Freshman Year

Well, freshman year is over. I am actually workin' on my last day of classes as I write this blog. I look back at some good memories and some life lessons I will never forget. I learned how to better write a paper (w/ citations and everything), I learned how to "attempt" to manage my money better, I made new friends, I had my mind strenghtened, I had my beliefs tested, I had my eyes open, and so much more. This year, though difficult, has been so great. I'm a college student. I've been tested beyond measure. I really saw how this is not high school. :) There have been some great lectures and then those that completely sucked. There's obviously been procrastination, but I've seen how hard that is to do in college. It's kind of funny. It's hard to not do your work til the last minute. More understandable- it's hard to do all that work at the last minute. I have had a great time. Many memories have been made- Sara and her Cherry Coke, Elisabeth not understanding a word of spanish (except que now), sneaking pictures, being too scared to go get ice cream alone, playing life before class, playing my power point game, the [], and many more. I have mixed emotions being done with Freshman year, but it doesn't matter how I feel in the end- it's just over! After exams nxt wk, I'll be a SOPHOMORE!

(pictures from Freshman Year)

dude named Cam "playing" the piano before our last class of the day- Foundations of Education.

friend, Leah, waiting for the Caf to open for lunch

me during Survey of Fine Arts...friend took this to get back at me for always sneaking pictures of her.

friend, Sara, actually letting me take a picture of her

gettin' ready for chapel

friend, Elisabeth aka Que, txting HER Matt

Governmental Pet Peeves

I have many pet peeves- incessant clicking of a pen, idiotic drivers, tapping, and allowing me the pleasure to hear you chew your gum. There is one though that annoys me to no end. That is the people who complain about government and our officials and then don't vote. Why in the- How- ugh! I don't get it. If you don't vote, voice your opinion in the given fashion, why then are you voicing your opinion now! If you don't care enough when it matters- when you can make a difference, STOP CARING AT ALL!! In my opinion, if you don't try to make a difference, shut up about the way things are. Yea, I agree- this government is really starting to suck and these officials aren't helping (especially Obama >:-/ ). The only difference between me and you though- I actually vote! Now, I'm 19. I missed the past election because my birthday was the day after election day, so up until recently I hadn't registered to vote. What I did though is our county elections are coming up so I went to early voting so I could do both- register and vote! I got the voting packets after the actual cut off but called to find out if I still could. So, yes, I have only voted once. I'm hoping though that I can continue to do this duty. Yes, it's a duty. It's a privilege. You want to be able to complain with rights- then vote! If you don't vote, don't complain to me. Chances are I'll smack you upside the head! You don't like the way things are- then make your voice known by voting!

finally got to vote!!!!!!!!!

