Do I smell early lunch?

Sitting in our last class we count down the minutes till the bell goes, signaling lunch. Around 15 minutes before we are allowed to go, listening to our teacher suddenly isn’t what’s on our mind anymore. It’s the question of “hmm. I wonder what’s on the menu for today? See getting early lunch is something that every student wants everyday (aside from sleep in maybe) but the thing is the Brentwood staff or who ever decides to deprive us of this wonderful privilege doesn’t take into account what the benefits of early lunch really are.For some of us the last 15 minutes of period 5 are used to fantasize about the massive sandwich we will create or maybe the mouthwatering bowl of rice complete with soy sauce and melted cheese, honestly our stomachs are thinking of food and our minds are listening.

As the non-existent smell of lunch wafts through our heads just taunting us, the lunch ladies are preparing for the herds of students that come running in… pushing and shoving to get their food first. The ladies who dollop food onto our plates are now under the stress of making sure 400 students get what they want…. And fast. I mean come on now, how hard is it to handle a mass of hungry teenagers… I’m guessing pretty damn difficult. See if there was early lunch for classes, scattered out there wouldn’t be such chaos. So why isn’t it taken into account? how hard the rush must be of feeding these hungry beasts? Some people who see the enormous line up skip lunch because the hot food line is so extensive and after having 6 hours of learning drilled into our heads, all we want it to taste that food. I’m also pretty sure the teachers of the classes wouldn’t complain either…lets be serious now. Early lunch isn’t just to satisfy our empty groaning bellies, it also helps spread out the flood of all students so there is not such a long wait. I’m not saying this has to happen every single day but as a treat once in a while…. Having an early lunch would be fantastic!!

Are Fairytales Bad For Our Children?

We have all been told the stories of how Jack climbed the beanstalk and found an unexpected giant or how the Three Little Pigs escaped the Wolf. From a young age we have been taught that these stories have moral values that are to be followed and never questionedBut is it right to teach our youth that we should accept the decisions of people without questioning their intentions or morals? What if there are hidden negatives in the stories that we read to our children, that if focused on, could have been the reason they wouldn’t have been heard again? For instance the fact that we are raising our children to believe that life will be as perfect as the characters’, or that beautiful people get it better, and even the little negative details of stories that we do not notice. These are not positive opinions that we should be putting in our children’s minds.

Fairytales are basically stories that we tell our children to amuse them and stretch their imaginations, but unless we specifically tell them, they are unaware that these stories are not reality. No girl really meets her prince that easily and certainly nobody magically awakens from a coma to find that their life is perfect. To us, this seems ridiculous, but to a five year old, they do not know what reality is, and for all they know, that’s it.

Every story has it’s moral message. Beauty and the Beast tells us that beauty is within, Pinnochio teaches us to live honestly. That is the primary point of us as children hearing them: to learn lessons that we should live by. But nobody seems to remember that Cinderella doesn’t stand up for herself, or that Ariel gave away her voice in return for legs, so the prince has to fall in love with her without hearing her speak. The messages that are under the surface should not be taken so lightly.

As humans, we believe what we are brought up to believe. Our virtues are based on what our parents or gaurdians wish us to think. By reading our children these fictional stories, the morals that are meant to be focused on may be overshadowed by the negative messages that they are sending.

The Canadian Health Care System

Today in Canada, healthcare is a word that has almost become a synonym amongst the population for political inefficiency. And who could blame them, with the waiting lists, and the insufficient medical coverage? But does anyone really know the rules and regulations they are relying on to save their lives? Do people really even care until they or a family member are dying because the waiting list became a race against time they lost and had to pay for instead with their lives? So many problems, and no one seems to have the answers. Or if a select few do know the facts they aren’t doing enough to inform the public because health care is and remains one of the most misinformed topics in the political system.

I’m not saying I have all the answers but I do know that the Canadian Governments, statement about health care makes me nothing but nervous. “ The basics, however, remain the same - universal coverage for medically necessary health care services provided on the basis of need, rather than the ability to pay.” This statement if of concern simply because of their usage of the word need, without defining what they are promising.

