Jaclyn Larsen. Mr. Gregory. Period 2. February 12, 2017.

Jaclyn Larsen Mr. Gregory Period 2 February 12, 2017 The Gateway Theory: On Marijuana Within the last few years there has been a nation wide drive towards the legalization of marijuana. This year, it has finally been taken off the list of gateway drugs. A number of states have seen the legalization of marijuana as a gateway to medical benefits. Whereas other states are still skeptical of some of the unknown factors of marijuana. So how was the decision made that marijuana is not a gateway drug? It simply came to the end fact that it is up to the user whether they will experiment with other drugs or stick to just marijuana. In recent discussion, Robert L. DuPont, president of the Institute for Behavior and Health and the first director of†¦show more content†¦He is mistaken for he fails to see that a majority of those people who start with smoking weed then move on to other drugs more than likely have some other problems that provoke them to try these substances. On a more reasonable side to the argument, Deborah Peterson Small shines light on the factors that DuPont missed. The former director of public policy for the Drug Policy Alliance observes that, â€Å"...the real gateways to addiction are poverty, trauma, mental health problems and the effects of criminalization and stigma.† (Deborah Peterson Small, Look at the Real Gateways to Drug Addiction.) Basically, Small looks at the real problems that can be prove to lead a more general group of people to experiment with drugs. Not just a high school kid who s feeling a little rebellious and wants to see what the high life is all about . It is important to keep in mind that marijuana may enhance the brain’s reaction to other drugs, but it cannot make the brain want to try more drugs. The gateway to try other drugs is left open, it is a personal choice that can be made by anyone without the influence of marijuana. Whether it be a mental illness or difficult life situation, marijuana is not a gateway drug, so it was a well thought out decision to have it removed from the list of gateway drugs. Another important detail to remember is that marijuana is not proven to lead to the consumption of other drugs. â€Å"...the vast majority of people who use

The Federalist Papers - 1250 Words

Introduction The Federalist Papers present a series of essays written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. This volume of eighty-five essays, written between October 1787 and May 1788, is perhaps the most famous, and at the same time the most important newspaper column ever published. These essays are considered to be among the most important documents of the Founding period, together with the Constitution and Civil Rights Act. In these essays the authors provided facts and justification for the Constitution, with also raising and discussing some of the most important political issues of the time. The sole purpose for writing the essays was to convince people of the State of New York to ratify the U.S. Constitution. People of New York and its political leaders were strongly against the Constitution and they firmly opposed new government. The main reason for that is the fact that the State of New York gain independence under the Articles of Confederation and was becoming rich troug h the trade. The citizens of this state believed that they have no interest in ratifying the Constitution and joining the Union. The writers of The Federalist Papers were very concerned that because of New York’s reluctance and decided to take the matter into their hands and came all the efforts in order to change their minds. They were very well aware of the relationship between human nature and popular government. Hamilton, Madison and Jay were apprehensive of the ethics of theShow MoreRelatedFederalist Papers : The Federalist Paper1617 Words   |  7 PagesDaniel Gasca Mr. Brooks AP Government Period 1 10/27/15 The Federalist Papers The Federalist Papers Ten and Fifty-One were the ideal papers written by Madison to support th ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬Ã‚ ¬e ratification of the Constitution. Out of all the federalist papers, these are two of the most important federalist papers. So what were the federalist papers? They were 85 essays written by three gentlemen: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay that explained particular provisions of the Constitution in detailRead MoreThe Federalist Papers By John Jay995 Words   |  4 PagesThe Federalist Papers â€Å"This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a ban of brethren, united to each other by the strongest of ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.† (Jay 1787) This was written by John Jay in one of a collection of 85 essays written by John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton known as The FederalistRead MoreThe Federalist Papers By John Jay2011 Words   |  9 PagesThe Federalist Papers, written in New York by John Jay, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, during the years of 1787 and 1788, were a collection of eighty-five essays that were written to augment and garner support and to defend those concepts set forth in The Constitution of the United States of America (hereafter â€Å"The Constitution†), which had not yet been ratified. The Federalist Papers not only championed The Constit ution, but they also explained how the new government would operate in theRead MoreThe Federalist Paper By James Madison1728 Words   |  7 PagesThe Federalist Papers were 85 essays that were published in 1787 and 1788. They were anonymous and always signed by â€Å"Publius.† Publius was actually 3 men, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay. They wrote the papers to convince the people of New York to vote to ratify the Constitution. These essays were published in newspapers throughout the state of New York. Federalist 10 was written by James Madison and was titled The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and InsurrectionRead MoreThe Federalist Papers By Alexander Hamilton2239 Words   |  9 PagesThe Federalist papers are essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay with the main purpose to show the pros of officially confirming the constitution. The essays show an overall pessimistic view to mankind, emphasizing the r eliance men need on government, and the importance of having the best fit government. They give a great base for understanding the intentions of the constitution that we, as a nation, still attempt to follow today. Although these papers were written in 1787Read MoreFederalist Papers #10 Essay1425 Words   |  6 PagesUnited we stand, divided we fall The Federalist Papers Number 10 is written by James Madison and explains the necessity of the Constitution to protect our country from factions. A faction is â€Å"a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent aggregate interests of the community (Publius, 72).† Publius states that there are two waysRead More Alexander Hamilton’s First Federalist Paper1075 Words   |  5 PagesAlexander Hamilton’s First Federalist Paper Alexander Hamilton’s first Federalist Paper endorses ratification of the proposed constitution. His unifying point is that the use of reason—in the form of the people’s reflection and choice—will lead to the truth, whereas their use of passion will lead to ruin. Hamilton attempts to persuade his readers to make the correct decision by reminding them of the sheer importance of the matter. He suggests that good men will want to make the correct choiceRead MoreThe Federalist Papers By Alexander Hamilton778 Words   |  4 PagesHamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, the Federalist Papers are a collection of essays that were created in order to defend the Constitution against claims that stated it threatened the freedom and liberty of individuals, and gave too much power to the national government. The 78th essay of the Federalist Papers was written by Alexander Hamilton in efforts to address one of these concerns, that anti-federalists feared the independenc e of the Judiciary. In this paper, Hamilton recognized and acknowledgedRead MoreThe Federalist Papers By Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, And John Jay1176 Words   |  5 PagesBut the Federalists would not easily forfeit. They argued that the Constitution didn’t require a Bill of Rights. The Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, summed up the thoughts of many Federalists. In Federalist Paper No. 84 Publius, a pseudonym under which they wrote, addressed Antifederalist worries, â€Å"Bills of rights†¦ are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous.† Publius argued that because the Constitution was â€Å"foundedRead MoreWhy Did The Federalist Papers Influence The Ratification Of The Constitution?2354 Words   |  10 PagesSection A: Identification and Evaluation of Sources This investigation will explore the question: To what extent did The Federalist Papers influence the ratification of the Constitution? The publications, arguments, and effects of this document will be the focus of the investigation to allow for an analysis of where and in what ways The Federalist was influential during the constitutional conventions from 1787 to 1789. The first source that will be evaluated in depth is Ron Chernow’s book â€Å"Alexander

