Evidence and support for your claim Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Evidence and support for your claim - Essay Example When talking about violence in media, advocates against violence state that they are pushing for more censorship in behalf of the youth. A study has shown that children who were non-violent showed a high level of brain activity similar to that of children with aggressive behavior. (Mathis, 2005) More research has to be conducted to ensure that the brain activity was a direct result of exposure to violent television shows. Nevertheless, theories on behavioral psychology explain that an individual’s behavior can be influenced by a number of things, one of which is through observance of the actions in his or her surroundings. As a child, the individual tends to mimic what he or she sees from the adults around him. (Observation, 2005) Children usually imitate behavior and language from the people around them. This is how they start learning to communicate. As such, adults are often mindful of how they act and what they say whenever around very young children. This is also why parents have their kids watch educational children’s shows. They are in the frame of mind that their children will pick up the words and lessons from the said shows. This way of thinking can also be applied when it comes to violent shows. By having children watch shows with gun-wielding teenagers, people fighting and individuals shouting foul words, media is sending a message that it is normal to act as violently. Media is reinforcing the notion that fighting is acceptable in society. It provides the young viewers role models who exhibit aggressive behavior. Producers of the show maintain that they cannot do away with action scenes and aggressive behavior as these will affect the quality of their shows. They may say that it is the responsibility of the parents to supervise what their children are watching. Also, they may say that their shows are classified for adult viewers who know the difference

It’s Time to Demand More from Corporate America Essay -- Argumentative

It’s Time to Demand More from Corporate America Michael Moore exposes corporate America's dark side in Roger and Me, Pets or Meat: The Return to Flint, and The Big One (Moore).   These show that corporate America is committing a form of domestic terrorism by dehumanizing and exploiting their workers then forcing them to the streets to survive. The actions by individuals such as Roger Smith and Phil Knight are perfect examples of capitalists constantly oppressing the working class described by Karl Marx.   By dehumanizing workers business owners are able to push them to the streets by closing factories and remain a good public image.   Who cares if these degenerate people lose their jobs?   The first step in the terrorism plot is to strip the workers of their livelihood.   When the workers are oppressed they will eventually break down and lose their identity making them easy to push around.   Mike Lefevre demonstrates this idea in his interview with Studs Terkle.   "Everybody should have something to point to." Mike says suggesting the loss of identity he feels with being a labor...

Are Steroids Worth the Risk

Are Steroids Worth the Risk? One of the most controversial issues with all athletes are steroids. How harmful are they? Is it worth the risk to get a competitive edge on the game? Should it be banned from sports? Steroids are not the answer; not only are there physical bad side effects, there are also psychological effects short and long term. The history of steroids dates back to the 1930s, the were taking from male testosterone originally. They were used to treat HIV-AIDS and cancer. They also helped stimulate bone growth and appetite, in order to help those who had trouble with weight gain. An example of this was a man named Barry Tyson who was suffering from HIV and took steroids in order to help build more mass in order to fight off infections from the disease. He noted that, within the first dosage he had taking at night he woke up the next day feeling like a new man and had abundant sources of energy. Some were along theses lines of using it for good medical use and healing it was lost for the benefit of athletes. The effects of steroids are tremendous in both genders. Yes even girls have been caught on steroids to help give them an advantage in sports. The risk that effect boys in the long run are; Testicular shrinkage, blood clotting, breast development, impotence (inability to get an erection), sterility, jaundice (liver damage), shortening of height, heart disease, cancer, and even tumors. Now why would someone want to risk all those long term effects just to get a little stronger. Some would say, â€Å"well I'm just going to use it for a little then I will get off of it. Well steroids is just like any other drug, it is addicting. People try to get off, but once off they realize they cannot get gains as quickly as Palcsik 2 they were before and go back on the steroids thinking just one more time will be fine. After time has passed they never get off and become addicted just like any other drug. Even if you are still skeptic here are some short term effects on boys from steroids: Premature balding or hair loss, dizziness, trembling, seizures, pain when urinating, and even aching joints. Not only are boys effected, but some girls try to get a competitive edge over the fellow athletes. Steroids are not meant to be taken by woman, because a woman's genetics are not meant for male testosterone. Some of the effects on girls are; increased facial hair, development of masculine traits such as deepening of the voice, loss of feminine characteristics, shrinking of breast, and even extreme increased sex drive. These risks are not worth having just so they can become better or close to their competition. Most woman's effects of steroids are irreversible and once one cannot be changed. Another trend found in woman is that when they take steroids they tend to drink more often than usual. This leads to even more liver problems and possible shut down of this organ may be a long term effect. Not only are there physical effects, but there are some psychological effects also. One of the most major factors is â€Å"roid rage. † Roid rage is a result of steroids that cause drastic moods swings and aggression. No just little mood swings, they are extreme uncontrolled bouts of anger caused by steroid use. The longer use of the steroids the more so called rages are experienced and to a greater extent. Back a few years ago there was an entertainment wrestler that used steroids excessively. As the years went on he never noticed any rages or irritability. Suddenly one day he snapped in a violent rage killing his wife and strangling his little seven year old son. Other psychological effects are depression, becoming delusional, paranoia, and even problems sleeping. So not only are there all these mental aspects of steroids that can destroy you, but also physical effects too. Many people believe that taking steroids to get the competitive edge is worth it. Look at all these negative effects. The short term results are not worth the extreme damaged caused to athletes body. People also say well steroids shouldn't be illegal in sports, if you choose to take the risk then it is Palcsik 3 that persons responsibility. The answer is no steroids are not okay in sports or at all in daily life. It was initially banned not because it was considered cheating in sports, but because of the unhealthy effects of steroids and the addictions caused by it. Also it is cheating it is not a persons natural ability, it is fake and additives to the body that are naturally there. People might say well people use it when they are sick so it can't be that bad. Steroids should only be used in medicine to help patients that need it because it is controlled by doctors so u cant exceed the amount you are supposed to have. It is a controlled prescription that the doctors understand. Steroids are not the answer for athletes. If you have the raw natural talent then you have what it takes to be a superb athlete, if not then keep trying till it is no longer possible. If it is not meant to be then it isn't meant to be, there is no point in sacrificing your body just for a few years of possible fame or glamor. Also its not even guaranteed that a person will succeed in the what the reason is that they are taking steroids. The question is are you willing to go throw pain and suffering for the rest of your life just for a advantage over the competition for a temporary time?

