Until recently, morality was viewed as something that humans were forced to develop in order to maintain societal order, to keep chaos from breaking out lest our natural “base urges” overtake us and cause us to run amok. 

But Frans de Waal, a biologist at Emory University in Atlanta, told the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science that “humans have a lot of pro-social tendencies.”

New research on higher animals from primates and elephants to mice shows there is a biological basis for behavior such as cooperation, said de Waal, author of “The Age of Empathy: Nature’s Lessons for a Kinder Society.”

Cover via Amazon

De Waal explained that human children — and most higher animals — are “moral” in a scientific sense, because they need to cooperate with each other to reproduce and pass on their genes.

Biologist Thomas Henry Huxley argued in the 19th century that morality is absent in nature and something created by humans, and that point of view has been commonly held until research showed it to be incorrect.

And de Waal wants it known that Charles Darwin never had a thing to do with perpetuating that harsh view, nor did it have anything to do with his Theory of Evolution.

“Darwin was much smarter than most of his followers,” said de Waal, quoting from Darwin’s “The Descent of Man” that animals that developed “well-marked social instincts would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience.”

De Waal showed the audience at the meeting videos from laboratories revealing the dramatic emotional distress of a monkey denied a treat that another monkey received; and of a rat giving up chocolate in order to help another rat escape from a trap.

Such research shows that animals naturally have pro-social tendencies for “reciprocity, fairness, empathy and consolation,” said de Waal.

“Human morality is unthinkable without empathy.”

Taking a look back, I wonder if it has all been worth it.  Has it been worth being out there away from home, family and our personal obligations?  What have we gained by the action we have taken?  Is our government really listening to the voice of the “people,” we the people that make up the voting populous of America and in other places around the world who are also protesting the economic and social conditions found in today’s society?  It is a question we will not have a real answer to until some future date.  Despite our outcries, we still have to sit and wait and watch.

The Occupy protest began  as a protest movement by the general populous called the 99% as a protest against the high unemployment and the greed, corruption and the undue influences of large corporations on our government and the social and economic inequality in the United States between the wealthiest 1% of the U.S. population and the other 99% being pushed down and smothered by these powers and their influences on our governing bodies establishing an unfair global economy that is literally foreclosing on our future as businesses downsize and have major layoffs because they can’t afford to keep everyone employed or they are forced into bankruptcy and close their doors.  The general public loses their income and in the process their homes and livelihood while taxes, medical expenses, insurance, the cost of food and basic necessities have doubled and are crushing the life right out of the 99% represented in these protest movements that began on September 17, 2011 at Liberty Square in New York City’s Wall Street financial district and fanned protest all across the United States and around the world as the populous of nations banned together in protest against corrosive leadership in both government and big business. 

The economic and social conditions need to be re-evaluated to reflect equality for all 100% not just the elite few and not allow our rights to become tarnished or infringed upon by others through unfair laws, regulations and business practices.  No one is or was asking for a handout; just a hand up out of the mess the 1% has made and we allowed to happen by not speaking up sooner.  These protesters were asking the 1% to play fair and do their share.  The majority of Americans are willing to work for a living, pay their fair share of taxes to keep our Nation strong and running but things have got so far out of balance the “people” (that 99%) finally have had to say enough. 

We need to re-evaluate and repair the condition our condition is in and do it in a way that is fair to everyone.  You cannot get out of debt by borrowing more money or foreclosing on the 99% who are trying to do their fair share.  We can’t keep our own Nation strong and competitive when we give it away to other Nations or we become an aristocracy or socialist republic.  History has already proven that over and over again.  The only thing that works is when people pull together as a united front and do not succumb to the dictations of one or the few.    

We all want change and we all have our personal and community reasons for desiring change but change only comes if we make it happen and to make it happen we have to begin on a personal level.  The change has to begin at home and with each of us personally.  We need to ask our self what we can do to make things better for our self.  What can I personally do, change about my own circumstances that will in some way improve the situation I am in. 

Life isn’t always fair or easy.  There will always be someone who has more.  There will always be those who others consider to be poor.  There will always be those who will cheat and lie and scam and con to get what they want to fill their own pocket of greed.  There will always be users and abusers and some will actually get away with it for a time.

