Is It Ethical To Use Animals In Medical Testing?

Is It Ethical To Use Animals In Medical Testing? Medicine is very complicated field. There is no doubt that it has helped human beings through history to live longer, but it has had its bad times too. Because of medicine we have found cures for various diseases, and now can extend our lives for years. Medicine is helping animals too. However, on occasions, medicine is a very controversial field, and animal testing is one of the most controversial fields of medicine. Some people and medical experts regard animal testing as necessary and helpful in discovering various cures. On the other hand, many animal right groups, and also medical experts, consider animal testing cruel and unnecessary. In my opinion animal testing is unethical and if not forbidden it should be limited to the maximum. Animal testing kills innocent animals in the cruelest ways such as dissection, poisoning, vivisection, toxicology testing, and other methods. To better understand why animal testing is unethical and why it should be limited I will present the pros a nd cons arguments of animal testing. First of all, animal testing should be forbidden because for certain products there is no need for testing. There are products, which pose no danger to the human health, but medical personnel still performs tests on animals to see the results. These are just in case tests, which kill animals for no cause. For example, killing animals just to find out if a shampoo or soap smells good is unethical. Medical companies, and experts, should create some kind of ethical code for animal testing. For example, animal tests are forbidden for products that do not cause serious health problems in human beings. Lab experts and doctors should find other ways how to conduct safety testing for such basic products, and limit the number of animals that are killed. Additionally, many experts argue that results from animal testing may generate at least two or more different outcomes. For example, soap may cause allergy in rats, but not in rabbits. In this case both animals would be killed for no result. Also, blinding or killing a rabbit just to see if some new kind of mascara is satisfactory is very cruel and unethical. Further, animals are different from human beings they have different bodies and other organs, so testing on animals may not bring the expected results. Rats, frogs, or rabbits may react to some chemical or drug, but this does not guarantee that the reaction will be the same or similar when tested on human beings. Because, humans are different from animals there is no need for animal testing. Medical workers should find more efficient ways to test products that will get them the right results. According to many animal rights groups and medical experts, that are against animal testing, the biggest argument against animal testing is that there are now many other alternative testing methods available. The medicine has become so advanced that animal testing is obsolete. If we want more accurate and real results we can use human cells for testing. They may show the exact reaction and results from drugs or other testing. Also, tissue studies are very advanced methods for testing medical cures and drugs. Tissue samples can be used to analyze the effects of a soup or other body creams, or an allergen or other type of drug. These tissue experiments will show the desired effects on human beings. Because of the above mentioned alternative testing methods, and many others which are available nowadays, animal testing should be banned or very limited, as there is no need for it. Even though, many people consider animal testing cruel and unethical, many other consider it essential for achieving the desired medical results. These pro animal testing groups have their arguments about this issue. One of their strongest arguments is that medical research saves millions of lives each year. Because of testing on animals, they argue, medical workers around the world could find cures to HIV/AIDS, cancer, Alzheimers disease, Parkinsons disease, and many other non-curable diseases as of the moment. Therefore, those supporters of animal testing argue that if animal testing is eliminated there may be some future problems in finding new cures for existing and new diseases. That is why animal testing is so important. Another argument for animal testing is that animal testing not only helps human beings, but it also helps animals. During the last two to three decades, the discovery of various cures for animal diseases has increased dramatically. Animals today live longer compared to 40 to 50 years ago. Pro groups argue that thanks to animal testing, animals now have better chance to survive diseases and injuries. Animals are treated from various diseases thanks to them and the experiments done on them. Nowadays, a whole field of medicine is dedicated to animals. Doctors are performing surgical operations on animals; horses and dogs and other domestic animals are treated for various kinds of viral infections, etc. Also, defenders of animal testing argue that if there were other testing techniques, that can substitute animal testing, then they will accept them. But, as of the moment, according to them, there are no other advanced testing techniques. That is why now and in the future, until some other testing methods are found, animal testing remains the most valuable testing method. People and medical science are massively dependent on animal testing to find cures for some serious diseases. Moreover, as some supporters of animal testing claim, we should be more concerned with saving human lives than with saving animal lives. According to them, animals are worthy to some respect, but they are not as worthy as a human live. Many of them argue that if a person comes in the situation to choose between saving the life of a rat or the live of his mother, the answer is already known. That is why, animal testing should be allowed, because saving human lives is more beneficial than saving animal lives. However, the testing processes and experiments should be controlled. Finally, the strongest argument for animal testing is that the complaints of the people, who are against animal testing, are not correct and they are vague, and they do not constitute serious arguments. The pro groups argue that animal testing has generated very valuable information of how certain drugs, and other medical cures, work inside human bodies. Because of animal testing we are where we are in medicine today. Even though, both pro and cons groups have strong arguments, according to me, animal testing is unethical and cruel. Maybe it should not be forbidden altogether, but certainly it should be limited. Animal testing should be used when looking for cures for some serious disease such as cancer. But, it should be strictly controlled when the testing is done for products that cannot harm human health, such as testing animals for detergents. The medical companies and experts around the world should seat and discuss ways to reduce animal testing to the minimum. There should be some ethical standards of how animals should be used and treated during tests.

