Circumcision Ban??

April 27, 2011. "A group opposed to male circumcision said on Tuesday they have collected more than enough signatures to qualify a proposal to ban the practice in San Francisco as a ballot measure for November elections." That is correct. Schofield, a man in San Francisco has started a petition against circumcision, citing it as an "excruciatingly painful and permanently damaging surgery that's forced on men when they're at their weakest and most vulnerable". However, a lack of medical evidence proving it as harmful would cite the ban as "as interfering with religious practices".

Other sources used in that article, then, informed the reader of the unconstitutionality in regards to the first amendment discussing freedom of religion. Many of the men that are being circumcised as children are Muslim or Jewish and are obliged to follow through with the procedure as a part of their customs. Yet, Schofield found his ban reasonable as it prevented the pain men experienced as infants. He proposed one year in jail and a $1000 fine served as punishment for parents that circumcised their kids under the age of 18. In my opinion, and to keep it short, I find the man and his ban to be completely absurd. He shouldn't rid of circumcision for others because he doesnt approve of it. If he's against it, then he needs to make sure he doesn't do it to his own kids when the time comes. Period.

Re: We Need To Try Harder

Two weeks ago from today an article was written by a colleague of mine in regards to our ever-changing and seemingly failing education system. He expressed his disappointment in his former, idle classmates, the school system in its entirety, and failed attempts -by schools- at keeping students in check in able to bring in larger checks. Irritation was also seen in his expression of the truth that inadequate teachers are allowed to continue to influence our futures because of the seniority system. His stance on the future of our country continued on to say that “our educational system is going to need some changes if America wants to stay on top of the food chain.”

I share his views on the betterment of education as I’m sure any American that cares to receive more than a high school diploma would. Still, what puzzles me is that congressmen, with advanced degrees, would be in favor of cutting funds for education. Who would they propose to take their seats one day? The kids who were actually present in their high school government class, or the students that -on the government’s behalf- were also able to receive advanced degrees? If you know what kind of brainpower it takes to run a country, why would you lessen the standards for teachers and schools and cut the resources for the people that will have to run things when you are no longer able to? Through all of this I assume that the response I’ll receive is to deal with the hand I’ve been dealt. That hand is old and, I suppose, a little insensitive and money hungry so I will accept what I have now because, lord knows, it will only get worse before it gets any better.

Do you need a spanking?

You may be “justified to use non-deadly force against a child under 18 when and to degree the actor reasonably believes necessary to discipline, or safeguard or promote child's welfare.” This was found searching for spanking laws in the USA. However, that law only applies to parents in Texas. I failed to find one set law for spanking within learning institutions for all the states that still permit spanking. That is probably due to the fact that there are more and more stipulations put on schools’ spanking policies everyday to please an increasing number of lenient, force-free parents. Everything, nowadays, is giving children options, letting them do as they please, and leave misbehavior to parents that still may only give the option of “no laptop, or no phone?” as punishment. I believe there is nothing wrong with discipline in any form if it doesn’t threaten to hospitalize the wrongdoer. Still, there are many different opinions and ongoing debates on the concept of corporal punishment in schools.

Only a week ago, on March 26, there was a protest in New Orleans against an archbishop who “had called on school officials to abandon the 60-year practice” at St. Augustine High School. The protestors were supporters of corporal punishment in schools, similar to me. Yet, their reasoning for it is out of “respect for the school’s history and traditions.” My reasoning for it is when a child has seemingly lost their mind and has overly disrespected the teacher, a classmate, or the school, a simple sit down in a quiet classroom after-hours or a call home to Mrs. Lenient does not serve as a proper way of discipline. (And since when was it wrong to discipline a child as seen fit, instead of as much as they are willing to accept and comply with?) Besides that, most people see spanking as outward swatting with a belt until you think they’ve learned a lesson. It is usually only 1 or 2 smacks with a paddle and most of the time the punisher is supervised to make sure they don’t step outside of those bounds.

My support for spanking comes from my own experience in the childcare field. I witnessed a 7 year old spit in a teacher’s face because he had to “take a break” (nicer way of saying “timeout”). The teacher’s reaction was, “why did you spit in my face? That’s not nice. Now go take a break while I call your parents.” Fail. That child is likely to do that once more if their only punishment was a few, not-that-harsh words. What will kids become if they’re only given easy punishments because someone is always ready to sue because their child didn’t agree with the punishment served? It doesn’t necessarily have to be spankings that are used as a harsher reprimand, but reverting back to the days before me is the only solution that comes to mind.