Election 1912 Essay Example for Free

Election 1912 Essay In the election of 1912, candidates Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft and Eugene Debs competed for the spot as President of the United States. Wilson represented the Democratic Party, Roosevelt, the Progressive, Taft, the Republican and Debs, the Socialist. Although there were four candidates in the running, most would agree that the real competition was between Wilson and Roosevelt. A few of the many issues during the time of this election concerned trusts, women’s suffrage and tariffs. Wilson thought that trusts, or big monopolistic businesses, should be eliminated all together, while Roosevelt wanted to place limits on them. Roosevelt openly supported women’s suffrage and Wilson wanted individual states to decide voting rights for women. Wilson wanted to get rid of tariffs along with trusts, but Roosevelt wanted to keep them in order to protect wages. There was still an indecisiveness between state power and national power as we have seen in nearly every era preceding. Can’t Bring A Bull Moose Down In the first ad, the audience we were trying to address was the everyday, common men. We felt that people could relate to facing hard times and adversities and overcoming them. As common people ourselves we found these acts admirable and felt that the common man of 1912 would have viewed them the same way. This ad is supposed to show viewers about how persistence is an important quality in a president and how Roosevelt clearly showed that quality when he kept speaking for 90 minutes after being shot in the chest. This way, viewers will know that Roosevelt will be persistent in his original and elected beliefs when making decisions for their country. What Women Want The audience we were trying to address in the second ad were women. Although women did not have voting rights, they still had a fair amount of political pull. The issue of voting rights would have been a very important one to women everywhere at the time and the fact that Wilson did not even acknowledge them was an issue, whereas Roosevelt supported women’s suffrage in his campaign. The message of this ad tried to get voters to retract support for Wilson because he didn’t encourage women’s rights and support Roosevelt because he did.

Arguments On Gods Existence Philosophy Essay

Arguments On Gods Existence Philosophy Essay Does God really exist? This is perhaps one of the most sought answer that has divided humanity into two discrete ideologies theism and atheism. To subscribe to either of the two doctrines, one would first need to understand who or what is God? The most conventional definition of God that cut across most religions is God is the creator of the universe and everything on it. One would therefore argue that for God to do all this He must not only be self existent, omniscience, omnipotent but also the Highest Form of Being. This assertion and believe has by and large provoked deep rooted enmity between atheists and theists. While one can sometimes feel obliged to lean towards Atheism based on the arguments extended by atheists the strongest conviction of existence of God is perhaps realized through theists support for existence of God as their arguments are satisfactory as opposed to atheists that are more often than not left hanging. Theism is the most popular doctrine in the world today because one is easily convinced by arguments put forward to support Gods existence. These arguments are multi faceted spanning from various dimensions; history, science, and philosophy. Historical arguments emanate from a religious perspective most notably Christianity. Stories from the Bible both Old and New Testament talk of the existence of God as the creator of the universe and everything in it. God existence is mentioned in the Bible in more than one occasion. The scriptures talk of God who created the heavens and earth in six days. By faith believers are urged to believe in his existence; And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him (Hebrews 11:6). Every individual who has this religious affiliation or believe accepts God existence and hand in natures creation. From a religious perspective one can therefore understand natures beautiful creation. In addition, believe in existence of God or a Superior Being transcends diverse societal cultures, civilisations and even continents. Surely this does not fit the description of a mere coincidence but rathe r an unknown force (God) causing this belief. Critical thinking be it evaluation of logic or deductive reasoning put forward as philosophical arguments further justifies the existence of God. Three main philosophical arguments explains the existence of God; anthological, first cause, and argument from design. Simple reasoning clearly shows that there is a God. Trying to argue otherwise defiles logic for one cannot even explain where the intelligence to question His existence comes from. If one really knows what or who God is then arguing that He does not exist is just as vague as its illogical. The universe must have come into existence at one point in time. However, nothing ever creates itself in light of this it must have been created by someone or something that is inconceivable and that was there from the beginning (God). No matter how we may want to deny Gods existence we cant explain creation of the universe from a mere explosion, who and what caused the explosion? What was exploded and who created it? Unless we embrace the fact that another supernatural forces really exists, none other than God! The world perfectly supports living things, the sun and other planets arrangement in space can only be described as artistic. If anything were to change like maybe the sun moves closer to the earth all living things would die the reverse is also true. Can a Big Bang cause such perfect dispersal? Why is everything still in precise locations after millions of years? Its definitely because there is a god who designed this universe to support life, period!! The existence of God can also be explained through scientific experiments of living organisms properties that portray high level structuring of DNA. While living cell denotes unique arrangement that is actually instructional like binary codes that run a computer programme, scientists have failed to explain this existence of such a pattern without programming, it therefore goes without saying God must have made it that to guides organisms activities. In addition the complexity of a human brain cannot be fully described by evolution theories in place, only God is capable of making a human being a very bright creature. Existence of God is not only practical but theoretical as well. As one examines nature, Gods presence is manifested in many forms ranging from perfectly arranged planets and sun to complex minute cells with unique structured DNA that guides organisms activities. Scholars more importantly scientists have failed to provide a satisfactory explanation of these phenomenas thus rationalizing the existence of God who makes all these possible. Critical thinking and deductive reasoning regarding the coming of existence of the universe has proofed beyond any reasonable doubt that the universe did not come into existence by itself but rather by a creator who can only be God. However some arguments put forward to explain Gods existence are contradictory and at best may just seem as illusions rather than facts. For example arguing that everything that exist has a cause is logical but merely stating that God is self existent along the same line of thought undermines the fact that the statement is trying to put across, one may wonder if God is complex and is inconceivable, why cant the universe being a complex phenomena be self existent too?