Globalization Economy Nicaraguan

Globalization Economy Nicaraguan Globalization has had a great impact in the modern world, and has even come to affect the economy of several Latin American countries. However, has globalization affected the Nicaraguan Economical panorama? In order to answer this question, it is important to take Nicaraguas history into account, a history that has been smeared with endless corruption. Another idea that must be kept in mind is the term â€Å"globalization† has numerous amounts of definitions, so in order to identify the answer; a proper definition must be structured. Within the context of globalization, it is trivial to identify if the key treaties like the ALBA and the CAFTA have had any significant effect on the Nicaraguan economy. Through a careful evaluation, it will be noticed that Globalization has not had an impact in the Nicaraguan Economy yet; however the roots of globalization can already be traced to the economy. One of the limitations found in this research paper was the gathering of different sources from the rural sectors of the country, as the rural perspective of this essay is of much importance to define if globalization has affected Nicaragua or not. Introduction Globalization has started to influence the Nicaraguan economic scheme from the beginning of the 21st century. The Nicaraguan population should ask themselves if globalization would aid the economic stance they are in. Another question that must be asked is if the new trade agreements will benefit or harm the private sector of the rural Nicaraguan farmers. The last question to be answer is, â€Å"Globalization from what side?† as the American Hemisphere seems to be structured with a strong Capitalist giant on the top, The United States of America, and numerous amounts of underdeveloped Socialist countries, which can be said to be most of South America, consisting of Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Ecuador, Venezuela, and Bolivia, Uruguay all have socio-democratic governments, that exercise populist tendencies. Another point that should be kept in mind is the choice between the ALBA and the CAFTA, as the socio-democratic alignment that Nicaragua currently has should be kept in mind. Both treaties should be considered in the â€Å"global† sense as there are currently four enlisted countries in the ALBA agreement, which are Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Ecuador; while the CAFTA is conformed of The United States, Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Dominican Republic and Costa Rica. The main concern in regards to globalization may not even be of an economic impact, but rather on of an ideological degree. The Nicaraguan populations view on globalization is of a loss of national pride, as if the United States would take over the countrys economy; which to some extent is true. The ideological conflict, however, stands on whether to be a nationalist, a socialist or a capitalist. Nicaraguas preferences must be examined in order to determine if globalization will have an effect in the Nicaraguan economy. Nicaragua has a long history of corruption that can be traced back to the 1930s with the Somoza dynasty, and can then be followed along the list of Somoza family members onto the Sandinista Mandate and then into the 21st century with the newly elected â€Å"liberal parties†. It is important to recognize Nicaraguas background in order to determine if Globalization will benefit or harm the economy. In order to truly define the â€Å"sort† of globalization that suits Nicaragua best, a definitely structured definition must be established, as â€Å"globalization† is wide in the range of it meaning. Definition of Globalization The definition of globalization can be branched into three main concepts. The first of the concepts can be referred to as the â€Å"broad† point of view, in which globalization is interpreted without inclinations towards the foreign or domestic perspectives. In this notion, we call â€Å"globalization† when a company or multi-national industry invests capital in a usually underdeveloped economy such as Nicaragua. The other two perspectives stray apart when the question of â€Å"why would the companies invest in underdeveloped countries?† is asked. The â€Å"Imperialist† perspective bases itself on the moral principal of stimulating under developed countrys economies. In this lay out, a corporation such as Nike sets out a factory in the under developed country in order to provide jobs for the grand unemployed population. By providing such work, the corporation is thus permitted to pay low fees to its new employees. If a company does not wish to set up a factory in a new location, they can still enter the local markets through Commerce treaties. In Nicaragua there are two possible treaties, the CAFTA (Central America Free Trade Agreement) and the ALBA (Alternativa Bolivariana), the CAFTA being the most suitable, as it permits United States owned companies to compete in local markets. Taking the Imperialist point of view, the local population is given new choices in the market from which to buy from, choices that are sometimes less expensive and thus more economically feasible for a greater part of the population. The â€Å"Anti-imperialist† perspective, otherwise known as the down side to globalization, regards globalization as â€Å"Economic terrorism†. This point of view focuses on the injustices that these corporations bring upon the under developed countries. The first injustice is the claim that these companies pay a misery of a fee to the employees thus only keeping them busy instead of â€Å"feeding them†, reason for why this low pay condition is usually referred to as a â€Å"Sweat-Shops†. The most impacting injustice would be the fact that these corporations are allowed to compete in local markets. The reason for this claim is that the foreign companies offer products of a cheaper nature, and therefore encourage the local merchants to buy foreign products instead of local ones. Once the local products are not consumed, the national domestic companies thus run out of business placing people out of work. The only form of globalization encouraged in Nicaragua, is one through the ALBA agreement, as the conditions in this treaty are of Self-Growth concepts between allied Latin American countries Venezuela, Bolivia, and Nicaragua. Nicaraguas Economic Background during the Somoza era and the Sandinistas. In the 1936, the Nicaraguan population elected Anastasio Somoza Garcia to power. At this moment, the Nicaraguan economy is on the rise. The