Dictionary Definition:

need [ned]

verb [trans.]

1. require (something) because it is essential or very important

Canadian Government’s definition:

need [ned]

noun

1. a medically relevant situation that that needs to be acted upon immediately.

But what about the medical situations that aren’t urgent? The cases where a lack of medical treatment can negatively impact a persons life in the long run? Are their needs not as important because because their condition is not as critical?

For example, a recent study in England showed that one in every 10,000 babies is effected by anopthalmia, a rare disease that results in infants being born without their eyes. You may be asking, what the problem is, since visually impaired people need relatively little medical treatment and are still capable of living a normal life. But the difference is that the children effected by this disease are still growing and developing and need glass eyeballs in order for their sockets and face to develop normally.

And yes, you guessed it, this disease, is shockingly not covered by the Canadian Health care system, since glass eyeballs are simply too expensive despite the fact that it is a necessity for the people effected by anopthalmia.

The fact is though that, "everyone as a person has the same rights as any other person," as is stated in the Deontological Principal of Equality and Justice. These people have the same right to a normal life as any of us, and they should not be deprived of that right simply because of the limited defenitions of one word. Need.

Learn more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584062,00.html#ixzz1d5EMNnor

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/index-eng.php

"Pardon My Language"

Why do you need to pardon your language when you cuss? Are swear words really as bad as they're made up to be? Humanity is full of atrocities like torture, epidemics, and starvation. This list could go on. If an alien was studying the human languages, he would learn of these things and wonder why we use them in everyday language casually. "Man waiting in that lunch line was torture!" or "I'm starving!" "that video was sick." Why do we use the worst things we can possibly do in everyday language? The funny thing is as that as soon as we say a swear word like "F***", there's a huge stigma and we're considered irresponsible and a bad influence. The "F" word meaning reproducing, showing physical attraction and love between two people; one of the best things we do as a human race is "F". I might be being an egoistic person saying this, but I feel like something is wrong.

There is sometimes a stigma on words that are good words,

and the worst words are just thrown around like it's nothing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSQmk6gGTcE&feature=related

This is a video on Stephen Fry talking about "swearing"

Being Minor: The Pros and Cons

Minor: A person under the age of full responsibility, lesser in importance, seriousness, or significance. Legally, a minor is a person under a certain age (usually 18) – which legally demarcates childhood from adulthood. Of course, being a minor is not something we can control as children or young adults. Which means that there is no way out of “being a minor”. However, whilst we are still under this category, we should take some time to observe what we can do, what we can’t do, what all this means, as well as our limitations. Should society and the government still use this term and set of rules?

Minors are always looked at as unimportant and incompetent and are seen as individuals who are not able to make their own decision. Their Guardians make major life decisions; not just because they (the minors) aren’t capable of doing so, but also because the law commands that they do so. As minors, people, often from the older generations (who, in another words aren’t minors) see us as not being capable enough to carry out functions or point our life in the right directions. This leads to my next point – As our society is progressing rigorously and the media is starting to take the reins on our communities, individuals of the younger generation start to question their place in the society, and the freedom they are allowed to possess. Now, this brings in a tricky situation, where the younger generations start to have their own mindset and ideas. Since we are in the early ages of media, the internet, connectivity throughout the world, and all that fancy stuff, it is understandable that minors, especially young adults would start to think differently, and act more aggressively than ever.

This then brings in a dilemma about who is right. Of course, for the older generations, keeping up the standard, upholding this status and our amount of freedom would be key, as they have all the right reasons to believe that keeping up this standard would allow us a bright future. As minors, we would be less mature than adults, and would not be able to weigh our options as well as someone who has lived in this world for a longer time with more experience. Yet, it has never really been tested to listen to the younger generations, as parents and the older generations generally have authority over minors, simply because of the maturity and age gap.