Should The Death Penalty Be Mandatory For Homicide?

Should The Death Penalty Be Mandatory For Homicide? Death penalty is considered to be a cruel and inhuman punishment for crimes mostly for the murder since 19th century. Death penalty is also called capital punishment which is the supreme punishment of murder or killing. Death penalty in Texas, in USA for homicide is shouldnt be mandatory because it is a brutal and inhuman punishment. Texas has the record for the number of executions. This death penalty issue is a controversial issue because some states and people think that the use of capital punishment should be mandatory for all murders otherwise the number of homicide or crimes will be increased dramatically and the criminal will get more chance to do more crimes like homicide. Besides this most of the nongovernmental institution like Amnesty International, United Nation does not want to let the death penalty mandatory for murders. According to Irene Khan, the secretary general of Amnesty International, The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Beh eadings, electrocutions, hangings, lethal injections, shootings and stoning have no place in the 21st century (Amnesty International USA, Death Penalty: 2,390 executions in 2008 worldwide, 72 per cent in China). States of Texas use electric chair, lethal injection, lethal gas, hanging, and firing squad to execute the guilty. Firstly, I believe that punishment like death penalty for homicide which is an in justification to human being and violation of human rights should not be mandatory. Secondly, the cost of death penalty for homicide is higher than the cost for the sentencing alternative of life imprisonment without possibility of parole. (The Death Penalty: Specific Issues). Thirdly, the danger of erroneous convictions and executions of the innocent people may increase because of the usage of false testimony, the willful suppression of evidence, and coerced a confession. Again, People have the right to live. Who gave the right to the state to take a decision of capital punishment against a person? (The Death Penalty V Human Rights: Why abolish the death penalty? September 2007). Firstly, death penalty for homicide is a violation of fundamental human rights. For homicide death penalty should not be compulsory because it offers society not further protection but further brutalization. The state can exercise no greater power over a person than that of deliberately depriving him or her of life. However, the state does has the right to punish a person by sentencing him or her to death? From the critics view the answer should be No. (The Death Penalty V Human Rights: Why abolish the death penalty? September 2007). Capital punishment denies the legal process of law. The approval of death penalty is contradictory to law where the human rights is being preserved. The imposement of death penalty differs because of the color of the people and the financial condition which is injustice and against human rights. In June 29, 1972, the US Supreme Court declared capital punishment as a cruel and unusual punishment which proves that death penalty is a violation of human righ ts and injustice to the people. (Death Row Facts: Texas Department of Criminal Justice). A person who is innocent but punished for the deeds which he or she did not is a clear violation of human rights. Secondly, death penalty for homicide in Texas should not be mandatory because of the knowing use of false testimony, the willful suppression of evidence, and coerced a confession which has, at times, resulted in the conviction and execution of innocent persons on capital punishment. Factors like police and prosecutorial misconduct, misinterpretation, inadequate legal representation, undeveloped technology also lead the judge to give a punishment like death penalty for homicide which shouldnt be done with the people who are innocent. In USA since 1973, because of the evidence of their wrongful convictions, over 130 people have been released from the death row. And in Texas the release of four men from the death row on grounds of innocence prove that death penalty for homicide is a wrong decision. (Regional summaries, Death Penalty and Innocence: Amnesty International USA). For example, Randall Dale Adams and Clarence Brandley was the victims of the misconduct of the judges and was rel eased from the death row after years of struggle to prove them innocent (C. Dieter, Richard: The Future of Death Penalty in the U.S.: A Texas Sized Crisis). Thirdly, the cost of death penalty for homicide is higher than the cost for the life imprisonment which is an alternative to death penalty. If it is mandatory for all murders the cost will increase more and more. In death penalty for homicide, large proportion of the money spent prior to and during the trial. There is a little cost in post-conviction of proceedings in death