main exports were cattle and coffee, settling Nicaragua as one of the richest countries of Central America in the first half of the 20th century. Somoza Garcia, however set Nicaraguas faith by providing the United States with raw materials during World War Two for the Allied war effort. This close association with the United States set the Nicaraguas economical and political dependence to the will of the United States. During his presidency; however, he did not increase the Nicaraguan Economy to a significant degree, instead hes main dedication was of a personal extent. Somoza Garcias tactics consisted of diverting government funds to his own accounts, and purchasing government lands at ridiculously low prices. While the Nicaraguan economy remained at a flat constant, Somoza Garcias personal Bank accounts were at an all time raise. During the wartime, he attained numerous facilities to which income was due, facilities such as a cement factory, the national railroad, a cement factory, most textile plants, several electric power companies, the national airlines, and an extensive control over the banks. His personal income, after World War Two, was estimated to have been of 60 million dollars. After Somoza Garcias death in 1956, his younger son Anastasio Somoza Debayle took control of the presidency and succeeds his father in power. A few years later, after a rigged election, Luis Somoza Debayle, Anastasio Somozas older son, took control of the Nicaraguan presidency. During Luis Somozas presidency, the Nicaraguan economy was hit with a drop in Coffee production, as now the competitions for their main product had been expanded onto other locations and were purchased at even lower prices, causing Nicaragua to drop prices as well. It wasnt the coffee drop, however, that caused many grievances to the Nicaraguan Economy, it was the 1972 Earthquake that caused $15 million in damages. Richard Nixon, however, aided the Nicaraguan government with a donation of $50 million. The Nicaraguan Treasury only reported $17 million of that donation, while the other $33 million was believed to be in Luis Somozas personal bank accounts abroad. It was until 1980 that the Somoza dynasty was replaced by another sort of mandate, a leftist government. In 1980, the United States lifted its â€Å"protective shield† over the Somoza family and allowed internal social conflicts to rise out of control. Luis Somoza was then pressured by the United States to leave Nicaragua with the threat of freezing bank accounts that were located in United States banks. The country was therefore left in the hands of the Revolutionary party F.S.L.N (Frente Sandinista de Liberacion Nacional, which is translated to â€Å"Sandinista Front, for National Liberation†), which was commanded by Daniel Ortega. At the moment the F.S.L.N gained presidential authorities, the economic situation had an incredible deficit as major loans were issued from the World Bank. The F.S.L.N, or the Sandinista party for short, did not play a significant role for the Nicaraguan Economy, as their main intentions remained to â€Å"restore the social injustice†. Governmental and private lands were both confiscated and given to the Nicaraguan population as a sort of Land Reform. Not all the land was given to â€Å"the people†, most of it was kept by the high ranking officers such as Daniel Ortega, his brother Humberto Ortega, his right-hand man Tomas Borge and several other Sandinista generals. The countrys economic status dropped from being one of the richest countries in Central America, to being the poorest in the American Hemisphere, preceding only Haiti on the list. It is said by the Director of the Nicaraguan Economic Institute during the 1980s, father Xabier Golostiaga, that â€Å"the Sandinista government, when they took power, found a country with no financial resources†, and also stated that only 3.5 million dollars were found from the 19 banks that were nationalized; however, according Father Golostiaga, Nicaragua inherited a debt of $1.6 billion dollars, while more than half of that money was never used on the Nicaraguan grounds. Even though the Sandinista government is still regarded as a group of â€Å"bandits† in Nicaragua, they did relieve a great percentage of the external debt that Nicaragua had attained during the Somoza dynasty. At the beginning of the Sandinista mandate, influences shifted from the United States the Soviet Union. Nicaragua would engage in trade with the USSR instead of the United States, as the United States had placed Nicaragua in a sort of Financial Boycott. Once the Cold War was over, and ties with the USSR started to shed, the Sandinista government seemed to lose its grasp over the governmental panorama. In 1990, the Sandinista government accepted elections to go forth, losing to candidate Violeta Barrios de Chamarro of the U.N.O party (National Opposition Union). The Nicaraguan Economic panorama (between 1991 and 2007). In 1991, after the Nicaraguan Revolution and the decline of a communist dictatorship, finally, the first liberal government was established during the globalization era. The UNO mandate, cleared much of the economic rubble that the Sandinista dictatorship had left behind. During Violeta Barrioss presidency, she was denied compensation by the United States for damages during the â€Å"Contras† period. After this, donations from European countries were effected, as Nicaragua still remained the worlds second poorest country. It can be said that Nicaragua was institutionalized in a sort of rehabilitation for 7 years in order to get on its feet again. Seven years later, elections were carried out and the Nicaraguan , where people elected Arnoldo Aleman as president from the Liberal Constitutional Party (PLC). At this moment the economy was â€Å"up and running†; and was receiving donation from developed countries, receiving the most from Spain. Besides the flow of income, due to chronic corruption during his government, a 50 million dollar deficit was filed. Arnoldo Aleman had been diverting governmental funds to a private bank account in Switzerland and was arrested for corruption, and money laundry. Corruption had once again been in the hands of a single man. In 2001, Nicaragua saw yet another election, in which Arnoldos vice-president was elected president, president Enrique Bolanos. Nicaraguas economy suffered a stalemate, as president Bolanoss presidency served to â€Å"clean the corruption of the political panorama† and to pay off most of the debts that Nicaragua has inherited during the Sandinistas regime and the Somoza