Of course, there is the natural positive side of being a minor. Aside from being young, free, and a juvenile, we are also given the ever- important benefit of the doubt. Although we are less important and less trusted, there are also lower expectations and a higher frequency of forgiveness. As a juvenile, the court is always lighter on us (unless in extraordinary circumstances), and in certain countries, children under the age of ten are immediately dismissed from federal disciplinary action. This is all in the name of immaturity and ignorance. So you could say that other than child slavery and exploitation, we’re pretty fortunate as minors.

Of course, this isn’t all there is to being a minor. But I believe I have touched the surface of it… You can read more about minors and their statuses in other countries here. But, bottom line? You can’t change being a minor. But as you go along in your youthful stride, enjoy the leeway and understanding you get, because it won’t last for very long.

Rex

Your Crooked Heart

Liz Feldman once said "It's very dear to me, the issue of gay marriage. Or as i like to call it: 'marriage.' You know, because I had lunch this afternoon, not gay lunch. I parked my car; I didn't gay park it." You may be wondering why I opened up with this particular quote. In case you are, have patience young Padawan... I'm getting there. I don't understand discrimination. I don't understand homophobia. What's the point? We're all the same on the inside. Love is love, people are people. The Principle of Autonomy and Respect for Persons states that everyone has the right of self-determination subject to the equal and competing rights of others. In other words, we all have the right to well, rights. It shouldn't matter where you come from, what you believe in or if you like men, women or both. It may sound like the lyrics to the next John Lennon's Imagine , but I honestly don't see why people can't put these kinds of things behind us. Firstly, it's nobody else's business and secondly, bullying kills. And voilà, this is why I chose that quote. It's no one else's business who you love or marry.

As you're reading this, I'm sure you can think of too many headlines in which a child or teenager committed suicide over repeated sexual orientation and/or racist slurs. In fact, we discussed one in class the other day, which is what sparked my interest to write on this topic. I don't know about you, but I'm done with hearing those stories. I'm done with the hate and the angst. I mean, it's the 21rst century for crying out loud! We might not have the flying cars depicted in Back To The Future, but people all around the world are in the middle of rebellions and revolutions, fighting for what they believe in: the middle east with the Arab Spring, North America and Occupy Wall Street. People are trying to change, so why can't we eliminate some of these last, great weaknesses of human nature? The ostracizing and the aggression need to stop. I know we've all heard it a thousand times, and yet the message still doesn't seem to be getting through to everyone. Why the hate? What's the point? What do you benefit from hurting someone else? Nothing. Nothing is gained, and nothing every will be.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not dreaming of a utopia. I'm not saying I wish we could all get along like we used to in middle school or that I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy like the girl from Mean Girls, but I am saying that people have the right to be comfortable in who they are. This also implies that everyone has the duty to be treated with respect. Do unto others as you would like done unto yourself. Bashing them because they don't like the same things as you is not remotely acceptable. Yet people get away with it every day. That's the truth, and I've had it with the fact that people can't put aside their beliefs and differences. Beauty and character come from our flaws and all our little imperfections. We all have faults and we all have beliefs.

In WH Auden's poem, As I Walked Out One Evening, the speaker writes "You shall love your crooked neighbour, with your crooked heart." I shall, because no one is perfect, and we could all use a little more love. Will you? Leave your thoughts in the comments.

Aspartame: Godly or Ghastly

Everyday throughout the world, a dieter, health fanatic or just a lover of diet foods, is faced with an ethical dilemma. Should I come to terms with calorie filled sugar? Or face the alleged cancer causing aspartame, which is used as a sugar replacement. One would most likely choose aspartame due to the large labels stating “diet” and “sugar-free” but one must consider the positive and negative benefits of aspartame on the human body.

Although the positive effects of aspartame are rarely focused on, there are numerous benefits that one must learn in order to successfully answer the ethical question of “should I use aspartame knowing it may cause many undocumented health complications?” Aspartame was first created in 1965 but was not used as an artificial sweetener until 2009, where health activists and Internet “trolls” heavily criticized it endlessly, stating it caused cancer. Many have fallen into their trap and truly believe that it does cause cancer among other things, but several studies have shown that these results were inconclusive. As a sweetener, aspartame is the best, having zero calories, being 200 times sweeter than traditional sugar, and easily made and sold so one should weigh their options by becoming fat, with loads of sugar, or eat the foods you like, with the sugary taste of aspartame.