Thomas Jefferson

**Thomas Jefferson Paper I did for US History to 1865. Let me know what you think!**

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Jefferson). These words were penned by a man with intelligence, stubbornness, and skepticism. This man’s name was President Thomas Jefferson. One thing of two things come to mind when this man’s name is mentioned- his controversial relationship with Sally Hemmings or his authorship of the Declaration of Independence. These two things are not the only mentionable things about this man. This paper is designed to describe the person of Thomas Jefferson.
Thomas Jefferson was born on April 13, 1743, to parents Peter Jefferson and Jane Randolph (Garrett 13, 14). His mother, Jane Randolph, gave birth to him at Shadwell- a frame house in Albemarle County, Virginia (Garret 13, 14). She was twenty-three years old when Jefferson was born (14). Wendell D. Garrett, Vice President and Secretary of The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation, points out that Jefferson was the third of ten children (14).
Knowing that Jefferson was born is not quite enough, Jefferson’s parents are important characters to study in themselves. Knowing about the parents gives better insight into the person of Thomas Jefferson. His father, Peter Jefferson, was a surveyor, magistrate, justice of the peace, sheriff, colonel of the military, and member of the Virginia House of Burgesses (Garrett 13). He was a self-educated man and very successful (Garrett 13). Thanks to his father’s career, Thomas was able to have his first experiences with Indians (14). Garrett relates them to “friendly” encounters (14). Sadly, Peter Jefferson died when Thomas was fourteen on August 7, 1757 (14). When Peter died, there were two sons and six daughters still living (14). Jefferson’s mother, Jane, was a very accomplished woman (14). Not much is known about his mother other than there was an interesting relationship between them two that is discovered upon research. It can be assumed that Jefferson got some of his great ideals from the influence of two very intelligent parents.
Now knowing his beginnings on earth, his beginnings on the political scene need to be observed. Jefferson chose to attend college at William and Mary (Sanford 7 and Garrett 22). Charles B. Sanford, a United Methodist Minister, points out that Jefferson was exposed to deistic and enlightenment thinking during his college years (14). This exposure is argued to have had an effect on Jefferson’s religious ideals (Sanford 14). Jefferson began to practice law at age twenty-four (Garrett 31). He became a member of the House of Burgesses, like his father, when he was twenty-five in 1768 (Hitchens 14). Thus began his rise to the political grounds.
Stating that Jefferson’s college years had an effect on his religion imposes a force to look deeper into his religious life. It is known that he was a member of Charlottesville Episcopal Church (Sanford 4). Sanford points out that “[one of] Jefferson’s lifelong convictions was that religion was a personal or private matter” (12). With that said, there is not much known about Jefferson’s in-depth religious life. What is known, though, does give a somewhat wobbly foundation with which to begin a reflection of the inner mind of Thomas Jefferson. “He was called an ‘atheist, deist, or devil,’” claims Sanford (6). It is known that he did not believe in the trinity (4). Sanford also tells of Jefferson’s view of life after death- “he did not reject a belief in life after death, despite his questions on the subject, but he refused to be told that there was only one orthodox ‘way which according to the sacred geography leads to Jerusalem straight” (142). Jefferson did have some skepticism in him, but Christopher Hitchens, who was called “one of the most controversial and compelling voices in Anglo-American journalism,” tells that upon Jefferson’s death he made affirmation that he was ready to die (Hitchens 3). Whether this means he finally came to a conclusion on life after death or not is unknown. One very interesting fact about Jefferson is that he cut out his favorite New Testament passages and pasted them in a bound book reading through them for an hour every night (Sanford 3). Although much is not known about his religious life, it is concluded that he had some religious ideals one being the fact that he thought it best that religion should be a “private matter.”