dynasty. The Economic effects of the ALBA and the CAFTA agreements. The CAFTA and the ALBA treaties share similarities within their texts; however, both treaties are approached from different perspectives. The ALBA treaty, is not just considered a treaty, according to Hugo Chavez, it is a bond between Latin American countries, and as Chavez stated: â€Å"Latin America will save itself alone†. So far, there are only 5 members to the ALBA treaty, which members are: Cuba, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela. The CAFTA on the other hand is seen as simply a â€Å"treaty† between the United States and Central America and the Dominican Republic. This approach by the United States has â€Å"scared off† most of the trust among the population, as it suits the symptoms of an economically manipulative doctrine. The points of the CAFTA are expressed as follows: President Hugo Chà ¡vez in his intervention in ALADI has summarized the principals ALBA as the following topics: 1. To promote the fight against the poverty 2. To preserve the autonomy and Latin American identity 3. The transference of technology, the technical assistance 4. The formation of human resources 5. To prioritize national companies us public beings suppliers 6. The agreements could not be obstacle to the diffusion of the scientific and technological progress 7. To face the abuse of the monopolies and oligopolies through effective mechanisms that assure fare competition 8. The foreign investors will not be able to demand the countries by the handling of state monopolies of public interest 9. Treatment special and differentiated to unequal economies to open opportunities to the weakest 10. Process of wide social participation, which can be characterized like democratic 11. Economic, social, cultural and civil rights should be interdependent, indivisible and can not be waived 12. The commercial interests of the investors will not be able to have supremacy over the human rights or over the sovereignty of the States 13. Creation of founds of structural convergence for the correction of asymmetries The different definitions of Globalization must be kept aside when comparing the ALBA and CAFTA, as the goal of a foreign agreement is to aid Nicaraguas economy regardless of ideological opinion. The CAFTA is regarded as the treaty that puts forth the â€Å"Americanization† of a country, as on the contrary, the ALBA encourages Nationalistic growth. The CAFTA agreement encourages United States corporations into investing their capital in underdeveloped countries in exchange for tax liberation, lower employee costs, and a guarantee in case of corporate loss due to a social instability. The preamble of such documents states: â€Å"The CAFTA is designed to eliminate tariffs and trade barriers and expand regional opportunities for the workers, manufacturers, consumers, farmers, ranchers and service providers of all the countries.† The CAFTA, however, interferes with the local market thus damaging the economy anyway, as the bankrupted domestic companies are fully taxed and pay proper salaries to their employees, when I the other hand the foreign corporations pay miserable fees and when in regard to domestic re-investment, the it is unclear of how much of the companys profits are to be invested. Nicaragua has approved the CAFTA; however it has not been publicly accepted, as in Nicaragua, the CAFTA can be understood in the context of a US strategy to divide opposition in negotiations for other larger trade agreements. Instead of aiding US companies, the objective of the ALBA agreement is to promote cooperation and collective development of the region with an emphasis on fighting poverty and social exclusion. The general feel of the can be appreciated in Venezuelan president Hugo Chavezs opening remark at the United Nations: ALBA is not an agreement of the elite. ALBA is born from down below, from the grassroots of the population, without the people no union would be possible and that is one of the criticisms that we have always made of other integration efforts. The objective is not necessarily to maintain high economic statistics or attract investment, but rather to benefit our populations, so that they have health care, education, jobs, and so they can get out of poverty. Another factor about the ALBA and the CAFTA that must be kept in mind is the alignment is the political alignment that Nicaragua maintains of a socio-democratic regime that owes alliances to Venezuela and Cuba, as the Sandinista party owed much of their existence to Cuba during the Cold War. Due to these populist tendencies, it could be said that, the ALBA is the more appropriate treaty to sign. Socio-Economic Perspective of Globalization It is of public knowledge in Nicaragua that most of the populations regard Globalization as â€Å"not welcome†. The socio-economic perspective of Globalization can be seen from two lights the rural and the industrial perspectives. The rural perspective of globalization can be expressed as the lower classs point of view, while the industrial would affect the middle and upper classes. In short, both of these perspectives contain the entire range of the Nicaraguan society. The people that constitute the rural perspective, also known as the Nicaraguan Farmers, do not welcome globalization because of the economic impact that it will cause society. For most farmers in the outskirts of Managua and on the borders of the country, the prices set by the CAFTA are below the prices they have been used to deal with, meaning that there will be an economic impact for that sector of society. The rural branch of society represents about 70% of the Nicaraguan population, meaning that to off-set an economic pendulum from this side will affect the countrys economy greatly. The industrial perspective of the socio-economic side to globalism might actually benefit from the â€Å"no tariff† agreements as machinery and foreign goods might be less expensive to ship in, and national products will be easier to export. The industrial sector of Nicaragua can be said to constitute by 30% of the population, however, even though it is a minority in regards to the rural sector, the industrial sector represents about 50% of the Gross domestic Product in Nicaragua. The choice between which treaty to chose seems to be the more difficult question as the ALBA benefits the rural sector with its standard wages, while the CAFTA would cause a significant impact in the economy. The industrial sector on the other hand would benefit from both the CAFTA and the ALBA, as the free commerce