From Occupy Wall Street to all the other such places including Washington DC the voice of the people has spoken.  They original intent was good and meaningful but as I have looked back I think the whole Occupy thing got out of hand and not everybody was there for the right reasons.  Too many got caught up in the excitement, came for all the wrong reasons and crimes were committed on both sides and the whole thing seemed to go a little crazy. 

Instead of forming a truly united front, too many personal agendas, gripes and disagreements came to the surface and it has all ended with too much shouting and too many loud and angry voices screaming for their “rights” so that even if some who could make a real difference, were trying to listen, they couldn’t hear the words above the roar.  

On the surface it seems that all it has really amounted to is a lot more “sensationalism” in the news headlines with little to no real accomplishments achieved.  We are left right where we were when it all began, to sit and watch and wait to see what our government will really do.  Maybe some heard.  Maybe they can convince others to see the error of our way.  Time will tell.  For now we wait, we hope and we can all begin to make the changes this Country needs by beginning with our self and better governing our own personal behavior, and our attitude toward others.  

Image by Harald Groven via Flickr

We need some changes in our ethics laws that will open up the ears of lawmakers as wide to that mother and small business owner as to powerful special interest groups. Would a cap on lobbyists gifts work? And how much should it be? Some lobbyists feel that $100. is too little because some of the restaurants lawmakers are taken to cost much more than $100. a meal. How is it that they live in such a luxurious style that they expect a meal that costs over $100 dollars? In my opinion, an honest Representative of the people should live like the people he represents. My question is why do lawmakers feel they are entitled to any gifts at all. They are elected by the people and should be working for the best interest of the people, not the special interests groups that offer them the most expensive gifts. I feel the cap should be zero.

Some say limiting gifts will only hide the influence of lobbyists. States were ranked in 2010 using years of federal data submitted to the FBI by local government. Tennessee ranked number one in overall corruption and number 18 in in public corruption. Florida ranked 12th in public corruption. Both of these states have limits on gifts from lobbyists. Tennessee banned gifts from lobbyists in 1995, yet, in spite of the ban, in 2005 four Representatives and eight other people pleaded guilty or were convicted in the “Operation Tennessee Waltz,” a statewide bribery sting conducted in the state’s capitol.

Georgia has no limits and was ranked in the bottom 25% of the scale in public corruption. That’s why it’s thought by many that limiting lobbyists does not decrease corruption. It is also thought that caps would hide which lobbyists are lobbying which Representatives. Also, Representatives are required to report lobbyist expenditures every 15 days, if gifts were prohibited there would be no reporting and more room for shady maneuvers. Politics is a dirty business and it seems that every elected official is out to fill his own pockets at the expense of the people who voted him in.

Ruby’s:

http://socyberty.com/military/war-is-never-rational/

http://socyberty.com/politics/ron-paul-madman-or-prophet/

http://socyberty.com/issues/north-georgia-men-plotting-terrorist-attack/

http://socyberty.com/politics/12-million-home-too-small/

The fact behind such dialogs is in our cores – we both are not doing enough for sustenance of mutual trusts, though we both wish to trust each other. It is often said that trust begets trust, but the bitter fact of life is that mistrust begets mistrust. Indeed, we both have traces of mistrust for each other, this makes both of us not to care for sustenance of the trust of the other. This keeps our relationship switched on and off so often.

Image by Kerry Goodwin Photography via Flickr

The first and foremost condition of trust is its mutuality – both need to take care of it with equal zest and care. A little drift or doubt on one side spurs an equivalent reaction on the other side. Second important thing about trust is that it either full or null. Even a trace of doubt is good enough to nullify the will to trust.

When two persons make up their minds to trust each other, none of them must leave it to the other to keep on trusting, but each one must work consciously to sustain trust of the other. This I call providing conducive support to the other for maintaining the trust.

Another important issue about trust is that it matters little how you perceive your own conduct. Instead, it matters a lot how one’s conduct is perceived by the other. I put the same equation in other words to underline it – it is not enough for any one to be fair with the other by his/her own parameters but it is more important how fair his conduct is perceived by the other through parameters of the other person. Thus in matter of trust, one’s own perception gets less value as compared to perception of the other. Therefore, friends, don’t be just fair, but display fairness to the other to make him/her trust you.

The conclusion of the arguments here is simple, since trust is thing of mutuality, you need to understand parameters of the other partner of trust and comply with them to earn his.her trust, keeping your own parameter aside.          