Getting more personal with the religious aspect of Jefferson, the next topic to be discussed is the very “personal” love life of Thomas Jefferson. His first love is known to be a woman whom he found, after she rejected all his advancements, to be betrothed to another man (Hitchens 8). Hitchens’ claims that this was the cause of his plaguing headaches he had for the rest of his life (8). In 1770, he met his wife, Martha Wales Skelton (Garrett 34). Garrett says she was beautiful, smart, a wonderful musician, and Jefferson loved her (34). She was a widow with one son from her previous marriage to Barthhurst Skelton (34). It was said that she kept her father’s accounts to his plantation (34). Thomas and Martha were engaged in 1771 and were married on New Year’s Day 1772 (34). Martha died in September of 1782 (Hitchens 50 and Garrett 34). Hitchen’s asserts her death with the birth of Jefferson and Martha’s sixth child, Lucy (50). It is true that Jefferson promised her on her dying breath that he would never remarry (50). As the editor of Reason magazine, Damon W. Root, asserts, Jefferson’s promise to Martha did not mean he would “become celibate” (Root). Sally Hemmings was Martha’s illegitimate half-sister by her father’s slave (Hitchens 15 and Root). Both Root and Hitchens assert that the affair or sexual relationship between Jefferson and Hemmings started in 1788 when Hemmings was only sixteen years old during one of Jefferson’s trip to France (Root and Hitchens 64). Hitchens says that at that time Sally began to receive payment, nice clothes, and different housing accommodations (Hitchens 64). Root claims that Sally and Thomas could have been considered husband and wife according to law because it was a monogamous relationship, but because Sally was a slave she was left to be considered Jefferson’s concubine (Root). This relationship stirs the great Thomas Jefferson controversy which Root’s article, “The Trouble with Thomas Jefferson,” discusses. The controversy is the fact that Jefferson despised slavery going so far as to include “all men are created equal” into the Declaration, yet he held slave as well as had a sexual relationship with one of his slaves (Root). It is surmised that Jefferson indeed had a very interesting love life.
Now that Jefferson’s love life has been established, his family life or at least his family size needs to be mentioned. Jefferson had a grand total of thirteen children. Six of those children were from his marriage to Martha (Hitchens 15 and Sanford 3). Only two of those children outlived infancy (Hitchens 15). One child, Martha, survived to adulthood (Sanford 3). Jefferson also had children by Sally Hemmings (Hitchens 64 and Root). Hitchens says, “When they left for America [from France], with Jefferson insisting that [Sally] be berthed [sic] next to him on shipboard, it has been suggested by some historians that Sally was pregnant, though the child, if there was a child, did not survive. But all her subsequent children, duly entered in the log of Jefferson’s ‘farm book’ at Monticello, were born exactly nine months after one of his much-punctuated sojourns at the house. No other possible father was present at such times…” (Hitchens 64). Sally’s first child of Jefferson’s was born in 1795 which was the same year Jefferson became a grandfather by one of Martha’s sons (104). All of their children were eventually freed (64). They had seven children, but only four of them survived to adulthood (Root). Jefferson freed two of them himself, but the other two left Monticello on their own (Root). Root confesses that Jefferson never did free Sally, but she could have easily freed herself while in France (Root). He says that she did not do that because Jefferson promised that if she stayed with her he would free all of her children (Root). It can be well assumed that Jefferson had a rather large, interesting family.
Now that who Jefferson was has been asserted, a deeper look can be taken into this man’s ideals to see where he stood on issues. Thomas Jefferson has been called a republican. Forrest McDonald, a professor at the University of Alabama, says- “Jeffersonian republicanism was an ideology and an idea” (McDonald 161). Hitchens tells that Jefferson in 1778 proposed “a bill of proportion in crimes and punishments” to the Virginia House of Burgesses (Hitchens 40). This action shows a little of where he stood on some issues. His contradictory view of slavery is often talked about which shows a confusing side of Jefferson on the issues. Hitchens assess that Jefferson often said, when referring to Haiti and Virginia, that “the abolition of slavery could be as dangerous as slavery itself” (101). Not only is his statement true, but Jefferson’s struggle with this issue can also be seen. Slavery was bad, but would making it illegal really solve anything? It may be assumed that Jefferson was fearful of the changes this move would make. It is possible another war among the states would break out sooner rather than later. America was just starting. This issue was a very dangerous one to mingle in and Jefferson’s wisdom and yet skepticism can be seen here. It is also known that Jefferson recommended the Spanish dollar with its decimal principle to become the American currency (Hitchens 30). Jefferson was not only a republican, but a wise man despite his struggle with the slavery issue. Even the issue of slavery points out his wisdom as a politician.