agreement of â€Å"no tariffs† would mean that the import export of Nicaragua will of a wider range. The issue in mind however, remains on the ideological alignment concern. The rural sector of the Nicaraguan population belongs to a new mix of ideologies, a mix of neo-socialistic liberalism, where a sense of national pride and populism makes the number one goal to push on the Nicaraguan economy. The CAFTA is not appreciated in this perspective as it is seen as an agreement that binds Nicaragua to the will of the United States prices and tariffs, therefore permitting the Unites States to have a sort of control over the Nicaraguan Economy. Nicaragua has already felt the United States economical grasp in the 1970s during the Sandinista government, where the United States employed a boycott on Nicaragua. The sense of resentment has not left the Nicaraguan panorama yet, which means it might take a long time for the CAFTA to be approved by the population. The ALBA in the other hand, is more widely accepted as it involves direct proposals by Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez. In current times, Nicaragua has approved both the CAFTA and the ALBA, the differences, however, are only visible in regards to the material â€Å"gifts† provided by Hugo Chavez. On the Economical perspective, both the ALBA and the CAFTA have not made and impact. Both treaties have rendered the Nicaraguan economy with the same Gros Domestic Product than the year before their signing. Conclusion Nicaragua has been a signatory of the CAFTA for over 3 years now and has also been a signatory of the ALBA treaty for over 1 year now; however both these treaties have not saved Nicaragua from the enormous deficit that it faces. In conclusion, it can be said that Globalization will have an impact in the Nicaraguan Economy in the long-run; however, in regards to Globalism of the Socio-democratic sphere, the Latin American countries should remain united and try to roll back influences from the United States in order to be financially dependent on its own. Nicaragua needs to be financially independent, however, in its current economical state; it cannot stand on its own two feet, which means it should have the temporary support of a greater power. The choices are obviously dived between the CAFTA and the ALBA, which are obviously a reflection of the United States and Venezuela. In the wider-picture, the choice between the ALBA and the CAFTA is the choice between Capitalist democracy and a socio-Populist democracy. The relationship between Nicaragua and the United States has not been as strong as the 1930s in the time of Anastasio Somoza Garcia. The constant intervention from the United States in Nicaragua has rendered a sense of mistrust. In actuality, the CAFTA seems like another brick to the wide and high wall that the United States has been building over Latin America, the first brick being the Monroe Doctrine, which guaranteed the United States right to intervene in any Central American nation if its freedom was being threatened. Even though Nicaragua is a signatory of both the ALBA and CAFTA treaties, so far the ALBA has aided the Nicaraguan economy more than the CAFTA, due to the multiple â€Å"gifts† given by Hugo Chavez to the Republic of Nicaragua, gifts such as Oil Plants. The bottom line, nevertheless, stays the same; Globalization will have an increasing effect on the Nicaraguan economy. Bibliography http://www.ustr.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral/CAFTA/CAFTADR_Final_Texts/Section_Index.html http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/2360 Ministro de Estado de Venezuela para la Bancoex, Integracià ³n y Comercio Exterior http://www.globalization101.org/What_is_Globalization.html http://www.newdream.org/consumer/globalization.php http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-9212.html

Abolishing the Death Penalty Essay -- Capital Punishment Justice Essay

Abolishing the Death Penalty When taking a human life in response to a crime, a state is acting on behalf of all of its citizens. Capital punishment is an expensive procedure with permanent ramifications. It is therefore very important that the matter of capital punishment be seriously reconsidered. In order to protect all of America's citizens, I recommend that congress approve a constitutional amendment that reads: The states and the federal government shall not under any circumstances execute anyone. All prisoners currently under sentence of death shall have the right to a new trial. The reasons for such an amendment include the inherent immorality of capital punishment, its inconsistent application and its unjustified costs. The moral foundations followed today by nearly every nation were laid in 1949. With the horrors of World War II fresh in the minds of every government, nearly all of the world's nations sent delegates to San Francisco and formed the United Nations General Assembly to draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These rights, it was reasoned, "are inherent in every human being. They are not privileges that may be granted by governments for good behavior and they may not be withdrawn for bad behavior" (Amnesty International 1). Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reads, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person." This right to life cannot be abridged by any government because the treaty states it is one of the "inalienable rights of all members of the human family." Furthermore, Article 5 declares that no person shall be subjected to "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." It is not difficult to assume that killing someone is regarde d as degrading... ...Evolving Context of the Post-Furman Era." 1988. Social Forces: vol. 66. Porter, Phil. The Economics of Capital Punishment. 1998. <http://www.mindspring.com/~philporter/econ.html> Scalia, Antonin. A Call for reckoning: Religion and the death Penalty. Speech delivered 25 Jan. 2002. Sherrill, Robert. "Death Trip: The American Way of Execution." The Nation. 8 Jan. 2001. Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815. 1988. Trombley, S. The Execution Protocol: Inside America's Capital Punishment Industry. New York: Crown Publishers, 1992. U.S. Bishops. "Statement on Capital Punishment." Nov. 1980. <http://www.osjspm.org/cst/cappun.htm> 21 Feb. 2003. U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics. Capital Punishment 2001. 2001. <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/cp01.txt> Weisberg, J. "This is Your Death," The New Republic, July 1, 1991.

