Monday, May 17, 2010
Sunday, May 9, 2010
IMHO #2
"DA seeks hate crime charges in NM swastika case" which I found on MSNBC.com discusses a recent case concerning the assault of a 22-year old Native American. On April 29 Jesse Sanford, 24, William Hatch, 28, and Paul Beebe, 26 kidnapped the mentally challenged man branded a swastika on his arm with heated clothes hangers, shaved a swastika into his head and then wrote derogatory phrases on his body with permanent marker. After obtaining a search warrant and looking through the suspect’s vehicle police discovered insignia which indicated they might be affiliated with the white supremacist movement.
Sanford then told police upon being investigated that the victim had in fact requested a haircut and tattoo and this was not an act of violence. While the situation is being handled it doesn’t stop me from being disgusted by the entire situation. While every group has their right to state their opinions there is no excuse to act in violence on another person. The reason the article jumped out at me in the first place was that it really call into question whether giving groups a right to organize can cause real harm to others when the group’s philosophy is focused around that goal.
For example NAMBLA a controversial organization is centered around the idea of child adult relationships. Allowing a group to push for rights that could put children in danger to most people would seem entirely unacceptable. Is it really okay for any group to push for their goals when the result of their organization could harm others? It is easy enough for white supremacists to say they are just striving to keep the white race alive but when their ultimate goal is to eliminate all other races it cannot be ignored that their right to free speech is focused around the harm of others. Is it really possible for the government to regulate these organizations and allow them their right to free speech without leading to unfortunate consequences? in the end it’s the job of the government to protect the people and it’s a delicate balance between freedom and the abuse of free speech.
Sanford then told police upon being investigated that the victim had in fact requested a haircut and tattoo and this was not an act of violence. While the situation is being handled it doesn’t stop me from being disgusted by the entire situation. While every group has their right to state their opinions there is no excuse to act in violence on another person. The reason the article jumped out at me in the first place was that it really call into question whether giving groups a right to organize can cause real harm to others when the group’s philosophy is focused around that goal.
For example NAMBLA a controversial organization is centered around the idea of child adult relationships. Allowing a group to push for rights that could put children in danger to most people would seem entirely unacceptable. Is it really okay for any group to push for their goals when the result of their organization could harm others? It is easy enough for white supremacists to say they are just striving to keep the white race alive but when their ultimate goal is to eliminate all other races it cannot be ignored that their right to free speech is focused around the harm of others. Is it really possible for the government to regulate these organizations and allow them their right to free speech without leading to unfortunate consequences? in the end it’s the job of the government to protect the people and it’s a delicate balance between freedom and the abuse of free speech.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Blog #10 - Fish Out of Water
This past weekend my roommate who happens to be part of the dance department at San Jose State invited me to a musical theater production she was working that night. Almost everyone who attended was part of the dance department and it was one of the first experiences I have had attending that type of production. I didn’t know anyone and was a little nervous about not being able to enjoy the production because I am not very familiar with musical theater
The production was titled "Of Corpse", which I found amusing considering it was about zombies. I went into the show not knowing much about what was going to happen and quickly realized after I took my seat that a lot of these people were familiar with one another. The audience was packed into the small upstairs theater of the Spartan complex and consisted of dance students, family and friends of cast members and professors. When the production began I became all the more aware of what a tight knit family this was. The director of the department and show came up to speak before the show began and it was clear to me that every member of the audience knew who she was. Most of her speech was filled with a lot of inside jokes that a lot of the audience responded to but went right over my head.
When the show began I was extremely impressed. Because the theater is so small the stage is at the same level as the rest of the room and because I was sitting in the first row, I was literally on the floor sitting in a fold out beach chair with people performing within a foot of me. It was amazing to me that they were able to keep concentration at such a close proximity of the audience.
The show was extremely comical and it was fun to be in a room full of people all in on the same joke. The cast members were all really enthusiastic and I was impressed by the quality of the performance. Because I have no experience in any kind of performance I felt like I was seeing it through fresh eyes where as others have past references to critique through.
After the show all formalities went right out the window and people from the audience rushed the stage to congratulate cast members which I have never witnessed before. I felt a little bit awkward because everyone knew everybody and I wasn’t familiar with any of them. It was bit uncomfortable mostly because they were able to critique the performance in a way I couldn’t. However at the end of the day I had a great time and putting myself a bit out of my comfort zone only introduced me to new experiences that I had learned I really liked.