Politician he was indeed. This moves the discussion now into his careers where his particular view of government and politics would be utilized. His first career outside of the House of Burguesses was Governor of Virginia. At age 36 in the year 1779, Jefferson became the second governor of Virginia succeeding Patrick Henry (Hitchens 40). He then became the next minister to France after Benjamin Franklin in 1785 according to the official site of the Whitehouse in Washington, D.C. (“Thomas Jefferson”). On February 14, 1790, at age 46, Jefferson made his next political move (Garrett 141 and Hitchens 75). Jefferson hearkened to the call of President George Washington to become the first Secretary of State (Garrett 141 and Hitchens 75). The next move was not made on Jefferson’s part. Upon the farewell address of Washington in 1796, Madison arranged a ticket with Jefferson’s name mentioned for the Presidency (Hitchens 107). On March 4, 1797, John Adams won the Presidency with Thomas Jefferson coming in second winning the Vice-Presidency (Garrett 155 and Hitchens 107-108). Thus, Jefferson became the second American Vice-President. The last political move by Jefferson came in 1800 where he and Aaron Burr became President and Vice President (McDonald 22). Jefferson won the presidency with seventy-three electoral votes, fifty-three of those coming from slaveholders (22). Columnist and Commentator for Fox News, Robert D. Novak shows the fact that Jefferson and Burr actually tied originally for the presidency (Novak). Although there was in fact a tie, Jefferson was dubbed the third President of the United States (Hitchens 121). His inaugural address took place on March 4, 1801 (122). Just three hours before Jefferson’s presidency was to take place, President John Adam’s made a series of “midnight appointments” under the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1801 (McDonald 35). These “midnight appointments” made Jefferson first term start off with slight difficulty. A lot took place during the two terms of Thomas Jefferson- the Barbary Wars, the Louisiana Purchase, and the Louis and Clark Expedition (Hitchens 125). In 1802, Jefferson put into action the Treaty of 1802 which is said by McDonald to “become the basis for Andrew Jackson’s ‘death-march’ policy of Indian removal” (McDonald 47). The original terms of this treaty were as follows- “to liquidate, by purchase or otherwise, Indian land claims in what remained of Georgia and to set aside one-tenth of the acquired lands for the compensations of Yazoo claims” (47). On January 6, 1802, the Judiciary Act of 1802 to repeal the Act of 1801 was submitted to Congress (50). With a tie, Vice-President Burr cast the final vote to send the bill back for revisions (50). The bill was passed a few weeks later (50). Marbury vs. Madison took place in 1802 judging the constitutionality of Adam’s “midnight appointments” (49-51). On March 3, 1803, the case of impeachment of Federal District Judge John Pickney went underway (51). He was being tried on drunkenness and insanity (51). On March 12, 1804, Pickney was simply removed from office (80). The Mobile Act of 1804, the embargo bill of 1804, and the enforcement act of 1808 also took place during Jefferson’s presidency (73, 143, and 149). March 1, 1809, Jefferson signed the repeal of the embargo act of 1804 (158). The Non-Intercourse Act was Jefferson’s last act of President (Hitchens 166). His presidency ended on March 4, 1809 (McDonald 158). There were also trials during his Presidency. The most notable trial was his opposition with Burr. Although Burr was not his Vice President for his second term, Jefferson still had to deal with him. Richard Brookhiser, renowned journalist and historian, shows in his article, “Plots and executive privilege: Jefferson and Burr squared off first in a trial about high treason,” that Aaron Burr was arrested for treason, but acquitted despite Jefferson’s testimony (Brookhiser). There were times in all this where Jefferson hoped and attempted to retire. Each attempt though was foiled by the call back into the political scene. It can now be assessed that although a very prosperous political career Jefferson still went through some big trials.
Even the greatest minds do not live forever. Thomas Jefferson died on July 4, 1826 (Garrett 205). At 12:50 pm, on the fiftieth anniversary of his great work- the Declaration of Independence- a great mind was lost (205). It is said that he died of wasting diarrhea and an infection of the urinary tract (Hitchens 2). Due to his skepticism, he was ready- complete with will and designed tombstone (3). His legacy lives on in the Declaration of Independence and his movements toward the expansion of America with the Louisiana Purchase and his referral of the Spanish dollar as the American currency.
Thomas Jefferson was a great man. This is evident in his works, his actions, and his ideals. As seen, he is a man that dealt with hardship and enemies. Any great mind would deal with these things. Although Jefferson was not without great controversy, he was still a great man. Hopefully now the person of Thomas Jefferson can be better understood. Indeed a great man wrote these words- “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Jefferson).

