Labeling Genetically Modified Foods by Cheyenne Cortez

The argument for labeling genetically modified (GM) foods is often overlooked. However, recently consumers, not only in the United States, but all over the world are becoming increasingly aware of this topic. The knowledge of personal health is expanding throughout the US and these days it’s seen as an improved way of living. The question: Should US laws mandate labeling GM foods?

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has claimed that there is no substantial difference between GM foods and conventional foods. Since 1992, the FDA has required labeling of GM foods only if the food has a nutritional property that is notably different from what purchasers would expect of that food. For example, if the protein from one substance is injected into the DNA of another substance, it may contain an allergen that the consumer would not assume to be in that product. However, wouldn’t you consider any foods that have been genetically modified different from what you would expect? Is a tomato in a laboratory, that has been injected with the anti-freeze gene from an arctic fish, the same exact thing has a tomato that has been grown fresh in your backyard? The pro-labeling argument is as simple as this: we as human beings deserve the right to know what is in our food.

Many anti-labeling arguments state that when you label a product as “genetically modified” it has been known to cause consumers to avoid purchasing that product. Even if there is no sufficient evidence of said product being harmful to one’s health. Europe had an experience with this ordeal when they permitted mandatory labeling laws. Segregation of GM foods became so great that retailers had to eliminate all merchandise from their shelves. It is axiomatic to say that the price of produce increased.

You can not ignore the request of American citizens though. In 2013, the New York Times organized a poll, with 93 percent of respondents saying that foods containing such ingredients should be identified. The national telephone poll was conducted with 1,052 adults and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. Produce prices may increase, but that is the price most of us are willing to accept. Abolishing GM foods is not my argument, to accommodate the food supply in our country is necessary. Nevertheless, I deserve the right to know what exactly I am putting into my body.

Death with Dignity Act S.DAY


In October of 1997, Oregon enacted the Death with Dignity act which allows terminally-ill residents to end their life by the voluntary taking of lethal medications prescribed by a licensed doctor. This act does require the Oregon Health Authority to collect patient information regarding the patients and physicians who participate in the act, and statistics are published each year. By reviewing the statistics, Physicians prescribe these medications for patients who face a life threatening illness such as cancer that is treated through harmful/painful means to the body like radiation and surgery.

    One might question, how exactly do doctors determine that a patient is in well enough mind to make the decision between: life or death? Has this patient truly understood the stages of treatment, and the possible outcomes of that treatment? Has the patient’s family been spoken to, and has the patient spoken to the family regarding her choice? Has the patient truly weighed all options regarding treatment options? Should her family accept those choices without fight, because it is her choice? One issue with this, is what happens when the family finds that their daughter, son, mom, dad, aunt etc. has passed away following ingesting these lethal prescriptions due to the Death with Dignity Act? There is a lot of paperwork and steps a patient must go through in order for a doctor to prescribe these medications. A patient according to the Oregon Health Authority must first obtain two consulting doctors compliance/approval forms that the patient understands their condition, treatment options and the consequences of these lethal prescriptions, Psychiatric evaluation to ensure that the patient is in the right state of mind, and there is a consent form that ensures the patient understands their diagnosis, prognosis of said diagnosis, options of treatment, and that said patient understands that death may occur three hours after ingestion of lethal drugs or can happen longer than that, this form also requires two witness signatures- blood, and one non related person who has no mention in patients will (If that patient may have one), there is also an attending physicians form that documents when the patient requested the lethal medications (which must be done twice, and the third time a prescription must be written in 48 hours) this physician must also note that he has determined the patient is terminally ill, making her own choice (without being forced by someone else), is in fact an Oregon resident. The patient is also consulted about not taking these medications in public places and to have someone there when these medications are ingested. After the patient has died, the doctor has TEN calendar days to fill out a form determining if patients death was in fact caused by the lethal medications, underlying causes, or in fact by terminal illness itself. This attending physicians follow up form in depth to the point that it asks for the specific amount of time it took for patient to pass.