The production was titled "Of Corpse", which I found amusing considering it was about zombies. I went into the show not knowing much about what was going to happen and quickly realized after I took my seat that a lot of these people were familiar with one another. The audience was packed into the small upstairs theater of the Spartan complex and consisted of dance students, family and friends of cast members and professors. When the production began I became all the more aware of what a tight knit family this was. The director of the department and show came up to speak before the show began and it was clear to me that every member of the audience knew who she was. Most of her speech was filled with a lot of inside jokes that a lot of the audience responded to but went right over my head.
When the show began I was extremely impressed. Because the theater is so small the stage is at the same level as the rest of the room and because I was sitting in the first row, I was literally on the floor sitting in a fold out beach chair with people performing within a foot of me. It was amazing to me that they were able to keep concentration at such a close proximity of the audience.
The show was extremely comical and it was fun to be in a room full of people all in on the same joke. The cast members were all really enthusiastic and I was impressed by the quality of the performance. Because I have no experience in any kind of performance I felt like I was seeing it through fresh eyes where as others have past references to critique through.
After the show all formalities went right out the window and people from the audience rushed the stage to congratulate cast members which I have never witnessed before. I felt a little bit awkward because everyone knew everybody and I wasn’t familiar with any of them. It was bit uncomfortable mostly because they were able to critique the performance in a way I couldn’t. However at the end of the day I had a great time and putting myself a bit out of my comfort zone only introduced me to new experiences that I had learned I really liked.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Japanese Internment Memorial
Following the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1942 the United States government implemented a forced relocation of nearly 110,000 Japanese Americans to internment camps located along the west coast. It was president Roosevelt who authorized these relocation camps through Executive Order 9066 which allowed local military commanders to designate "military areas" as "exclusion zones," from which "any or all persons may be excluded." It was not until 1988 that President Ronald Regan apologized for the exclusion of Japanese Americans.
One of the hundreds of thousands Japanese Americans who was forced from their home was Ruth Asawa. At the age of 16 Ruth found herself under the control of executive order 9066 but through the experience found inspiration within herself to create inspirational art pieces. The experience of internment lead Ruth to create the Japanese American Interment Memorial located in downtown san Jose.
While I was familiar with Japanese interment I was not aware of the memorial in San Jose. I did not have any idea what to expect of the memorial and was surprised hen it happened to be a piece I pass almost every day. The 5 foot high bronze sculpture sits out on south 2nd and San Carlos Street and while it is something I have never really taken notice of before when you get close and actually look it has an assuming presence.
At first glance it is a scene of chaos. Mother, fathers and children scatter the landscape and there is a wide variety of action taking place throughout the piece.
One of the first elements that stood out to me was a paper plane flying high above the crowd along the top of the piece. To me it exaggerated the significance of the chaos going on below. As it appeared to float gracefully, along the bottom trains pulled out of stations separating families, fires burned and people sat in masses looking lost and devastated.
Another element of the piece that struck a chord with me was how incredibly crowded the camps were. Crowds of children were frolicking amongst their parents who at the same time were having their belonging burned. The amount of different things going on outlined every aspect of the camps. It highlighted the sheer lack of privacy, but I can only imagine what it must feel like to be around so many people yet still feeling a deep sense of loss and how lonely that must make someone feel.
I would like to think that nothing like this could ever happen again, that today the majority of Americans are enlightened enough to realize that everyone deserves the right to live their life and no one should be stuck in a box. Only time will tell if this mistake could be made again and the while some people’s feelings of fear and ignorance may never go away hopefully laws today will help protect citizens from the mistakes of the past.
One of the hundreds of thousands Japanese Americans who was forced from their home was Ruth Asawa. At the age of 16 Ruth found herself under the control of executive order 9066 but through the experience found inspiration within herself to create inspirational art pieces. The experience of internment lead Ruth to create the Japanese American Interment Memorial located in downtown san Jose.
While I was familiar with Japanese interment I was not aware of the memorial in San Jose. I did not have any idea what to expect of the memorial and was surprised hen it happened to be a piece I pass almost every day. The 5 foot high bronze sculpture sits out on south 2nd and San Carlos Street and while it is something I have never really taken notice of before when you get close and actually look it has an assuming presence.
At first glance it is a scene of chaos. Mother, fathers and children scatter the landscape and there is a wide variety of action taking place throughout the piece.