Works Cited
Brookhiser, Richard. "Plots and executive privilege: Jefferson and Burr squared off first in a trial about high treason." U.S. News & World Report 124 (1998): 24. OmniFile Full Text Select. Web. 13 Apr. 2010.
Garrett, Wendell D. The Worlds of Thomas Jefferson. New York: Weathervane Books, 1971. Print.
Hitchens, Christopher. Thomas Jefferson: Author of America. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2005. Print.
Jefferson, Thomas. The Declaration of Independence. Philadelphia: Independence Hall, 4 July 1776. Web. 13 April 2010.
McDonald, Forrest. The Presidency of Thomas Jefferson. Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 1976. Print.
Novak, Robert D. "Our Founding Partisans." The American Spectator 41.7 (2008): 42-3. OmniFile Full Text Select. Web. 13 Apr. 2010.
Root, Damon W. "The Trouble With Thomas Jefferson." Reason 40.8 (2009): 61-3. OmniFile Full Text Select. Web. 12 Apr. 2010.
Sanford, Charles B. The Religious Life of Thomas Jefferson. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1984. Print.
“Thomas Jefferson.” Whitehouse.gov. Web. 13 April 2010.

Arguing Abortion

**this is my research paper i worked on all semmester in English Comp 2. let me know what you think!***

It is sad to see a teenage girl burdened to become a parent of a child when she is just a child herself, but can that fact alone really justify abortion? Scientist, scholars, and political figures argue and debate with little relief over the topic of abortion. Should a woman really have the authority to destroy the child growing within her? Is the child really a child? Is a fetus merely part of the woman’s body? These are all questions that have been asked in previous years and are still being researched today despite the earlier findings. Realizing the valid debates and sad truths of the pro-abortion stance, this paper is designed to show the advancements of the pro-life stance to now be able to validly argue these difficult arguments. Can abortion really be rationally justified?
Before the argumentation can being, the two different sides of abortion need to be defined. The two different sides are pro-life and pro-choice. Webster, said to be America's most popular language-related reference work, defines pro-life as simply- “opposed to abortion” (“Pro-life”). This definition sums up the pro-life side very accurately. The pro-life activist simply argues that abortion is wrong. In most cases it does seem as though the pro-life side is small and weak. Although many are against abortion, it is very hard to find someone who can readily argue the issue with logic and not emotion. In many debates, the pro-life side loses because it uses personal beliefs with little evidence to back their claim up or they include religious beliefs which are always dismissed because not all agree with that person’s religion. Since it is hard to find people that can logically debate abortion, the pro-life side seems very weak. The opposition, pro-choice, is defined by Webster as- ‘favoring the legalization of abortion” (“Pro-choice”). The pro-choice advocate argues that there is nothing wrong with abortion. In short, this side agrees with abortion whole-heartedly.
Now that the two sides have been seen, the argumentation can begin. Beginning the debate is the biggest abortion argument which is considered in most circles a scientific based argument. It is the idea of life beginning at conception or the idea of the fetus not being human. The pro-choice side often concludes that the child is not human but rarely debates that life does not begin at conception- though some still attest to that belief. Pro-abortion website Choice Matters put out an article ten years ago to outline the pros and cons of abortion arguments. They claim in a section of that article that the idea of life beginning at conception is a religiously based idea. John Ankerberg, host of many abortion debates, and Weldon, one-time abortion advocate, point out that the issue of life beginning at conception is a scientifically proven fact (12). They even give scientist testimonies that this ideal is true (12). These two men also show the advancements in science and technology in the areas of fetology and ultra-sounds. These tools can be used to prove that the so-called blob is more than that because each and every stage of development can be seen (13-15). Dr. J. C. Willke, a physician, author, lecturer, and an expert on human sexuality, with his wife authored on a book called Handbook on Abortion, at one time a best seller. They point out the idea that the only difference from an adult human being and the fetus are nutrition and oxygen. He says, “The tiny human you once were, developed into the adult you now are, but you were there totally at conception. All you needed to become the adult you are was nutrition, oxygen, and time.” These things are supplied differently in these two stages and that is the only difference (11). There are many different ways to debate this idea, but Ankerberg and Weldon give an amazing argument. They summarize it in three steps- it is alive, it has an unique human nature, and at any stage of development it is most accurately described as an actual person with great potential (98-99). Lastly, many argue that the child cannot be human because it lacks brain-waves and consciousness. Despite the scientific proof of the existence of some of these accusations, Ankerberg and Welson make a statement saying- “there are many times when people exist without consciousness, without brain-waves, without human heartbeat, etc., and yet no one would argue that at any time they are not human” (19). They also say, “No human being is more ‘human’ than the other” (97). In the end, this argument is proven invalid because the fetus is proven to be human. Not only do the pro-choice use the scientific approach and debate the fetus’ humanity, but they also use the idea that the unborn can be killed just because they are not independent beings or viable. Viability is a very common argument. Prometheus Institute, an organization seeking to educate the younger generation, alludes to this opinion of viability in an editorial supporting abortion - “The question isn’t where life begins, but where independent life begins (“Abortion:”). The pro-choice side states that if the child is not viable- he is dependent on the mother’s care- then he can be aborted without question. There are several ways the pro-life movement has found to argue this ideal. Dr. and Mrs. Willke argue that viability is not a valid argument because even a baby outside the mother’s womb is dependent on care (23). Some will fall to this argument because they believe that once the baby is outside the womb it is murder, but some will not fall to this idea because they believe that infanticide is also acceptable and should be legalized as well as abortion. The Willke’s also show the fact that even a ten day old baby in the womb can assert his independence by stopping the mother’s menstrual cycle (10). Thus viability is not a valid argument.