Role Playing and Control in A Doll’s House Essay -- Dolls House essays

This essay will explore the issue of roles, or game playing, in A Doll’s House. This concept is one key to approaching the play, and particularly Nora's role. Let me further make the observation that one crucial factor in the roles Nora plays is that she needs to be in control, to take the lead role, as it were, using other people either as supporting actors or audience and that she writes her own script. This notion helps me to deal with a question which frequently arises here: How can one woman make so many unexpected transitions? How is it possible for the child-wife to play the adult female tease (with Dr. Rank), the capable determined businesswoman (in her secret dealings with the debt), the frantically desperate woman thinking of suicide, and, above all, the coldly independent mature woman at the conclusion of the play? Well, one common feature these manifestations of Nora's character all have is that they enable her to control others, to assert herself without really attending to, listening carefully to, learning from, or acting on what other people say. Consider for a moment why Nora would not have told Torvald long ago about the debt. The reason she gives is interesting: she doesn't need to at this point in her life--she's young enough and pretty enough to exert her control over him in other ways (and telling about the debt would shatter her image as the clueless but sexy child-wife). However, she is looking forward to using that event in the future, when she can no longer rely upon her looks. How exactly this would help restore his affections may not be clear, but there is certainly a sense that Nora hopes it will make her more important to him. The fact that Nora thinks of her relationship with Torvald in ... ...d she did it (society be damned). Moreover, the hard disciplined work over many years necessary to repay the loan is a tribute to Nora's determination and skill in carrying out her own project, all the while sustaining her own marriage in quite another role. This quality lies at the heart of Nora's heroic character. Her confidence in herself, in her abilities to control the situation, to solve the problem, has led to her success and has confirmed, in her eyes, that she is right. She flouted society's laws, worked hard, and is now about to reap the success of that action by handing over the final payment. It has not been easy, and there are times when a certain strain shows through (as in that mention of the word "Damn"), but there's no sense that Nora feels that she has been compelled to act in this way, that she has not freely chosen to be the person she is.

Death of a Salesman - Linda Loman Essay -- American Literature

Death of a Salesman - Linda Loman In the play Death of a Salesman, Linda Loman serves as the family's destroyer. Linda realizes, throughout the play, that her family is caught up in a bunch of lies. Linda is the only person that can fix the problem and she doesn't. The first instance where Linda Loman serves as the family destroyer is in Act when Willy Loman comes home and tells her, "I suddenly couldn't drive any more. The car kept going off onto the shoulder, y'know?" (1402). Linda replies, "Oh. Maybe it was the steering again. I don't think Angelo knows the Studebaker" (1402). Willy says, "No, it's me, it's me. Suddenly I realize I'm going sixty miles an hour and I don't remember the last five minutes. I'm--I can't seem to-- keep my mind to it" (1402). Linda says, "Maybe it's your glasses. You never went for your new glasses" (1402). Linda knows throughout this conversation that her husband, Willy, is trying to kill himself in a car accident. Yet she continues to listen to the excuses Willy makes up for the car accident. To make matters even worse, Linda even makes up he...

Civil Disobedience: Henry David Thoreau and Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

â€Å"Disobedience to be civil has to be open and nonviolent. † – Mahatma Gandhi Throughout history philosophers have played a key role in our society. Both Henry David Thoreau and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. brought forth their own ways of civil disobedience, in their belief that it was imperative to disobey unjust laws. Their thoughts manifested from ideas, to theories, and eventually lead to our society today. Civil disobedience in a pragmatic way is the act of a non-violent movement in order to enforce the change of certain laws to ensure equality for all. Dr. King explained in his quote â€Å"One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, willingly to accept the punishment† (220). Nevertheless, on opposite ends of the spectrum, Thoreau implied an aggressive stance motivated by his own personal hate for the government but yet King used religion, supported by his charismatic ways of being gentle and apologetic. While King and Thoreau both believed in the use of civil disobedience to create change, they went about using civil disobedience in staggeringly different fashion. As stated by Dr. King in his letter from Birmingham Jail, â€Å"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere† (214). Regarding this issue, King believed that all American communities are connected and that injustice in one community will affect other communities. Perhaps, one could deem injustice as a disease such as cancer that forms in one area then quickly spreading and eventually discombobulating the entire social infrastructure. Dr . King reshaped America’s social issues through a non-violent approach in distinction to boycotting buses in Montgomery to marching through Selma, King responded to unjust laws with civil disobedience and direct action. Dr. King’s stance on prejudice laws came from morality. Primarily using morality as a backbone in his argument, we would agree that it is wrong to foster laws that affect a certain race or group of people. Moreover, our laws are a reflection of our morals and it sets forth what we know is right and what we know is wrong. Early philosophers often struggled and faced opposition with either the government or social groups. Opposition faced consequences such as confinement, torture, or worse, death, whereas the idea of brutal punishment inflicted fear on the next individual. In his â€Å"Letter from Birmingham†, King compared his calling to Birmingham to the Apostle Paul in the Bible, â€Å"[and how he] carried the gospel of the lord to the far corners of the Greco-Roman world† (214). King expressed a legitimate concern over the anxiety to break laws; elaborating the fact that there are two laws; just laws and unjust laws. King stated, â€Å"In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law† (220). Rather