    Everyone has heard the story about Brittany Maynard, and I’m sure most people thought “That’s an extremely cowardly thing to do” or something of that nature. I thought however, about how the physicians determine that a patient is in the right state of mind to make that decision when given a terminal diagnosis like brain cancer. Brittany Maynard began to experience really bad headaches and decided to see a doctor, after a CT scan it was found that she had Stage 4 Glioblastoma, a malignant form of brain cancer, and underwent a craniotomy to try to remove the tumor. Three months later, it was found on another scan that the tumor g actually grown in size, and this was when Brittany was told she had six months to live, at best.

Since this occurrence, four other states have legalized the Death with Dignity act: Washington, Montana, Vermont and New Mexico. Whereas California, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Jersey, have campaigns in place to assist in death with dignity cases all started by Compassion & Choices.

So take a moment to ask yourself, is it really right to have someone suffer… just because Doctor assisted suicide is such taboo?

Below I’m including the links to the forms used in Oregon as well as where I got the information from.



(Source for images:

A.ROSE Capital Punishment

Many people in this world have their own opinion on Capital Punishment (the death penalty), and their beliefs on whether they think it is right or wrong. This blog is against it, there are a lot of other ways to punish a human being for a crime they have committed. Death is not a discipline action if the person does not learn from his or her mistakes, because he or she will be dead. Capital Punishment should be abolished because it is inhumane, the victims may be innocent, and it is irreversible.                                       Capital Punishment is inhumane; people should not kill other people for many different reasons. If a person makes a mistake, he or she deserves a second chance no matter the circumstances. How do people expect someone to learn or know what is right or wrong if they do not teach them, so they can pass on what they have learned. Death is not the answer to a penalty. If one is religious, they know that killing another human is a sin, according to the Holy Bible. No one wants to be punished for all eternity by god. If a person does not learn from their mistakes; a life time in jail is better then no life at all.

Besides inhumanity, another reason Capital Punishment should be abolished, is because the person who is sentenced may be innocent. Conspiracy happens a lot in the court room and on cases. For reasons such as money, Jurors or lawyers may have been in on a scam to say the offending is guilty; not noticing the outcome of ones life or if he or she had a family. Another reason is Jurors may have been biased, and may not have cared too much about the trial. In some cases there is faulty evidence that is mistaken or made to mislead people in finding the person guilty. Also, evidence could have been left out and presented incorrectly.                                                                                             Inhumanity, and one being innocent are important traits when viewing Capital Punishment as wrong, but the key detail is that the death penalty is irreversible. Once a person is killed the sentence cannot be fixed, changed, or taken back.  Ending ones life is the ultimate step. If in the future new evidence surfaces or shows the person innocent, it will be too late, because the person cannot be brought back. Then he or she who is responsible and all who supported the sentencing will have deep regret. No one can bring the victims family comfort; the family would be deeply hurt, not only that they lost a love one, but because they lost their love one for no reason since he or she was innocent. Everyone supporting the sentence will lose peoples trust and have to live with regret and sorrow knowing they took an innocent life away for ever.                                                         Capital Punishment should be abolished because it is inhumane, uncertain if the victim is truly innocent, and it is irreversible.  You cannot simply take someone’s life because they took a life, two wrongs don’t make a right. On the other hand, it takes years before someone is sentenced to the death penalty, while they are awaiting the sentence they are still in prison living off of tax payer’s money. There is always going to be people with different opinions on it. Pros and cons on Capital Punishment need to be overlooked and weighed out to see what the best possible disciplinary action for a human being is. When worst comes to worst, taking the life of another human being is wrong.


Yanely Carrazana (Florida Southwestern): Racism

My opinion on racism is that no one should be treated differently based on race, gender, age. Even though the official definition is hate or discrimination on a certain race, racism comes in different ways. We find racism now even with the outlaw of segregation. No law can change the opinion of a human being and if someone dislikes a race there’s nothing to be done about it. Someone who dislikes a race would disagree with this blog post. They could think themselves better than someone of that race. They might think that they are the only one capable or worthy to go someplace or do something.

Moreover, according to white people have higher employment rates comparable with Hispanics. While this is America and there are more white people than Hispanics, there is a chance that Hispanics might not get the same opportunities to reach their goal.