Society has mainly focused on the negative aspects of aspartame, as many believe there are terrible health risks associated with the use of aspartame. These health risks range from cancer, as mentioned earlier, to blindness and originated from a spam email that flowed to millions of North Americans, warning people that the government is attempting to kill us with aspartame. But you need not to worry, as not one of these many diseases including multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus, methanol toxicity, blindness, spasms, shooting pains, seizures, headaches, depression, anxiety, memory loss, birth defects and other annoying symptoms, have been proven truthful by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration)

If you’d like to read more about the controversy involved with aspartame, there’s a Wikipedia page here dedicated to the American outrage at aspartame. My final thoughts are live life to the fullest; even if diet coke is going to give you cancer and you avoid it, there are millions of other products out to get you in the long run.

Patty Cakes

Derren Brown: Mentalist or Magician?

Derren Brown is a famous illusionist from Britain who has become famous with his claim to be able to read minds. He has a number of TV shows and has proved himself to be quite an entertaining performer. He reveals very little about the tricks he plays on people, and says that it's a combination of "magic, suggestion, psychology, misdirection and showmanship". He's been creating television shows since the late 1990's and is still doing live performances today. The real question so many people have wondered is how he does it. He claims to have no stooges on his show, only real, honest people he has never met before. This also adds confusion to his ability to read minds and predict thoughts.

Cosmic Habituation

The idea of cosmic habituation is a very new and obscure idea. However, our story does not start here. It starts with a study done by a man by the name of Schooler. His study showed that when participants were shown a video of someone robbing a bank. They got a clear shot of his face and then afterward they were asked to give a description of the man. Then seperate participants were shown the same video and then asked to pick the person out in a police line-up. What Schooler discovered was that people were, on average, 30%-40% less accurate when they were forced to pick the person out in the line up. Now this is where things get weird. When Scooler went to repeat the study months later, the findings went down. There was still a difference in accuracy but it was not near as significant as the first time. So he repeated again and again the experiment came back less and less significant. Schooler had some ideas. One of the ideas was that regression to the mean. Regression to the mean basicaly means that over time your results will get closer and closer to the actual average. In essence it meant that Schooler had simply gotten lucky, and that his new test results were going back to the actual average. However this didn't explain why it continued to get smaller and never stopped. Also other studies that were being repeated at the time were having this same problem. Not that there studies were regressing to the mean or even getting smaller, but that what they had found the first time was changing overtime and the studies, as they were repeated, were starting to prove against their findings. It was at this point that Schooler hypothesized that maybe as we study the universe around us it changes as if it were changing because of our studies. This affect was coined as cosmic habituation. There are undoubtedly problems with the theory. For example, if this affect does exist then if we study the affect we should discover that it to would change, maybe making our second and third recreations of a study, perhaps more powerful or with more proof. Also, it too would probably change making it impossible to track or study. So there really is no way to study this or even see if its real, it's always going to be a hypothetical assumption and there will most likely never be any proof. I believe it's a very creative idea but it advocates that there is no point studying the universe around us because it will be always changing.

Scam, Fraud, and Pink Bananas

⇐ Yes, that is a pink banana. Welcome to the world of the unrelated. On a completely different note, let's talk about how not to get ripped off!

In today’s world of social networking, internet marketing, and borderline-addictive cell phone use, there is an extremely large issue plaguing us. This is, of course, the issue of rampant frauds and scams on the internet. Today, I'm hoping to give you a quick guide to see past all the rhetoric (and sometimes outright lying) that you see while casually surfing the interwebs. To begin, there are some prime examples of internet scams. For the latest an greatest of these rather amusing ploys, see here. A few personal favourites are: one starving, cancer-ailed Valentin Mikhailin, the guy stuck in the middle of nowhere that desperately needs a cab (but can still somehow email thousands of people), and the guys at Microsoft that decided they wanted to hack your computer.

