Politically correct, legally wrong; Why a law school's nondiscrimination policy runs afoul of the Constitution - By: Anonymous(Editorial)

http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=2012619381&sid=6&Fmt=3&clientId=9417&RQT=309&VName=PQD

(Please make sure you are logged into FCC's National Newspapers first before clicking on the link above.)


The University of California, Hastings College of Law has a strict policy where it's student groups must adhere to the school's nondiscrimination policy. There is 60 "recognized school organizations" that all are equally held to this policy. In this policy each group must accept students who want to become members or even leaders in that group, even if the student disagrees with everything that is central to what the group stands for. "A law association for African American students being told that it must let white supremacists run for leadership posts." This school policy is outraging many in these groups because if the group does not comply with the school's policy, then the organization will not have access to campus meeting rooms, school e-mail lists, and will not be invited to the annual student organization fair, and even be denied the right to apply for grants funded by student fundraisers. This outrage has spawned a San Francisco-based law school group called the Christian Law Society (CLS) to file a lawsuit with the Supreme Court against the school. The CLS is standing against the college by limiting their members to only those who agree with their scripturally based laws.

I feel that this article was well written by one of the editors of the Washington Post. It logically and effectively supports groups like the CLS, by showing the reader how though the school is trying to be nondiscriminatory toward it's students, it "only exacerbates the harm." The argument is persuasive by showing how those of a completely opposite belief can join a group is absurd and throws the meaning of association out the window. This article doesn't state much of the author's personal opinion on the topic. However, because the article is rich in facts, the editor doesn't need to say much more than a few well placed words. This article will be read by those who are in the District of Columbia who decide the laws of our nation. I believe the author also reaches his intended audience by publishing this paper in a nationally known newspaper (The Washington Post).

This article about the rights of groups in our universities hits home for me. I am a college student and I plan to join a ethical hacker school organization at a future college in West Virginia. This group attempts to build up it's members ability to protect network systems against hackers who wish to compromise the data of a individual or business. If one of these bad hackers were allowed to join the organization of ethical hackers at the school, it would be detrimental toward what the rest of the group is trying to establish. I think the opinion of the author of this article is right on in his stance of the issue. Thought the school is trying to make everyone happy by forcing equal rights on everyone, the whole point of a group is to have only those who share the groups core beliefs involved in it.

Misunderstood

Effective communication is key to any conversation. Whether at work, school, or with friends communication is always being used to converse between two people. Without correct understanding, it is hard to analyze a sentence and respond constructively.

It can be difficult to express what one is trying to say to another on any given day. Cultural differences play a large part in communication. This clip from you tube shows a funny, yet likely example of a call center employee trying to communicate to a customer. The employee is from India where a pencil eraser is called a "rubber". I assume the customer being helped on the line is from America, where a rubber is slang for a condom. The customer is very upset as she thinks the employee is telling her to buy condoms for her young son for school. The employee is not trying to suggest that the young boy has a need for contraceptives, but instead miss-communicates to the lady. It's because of their cultural differences, both parties are at a loss for words and find it hard to understand what the other is trying to say.

Our experience, age, sex, race, and culture all play apart in how we communicate, and how we understand someone else. We filter what we see and hear by these things and should realize that we need to focus more on how these effect other people. Doing this can help us see what other people are trying to say and from where he or she is coming from instead of focusing on what we want to say all of the time.

Website Evaluation Worksheet Summary

I am writing a paper about computer services outsourcing issues effecting America, and I have found a credible source of information to draw from when writing my paper. The article entitled, "It security rides offshore outsourcing wave" is found at http://news.cnet.com/IT-security-rides-offshore-outsourcing-wave/2100-7355_3-6094051.html#comments and is written by Dawn Kawamoto, staff writer of ENET News.

Based on the CRAAP test I believe that this source of information is a good and credible source to use in my research paper. The article was published in July of 2006, and the links are still current. I think it is still within the 3-5 year limitation for my topic to still be within a good timeliness. The relevance of this article directly relates to the security outsourcing percentages and data in 2006. It is written at a level where the average American citizen should be able to read and understand it. The source of information or the authority of the article is shown by having an established author, Dawn Kawamoto, who has written 1074+ articles for CNET News, and established publisher CNET News. I was able to find more information on the writer here: http://www.dailyfinance.com/writers/dawn-kawamoto/. The accuracy is shown by sitting information from a survey released by Computer Security and the FBI, as well as doing my own research and verifying some of the same data in this article at http://www.security-gurus.net/2006/08/highlights-of-2006-csifbi-computer.html. The tone of the article does not seem to be biased or having any positive or negative emotion used to write it. Finally, the purpose of the article is to inform its readers with data. The information is fact, and appears to be objective and impartial, and not using any personal, political, or religious biases. Using this CRAAP test has shown me that this article is credible and not "crap" to use in my research paper about the negative effects of outsourcing our computer services overseas on America.

Research Thesis Statement

Our growing reliance on overseas outsourcing is destroying our nation as a whole and will continue for our future generations. In order to reverse the negative effects of outsourcing on our nation, the government should put regulations on the total amount of outsourced work that is being sent out of the country; minimizing the negative effects, while still keeping most of the benefits of outsourcing.

I vote for Megan Fox

The main reason I would choose Megan Fox to be “voted off the island” is for the constant sex-image she portrays both on and off the movie screen that in turn models unrealistic sexual expectations to today’s teenagers. From one of the first movies Megan stars in, Transformers (2007), she plays a teenage girl having a seductive image. In newspapers and magazines her revealing outfits are ever present. For example, in her latest movie, Jennifer’s Body (2009), Megan plays a cheerleader who is possessed and uses her body, even naked at times, to lure and kill men. The July issue of British GQ quotes Megan openly admitting,“I have this sort of promiscuous image. People assume I’m really overtly sexually aggressive and that I’m this wild child.” “I would rather have an image that is wild and promiscuous than to go out of my way to be proper all the time.” Megan Fox is only showing our youth that it’s not brains, but how one looks that is most important.

Things would be quite different if Megan Fox was to leave the main stream media for good. I would imagine that those who would miss her would consist mainly of men. Most any guy would mourn the loss of another fantasy woman to lust after, but would soon focus on one of the many other sex symbols in our media. Megan is overexposed in our media and her leaving wouldn’t be hard on the media publications. They will just find the next “sex icon” to be on the front cover to sell their next month’s publication. I think we would be better off without her because there will be one less poor role model for our youth.

My personal principle is that Americans should not be exposed on a daily basis to unrealistic examples of how women “normally” act and dress, or else we will destroy our children's outlook in the future. Actresses like Megan Fox have pushed the standard of what sells to new heights, and it’s not fair to our children. If we allow this to continue, our sons will expect that all girls should have a perfect shape and dress like Megan. Our daughters could find that they have to dress seductively to be noticed, and will constantly have a poor self-image because they won’t always be proportioned perfectly. The sooner we realize this, the better the chance we have of helping our young people have a healthy image of self and others.