Not only do the pro-choice advocates argue humanity and viability, but they also argue that the fetus is just an extension of the mother’s body. Thus begins the legal side of the abortion debate. In this sense of the fetus merely being an extension of the mother, it is argued that the mother then has the right over her own body. Pro-abortionist say, “The fetus is totally dependent on the body of the woman for its life support and is physically attached to her by the placenta and umbilicus. The health of the fetus is directly related to the health of the pregnant woman. Only at birth are they separate ” (“Legal Abortion”). This ideal is disturbed by the fact that the child is truly human. Kent Kelly, pastor and founder of “Churches for Life and Liberty,” makes this observation based on that very premise- “Any woman has the right to have sex. Any woman has the right to refrain from sexual activity. However, once conception has occurred, the rights of another human being are involved” (103). Furthermore, Ankerberg and Weldon dedicate a whole chapter in their book to arguing this ideal of the fetus being part of the mother. They provide five reasons that the child is not just part of the mother’s body- the mother and child can have two separate blood types, the baby can be dead while in the womb, it is recognized as a foreign body requiring the protection from the placenta, the child could be male, and the child has its own organs (21-23). Therefore, the argument of the fetus just being part of the mother is also proven invalid.
The idea that the fetus is just part of the mother has to do with women’s rights. The same idea can be seen with this next argument- rape and incest. Rape and incest are very common arguments from the pro-abortion stance, and abortion is often justified in these two ideals (Beckwith 169). Pro-choice activists will say, “Forcing a woman to bear a rapist’s child is further torture of the victim of a heinous crime” (“Legal Abortion”). Ignoring the fact that these two events are substantially rare in most cases, Ankerberg and Weldon give this idea- “no one will deny that [the mother] has been the victim of a cruel violence of another. But does this give her the right to subject the innocent life growing within her to a similar violence?” (117). Most people would not equate these two violent acts. In that case Francis J. Beckwith, a lecturer of philosophy at the University of Nevada with a PhD in Philosophy from Fordham University, argues this to summarize the end of this conclusion- “the unborn is not an aggressor when its presence does not endanger the mother’s life.” He argues this on the basis that the mother’s life is the only idea where abortion is agreeable (69). Therefore, rape and incest are not valid arguments for abortion.
Not only does the pro-choice side use science and legal issues to support their argument, but they also use an emotional tactic. This tactic is seen in the pro-choice assumption that abortion is unstoppable and if is made illegal more women will die because of “illegal” abortions (Beckwith 168). Pro-abortionists claim that fighting the legalization of abortion and sending women back to have “back-alley” abortions is hypocritical because pro-lifers are supposedly for life but they are causing more women to die with illegal abortions (“Legal Abortion”). What most people do not understand is that women do die from legal abortions. Dr. J.C. Willke with his background in medicine he says that many of these are not recorded because the death came from an infection during the abortion procedure and was not noticed or that the person’s family does not wish it to be known that the deceased had the abortion (79). This argument can be surmised as invalid since it is proven that either way- legal or illegal- women will die.
Not only do the pro-choice side attempt to use scientific, legal, and emotional means to prove their points, but they also attack the pro-life side personally. The next set of arguments from the pro-choice side has to do with the idea that pro-lifers are just pushing their views on others. The idea of the pro-choice movement is to say that to be against abortion is a religious issue and to argue it is to push others to believe the same. Pro-abortionists say that if the pro-life person does not agree with abortion then they should just not have one and leave everyone else alone (Beckwith 169-170). On the idea that abortion is just a religious issue, Ankerberg and Weldon say, “Many people mistakenly feel that abortion is a ‘religious’ issue. But it is not. It is a scientific issue, and specifically, a biological issue” (5). They claim this on the idea that in their research they have concluded that most scientists have studied that to say that life begins at conception is a proven scientific fact and not a religious implication (5). Another argument on this ideal is given by Beckwith. He argues that people from both sides of the issue equate their claims on their religious views- not just pro-life. He goes so far as to say that there are even people on both sides of the issue that do not equate their views with religious ideals (80). The same idea is shown with the imposing views issue. Both sides are imposing their views. If the pro-choice person argues back with the pro-life person, then he is forcing his views on him (82). This set of arguments is known as an ad hominem attack. Ad hominem simply means that this very argument is attacking the person who is arguing rather than the argument itself which makes it an invalid claim.
After looking at each of these arguments and seeing each one debunked it is hard to see how this killing of an innocent child can be validly argued. It is depressing to see a teenage girl becoming a mother although still a child, but how much more depressing is the thought of an innocent baby being killed. Not only is it depressing that a child is killed but the women are constantly struggling with the impacts of abortion. Renowned author, Don Baker said, “For every unborn child that dies, there is a mother who suffers varying degrees of physical, emotional, or spiritual pain” (95). Bill O’Reilly, well-known political commentator for Fox News, conducted an interview of a Miss Kelly. This young girl had an abortion and is speaking out in this interview about the effects of her choice. She says when she looks back on what she did she feels disgusted. She admits to suffering post-traumatic stress, low self-esteem, promiscuity, drug usage, and eating disorders (Kelly Intv.). The sad truth here that not only was a poor innocent child cruelly murdered but a mother is now suffering the fatal affects of her decision. Baker speaks out on this sad truth in his book, Beyond Choice, based on a true story. He writes, “Debbie continues to remember…as hard as she tries to forget…she continues to remember” (93). Despite the pro-choice’s attempt to justify abortion, abortion cannot be justified rationally.