Case in point, the Atlanta Public Schools decided to take the gifted children to Disney world for five days next month. For shame, Can you imagine how the other children who had worked hard to keep good grades felt? They felt they were not as good as the gifted, and that should not be tolerated. Inviting a select group and not others. That is segregation, pure and simple. That attitude is teaching children in American schools that they are inferior, it also encourages bullying. I say again. Shame on Atlanta Public Schools.

We should know by now not to sort out children in groups. Remember when Brown versus Board of Education concluded “to separate some children from others of similar age and qualification generates feelings of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone.” Are the gifted to be rewarded for being gifted, over the average who have to work twice as hard? All our children should be treated fairly and equally.

Researchers at Duke University developed a program called “Project Bright Idea.” They made a five year study of 10,000 students in the elementary grades who were all taught in the gifted classrooms. As a result a large number of students taught with techniques used in the gifted classrooms were eventually identified as being gifted. Compare that to 10 percent of students taught in regular classrooms.

Maybe, the decision makers who are allocating the $400 million Race to the Top grant will think differently than the School Board in Atlanta, and will get programs in place that can change the way our kids are taught and give them all a chance to excel. Every child should be recognized for his hard work, regardless of being gifted or average.

Publish your articles and earn income.

Articles by Ruby Hawk:

http://socyberty.com/government/the-bill-of-rights/

http://socyberty.com/crime/gangs-in-atlanta/

http://socyberty.com/languages/north-georgia-mountain-dialect/

http://socyberty.com/issues/child-prostitutes/

http://socyberty.com/lifestyle/why-some-succeed-where-others-fail/

Fort Knox, KY, in 1960 was still a very active military base that was home to a large tank training unit, some basic training units, and a few tons of gold.  I was there at the tender age of seventeen to do my basic training.   After waiting a one or two anxiety filled weeks for enough raw recruits to show up to form a company we were transferred to our stark, drab and extremely functional barracks.

        Age and time have erased any specific memories of how it all happened but I know that at some time we had to fall out into formation and attend to the business of the hour.  We also met our cadre, the sergeants and officers who would be cracking the whip over us for the next eight weeks.  We expected the worst.  We got the best.

       Our platoon Sargent was Sgt. Vargas.  A slight, fairly quiet, and unflappable Mexican America.  He hardly fit the image of the wall rattling, booming voiced, man-gorilla we usually think of when picturing a basic training platoon Sargent

       Our First Sargent was Sgt. Poolaw.  You don’t ask a Sargent what his first name is . . . Or much of anything else.  So, I don’t think any of us knew his first name then.  He was just Sgt. Poolaw.  And he was impressive.  He seemed eight feet tall, but probably not.  His build was square, he looked like his smile had abandoned him long ago, and his words were few, but well chosen.  He was native American.

      One day someone came from company headquarters found me and told me I had to go see Sgt. Poolaw for something other than for discipline.  I am sure he had an office but he did not seem like an office kind of guy.  I was told to meet him at the flag pole.  I met him there.  For a seventeen year old boy to meet with the first Sargent was an honor beyond compare.  I had lost my father before I ever got to know him and Sgt. Poolaw seemed like the quintessential father.  It seemed to me that had I ever wondered what a father looked like, this was it. 

        I came to learn that most of the guys in my company felt the same.  Even Sgt. Vargas spoke of Sgt. Poolaw in respectful tones.  My platoon was not made up of really great soldiers but in the end we came to respect our leaders so much that we wanted to win the outstanding platoon award for Sgt. Vargas.  We worked extremely hard to get all the bolts on our m1s to click shut in unison after inspection arms.  And they did and we won.

       Many years went by and many sergeants went by, but whenever I thought of what a soldier was, the image of Sgt. Poolaw came to mind.  One thing he said still sticks out in my mind.  He said that when we left basic training each one of us must be the kind of soldier who, when our foxhole buddy look across the foxhole at us, he was trying to see if we are OK and not to see if we were there.  He drilled it in to look out for each other.

       My three years in the Army came to an end and my civilian life began.  Many more years interceded during which I often remembered that man who looked for all the world as if he were born in army fatigues.  There are only a couple of people that one meets in ones lifetime for whom there is a feeling of having been in the presence of someone with a great deal of integrity, honesty and courage.  He was that person.  For all the respect I held for the man I did not hold his name in my memory, no matter how hard I tried to dredge it up.

