extremely conservative' based on his ties with Argentinian military rulers.
I have a hard time understanding why the pope even exists at all. I mean, he's supposed to be a holy man and preach goodness to society, but he's just a figure head, right? A figure head that gets to live in luxury, eat the best foods, and get the best healthcare. He comes out a couple times a year during public events and says inspirational things in Latin. Yes, historically speaking, the pope did play a significant role for hundreds of years, with Catholic and Christian leaders all over the world practically bowing at his feet. Now though, the times are changing. Things like same sex marriage that are typically frowned upon by religious societies are becoming more common. Pope Francis, in one instance, described a law that legalized gay marriage as 'a war against God' and 'a maneuver by the devil.' Instead of bringing people together, he's actually victimizing a  large part of society today.

Bold Pink Strip Labels the Drivers' License of Young Illegal Immigrants

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/06/us/north-carolina-to-give-some-immigrants-drivers-licenses-with-a-pink-stripe.html?ref=immigrationandemigration

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival program is an 'equal-opportunity-for-all' program introduced by the Obama administration to help young illegal immigrants who were brought to the US by their parents. As a response to the program, North Carolina agreed to issue drivers' licenses for these youths. These drivers' licenses, though, did not look like your typical 'State of North Carolina' drivers' license. Instead, they had a blatant pink strip with the words 'NO LAWFUL STATUS' printed across the little plastic card. Many people found this humiliating, The fact that their immigration status was visible by strangers when they were required to present their ID in bars, supermarkets, and other public settings, made them targets in their community. As a result, North Carolina agreed to make changes to the license; putting the words, again 'no lawful status', in small print on the back instead of on the front.
I thought they did the right thing in finally changing the appearance of the license for illegal immigrants. Some people are attacked simply because they look different, but to openly tell everyone on their ID that they are indeed an illegal immigrant? That's just asking for more trouble. These licenses are for people who were brought here from a different country a children, not knowing they'd be an illegal immigrant. Information that private shouldn't be announced on something as public as a drivers' license.