Works Cited
“Abortion: A Logical Pro-choice Argument, Amazing!” Editorial. Prometheus Institute, 2 January 2008. Web. 17 February 2010
Ankerberg, John, and John Weldon. When Does Life Begin? Brentwood: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, 1989. Print.
Baker, Don. Beyond Choice: The Abortion Story No One is Telling. Portland: Multnomah Press, 1985. Print.
Beckwith, Francis J. Politically Correct Death. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993. Print.
Kelly, Kent. Abortion: The American Holocaust. Southern Pines: Calvary Press, 1981. Print.
Kelly. “Dr. Tiller Abortion Patient Speaks Out.” Interview by Bill O’Reilly. FOXNews.com. The O’Reilly Factor, 13 Dec. 2006. Web. Feb. 2010.
“Legal Abortion: Arguments Pro and Con.” Choice Matters. 2000. Web. 18 April 2010.
“Pro-choice.” Def. Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary. 1975. Web. 17 Feb. 2010.
“Pro-life.” Def. Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary. 1971. Web. 17 Feb. 2010.
Willke, Dr., and Mrs. J.C. Handbook on Abortion. Cincinnati: Hayes, 1979. Print.

What the Crap?!

What is this world coming to? I was going to do a blog on the fact that this idiotic woman tried to hit me while I was walking through a parking lot and then cusses me out, but I found something more worse to blog about. This is actually old news but I just found out about it. I subscribed to this Canandian vlogger named FLuffee. His videos could be better if he could leave out the profanity. I watched one of them about a 18 year old dude that raped his own daughter- the daughter was only 10 months old. I fould out that she was actually only 8 days old according to the news report. The news had been distorted when he looked into the story more. I don't care how old she was...how could any person rape a baby?! How is that pleasurable?! I didn't look at more recent reports of it, but news was that he beat her and raped her at her 15 year old mother's house while there were other people there! What is this world coming to when a baby is raped?! Luckily, I did find out that the child lived but that's gonna ruin the rest of her life. Her father raped her, when she was only a baby! This is sick. This story happened Sept. of 2008 so it's old news but still. First off, rapes happen and that's horrible, but a baby! What the crap is this world coming to??