penalty. Even if the cost of post-conviction is being eliminated, the cost of the death penalty for homicide still would be more expensive than other alternative punishments. From the survey on Texas about the cost of the death penalty we can see that the cost of death penalty for homicide is estimated $2.3 million per case with having 300 people on the death row and the homicide rate in this state is one of the highest in the country. The expansion of death penalty shrinking the budget of the sates for police departments, drug treatment programs, education, and other government services that help prevent crime. I n Texas a homicide death penalty costs taxpayers accounting $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a cell at the highest level for 40 years. (Ellis, What Politician Dont Say About the High Cost of Death Penalty). In addition, Taxes spent approximately  £183.2 million dollar in just six years on the death penalty for homicide. As US Supreme Court ruled that the jury must be informed in advance if the defendant would be eligible for parole whenever a sentencing jury has the ability to impose death penalty (Capital Punishment, Death penalty data). The use of parole makes the capital punishment very costly. People who support the death penalty to be mandatory for homicide argue that death penalty deter capital crime. They refer that death is the surest way to bring it about the most total prevention from functioning in a normal way and irrevocable. People fear about being punished by sentencing to death before doing any homicide. Because of the death penalty for homicide criminals think before doing anything wrong. (Den Haag, The Death Penalty: A Debate). Again, there is no way to make a wrong decision for the judge which will cause the life of an innocent people. The judge consider everything such as the mode of incident, explanation from the witness and obviously the technology like DNA test, medical inspection of the body which makes the case easier for the authority to identify and sentenced to capital punishment of the guilty. Furthermore, Firstly, Death penalty doesnt deter crime because there are enough potential murderers to replace all those incapacitated. Crime rates are influenced by the other factors not because of the capital punishment. The threat of life in prison deters more than any other term of punishment like death penalty for homicide. Life in prison is unpleasant and horrible than the death penalty and painful to die by the passage of time. It makes the feelings of the prisoner to die than living in such a condition which create mental illness for them. By sentencing to prison make an example for the murderers from where they can realize the harsh punishment. However, criminal who are adamant to do murder cant be controlled or kept quiet whatever the punishment it is. As we can see from the research on Texas, the crime rate grew up by 24% and 46% of violent crime. (C. Dieter, Richard: The Future of Death Penalty in the U.S.: A Texas Sized Crisis). Secondly, the argument named the killing of innocent th at death penalty supporter shows for homicide is not true because there is a great chance of doing something wrong about justification. Human beings are not out of making wrong decision and the judges do too. Again the use of technology in identifying criminals is not available all over. The use of new technology like DNA and other medical instrument which are very expensive and states like developing and poor countries can not afford this type advance technology. In conclusion, we can say that death penalty for homicide is controversial issue all over the world. The use of death penalty may cause the life of innocent people as the use of false testimony, the willful suppression of evidence, and coerced a confession. The use of death penalty for homicide is a very costly one because of the trial which means the cost of pre-conviction proceedings. Death penalty is a violation of fundamental human rights. People have the right to live. A judge cannot decide whether a person should die or not. The creator has created us and will make the decision whether a person should die or not. The prison system should be more about rehabilitation than simply introducing capital punishment or removing the criminal from society. It costs a few dollars per day to have a parole officer check on a parolee than the huge cost of death penalty. And it could be an example for the murderers. I believe that we are human being and we are beyond mistake. Death penalty do esnt deter crime as it is a simple way than making the life imprisonment which makes the life of a criminal terrible in every step. However, we should give a chance to the criminal to correct as forgiving is great virtue. Proper steps should be taken to abolish capital punishment and make the world to be free from cruel and inhuman punishment.

