Childhood obesity is seen everywhere throughout the United States, but on Tuesday, May 18, 2010, Rhode Island legislators heard testimony on a bill to tax soda in order to help prevent childhood obesity.  When I was a child, my parents would give me money for lunch and I had the option to choose which drink to buy.  As a child, I did not worry about budgets or the taxes on certain beverage items nor did any other child my age.  This tax is not going to change the mind of any child buying soda because they just do not really understand the value of the dollar or much about the economy at such a young age.

In Rhode Island, soda is already subject to the seven-percent sales tax.  This soda tax would also be added onto that sales tax.  Obesity is definitely an issue in the United States, especially among children; however, an extra five to ten cents for a soda most likely won’t make a difference to children who don’t always have money or budgets on their minds.  Another problem with this tax is that, among other beverages, juices will be exempt from the tax.  Juices, however, contain a lot of sugar, which is the main cause in weight gain among children.

I don’t think the government should take it upon themselves to deal with the issue of obesity through the use of taxation.  It simply will not work.  If childhood obesity within the United States is to be eliminated, it is important to educate today’s youth on health and nutrition.  It is up to the individual to be healthy; it is essentially his or her choice; parents also have to step up and take the initiative and help to show their children the way to lead healthy lives.  Also, by adopting a plan of education for health and nutrition, today’s youth will have a better understanding of a healthy and balanced diet as well as what typed of food and beverages can cause health problems such as obesity, diabetes, tooth decay, heart failure, etc.  Educating the youth on health and nutrition is a much more efficient way of helping to prevent and eliminate childhood obesity throughout the United States because most children do not worry about money, but what they learn will stick with them throughout their lifetimes.

There are certain crimes that no prison sentence can punish.  Since when is three meals a day, shelter, television, basketball, showers, and free laundry a punishment?  Since when is having the taxpayers pay for all your resources a punishment?  It’s not.  These criminals get to live their lives with all these resources while the families of their victims suffer from their losses.  Sure, getting beat up in prison must be awful, but it’s nowhere near as bad as what these criminals did to earn themselves a life sentence.  It is also unfair to make taxpayers pay for the prisoners with life sentences when they will eventually have the same outcome as they would if they were sentenced to capital punishment.  Sentencing more people to the death penalty may also be enough incentive to stop people from committing certain crimes.  As long as the evidence is solid and there is no doubt that the person on trial is guilty of the crime then, with the most heinous of crimes in which the criminal will be otherwise sentenced to life, Capital Punishment should be used.

90% of the world’s milk, which is made up of 88% water, comes from cows.  When cows are just ten weeks old, they are able to eat dry food.  Young calves are handled (hooked up to machines and milked) in order to prepare them for milk parlors.  Dairy cows are injected with PGF20 and milked at least twice a day.  The veins need to be visible on the cows utters.  One cow can produce milk for about fifty people.  Milk is also graded.  Grade A milk yields less than 100,000 bacteria cells count and less than 1,000,000 somatic cell count.  Milk is sold by a hundred pounds.  Also, one hundred pounds make about eight to sixteen pounds of cheese.  There are four different cheeses in the United States and they are all based on moisture.  The herds of cows are usually used for dairy for about four to six years and then they are usually killed.

Approximately 50% of all animals used in cosmetic testing die two to three weeks after the experiments.  It is unfair to put these animals through such torture for them to only die a short time after.  They are also inflicted with pain and infections that are very disturbing.  These innocent animals are dying for experiments that may or may not have accurate results.  Animal experimentation for cancer research has proved to be inconclusive yet animals are still being used for these tests while there are better, more accurate ways to study cancer.  There are alternative research methods such as computer models, cell cultures, and human studies that are safer and more accurate.

Many of the animals used in animal testing are blinded, infected, tortured, and when they are done being used and abused, they are killed.  About 115 million animals are used for experimentation and killed in the U.S. each year.  Some animals have had their eyelids sewed shut and sonar devices strapped to their heads in order to study blindness.  Other animals have had their skulls cut open and nerves severed  without the use of any painkillers or anesthesia in order to study hearing loss.

Who gave humans the right to use these poor, defenseless animals for inaccurate experimentation?  Who gave humans the right to torture, poison, and kill these animals?  We need to stop using animals for research when there are safer, more accurate methods.  Humans don’t have the same genetic make up as animals.  Mice are not tiny men; they are rodents.  Although humans are animals are biologically different, animals still feel pain; they are still living, breathing beings.  We don’t have the right to inflict harm upon these animals for research that is usually unnecessary.  Animal testing needs to be stopped.

On January 14, 2010, Phoebe Prince, a student at South Hadley High School in South Hadley, Massachusetts, was found by her younger sister in a stairwell, hanging by a scarf.  She had been harassed and bullied by students at school because of a brief relationship she had with a senior high school football player.  School officials had been notified about the incidents, which involved both physical and emotional harassment, but did nothing to stop it.  This tragedy has caused much controversy over who should be held responsible for her death and who should be punished and criminally charge.  Where were the adults in this situation?  The school needs to be held responsible for this incident just as much as the students who bullied her.

At 15-years-old Prince felt that the only way to escape the harassment was to kill herself.  The school officials were warned and a teacher even witnessed Prince being harassed the day that she committed suicide.  The female students who bullied Prince as well as South Hadley High School officials should be charged with wrongful death.  The students are the cause of her death and the school officials did nothing to stop the harassment despite their knowledge of what was going on.  Bullying happens far too often and needs to be stopped.