       But, a couple months ago, while visiting my wife’s relatives, one of her nephews arrived.  He had a fresh, very short haircut.  The thought immediately and involuntarily ran through my mind, “That looks like a Poolaw”.   I was thinking about the haircut.  Sgt. Poolaw had been a stickler for Army hair fashion.  He told us to get our hair cut every two weeks and just tell any barber on base we wanted a “Poolaw”.  That is how the name came back to me.  I wrote it down before I was robbed of it again for another thirty years.

       When I got home I decided to Google “Poolaw”  to see what I could find.  Amazing!!  His name was Pascal Cleatus Poolaw Sr.  He was the most highly decorated Native American soldier in the history of the U. S. Military.  Among other decorations he won, as a young soldier in WWII, was the Silver Star, the military’s second highest wartime medal.  His commendation read, in part, as follows:

 Near Recogne, Belgium, on 8 September 1944. While attacking in support of a rifle company, Sergeant Poolaw displaced his machine gun squad forward across an open field under heavy mortar and small arms fire in such a manner as to effect a minimum number of casualties among his squad. After reaching his new position, Sergeant Poolaw saw the enemy advance in a strong counterattack. Standing unflinchingly in the face of withering machine gun fire for five minutes, he hurled hand grenades until the enemy force sustained numerous casualties and was dispersed. Due to Sergeant Poolaw’s actions, many of his comrades’ lives were saved and the company was able to continue the attack and capture strongly defended enemy positions. Sergeant Poolaw’s display of courage, aggressive spirit and complete disregard for personal safety are in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service.

He became a career soldier and served in the Korean War where, again he won several commendations including a second and third Silver Star.  His second Silver Star was awarded for the following action:

On 19 September 1950 when the company attack on an enemy position was halted by stiff enemy resistance, Sergeant First Class Poolaw volunteered to lead his squad in an assault. Courageously leading his men in a charge up the slope to penetrate the enemy perimeter and engage the numerically superior enemy in fierce hand-to-hand combat, Sergeant First Class Poolaw inspired his men to hold their position until the remainder of the company was able to seize the objective. Sergeant First Class Poolaw’s outstanding leadership reflects great credit upon himself and is in keeping with the highest traditions of the American Soldier.

Again, later in the Korean War, he earned a third Silver Star by these heroic actions:

 On 4 April 1951 near Chongong-ni, Korea, while attacking strong hostile positions, one squad of Master Sergeant Poolaw’s platoon was immobilized by a devastating automatic weapons and mortar barrage. Exposing himself to the deadly fire, he slowly advanced across open terrain, firing his rifle as he progressed. By deliberately diverting the attention of the foe to himself, he enabled his men to maneuver to more advantageous positions. Master Sergeant Poolaw’s valorous actions were instrumental in the fulfillment of the unit mission and are in keeping with the highest traditions of the American Soldier.

       I served with Sgt. Poolaw in 1960 and in 1962 he retired from the military.  When Vietnam heated up Sgt. Poolaw saw one of his sons go to Vietnam and lose a leg to action there.  When another son joined the Army and was served with orders to go to Vietnam, Sgt. Poolaw quickly re-enlisted in the Army in the hope of volunteering for Vietnam, thereby, under the Army tradition of not allowing two family members to serve in the same theater of war at the same time, to relieve his son of the obligation of going to Vietnam.  His plan failed and both father and son were sent to Vietnam.    

       In fighting there Sgt. Poolaw earned his last Silver Star medal, posthumously.  He was killed during the Battle of Loc Ninh when, while wounded himself, he was carrying a wounded man to safety he was struck by a rocket propelled grenade.  His inscription reads as follows:

for gallantry in action against a hostile force in the Republic of Vietnam on 7 November 1967, while serving with Company C, 26th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division. On this date, during Operation SHENANDOAH II, First Sergeant Poolaw was accompanying his unit on a two-company search and destroy mission near Loc Ninh. As the patrol was moving through a rubber plantation, they were subjected to sniper fire. Within minutes, the area was raked with intensive claymore mine, rocket, small arms, and automatic weapons fire from a numerically superior Viet Cong force. First Sergeant Poolaw unhesitatingly ran to the lead squad which was receiving the brunt of the enemy fire. With complete disregard for his personal safety, he exposed himself to assist in deploying the men and establishing an effective base of fire. Although wounded, he continued to move about the area encouraging his men and pulling casualties to cover. He was assisting a wounded man to safety when he was mortally wounded by Viet Cong fire. His dynamic leadership and exemplary courage contributed significantly to the successful deployment of the lead squad and undoubtedly saved the lives of many of his fellow soldiers. First Sergeant Poolaw’s unquestionable valor in close combat against numerically superior hostile forces is in keeping with the finest traditions of the military service and reflects great credit upon himself, the 1st Infantry Division, and the United States Army.