Meningitis and Encephalitis :: Biology Medical Biomedical

Meningitis and Encephalitis Meningitis and encephalitis are two debilitating infections. They cause the inflammation of the meninges and the brain, respectively. Both of these infections are more common than the public believes them to be. Almost any bacteria or viruses can cause a form of this infection and any person of any age can contract this illness. In the United States many cases of meningitis and encephalitis are reported yearly. These two illnesses are often confused and considered by the general public to be one illness. But that is a myth. Meningitis and encephalitis are related, however, since encephalitis usually stems from the former. But meningitis causes inflammation of the meninges, or the lining of the brain, while encephalitis inflames the brain itself. Both of these inflammations have two forms: viral and bacterial. There are many different viruses that cause meningitis, such as mumps virus, echovirus, human entroviruses, HIV, arborviruses, west nile viruses, and many others. Mumps virus and Enteroviruses are the most common viruses that cause this infection. Viral meningitis tends to be more prevalent during the winter months. It is more likely to be found in adolescents or adults. Bacterial meningitis, like viral meningitis, is caused by many different organisms. Fifty percent of bacterial meningitis is caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, and fifteen percent are caused by Neisseria meningitides. The rest is caused by different Streptococcus and Listeria bacteria. Bacterial meningitis is contagious through direct contact with the oral fluids of the effected person. Therefore, the significant other and household contacts are often a likely candidate to contract bacterial meningitis. Eighty percent of cases are in people under the age of 16 and the majority of that group is under 5-years old. Haemophilus influenzae are gram-negative rods and it is commonly found in the United States. Their cell has a polysaccharide capsule with outer-membrane proteins. It is also non-motile. This bacterium prefers a carbon dioxide rich atmosphere though some strains do not need it to survive. An unusual trait of this bacteria is that when it is cultured for a long time, it loses its capsule and then dies. H. influenzae causes most cases of meningitis that occur in children between the ages of 2 months to four years, although-the mortality rate is a low three percent. Neisseria meningitides is a gram-negative diplococci, or a cocci that travels in pairs. This species is one of two Neisseria that are harmful to people. It is a spherical bacterium with a polysaccharides capsules.