more, King agreed that just laws should be followed; however unjust laws are to be met with civil disobedience. What makes a law unjust one might ask? From the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas, King explained that â€Å"any law that degrades human personality is unjust†. (219) Segregation gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and distorts the soul and damages the personality. Back in Dr. King’s time, a series of laws were passed that were the ethos of â€Å"separate but equal†. King rallied in oppositi on of these laws as still prejudice and unjust, in fact these laws were against morals. Under this doctrine, services, facilities and public accommodations were allowed to be separated by race, on the condition that the quality of each group's public facilities was to remain equal. Signage using the phrases â€Å"No Negros allowed† and â€Å"whites only† distorted our views on race relations. However, King believed this in fact is not equality and it is against our morals. As a result of Henry David Thoreau using civil disobedience and direct action, Dr. King was motivated by his techniques which lead to a series of events that would lead to the Civil Rights Movement. â€Å"All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist the government when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable† (180). As Thoreau explained in his excerpt from â€Å"Civil Disobedience†, Thoreau used the revolution of ’75 as an example of bad government. Thoreau elucidated how the government taxed certain foreign commodities that were brought to its ports. He then began to correlate bad government to a machine and stated how all machines have their friction, however, when friction takes over a machine, â€Å"and oppression and robbery are organized, I say let us not have such a machine any longer† (180). Thoreau elaborated on this idea that the government is a machine and when evil takes over, let us no longer have such a government. He believed not that a government should exist â€Å"but at once a better government† (178), Thoreau argued that power should not be left to the majority, but the â€Å"conscience†, in fact he questioned the reader rhetorically asking â€Å"Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? †(178) Thoreau feels that the â€Å"conscience† plays a personal role. Thoreau questions democracy, and thereupon he advises us to question why we should capitulate to the government if we do not agree with a law? Why would we possess brains and have a conscience of our own if we are not allowed to think for ourselves and do what we want? Thoreau feels we ought to be real for ourselves, not the government. Furthermore, he articulated the idea that should we surrender our thoughts, or conscience to the government, or should we pursue a justifiable explanation of the dilemmas that surround us? What is right as opposed to what is wrong is what leads to civil disobedience. Thoreau believed that the idea of paying taxes to support the Mexican-American was an unjust cause, whereas; King strongly disagreed with laws that were prejudice. In Thoreau’s reading from his article â€Å"Civil Disobedience†, he argues â€Å"that government is best which governs not at all† (177), which ultimately leads the people to discipline themselves. On the other side King explained how â€Å"nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a [community that has refused, is forced] to confront the issue† (216). By cause of King being after Thoreau’s era, King used Thoreau’s â€Å"Civil Disobedience† and direct action to spark a change in society. While both Thoreau and King argued with morality in mind, they both believed injustice exist. Thoreau thinks of injustice as friction or tension that can wear the machine down. King believes that injustice just exists and tension must be created with direct action to negotiate with the machine. I accredit Dr. King in presenting the best argument due to the audience he reached out to which of course was the populace and his motives that captivated his courageous and selfless acts. Furthermore, Dr. King was concerned about injustice towards people based on their race, religion, or sex; whereas Thoreau was motivated by his personal hatred for the government. Regardless of how either King or Thoreau used civil disobedience, their contributions led to an admiration for their works and casted a light on unjust laws.

Comparison of Wuthering Heights & Madame Bovary on the Conventions of Popular Romantic Fiction.

The novels, Charlotte Bronte's Wuthering Heights and Gustave Flaubert's Madame Bovary both vary on the conventions of popular romantic fiction. Wuthering Heights does this in several ways. For example, in the ever standing issue of social standing in novels of Bronte's era. Catherine is of a much higher social standing than Heathcliff, whose social standing was first elevated by his adoption by Catherine father, Mr Earnshaw, and then degraded after the death of Mr Earnshaw by Hindley. This aspect of the novel is relatively conventional.Social standing has always been a big issue for the couples of the fiction of that era. What made the situation between Catherine and Heathcliff different, however, is that they didn't triumph over it as is the convention of other romantic novels, like Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. Instead, Catherine married the man who was of better social standing, and who would elevate hers as well, Edgar Linton, instead of Heathcliff, whom she is quoted to say ing that it would â€Å"degrade [her] to marry Heathcliff now. â€Å"Another way, a more significant way, that Wuthering Heights varies on convention is the characters. The characters of Wuthering Heights are far from the conventional characters in romantic fiction. Catherine, as the novel's lead female character, is conventionally beautiful and strong willed, is also conflicted, violent and temperamental, much unlike the conventional heroine, who is usually more moral. Edgar, who is the ‘rival' of the story, is a far cry from the conventional rival, who is usually so obviously wrong for the heroine.Edgar Linton, instead, is a well-mannered and virtuous gentleman, who truly loves and cares about Catherine. After her death, he buries her in a spot overlooking the moors, a place he knew Catherine loved, and was even buried beside her after his death. Heathcliff is probably the best example of this point. He is possibly the most unconventional male lead in fiction history. The conventional character being a man of virtue and grace, a person more like Edgar Linton. Heathcliff, on the other hand is a hard man, cruel and vengeful. He vows and exacts revenge on