          I am proud to have known Sgt. Poolaw and I am also proud that when he was killed he was serving in the same regiment that my father served in during WWI, the 26th Infantry Regiment of the 1st Infantry Division (The Big Red One).

In all Sgt. Poolaw received 13 awards for valor during his career.  Each one of which any ordinary soldier could be very proud.  He was nominated for a Congressional Medal of Honor.  He was a Kiowa Indian from Oklahoma.  At Fort Sill, Oklahoma, where he is buried, there is a building named after him and there stands a bust of his likeness.  And, of course, his name is inscribed on the Vietnam War Memorial Wall in Washington, D. C. 

I am not much of a military person even though my father and all eight of his sons served in the military.  But I know that as long as we continue to ask young men to go to battle for us, and possibly die for us, we have a crying need for people like Sgt. Poolaw to train and lead them.  And, I am satisfied, that during my life time, I have met at least one great man.

 A look at the various advertisements on TV and the magazines, will reveal that Indians are obsessed with fairness. There are Ads  promising a fairer skin in 30 days and again some Ads propagate the virtue of a fair skin. There is also no doubt that all the ancient classics in Sanskrit and the Braj bhasa or even Tamil eulogise fairness of the skin as a concept of beauty. All the Indian folk lore talk of fair skinned beautiful damsels, who entice men with their fairness and glowing skin.

The fact  however is  not that simple, as a vast majority of Indian women and girls are either dark skinned or at the most brown tanned. Only a small fringe that consists of north Indian Girls from Punjab and Kashmir and the Brahmins from the south are fair skinned in the true sense. but everbody wants to be fair and those that are fair don’t want to get tanned.

  How did fairness as a concept of beauty creep into the Indian ethos. Its hard to pinpoint , but over the centuries the  Aryans who invaded India and  drove the dark skinned Dravidian’s deep into the south, emphasised their fairness and as they were the victors and the Dravidian’s the vanquished, fairness as a concept of the ruling class gained currency. This continues even today and most of the women laborers or workers in the houses as maids will have a darker skin.

Matters are not helped with the media and the prominent film stars and idols emphasising fairness as the path to success on the cinema screen and other field. Why, even the matrimonial Ads in the Hindu or the Hindustan Times  have a requirement for a ‘ fair skinned Bride. Most mothers in law will not desire a dark skinned daughter in law.

 But perhaps the concept of fairness as a criterian of beauty needs revision, but I don’t see this happening in India, where extremely fair stars like katrina Kaif and  karena Kapoor rule the roost. Can a black skinned girl strike it rich in Mumbai or Madras cinema ? No way at all and that sums up the Indian psyche.

The Great Penitentiary Rivalry has impacted change in the “most effective way to run a prison.” (University of Phoenix, 2006) There are many concerns addressed on how to have a more positive effect on the inmates rather than using prisons as a form of punishment. The Rivalry has encouraged new ideas and impacted the prison system in ways to decrease the negative behavior one offender may have over another. The rivalry introduced “separate confinement “and “congregate system”. (University of Phoenix, 2006) In the rivalry separate confinement was used to separate prisoners and study the change in behavior if any. Each prisoner was to eat, sleep and work alone. In the congregate system there were similarities to individual confinement. The prisoners were to eat and work together but silence was imposed.  After learning the impact of separating and silencing had on the prisoners. This was only the beginning of new discoveries in prisons.