The Red Badge Of Courage :: essays research papers fc

In The Red Badge of Courage, Stephen Crane uses fear to bring you into the story and keep you there. Crane’s main character Henry, â€Å"the youth†, is the prime example for this point. Henry’s fear is the entire novel’s basis. Throughout the story, Henry goes through different phases of fear.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Henry starts out to be a rebellious teen wanting to join the army and gain the glory and recognition that comes with it. He fails to realize that fame and glory don’t come easy. He realizes that he is going to have to work for it and this is where his fear stems from. Once enlisted, Henry finds himself on the field of an ensuing battle. He debates if he will fight with his side, or run off into the woods. The battle starts, and Henry keeps to his position through sheer fear of dying. When the opposing side appears to retreat, the Union side celebrates pre-maturely. Moments later, the South re-groups and attacks again. Henry this time does not stay and fight. The first wave was hard enough and this time Henry is too afraid to stay. As he ran into the woods, he began to question the slaughter he had witnessed in the battle. When Henry comes out of the woods into another regiment another soldier slams him over the head, giving him a false red badge of courage, for not letting go of him.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Henry, scared and wounded, stumbles in the dark overcoming a great fear of the Southern army, by wandering through dark and unknown land, to find his way back to camp. He finds a friend who leads him to his regiment. Henry, afraid of what his regiment will think of him, begins to think of a story to make his injury seem realistic. Trying not to give away it’s actual origin, Henry comes up with a gunshot wound story. His regiment gives him the glory he wanted, but under false circumstances. In the following days, another battle takes place. Henry fearing again what his regiment would think of him has to stay and fight. Henry is so into keeping the origin of his wound hidden that he stands behind a tree and fires shot after shot towards the army. He continues to fire after the rebels had retreated; another soldier had to stop him. Henry is seen as a great soldier.

Do Video Games Cause Violence Essay

Do violent video games cause violent behavior? I believe that violent video games do not cause violent behavior. While I agree that violent video games may desensitize youth to violence, I don’t believe the games make the youth more violent than they already are. Its not fair to single handedly blame violent video games, when there are tons of other violent media sources out there. Karen Sternheimer is a sociologist from the University of Southern California and has been researching the topic since 1999 and she says â€Å"Placing the blame on video games exonerates the environment that a child lives in that might nurture violence: poverty, instability, family violence, unemployment, and mental illness, Sternheimer argues.† I agree with her that blaming the games is a cop out and an excuse for the parents and other violent media to not have to take responsibility. In Sternheimer article titled â€Å"Do Video Games Kill?† She says â€Å"If we want to understand wh y young people become homicidal, we need to look beyond the games they play,† I agree with Sternheimer here because I think that its safe to say a youth doesn’t just suddenly get the urge to go out and start killing people. If people were willing to look beyond face value and beyond how something appears to be. They would see that these kids who become violent might be being bullied, or depressed or have other life things going on that pushed them to the â€Å"breaking point† and they just might happen to play a violent video game. The research that show violent video games causing aggressive behavior are not accurate to how these games are played in real life. Andrew Przybylski and colleagues who wrote an article in the Review of General Psychology say that â€Å"most video game experiments only have players play for short periods of time, often for as little as 10 minutes, and violent games tend to be more difficult to learn and have more complex controls than non-violent games, it appears that many participants in these experiments may simply have been frustrated by being cut off so quickly before they even learned how to play, rather than by the violent content of the game.† (Review of General Psychology). To me this makes the research the people are using to discredit the violent video game unreliable. They are just taking the data and interpreting it to show their side as being right. I know that if I only had a short amount of time to learn a new video game it would make me pretty frustrated too. So the aggression that they are seeing is not necessarily aggression from the game as it is aggression from failing. Graduate student Jose Valadez found that both violent and nonviolent games tend to relax people over time, not anger them. People now days actually do use games to release stress and relax. Sometimes people who are feeling aggressive use the games to vent that aggression rather than have the game add to their aggression. Almost everyone will have a homicidal thought at one point or another in time. But for those thought to turn to action is a completely different problem that does not have any association with video games. When a youth acts out in violent manner instead of looking at what video games they are playing they need to be looking at the mental health and stability of the youth. Consistent and ever present homicidal thoughts are linked with severe mental health problems such as psychosis, depression, anxiety or paranoia. (Scientific American) Those mental illnesses are causing violent behavior not video games. Blaming the video games also allows for a cop out for parents. In the United States the ESRB or Entertainment Software Rating Board puts ratings on all games. Those rating range fro EC or early childhood to AO or Adult only. All of the games accused of causing violent behavior in youth such as Call Of Duty, Halo or Grand Theft Auto are all rated M for mature meaning the parents or someone of authority had to purchase these games for the youth. The ESRB rates these games with certain age requirements for a reason. Allowing anyone to blame the video game takes all accountability off of the parents because they don’t have to own the choice to ignore the advice of the rating company and allow their children to play these games. Being able to blame the video games also ignores the violence the youth is exposed to at home also allowing the parents to blame something else besides themselves. While the media says two boys went on a killing spree in the mall and they happened to play halo is a harsh generalization that shouldn’t be said or used, because while these kids may have played halo doesn’t mean that halo is the reason these kids went on a killing spree. These kids could have been being physically or emotionally abused at home. Abuse makes people feel helpless powerless and worthless. These kids could have finally just had enough and acted out in a violent manner just to finally feel like they had power in their lives. Abuse could be the answer but no one would know becaus e the parents will never admit to being abusive. If all other arguments fail the one that has to be considered is that videogames are not the only violent media out in the world. While violent video games are first person and put the player in the shoes of the shooter or killer it is no less desensitizing then it is to watch someone else on a screen kill somebody. Violent movies show some of the most realistic and grotesque violence around. When it comes to desensitizing someone to violence or glorifying violence movies are just as guilty if not more guilty than games. Movie like Act of Valor or Rambo glorify violence because they show the â€Å"hero† killing the â€Å"bad guys† in reality not on a animated picture. Violent music is also guilty but has been brought to more light in examples such as the Cassie Jo Stoddart case where the two boys who killed Cassie said they were inspired by the lyrics from a song by the band Insane Clown Posse who are known for their intensely violent lyrics. If people are wanting to blame video games a form of media they also need to look at all other forms of media involved in that youths life such as what music they have on their iPods or mP3 players to what movies they have at home and that they have watched recently. In conclusion while violent video games may contribute to the desensitization of violence they are not alone in the desensitization of violence. Also until there is a set scale and proven test to determine the aggression associated with video games they can not be blamed for the acts of anyone one else. Parents need to also be held more accountable for the actions and roles they play in these tragic events they need to stop hiding behind video games and take responsibility for what has happened.We as society also need to step up and look harder for the solution to why these teens go homicidal rather than blaming the first thing that we find.

