Reality TV

I am getting really tired of all the reality shows on TV. I use to like watching shows like the hills and the bachelor and so on, but now it seems like none of these shows are real and that people go on them just to make money and be famous. It is all drama and people acting stupid, so they get attention. It is like a 2 year old trying to get attention. Also, there seems to be a lot of people who exploit their children such as John and Kate and there is another family who had sextuplets that are also getting a reality show. It is amazing that John and Kate are getting a divorce and John is going to be with his new girlfriend, but they are still going to have a show. It is bad enough to have your parents go through a divorce, but to drag your kids (who are the only reason they are famous) through it on TV, shows that money is more important to them than family. You can argue that their reality TV show is a cause to their divorce.

Thanks

I just want to say thank you to everyboby in my class before this blog is closed.
This class is my frist English writing class in my college course.
before I take this class, I took some ESL writing class which were totally different from this class.
I learned many things from this class.
Espacially, peer reviewing is very helphul for me.
I learned how to organize paragraphs from my peers' paper.
I am glad to to have you.

anyway, thanks again and have a nice summer.

"They just don't know any better"

I read an article today about children themselves talking about their lives and families and, of course, they did not have anything bad to say. As I thought about it, I thought of all of the other things I had read talking about the adverse affects that gay parenting has on kids. Usually these negative articles/books/etc. come from people who are A) not gay B) do not know anyone who is gay and/or C) have not been raised in a home headed by a homosexual couple. It made me realize that no matter how hard someone tries to fight for/against an issue, he or she really doesn't have a strong point unless they have experience and ethos to back it up.

So, my question is: Is it the children of gay parents who simply "don't know anything better," or is it the people who don't understand who have something more to learn? This same question can be applied to pretty much any of our topics. There's always a different perspective that we can't understand unless we try to experience it ourselves and see things their way by jumping in head first.

is college a waste?

im sure all you at one time or another have thought about what am i doing in college? is this gonna get me anywhere, i think most people go to college to get a good job but that doesnt always happen. Some people say college is a great thing, the higher education you have the higher salary you will earn if you get a job it will also protect you financially and ensure that you keep the job. But i know others say college is a waste of time, not only that but its cost riduculous amounts of money, not only that but if you do graduate you'll end up paying the loans back for the rest of your life and earning probably a low wage, but think about it in the end college vs no college, the goal is to get a good job right? Now days its about the people you know, how motivated and determined you are and how goal oriented you are as an individual. But you can never say if college is a waste of time or money its what you do with your education and the knowledge you learn.

capital punishment

I am writing about capital punishment for my classical argument.
I think it is a really controversal issue, and I always believed it should be abolished for some reasons.
However, while I was researching about why people support capital punishment and why capital punishment should be abolished, to be honest, I was confused which side I should be on for a moment because I thought about the victims and their families' and friends' suffering. Who will compensate for their suffering? They can never forget the incident that happened to them. When I imagined how hard it will be for them, I asked myself a question, "Am I wrong? and is capital punishment only way to punish murderers for victims?"
But later I made the decision that capital punishment still needs to be stopped. I thought that even though the murderer kills someone, it seems like a contradiction to kill the murderer for killing. Does anyone understand what I'm saying? I think its kind of hypocritical.

A little off topic, but I think this is ridiculous

This has nothing to do with English or probably any of our papers, but I just thought this is ridiculous. I am working on my paper or I would properly express my hatred for PETA but take a look and give some comments.

"Where'd all the good people go?"

I was able to attend several journalism conferences within the last couple years and we talked a lot about how today the news is not so noble as it once was. The days of great reporters unearthing crime are over. Today news reporters have a bad rep. because they are usually biased and sometimes they get a little too nosy. Even news sources that claim to be unbiased still are put on by a certain group of people which makes it biased in the end anyway.

I've been thinking a lot about this as I have written my article on gay marriage and how it affects children. Every source I go to is, of course, bias. I find myself wondering how am I to pick out the real from the exaggerated, or the things that were hand selected out of a pool of information. For instance, one pro-same sex marriage book says that children of lesbians do just as well as they do in a single parent home, others simply say they do just as well as children with "heterosexual parents." Does that mean single heterosexual parents? Why can't they just come out and say it? Needless to say, that's been a source of frustration for me as I've written my paper.

Even MORE questions (answer any you choose):
Isn't honesty supposed to build your side up? That's why people loved the reporters of long ago- they were honest. How are you supposed to distinguish fact from fiction when it is so hard to find a piece of solid, unbiased information? Each piece of "information" is incomplete because it only shows one "angle." More importantly, how are you supposed to write an honest essay with the biased facts you do find? Are you being just as bad as the lying reporters by using information that might be corrupted (it's not your fault, you got the information from somewhere else, right?) or does using "facts" or "statistics" from each extreme strengthen your paper?

Lastly, is it really possible to have unbiased, written info considering everyone (the people who come up with the information) has his or her own personal convictions?

Just something to chew on... meanwhile, I challenge our class to write the most honest papers we possibly can given the most biased information in the world yet.