Additionally, racism goes against the constitution. It writes about equality and racism is all about inequality. It disallows a person the same chances or opportunities than a person of another race. Also, back during when Martin Luther King Jr was fighting for African American rights, black people were considered to be on a a completely different level than white people. White people thought they were lower than and deserved to be treated inhumanely.

Yanely Carrazana (Florida Southwestern): Beauty Standards

Beauty is different from one person to another. The average man might consider beauty to be something completely different from women. Women see models in magazine and convince themselves that if they don’t look similar, they’re not beautiful. Beauty can make you feel good about yourself thereby increasing your personal presence. Beauty makes people to feel professional, more confident, and make them self-esteem stronger effectively changing the way the act around people. Depending on their standards, a woman who feels confident and beautiful will walk down a street shoulders high, back straight, and unafraid of meeting someone’s gaze. Whereas someone who doesn’t feel comfortable in their own skin might walk down with less confidence and act differently. Their standards are set by the women they see on billboards and magazines that are considered ‘beautiful’ because of their fame. Men these days look at those models and think that they look beautiful, but not real. They know that achieving a women like that is near impossible because they’re not ‘real’. Even with all the changes they have done they are still not happy and they continue to change themselves cosmetically to achieve perfection.

How does beauty affect our culture? Females in our culture think that beauty can reach their goals and help them socially like job opportunities and social lives. It can change their social lives, but not the way they think it to.

In addition, nearly 50 percent of women think that plastic surgery to their body will add value to themselves. Instead of dressing themselves differently or applying makeup to  hide imperfections women surgically alter their body to change it for a longer period.

Beauty will affect social change. It can affect their behavior in social institutions, social relations, and social behaviors. If a woman feels beautiful they will feel more confident in their steps and the way they act in a social building like during parties.

If one feels confident about themselves, they will begin to integrate themselves with any group. They will begin to socialize with people they once thought were out of their league. They will feel as if they’re now worthy enough to talk to whoever.

Caitlynn Cook; Welfare

This is the definition of welfare; Welfare is the provision of a minimal level of well-being and social support for all citizens, sometimes referred to as public aid.
I feel as welfare is a lot of help to many people. But what frustrates me that there’s some people out there that are hardworking people that actually need help with buying food, or paying for things for their children that just because they make to much money can’t go onto it. But what the government doesn’t understand is that some people who are hardworking, only get to buy food or clothes or necessities with the tips that they make for that day, so if they didn’t make enough money in tips for the day they can’t put food on the table. I feel it is unfair for those people when people who are more than capable of getting jobs but are simply lazy get put on welfare. Its pretty much saying that you can sit around lazy your life and get everything paid for by the government.
I think that its a good idea that some people are trying to get the government to change by putting the ideas of making sure that the person is trying to get a job, etc. Hopefully if the government hasn’t already is looking into making joining welfare for people who actually need it.

definition of welfare from wikipedia

personal experience

Vera Lepera Rape Culture

Rape Culture has essentially survived the test of time; it has been around for nearly as long as human civilization has, and not enough has been done to end it. People in society believe that the attitudes and actions that have been perpetuated by rape culture have been and always will be. Despite the efforts of some, the majority of society has allowed this problem to continue to prevail. Television, music, literature, and advertising allows violence against women and forced sexual interactions seem common and sometimes even acceptable.  These attitudes have led to our society failing to protect victims of rape. Rape culture exists throughout the world; in certain countries of the world, it is a routine part of the terrorism against civilian populations in civil wars, such as the areas of sub-Saharan African.

The following is a definition of “Rape Culture” by the Woman’s Center at Marshall University.   “Rape Culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence against women is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture. Rape culture is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women’s bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women’s rights and safety”  Rape is such a violent crime, both physically and emotionally, it is important to raise awareness and take action to protect victims and to fight this pursuing culture. Raising awareness of rape culture in society is an important step in fighting the stereotypes and changing the attitudes that continue to perpetuate the culture. Therefore, this subject is important, and time is of the essence. We should spend more time trying educate both men and women that rape is not a game.  We should put more fliers on camps, also put ads on tv. They should include a number that people can call to get help. We need to let men and women know not to blame this on them self no matter what others say, and to call and get help. We should educate others to help to if they know anyone that has been raped and to be there for that person and help them to get through it. We need to give a hug to those that need us the most.