Effects in Mass Media Essay

What was the major development in evolution of mass media in the 20th century The mass media included television, radio, newspaper and telephone. Before television, there was morse code, but later the telephone came in to play, people decided that it was much easier than waiting for a telegram. Before the invention of television there was the radio, this was considered the main form of entertainment for a family, the radio contained talk shows and advertisements read over the radio from different stores. Newspapers have been around for ages, they were pretty much the communication for cities, towns and small communities. Everything changed when television made an appearance in 1935. The first television set was black and white, mostly they were owned by people who were considered rich, later it became affordable for more families to own. The three major programs offered were ABC, CBS and NBC, later on the color television set was developed. Later on the computer was developed, they seemed too large for households, so most computers were used by the government, after that Apple developed a computer smaller for household use, more and more companies have developed better technology with the computer, television and the internet. How did each development influence America How did these influence America, The newspaper gave the news, it had no other purpose, but as it developed it was used for other purposes, today the newspaper is used for comments and criticism, this involves social, political and religion, this also vents grievances. The radio became very popular, it became the opportunity to speak to people in their homes, it changed the consumer marketing and was a link for entertainment information and product consumption, another use of radio was the war, they used for the detection of planes and ships which was called radar. By the 1950’s radio was lost to television. Television was the main source of entertainment, when kids came home from school, the first thing they do is turn on the television, people use television for a form of relaxation, especially after a long day at work. Today there are thousands if not millions of television stations, due to technological progress, today televisions stations are available in every part of the world, and has been a very influential part of culture. The telephone has made communication with people better and faster, you can contact anyone, anytime of the day. The first rotary phone was developed in 1923, later on the touch tone phone. A few years later the cordless phone came out, this was great, you could move around your home and still talk on the phone. Then later on a new technology was on the rise, the cell phone, now there was no more setting around waiting on a phone call, after that the internet, the phone had more of an impact than any other technology.