Living in Fear of Ourselves Free Essays

Since the beginning of time fear has made men do things he is not proud of. This is no different in the book Lord of the Flies. The children on the island, particularly Jack’s tribe, have made many poor choices out of fear. We will write a custom essay sample on Living in Fear of Ourselves or any similar topic only for you Order Now This is similar to how fear affects the outcome of certain choices that are made in society today. In Lord of the Flies it clearly shows how fear led to the death of Simon, the death of Piggy, and how fear can lead to savagery and chaos whether on a deserted island or in every day life. For example, fear on the island was what caused the death of Simon. The boys on the island were full of fear of â€Å"The Beast† (Golding 153), which they thought was a parachutist, but is nothing more than their imagination. Due to their fear, they mistook Simon for the beast and ended up throwing their spears at him in the dark, causing his death. Simon showed courage when he went to look for the beast. The boys were getting wild and rowdy doing their rain dance to get rid of the rain because they were afraid of the thunder and lightning. Instead of exploring the island and finding out what they were afraid of , Ralph and Jack were busy trying to decide who would be the leader of the island. Fear of the beast got the boys scared that he beast was going to come down and kill them, Simon thought other wise. On the island fear of each other caused another death. Fear caused division amongst the boys which led to another death on the island. Ralph, Piggy, and Sam and Eric were going to get Piggy’s specs back. Piggy expressed his concern Rivera 2 about going because he was afraid of Jack. He had reason to be afraid of Jack because he was bigger, stronger and had intimidated him in the past, for instance, he would often tell Piggy to â€Å"Shut Up! (Golding 37). Jack was afraid that Ralph would be the leader instead of him. When Ralph and his crew showed up at Castle Rock they noticed that Jack’s tribe had their faces painted black like savages. Jack ordered Roger to get the boulder trap to get rid of Ralph and his crew. Piggy and Ralph put their fear aside and went up to tell Jack that the glasses were Piggy’s. Meanwhile, Roger, out of fear that Jack wou ld hurt him if he didn’t obey his orders, let the boulder trap go. The boulder hits Piggy and he falls off the cliff and dies. Jack covers up his fear by saying that he had planned it all along. As you can see, fear often leads people to make wrong choices, and unfortunately they are left with the consequences of their actions, or the lack of their actions depending on how they let fear manipulate them. The saying its better to be safe then sorry is a great way to sum up how people let fear control them. Being fearful is not always a bad thing, but when you let it completely take over how you react to every situation it becomes a bad thing. For example, if your friends are doing something you know is wrong but you’re scared they wont like you if you don’t do it, and you go ahead and do it any way, that is being a coward. People who run from the police because they are scared to go to jail, is a bad decision many people often make out of fear. People in the world often let other people’s fear control them. When at an amusement park, deciding not to go on a ride because a friend is scared, would change the outcome of the trip from having a good time to being bored. Often in politics people all vote the same way because someone else is telling them to and they are fearful of what people will think of them if they vote against crowd. There are many things people fear, the unknown, finances, love, happiness, death, just to name a few. Knowing when to let go of some of the fear is the important part. Being confident in life Rivera 3 and sticking up for what one believes in helps people become confident and not afraid all the time. Learning the difference between being cautious and being afraid is what will people in society must learn to not live in fear of living. In Lord of the Flies there are two perfect examples of how fear controlled the minds of the kids which eventually led to the deaths of Simon and Piggy. Fear in the world can cause things to go wrong, because it makes people hate each other and be prejudice. A lot of bad decisions are made out of fear that hurt others. Learning to live without fear is something that people should try to learn to do. In Lord of the Flies, the island would have been a more secure place, if the kids would have been more secure with themselves, and that is the same for the world we live in today. How to cite Living in Fear of Ourselves, Papers