Adolescents are so cruel to each other that the students who bullied her even mocked her death on Facebook memorial pages.  Honestly, grow up; you’re 15; you probably won’t be spending the rest of your life with the person you’re dating at that age; stop being immature and acting jealous because you have insecurities.  Adults, on the other hand, need to step up and teach their children right from wrong.  The mother of one of the female students charged in the Phoebe Prince case doesn’t think that her daughter did anything wrong because she didn’t physically abuse Prince.  She believes that “they’re teenagers.  They call names.”  Well news flash, mother-of-the-year, words can hurt much worse than any physical harassment can.  Schools need to enforce their zero tolerance policies for bullying and prevent anymore tragedies like this from happening.  If this tragedy doesn’t open up people’s minds then I don’t know what will.  It’s time to stop bullying before more tragedies like this happen.

It is unjust to the principles of America for the issue of same-sex marriage to be a conflict of religion.  Marriage is a religious ceremony while domestic partnership is a legal one.  It should be up to the Church, not the state, to decide whether a same-sex couple should be allowed to get married or not.  If the state is so against same-sex couples then it should be asking the question: should same-sex couples be allowed to have a domestic partnership.  The State should stay out of marriage because it is a religious contract.  The opinions of the people deciding whether same-sex marriage should be legal or not should not be swayed by religion either.

Most of the citizens of the United States who are against same-sex marriage have motives affiliated with the Church.  They sign petitions, hold picket signs, and campaign against same-sex marriage because, for some reason, they feel it is their responsibility to “save” gay people from Hell.  The State needs to keep in mind that these people who send in petitions are motivated by religion, not by what is right or fair.  My Parish is very accepting of gay people and same-sex couples.  Perhaps it is because I live in a more liberal part of the country.  The allowance of same-sex marriages should be the decision of the Church and the allowance of domestic partnership should be up to the State.  This plan would hopefully keep religion out of politics.

“Are you married?”  This can be one of the most dreaded questions that gay people are asked.  The answer is more complicated than a simple “yes” or “no.”  It is also a question that can out a gay person to anyone who asks it.  Many gay people don’t mind if everyone in the world know their sexual orientation; however, there are some who would like to have the choice of who to tell and who not to tell.  The two men or two women who have been in a committed relationship for years and would already be married if same-sex marriages were allowed may struggle with answering this question.  Technically, they are not married so they would have to explain that they have a “life partner” or something along those lines.  Even if the words “I’m gay” don’t leave their lips, “life partner” pretty much gives it away.  This could cause problems if the person asking the question is one of those Proposition 8 supporters.  Not only is banning same-sex marriage a violation of the rights and equality of gay people, but it is also and invasion of privacy.  Every individual in the United States is supposed to have these rights, but for some, seemingly unexplainable reason, gay people are denied them.  This should be changed now!

We are all guilty of using politically incorrect terms such as “retard” and Family Guy uses the word in almost every episode. This episode, however, clearly attacks Sarah Palin and her family and that is not right. Palin appeared on The O’Reilly Factor to comment on the jab. She stated that “the world is full of cruel, cold-hearted people who would do such a thing.” She went on to say, “when is enough, enough? And when are we going to be able to say, you know, some things just aren’t really funny.” She is absolutely right. It isn’t right for people to use words such as “retard,” but Seth MacFarlane went way too far on this one although the actress who is the voice of Ellen, Andrea Fay Friedman, actually has down syndrome. Friedman told ABC News, “it would be nice if [Palin] did have a sense of humor. Come on, Sarah, laugh a little.” Well, Andrea, Sarah isn’t the only one not laughing. Watching this episode just made my jaw drop. Not once did I find the remark targeting the Palins funny. My dad, who laughs at anything even remotely funny, didn’t even smirk and my mom remarked, “that’s horrible!” So, good job, Seth, it looks like this episode got more indecency complaints than it did laughs.

Under the DADT policy, any service member found engaged in a homosexual act will be dismissed from the military with dishonorable discharge while those found or suspected of homosexual behavior including, but not limited to a statement that the member is homosexual, a marriage or attempted marriage to the same sex, and speaking about homosexual relationships will be dismissed from the military with honorable discharge.  This is simply unfair considering service members found in a heterosexual act are usually not dismissed nor is anyone dismissed for talking about heterosexual relationships or for stating that they are heterosexual.  Being homosexual does not make a man or a woman any less of a man or a woman nor do any homosexual acts harm anybody.

The public, military personnel, and President Obama have varying opinions about the policy.  According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, 75% of Americans said people who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the U.S. military.  A Zogby poll of more than 500 service members shows that 75% are comfortable interacting with members of the LGBT community.  Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, John M. Shalikashvili, who previously supported DADT, “now believe[s] that if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces.”  Top military officials support President Obama’s motion to repeal DADT.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates “fully support[s] the president’s decision.”  chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Michael Mullen, stated the service members should not be forced to “lie about who they are.” President Obama has advocated to repeal the policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and to allow openly gay men and women to serve in the military.  This is only fair.

The United States takes pride in freedom; however, the DADT policy is not one based on freedom, but is one of discrimination and unfairness.  The military is something of pride and the U.S. should take pride in fairness and freedom, not discrimination and prejudice.  It is about time that action is taken against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and it is one more great step forward in equality for all humankind.