30.11.07

Government, get out of the culture and our pockets!

Ok, so I was reading the following page, and it was the straw that broke the camel's back (so to speak):

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gahr030700.asp

This isn't the first time stuff like this has happened. People also question as to whether pornography and foul language should be censored by the government. And the public schools are a mess of litigation concerning whether or not students can speak out about religion. Everyone quotes the separation of church and state (although I'd like to point out that that is NOT in the constitution, but was rather first mentioned in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a Baptist church).

Here's my solution:

Government, don't fund museums. Stop funding science. Drop public schools.

Ok. That sounds way out there. No schools? No museums?

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we the people need to stand up and not let the government mess with our culture. We the people will pay for what we want.
Take schools for example. First, I have a friend who did a study that determined that if the government dropped public schools and instead offered a $5,000 scholarship to every school-age child, they'd actually save money.
At that rate, it'd cost my parents $1,400 to send me full time to a fairly expensive private school that I attend part-time.
As well, if the government dropped public schools, they'd increase competency in schools (as parents wouldn't send their kids to low-quality schools), help grow communities, encourage the economy, and lessen the lawsuits and bellyaching about free speech violations. And if government totally dropped funding to schools period, you'd pay about 60%-70% less in taxes!

Museums could find sponsors and thus you'd not have so many problems with bad art or nonart being put up in museums.

And so on. You may disagree, and that's fine. No, I haven't fully researched this, but if everyone who reads this could send me an hour of time, I'll gladly research.

28.11.07

Pro Death Penalty

Ok, so I've been doing some research on the death penalty, and I ran across this great site:

Capital Punishment

He makes excellent points.

First, the death penalty is a deterrent to crime. When the death penalty was not used, murder rates escalated, and when the death sentence was reinstated, they dropped dramatically.

Secondly, there is a large body of historical evidence to prove that the death penalty, and often only the death penalty, is capable of stopping crime effectively.

Thirdly, the majority of people worldwide support the death penalty. This is prevalent even in nations that do not have the death penalty. A large majority (60%-70%) support the death penalty.

Life without parole, or LWOP, is dangerous as it does not prevent more killings from convicts, for several reasons: prison murders, parole killings, escapees, and convicts set free due to overflowing jails.

Many arguments used against the death penalty are cliche and either off topic, moot, or anti-law (that is, anarchist)

Capital punishment is often much less expensive than LWOP. This is not a well known fact, primarily due to the fact that most abolitionist LWOP costs are calculated for an average LWOP prison sentece, not that of a murderer. Death sentence level LWOP prison costs are much higher due to increased security, etc.

Capital punishment is not against the constitution, but rather is implied several times in the 5th amendment.

Christianity and Jesus are not diametrically opposed to capital punishment. In fact, not only is it mentioned throughout the Old Testament, even outside of the Levitical law, but it is also mentioned by Jesus Himself.

Because of all these points, I firmly support the death sentence.

I eagerly await the comments =]