This rivalry continues to shape and influence fairness in the prison system’s purpose. Knowing that steps are being taken to cure inmates rather than enforcing punishment and ignoring psychological and biological problems. Has a more positive influence on American thinking. Past theories have failed or had little impact on the offenders. The purpose of prisons of “what works” is still influenced in finding further rehabilitive programs to work with the prisoners rather than against.  The prison system’s purpose has been improving in recent years. The purpose in the past was more for punishing and showing only bias to wrongdoers. In research this purpose has proven to be ineffective to recidivism rates. Now the purpose of prison is to help and encourage right behavior in a more reasonable manner. The main goal is to find a cure for the wrongdoers and rehabilitate them back in to society.

Describe the comparison between publicly funded and privately funded prisons? Why is privatizing the prison system a topic of debate?

Public prisons are funded by the government to ensure efficiency and quality of the offender’s reduction of recidivism rates. Public prisons are concerned with the high population and low funding available. The number of offenders has increased in present years. Both private and public prisons share concerns of the effectiveness of deterring crime and reducing the recidivism rates of offenders. Privately funded prisons are not necessarily cheaper but are funded by private companies rather than by the government. The concerns with public funded prisons being overcrowded leads to financial instability. Although funded differently, the need for certain standards are needed in order to be an effective form of punishment. This is where private funding is proven to be more effective. By allowing private companies to pull up some of the slack “cost associated to these expenses would not be generated directly from tax payers pocket, allowing governments to better use their revenue to better service other public areas in need of assistance.” (Sycamnias, 1997) The balance of punishment and the concern of the offender’s health are important in both public and private prisons.

Privatizing the prison system has been a topic of debate. Privatizing prisons has its benefits on running cheaper for the government.  Many wonder if these prisons are able to run cheaper with cost and still provide the same quality as publicly funded prisons. Public prison costs are higher. However, questions arise in rather privatizing prisons can still provide the same efficiency in the policies to discourage hostile action by the potential aggressors. Rehabilitation has been adopted into public prisons to encourage good behavior can be rewarded, while bad behavior will only result in further punishment. A concern in privatizing the prison system is rather there are influences such as rehabilitation encouraged to the prisoners. The main goal of privatizing the prison system rests on efficiency and cost. Although cost is main concern, the need for the safety of the prison is just as important. Private and public prisons are funded differently but the concerns of the offenders relapsing into crime have been acknowledged. These factors are used to argue if privatizing the prison system is in our best interest.

References:

University of Phoenix. (2006). Prisons and jail. Retrieved May 18, 2009, from University of Phoenix, Week Eight, CJS200.

Sycamnias, Evan. (1997). All prisons should be managed by private enterprise. Law library . Retrieved May 18, 2009, from www.uplink.com.au/lawlibrary/Documents/Docs/Doc17.html

What is fair? What is right? In what kind of a world is it okay to say “sorry” with

your “checkbook?” In what world is it alright to be superficial and not care about what

you have done or are doing or even your effect on people, your effect on the environment,

and your effect on the world around you instead of apologizing, instead being “civil,”

instead of doing the right thing ? Unfortunately the world that which I speak is the world

in which we live and the companies, governments, and individual people who have

committed some sort of felony or have done something simply wrong and get away with

their crimes through manipulation of the “justice” system and/or paying off the victims to

keep their mouths shut. This is the sorry truth of our reality.

A sorrowful rain of hypocrisy and corporate tyranny is falling upon the face of the

earth, burning through it’s ozone like acid and polluting both the environment and good

nature of the people that take shelter upon it. In the movie, A Civil Action, however

untrue some of the smaller details within it, there are prime examples of how big business

and unjust groups and people infect, like a disease, the morals and ethical conducts of the

global population.

To discuss in clearer detail, I will speak upon the injustices of “Big Business”,

specifically, in regard to the way in which they poison both the environment and the

public psyche. An example of this can be found within the setting and context of the

movie and/or book, A Civil Action where an extremely large multi-billion dollar company

is found to be at least semi-responsible for multitudes of childhood leukemia. The

company found guilty, after years of legal battles and leaving the main character of the

movie in bankruptcy and a state of deep depression, settled for a deplorable amount of

money that gave the victims of their crimes with just enough money to perhaps buy a

couple of scratch-offs in hopes of winning enough money to pay the ridiculous medical

bills that they owe due to their children dying on them. What horrible bad children they

are for costing their parents so much money because it must be their fault because it

couldn’t possibly be the companies fault because if it had been they would have settled

for a whole lot more money than they did in reality.