many occasions in the novel.He punishes Hindley for his own cruelty towards him over the years when he returns successful and wealthy. He punishes innocent Isabella, in place of Edgar, who he blames for Catherine's illness. He even punishes Catherine by eloping with Isabella, for her betraying him by marrying Edgar. He holds on to his hatred, and his plan for revenge extended to next generation. He is cruel and threatening, even threatening to hold Nelly prisoner when she stopped him from seeing Catherine, scaring her into agreeing to bring her a letter from him.Of course, the most significant way that this novel varies on convention is the extent of Catherine and Heathcliff's love for each other. It is, after all, their love that has made Wuthering Heights one of the greatest love stories in history. They loved each other their entire lives, loved to a point where they felt like they were the same person. A feeling Catherine expressed more than once in the novels, â€Å"It would degrade me to marry Heathcliff now; so he shall never know how I love him: and that, not because he's handsome, Nelly, but because he's more myself than I am.Whatever our souls are made of, his and mine are the same; and Linton's is as different as a moonbeam from lightning, or frost from fire. † when speaking about her decision to marry Edgar Linton instead of Heathcliff, and again, â€Å"My love for Heathcliff resembles the eternal rocks beneath: a source of little visible delight, but necessary. Nelly, I am Heathcliff! He's always, always in my mind: not as a pleasure, any more than I am always a pleasure to myself, but as my own being† when speaking to Nelly about being separated from Heathcliff.Their love for each other that went to such an extent is unconventional by all means. Heathc liff on the other hand, showed the extent of his love for Catherine numerous times in the novel, for example, when she lay sick before him, and he told her that while he could forgive her for causing him pain, he could never forgive her for the pain she had caused herself. Even in this way, their love is shown to be unconventional from the love between other couples in popular fiction. Heathcliff's love for her is not the conventional fluff, and instead is something that ran much deeper.He could forgive her for the years of torment he had endured, but could not come to forgive her for being the cause of her own pain. This brings us to the second novel at hand, Flaubert's Madame Bovary. In contrast to Heathcliff and Catherine's deep love for each other, the situation in Madame Bovary is quite different. Emma's feelings for Charles Bovary is hardly passionate, first based on her own fantasies about marriage and then practically non-existent. Instead, she is disgusted by him, seeing hi m as inferior, unattractive and less than she deserves.A feeling made clear by Flaubert's description of a mealtime in the Bovary household from Emma's point of view early in the story, â€Å"But it was above all at mealtimes that she could bear it no longer, in that little room on the ground floor, with the smoking stove, the creaking door, the oozing walls, the damp floor-tiles; all the bitterness of life seemed to be served to her on her plate, and, with the steam from the boiled beef, there rose from the depths of her soul other exhalations as it were of disgust.Charles was a slow eater; she would nibble a few hazel-nuts, or else, leaning on her elbow, would amuse herself making marks on the oilcloth with the point of her table-knife. † Charles' adoration of her, on the other hand, is overwhelming and blind. He adores her to a point where he doesn't see the obvious signs of her infidelity. The man Emma really adored, Rodolphe, is enraptured only by her beauty, and he grew tired of her.A polar opposite to Heathcliff and Catherine's love, the relationships between Emma and her lovers are lustful, selfish, and lacks any regard for the other person. This lack of real love or passion, and Emma's infidelity is what makes Madame Bovary a unique read in terms of romantic fiction. Romantic fiction is conventionally a love story between two people. Madame Bovary, instead, in the story of a young woman who is desperate to fulfil her impossible fantasy of love, and the men who becomes involved in her search in making that fantasy real.Flaubert explains her misconception of love and expectation with â€Å"Love, [Emma] felt, ought to come at once, with great thunderclaps and flashes of lightning; it was like a storm bursting upon life from the sky, uprooting it, overwhelming the will and sweeping the heart into the abyss. It did not occur to her that the rain forms puddles on a flat roof when drainpipes are clogged, and she would have continued to feel secure if she had not suddenly discovered a crack in the wall. The presence of Heathcliff and Catherine's unending and unconditional love for each other, or Emma's utter lack of real love in her relationship with her husband, or Rodolphe's towards her, makes Wuthering Heights a more conventional love story in comparison. Madame Bovary sets itself apart even more with the constant presence of Emma's infidelity and the lust that surrounds her. Similarly to Wuthering Heights, the characters of Madame Bovary are also very unconventional compared to the characters of popular romantic fiction.Emma, the story's heroine, much like Catherine, made the choices in her life that would be the cause of her own pain. Emma, although like Catherine, is beautiful as is the convention, unlike the conventional image of a female lead in a romantic fiction novel, is instead, selfish, morally corrupt and unappreciative of her life's blessings. Charles is also a character that is very unconventional.He is portrayed to be a weak and pathetic man, madly in lot with a woman who is disgusted by him, and yet so blinding is his adoration of her that he cannot see it. He is incompetent, stupid and unimaginative. The first time he says something meaningful in the novel, is toward the end, when he is speaking to Rodolphe, he blames fate for the sad life he has, earning him only Rodolphe's disdain, certainly a far cry from the conventional male lead, masculine, strong and charming.A far cry also from the Heathcliff's character, who although was cruel, was also intelligent, competent and strong willed. Rodolphe, himself, is world's away from the rival of Wuthering Heights, Edgar Linton. Rodolphe is shrewd and manipulative, seducing Emma with an almost strategic precision, only to abandon her when she falls into debt. These two books are obviously, far from the conventional love story, and it is the fact that they are so far from conventional that makes them the classics they are today.