666 Syndrome

"The world is ending!! Run! Wait! Where do we go?" I find it very funny when I here talk of the end of the world. I mean think about it. The Lord says, "I come quickly." There's also talk of he comes suddenly, "like a thief in the night." Why then would he waste time in giving us signs of the end? Alot of this discussion took place on a rabbit trail in my New Testament Survey class. We spoke of what I dub as the "666 Syndrome"- hence the title of this blog. I thought about just leaving the title as 666 to see how many would freak out, but I then realized- if you don't comment I have no clue as to the reaction. So, then the idea is pointless. My idea as he was discussing the ideals of the end of the world and date setting and "setting the table" was that there's is a verse (and if i take time to look it up i will post it) that talks about him coming as a thief in the night. When a thief comes, do we really know he's coming? So, my idea is that we won't know when he's coming because it's the idea of a thief. My belief is that God wouldn't have allowed it to be put in his word if it's not true or a valid idea. So the idea of a thief is valid, it's literal. He comes like a thief. We will not know. Now, 666 is the evil number. Technically, as my prof said, does that mean we should run like the wind when we see this number. "Ahhhh, you devilish number!" I've always thought it was funny how one number can cause so much turmoil. It's just a number, people. Yes, it does mean something. As my prof said thought, we are not in the tribulation so it really has no real significance other than it is and will be the devil's "magical number". The other thing he brought out besides setting dates is the idea of signs which I also have touched on in this blog. A thief usually does not leave us a sign that he is coming to rob us. It's a surprise. So, in the same aspect, if Christ is coming to rapture the church it'll be a surprise. There is no signs!!! Yes, we are having tragedies. So what? There have always been tragedies. He comes in the twinkling of an eye as a thief. We will not know!!!!!! This goes along with the date idea. My only thought (not my profs thought) is why do you want to know. Does it not scare you? Maybe that's the idea. You wanna be prepared. If it's like a thief, you won't be prepared. I'm sorry. If we are always to be ready to die, we should always be ready to go. You may disagree with me- I'm sorry. I know not everything I say will be right, but neither will everything you say. That's just how I feel. This is my thought. Will I argue? I may. Sometimes I simply just don't have the patience for that. So in the end, God is coming. He is coming quickly. He is coming like a thief in the night. Be ready.

Reflection

Sometimes, life sucks. It's true. There's no way to pass that. It's not that your ungrateful for whatever God brings into your life. It's just, sometimes, you wonder why. I've been thinking alot about my past and my present and what I hope the future brings. I'm coming up to the end of my freshman year of college. Wow! I thought this was gonna take forever, and it's actually passing by so quickly. I look at my future. Matthew. He's my future. No one is going to stand in my way of that. If he weren't here, I don't think I would be. That's the truth. We've been talking alot about having kids and getting married. The married part first naturally. :) We even have the first boy and girl names picked out- Patrick Joseph and Elizabeth Nicole. It's really funny to see that the one name I have always loved and figured he hate is a name he also really likes- Elizabeth. My future, I hope, also holds an enjoyable career dealing with my other love- children. It's my hope to have an impact on this world and what better way then through children. My heart reaches out to those put into a "Christian" school. I've been there. I know what it's like. I've seen so called Christians go all the way through that school. My heart reaches out to those that will be in those same positions. I want to get my hands in there early. Maybe, just maybe- I can prevent the inevitable. Don't get me wrong. I loved my school. If it weren't for the things I went through I don't know where I'd be. It's just- I'm sick of seeing the opposite side of the spectrum. I look now at my past. Where do I begin- hurt, confusion, and sadness. There were moments of happiness. There were also moments of complete and utter depression. There were times I just simply didn't want to live any more. I don't know how I pulled through. I don't know how I ended up where I am. My only guess- the provision of God. I've learned so much. Yes, I've been hurt, but isn't it what I learned that makes it all seem worth it? I've been lied to by my own family, I've been mistreated by the ones who said they loved me, and I've seen heroes be persecuted and torn down because of plain stupidity. You know though- I've made it. I'm looking to the future with surprising optimism. The Lord has gotten me this far. Why should I doubt him now? The past is the past. Let's push forward to a bright and prosperous future. So, life sucks sometimes. Ignore the bad, push for the good.

age 4-- past

age 12-- past

age 19-- present

symbol of my future