Now the first piece of advice anyone can give, but yet seems to be the most ignored, is to use your common sense! Come on people, how many Nigerian Princes do you know that really want to throw millions of dollars at you for no particular reason? Or in that case, anyone who would do that! The golden rule is to remember: nothing in life is free. Make sure to analyze those emails carefully, and think if anyone would ever actually give you what they are claiming to. As well, think about it from a business perspective; how is this company benefiting or making money of this? If you notice a major discrepancy in this, such as being offered a large gift, and the only catch being you have to send a sum of money to them (they make a profit off this money, and you might not even get your ‘gift’), then be wary of scammers. Finally, remember that if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is.

All of this covers those legal companies who deceive you into letting them make a large profit, but what about those who don't play by the rules (however vaguely)? This, Ladies and Gentlemen, is what you have to watch out for! There are some not-so-nice people out there who disregard the law and will do anything to earn a quick buck. The interesting thing about these people is that they tend to be people who have fallen for get-rich-quick schemes, are experienced, and now target people who are desperate for money. This is scary, as it means these perpetrators of fraud are really good at what they're doing! There are three main things you have to watch out for while going about your everyday lives to help with this.

The first is constant vigilance when making purchases online. Check that the site you are at is really the site it claims to be, and not some 'phishing' site that is trying to steal your credentials. As well, make sure you get to know your seller. Meet them in person (if possible) in a public location, such as a bank. If this is not possible, then do your research! Look at their history, ask for references, and make sure you get your deal in writing.If all else fails, it might be wise to look for an alternate, more credible buyer.


The second thing is to make sure you know the contact information of your local fraud authorities, for example the RCMP Fraud Department, or RECOL. If you feel like someone is scamming you, committing fraud, or otherwise breaking the law online, it is your responsibility to report it.  Contrary to popular belief, the RCMP/Government/CIA is not some omniscient online being that can monitor anything and everything that happens. If you don't report it, nothing can be done, and you may be further endangering other people!

The third is to exercise your options! Almost all online commerce sites, such as eBay, offer buyer protection programs. Make sure you familiarize yourself with the company's policies, and how to file a complaint. Be sure to obtain all of this information before-hand, and consider using a middle-man service to ensure both parties get their fair share. And remember, if it seems too good to be true, it probably is, and there are always lots of other options.

Laws and Consent

Should the laws pertaining to consent be changed?

The laws currently state that where there can be consent, there must be consent. Meaning that a person always has the right to decide. On top of this consent must also be informed when possible - people have the right to know (and understand) what they are consenting to. There are exceptions to this: the doctrine of emergency and the doctrine of therapeutic privilege. These are for when a person cannot give informed consent, or if they were to be informed it would cause them harm. One may think that there are appropriate laws in place now on the subject of consent and informed consent, however some people abuse these laws. For example (this is a fictional story, with fictional characters, though it could potentially happen):

A man has been drinking alcohol since noon, by 3 pm he is severely intoxicated, though tries to drive home. On the way he runs through several red lights and ends up passing out at the wheel and crossing onto the other side of the road. He then drives into the ditch, hitting a light post. Luckily no civilians are hurt. Within 20 minutes the paramedics are there, and extract the man from his car. When he gets to the hospital, he has regained consciousness but is still groggy. Right away a sample of his blood is taken, as it is suspected that he has been drinking. The doctor's examination of him reveals that he has had a sever concussion and many scrapes and bruises. The results come back, his blood alcohol level was 3 times higher than the legal limit to drive. The driver is then taken into custody and held for 24 hours until he is bailed out. He is charged with driving under the influence which could result in him losing his license, a large fine, and not being able to travel to certain countries (i.e. the US). He has a good lawyer however, who argues that the blood sample was not taken under informed consent. Due to this the prosecution makes a deal with the drunk driver, he still must lose his license for a month and pay a small fine, though his record will be ex-sponged so he will not have to worry about a criminal record.

Is it right that a driver who posed a huge threat to anyone on the road that day, was let off scot free?

The laws around consent should be altered a slight amount to prevent events such as this one from occurring.