One of the first elements that stood out to me was a paper plane flying high above the crowd along the top of the piece. To me it exaggerated the significance of the chaos going on below. As it appeared to float gracefully, along the bottom trains pulled out of stations separating families, fires burned and people sat in masses looking lost and devastated.
Another element of the piece that struck a chord with me was how incredibly crowded the camps were. Crowds of children were frolicking amongst their parents who at the same time were having their belonging burned. The amount of different things going on outlined every aspect of the camps. It highlighted the sheer lack of privacy, but I can only imagine what it must feel like to be around so many people yet still feeling a deep sense of loss and how lonely that must make someone feel.
I would like to think that nothing like this could ever happen again, that today the majority of Americans are enlightened enough to realize that everyone deserves the right to live their life and no one should be stuck in a box. Only time will tell if this mistake could be made again and the while some people’s feelings of fear and ignorance may never go away hopefully laws today will help protect citizens from the mistakes of the past.
Word of the Week #10
- ad nauseum
- "My father explained to Sloane and me ad nauseum why video games polluted the mind, and if we really wanted to retain some knowledge, we should watch the stock-market channel and try to figure out what all the Dow Jones abbreviation on the ticker stood for"
- -Chelsea Chelsea Bang Bang (Handler 20)
- ad nau-se-um
adv.
1. To a disgusting or ridiculous degree - My advertising professor insisted on repeating the instructions for the assignment ad nauseum, causing the class to become restless.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Word of the Week #9
- Inept
- I was texting my sister and she referred to herself as inept.
- in-ept
adj.
lacking in fitness or aptitude - I tried to make sense of the poem I had just read but it went over my head and I felt completely inept.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
IMHO #1
The article I discovered on MSNBC brought an issue to my attention that I found extremely disturbing. "Dad sues ‘Thank God for Dead Soldiers’ church" discusses the free speech case of the Westboro Baptist church, a congregation “which believes military deaths are the work of a wrathful God who punishes the United States for tolerating homosexuality". In protest of this tolerance the Westboro congregation gathers at dead military members funerals picketing, holding signs saying "Thank god for dead soldiers"
This article called my opinion of free speech into question. Where exactly does one draw the line when unpopular and hateful opinions such as these are being expressed? I have always regarded myself to be an advocate of free speech, even when the opinions being expressed differ from my own. While I may believe all people deserve respect and a right to a free life others may not feel that way and expressing this opinion should not be discouraged. This stimulates discussion and propels our society forward.
However intruding on a gathering that is meant to honor the memory of a loved one I feel crosses the line. Everyone has the right to think whatever they like but disturbing the peace of those who are hurting seems inexcusable. As much as I do not like it intrusion into ones privacy is often a part of our society. Public figures and celebrities are criticized constantly on matters of their private life and in the same way sometimes people (like the families of those who are now dead) cannot be legally protected from the hateful actions of others.
I hope this article draws attention to the hateful attitudes expressed by some of these church groups and encourages others to lend support to our troops and country as a whole. In my personal opinion I feel these philosophies expressed by these groups are disgusting and entirely irrational and while they have every right to think what they like, those who disagree cannot to forget to make their voices heard as well so that courts feel the push to keep churches like Westboro from shoving their hate on others.
This article called my opinion of free speech into question. Where exactly does one draw the line when unpopular and hateful opinions such as these are being expressed? I have always regarded myself to be an advocate of free speech, even when the opinions being expressed differ from my own. While I may believe all people deserve respect and a right to a free life others may not feel that way and expressing this opinion should not be discouraged. This stimulates discussion and propels our society forward.
However intruding on a gathering that is meant to honor the memory of a loved one I feel crosses the line. Everyone has the right to think whatever they like but disturbing the peace of those who are hurting seems inexcusable. As much as I do not like it intrusion into ones privacy is often a part of our society. Public figures and celebrities are criticized constantly on matters of their private life and in the same way sometimes people (like the families of those who are now dead) cannot be legally protected from the hateful actions of others.
I hope this article draws attention to the hateful attitudes expressed by some of these church groups and encourages others to lend support to our troops and country as a whole. In my personal opinion I feel these philosophies expressed by these groups are disgusting and entirely irrational and while they have every right to think what they like, those who disagree cannot to forget to make their voices heard as well so that courts feel the push to keep churches like Westboro from shoving their hate on others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)