Comment on College's Post - White Supremacy

I agree! I believe that maintaining equality is very important in developing and maintaining a civil society. And not just that, seeing oppression, inequality, and, in a way, implicit segregation, is difficult to watch and personally deal with.

I am interested to know what you see to be the root of this problem. I would agree that there are many instances, similar to your examples given, where judges have poorly placed harsh punishments upon individuals who are a part of the minority, while white men of power (or no power) tend to slide through the cracks with lack of equal punishment and judgment. I believe that a big reason of why equality is declining is because of the many white, male leaders that this country holds. An example would be our president and his vice president: Donald Trump and Mike Pence. I believe them to be ideally the perfect examples of white, male dominance in the United States (and not strictly because they hold extremely powerful positions). Although their positions paired with their race and connections do indeed bring them power and authority, they have repeatedly demonstrated lack of empathy for the minority and have continued to manifest this over time. Through Trump’s campaign, it was clear that his mission statements were geared towards building a wall (and making Mexico pay for it), temporarily banning Muslims from entering the U.S., going after the Affordable Care Act, and many others which include ISIS and other foreign affairs. Through his mission statements, and past behaviors, it has continuously been shown that there is a lack of empathy for the minority. Although this is, obviously, not ideal, I believe there to be a lack of change (quickly) unless there is a change within Congress in the upcoming election.

Thanks for showing your point of view and letting me add to it! I am glad many are standing to keep equality in America and that many are standing up to the inequality, regardless if it affects them directly.

The link to her blog post can be found here. 

Editorial on the Progression of Marijuana in the U.S.

The legalization of recreational use of marijuana was opened up to the public in 2012 with the victory in Washington and Colorado. Since then, has the U.S. made much of a change in the advancement of the legalization of marijuana on a federal level?

Recreational marijuana is legal in nine states as of 2018: Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington – plus the District of Columbia.

An additional 21 states only allow medical use.

Although many states have recognized the popular demand for recreational use of marijuana, many states are still seeing marijuana to be a Schedule I drug, as it is classified by the federal government.

Marijuana, according to the federal government, is classified as a Schedule I drug through the structure of the Controlled Substance Act (1970). According to the Drug Enforcement Administration, drug schedules are “drugs [that] are classified into five distinct categories or schedules depending on the drug’s acceptable medical use and the drug’s abuse of dependency potential.” Schedule I having “no current accepted medical use” and a “high potential for abuse” - manufacturing or possession of a Schedule I substance is a federal offense. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are: heroin, LSD, ecstasy, methaqualone, peyote, and marijuana. Cocaine, methamphetamine, xanax, and oxycodone are, by the Drug Enforcement Administration, seen as having a lower level of abuse and lower danger levels than marijuana. Marijuana continues to be in the most restrictive category.  

The Obama administration continued to classify marijuana as a Schedule 1 drug and intended on making little progression to re-classify. Obama stated that it’s “a job for Congress”. (Congress could amend the law to reschedule marijuana or exempt the substance altogether, as it did for alcohol and tobacco products.)

However, there is little hope in the hands of our new president and his attorney general, Jeff Session. Jeff recently introduced a “new guidance to marijuana” in January of this year. This guidance would reverse the Obama-era policy and open up the doorway to enforce more federal laws against states that have already legalized the recreational use of marijuana. Jeff also has stated in the past that “good people don’t smoke marijuana.”

Now, you all must be wondering, why the hell is marijuana seen so poorly in the eyes of certain individuals? Well, In January of 2017, the editorial board of The New York Times wrote an opinion piece titled, “Scientists to Government: Make It Easier to Study Marijuana”. There was a report published by the National Academics of Sciences that explained the difficulty of studying the effects marijuana has on the body. The institute, or scientists or researchers generally, have to seek approvals from federal, state, and local agencies to gain approval to study cannabis. And not only that, they are limited to only one lab, the University of Mississippi, to provide samples.

It is ridiculous that the federal government will not even allow researchers the materials to prove them wrong. There are many forms of informal research that proves the safety and benefits of cannabis – that would completely clear marijuana from any substance schedule system.

There is an enormous benefit that the U.S. could gain from legalizing marijuana on a federal level – and this type of progression is not to be expected anytime soon (sadly). 

Sources:

Scientists to Government: Make It Easier to Study Marijuana - The New York Times

Jeff Sessions's Endless War on Marijuana - The New York Times 

Drug Enforcement Administration on Drug Scheduling 

comment on a college's work - A Liberal's Gratitude for Trump

This is an interesting perspective, Krista.

I, too, am more liberal than conservative. I have been struggling with Trump's presidency since the beginning. I had never really thought about the positive effects that have resulted from our president's negative actions. Many articles that overflow the current media are negative views towards Trump, or, a defense of Trump's inappropriate choices. This view opened me up to a different perspective than before.

I enjoyed that you included examples of ways this is shown through LBGTQ, immigration, race relations, and sexual harassment within females. Coming from a past filled with a mother who is gay, a sister who is gay, and sexual harassment, I had lost all hope for the progression of freedom within these realms of just being a woman and also being apart of an LBGTQ family. I had not come across articles that talked about the progression of women through Trump's current downfalls - and - does the media at this point REALLY want us to see them? (who knows)

However, I appreciate your different perspective through the eyes of a fellow liberal and your openness and desire for the progression of women. I believe that women should stand up to the current system and stand for the rights that we deserve.
Again, thank you for a great perspective!

(Full editory by Krista is available here!)

The progression of women’s rights has been an uphill battle for centuries. Mr. Trump recently attended the March for Life rally in Washington, showing his stance for pro-life. President Trump has kept a consistent message through the term of his presidency: Women should face “some sort of punishment” when seeking abortions. Roe v. Wade opened the doorway for women’s right to choice, however, the state of Ohio and others apart of the anti-abortion movement are hoping to propose the banning of all abortions with no exception to rape, incest, or saving the mothers life to open new doorways to the diminishing of Roe v. Wade nationwide. Our president would support that notion with the help of the next coming legislative election.

Ohio’s bill would not only eliminate the legality of abortions, it would also create the possibility of criminal charges placed among the women and providers of procedures. Women charged could be sentenced to murder, which, in the state of Ohio, could be punishable by life in prison or the death penalty. Through the unreasonable and insensitive bill, it would be decided that women no longer have the “fundamental right” (that is, by the way, guaranteed to Americans by the U.S. Constitution) to their own bodies as it is declared in Roe v. Wade.  

The diminishing of Roe v. Wade would result in many negative effects towards the entirety of the female gender. Reproductive choice is a right to women and is an important role in mental health and freedom. Abortion restrictions determine the lives for women and their families.  The illegalization of abortion would be detrimental to the progression of women’s rights that are valuable to the progression of time.

Below I have attached a public opinion poll on abortion for additional information. 

http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/