Goldman on Plain Sex free essay sample

Notes on Alan Goldmans Plain Sex Two Lessons about Ethical Thinking (1) Many ethical disagreements hinge upon disagreements about facts, not about moral principles. (2) Being a moral objectivist neednt mean being morally conservative. Both lessons help limit the appeal of moral relativism. ********************** (1) Many ethical disagreements hinge upon disagreements about facts, not about moral principles. Goldman claims that views about immoral sexual behaviour are rooted in our definition of sexual behaviour desire. Goldman criticizes Means-End Analyses i. The end (i. e. , purpose) of sex is reproduction. ii. The end is the expression of love iii. The end is communication iv. The end is interpersonal awareness. Why? Should we reject these analyses? Goldmans reason for rejecting those analyses: Theory (i) mistakes natures purpose for reproduction for our own. First of all, why should we think that nature really has any purposes at all? Only conscious things can have purposes, but nature isnt a conscious thing. We will write a custom essay sample on Goldman on Plain Sex or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Secondly, even if nature does have purposes, why should consider them  our  purposes? For example, if nature has purposes then probably the purpose of eating (from natures point of view) is nutrition, but we often think of eating differently. To us, the purpose is not just nutrition but also enjoyment. Theories (ii) (iv) mistake things that may, in particular cases, be associated with sex for things that are essential to sex. For example, Goldman thinks that sex  may  in particular cases be a way of expressing love, but it doesnt have to be. Are these convincing reasons for rejecting the these analyses? Goldmans Analysis:   sexual desire is desire for contact with another persons body and for the pleasure which such contact produces; sexual activity is activity which tends to fulfill such desire of the agent. (268) Sex is plain sex and nothing more. Is this the right account? How will the account you endorse affect your position on sexual morality? Consider:   once you define the purpose of sex, then it seems make sense to consider sex that doesnt serve that purpose as perverted, immoral sex. Think about the implications of each of the above analyses of sex for what counts as immoral sex. Notice how disagreements about something as seemingly uninteresting as the definition of sex can lead to substantial moral disagreements. ************************* (2) Being a moral objectivist neednt mean being morally conservative. Goldman considers both Deontological (i. e. , Kantian) Consequentialist (i. e. , Utilitarian) ways of considering sexual morality. (a)  Utilitarianism The moral rightness and wrongness of an action is determined by how much happiness it produces in total. Thus, the rightness or wrongness of   a sexual act is a function of how much happiness is produced by the act. What implications does this view have for sexual morality? (Note: Goldman seems to disapprove of utilitarianism. ) We might suggest it will lead to a fairly liberal view of sexual morality. With some limitations, if those involved in a sex act fully consent to it, its likely to lead to an overall increase in happiness, so the sexual act is morally OK. What might those limitations be? (b)  Kantian Morality The Categorical Imperative:  Ã‚  Act only according to that maxim [i. e. , rule] whereby you can at the same time will that it become a universal law. An Alternative Formulation of the C. I. :  Ã‚  Always treat others as  ends in themselves, not simply as the means to an end, i. e. , never just use people. What implications does this view have for sexual morality? Again, it might be thought to lead to a liberal view of sexual morality. With some limitations, so long as people fully consent to a sexual act no one is being treated simply as a means to an end so the act is morally OK. What might those limitations be? Here, the thing to notice is that both of these  objective  moral theories seem able to support quite liberal views about what are morally acceptable ways of behaving. The lesson here is that one can be a moral objectivist and have liberal moral views at the same time. ******************************* The question to think about for the assignment:   Is the view of sex that Goldman presents correct? [Philosophy 1200]