What is a Unitary State Pros, Cons, Examples

A unitary state, or unitary government, is a governing system in which a single central government has total power over all of its other political subdivisions. A unitary state is the opposite of a federation, where governmental powers and responsibilities are divided. In a unitary state, the political subdivisions must carry out the directives of the central government but have no power to act on their own. Key Takeaways: Unitary State In a unitary state, the national government has total authority over all of the country’s other political subdivisions (e.g. states).Unitary states are the opposite of federations, in which governing power is shared by a national government and its subdivisions.The unitary state is the most common form of government in the world. In a unitary state, the central government may grant some powers to its local governments through a legislative process called â€Å"devolution.† However, the central government reserves supreme power and can revoke the powers it devolves to the local governments or invalidate their actions. Examples of Unitary States Of the 193 member countries of the United Nations, 165 are unitary states. The United Kingdom and France are two well-recognized examples.   United Kingdom The United Kingdom (UK) is composed of the countries of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. While technically a constitutional monarchy, the UK functions as a unitary state, with total political power held by Parliament (the national legislature located in London, England). While the other countries within the UK each have their own governments, they cannot enact laws that affect any other part of the UK, nor can they refuse to enforce a law enacted by Parliament. France In the Republic of France, the central government exercises total control over the country’s nearly 1,000 local political subdivisions, which are called â€Å"departments.† Each department is headed by an administrative prefect appointed by the French central government. While they are technically governments, France’s regional departments exist only to implement the directives issued by the central government. Some other notable unitary states include Italy, Japan, the People’s Republic of China, and the Philippines. Unitary States vs. Federations The opposite of a unitary state is a federation. A federation is a constitutionally organized union or alliance of partially self-governing states or other regions under a central federal government. Unlike the largely powerless local governments in a unitary state, the states of a federation enjoy some degree of independence in their internal affairs. The US government structure is a good example of a federation. The U.S. Constitution establishes a system of federalism under which powers are shared between the central government in Washington, D.C., and the governments of the 50 individual states. The power-sharing system of federalism is defined in the 10th Amendment to the Constitution: â€Å"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.† While the U.S. Constitution specifically reserves some powers for the federal government, other powers are granted to the collective states, and others are shared by both. While the states have the power to enact their own laws, the laws must comply with the U.S. Constitution. Lastly, the states have the power to collectively amend the U.S. Constitution, provided that two-thirds of state governments vote to demand it. Even in federations, the distribution of power is often a source of controversy. In the United States, for example, disputes over states’ rights—the constitutional division of power between the federal and state governments—is a common subject of rulings issued by the U.S. Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction. Unitary States vs. Authoritarian States Unitary states should not be confused with authoritarian states. In an authoritarian state, all governing and political power is vested in a single individual leader or small, elite group of individuals. The leader or leaders of an authoritarian state are not chosen by the people, nor are they constitutionally responsible to the people. Authoritarian states rarely allow freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or freedom to practice non-state approved religions. In addition, there are no provisions for protecting the rights of minorities. Nazi Germany under Adolf Hitler is typically cited as the prototypical authoritarian state; modern examples include Cuba, North Korea, and Iran. Pros and Cons The unitary state is the most common form of government in the world. This system of government has its benefits, but as with all schemes of dividing power between government and the people, it also has drawbacks. Advantages of a Unitary State Can act quickly: Because decisions are made by a single governing body, the unitary government is able to respond more quickly to unexpected situations, whether they are domestic or foreign. Can be less costly: Without the multiple levels of government bureaucracy common to federations, unitary states are able to operate more efficiently, thus potentially reducing their tax burden on the population. Can be smaller: The unitary state can govern the entire country from a single location with a minimal number or elected officials. The smaller structure of a unitary state allows it to meet the needs of the people without involving a massive workforce. Disadvantages of Unitary States Can lack infrastructure: Although they may be able to make decisions quickly, unitary governments sometimes lack the physical infrastructure needed to implement their decisions. In national emergencies, like natural disasters, the absence of infrastructure can endanger the people. Can ignore local needs: Because they can be slow to develop the resources needed to respond to arising situations, unitary governments tend to focus on foreign affairs while keeping domestic needs on the back burner. Can encourage abuse of power:  In unitary states, a single person or legislative body holds most, if not all, governmental power. History has shown that power, when placed in too few hands, is easily abused. Sources .†Unitary Stateâ€Å" The Annenberg Classroom Project..†Constitutional Limits on Government: Country Studies – Franceâ€Å" DemocracyWeb..â€Å".†Overview of the UK system of government Direct.Gov. UK National Archives.