The repercussions of things like this, companies not taking responsibility for their

actions, are unpleasant to say the least. By cheating the world to line their own pockets,

big companies pollute the minds of the people, making it seem like this kind of deceit is

acceptable. Think for a moment, please, on what this says to the children that aren’t

killed by their environmental pollution, which is an issue that I will speak on later, it says

that it is okay to deceive people as long it makes you a couple of “bucks,” it’s okay to

cover up your mistakes and avoid the consequences just because they are not convenient

or cost effective enough to fix at that time, that it is perfectly okay to kill people as long

as it is done indirectly and by presenting these messages to the world they misshape the

morals and attitudes of the people that live on the very earth that the companies are

polluting.

Speaking of the pollution of the environment done by these companies, there are

horrible examples in the world today of their uncaring attitude towards environmental

issues. In the movie the case was based on dangerous chemicals seeping through the

ground, into the groundwater, and into the wells that provide water to the people of the

town, but similar things like this are done basically by every company that produces any

sort of chemical based product. For example textile mills and paper mills emit noxious

fumes into the air and even when the EPA and other groups and government officials put

into place different standards or regulations the big corporations find ways around them

to save money and not fix the problem or address the actual reason behind the standards.

So basically, they are just allowed to do whatever they find fit for their financial gains.

They are allowed to pollute the air and create all sorts of problems as long it

makes them money, and they don’t even have to fix their mistakes, it is up to them.

Even when there is a problem they calculate the cost of lawsuits versus the cost of

fixing the problem that they have. For example, let’s say a certain car company has

problems with their brake system and they decide the cost of fixing the issue and saving

lives outweighs the cost of simply letting the lawsuits roll in and settle for a fraction of

what it would cost to end the issue completely. So they let the people die so that they can

save money, because, as they may put it, “it’s the best financial option at the time.”

Although companies are the largest players in this poker game of corruption and

unfair scandal, people such as governors, presidents, bosses, and other individuals can be

just as bad as or worse than the damages that companies do to the environment and world

in general. For instance, tyrants such as Hitler and Kim Jong Il took control of people

and destroy things, take civil liberties away from innocent people, and corrupt entire

nations. Country’s governments can also be culprits of exploitation and damage to the

environment. Industrial government such as China’s and America’s produce tons and

tons of greenhouse gasses into the ozone on a regular basis furthering the murderous

process of global warming. One of these countries I mentioned above is even so bold,

and ignorant enough as to base their entire economy on this industry and dependency on it

so much so that this country is billions of dollars in debt to the other country I mentioned

above. I wonder which one it is.

In final reflections on the topic one will find that even though companies,

governments, and world leaders, are mostly responsible for being unfair, polluting the

environment, and poisoning the minds of our children, it is also in the fault of the

consumer and/or supporter for handing their money over to these people who are not

really trying to do any harm but simply to get rich, and is there really anything wrong

with that? I don’t really know but before you or people around you hand your hard earned

cash over to those people I want you to think for a second. I want you to picture your son,

daughter, niece, nephew, mother, father, brother, or sister. Now I want you to picture

them there next to you. They are smiling. Laughing even. Now I want you to picture a

green field and in the middle of that field there is a sorrowful hole and in that hole there is

a coffin, and within that weeping coffin there lying is your son or brother or mother, eyes

closed, they are dead. Perhaps they were one of the people that the companies let die in

order to save some money, maybe you’ll get a settlement, maybe they will say sorry with

their wallet, maybe they will, maybe they won’t, either way nothing will ever bring them

back, they are gone forever.

So before you buy a certain product, or support a certain group or company, think

about this. I don’t ask that you become a recluse, but be cautious, be careful, be aware.

Whatever you do go against the norm and do what the companies don’t, be fair.

It’s all over the news, people killing there self’s over people disliking them!

People don’t know that bullying is not just someone placing their hands on your body.

Bullying is more than shouting in someone’s face. I have been bully by a boyfriend who used to scream at me when he was wrong;

He would yell when he did not get his way and some type of way make me feel like I was wrong all the time;

I had a family member verbal abuse me and I hated to see their face. They used to call me names, make offensive remarks about the way I dress. They used to joke about my lack of style. They even teased me about the friends I used to keep, socioeconomic.

I know a young lady if she does not get her way she actually threats the police on people. She threats the department of children and welfare on people also.

This is verbal bullying;

Physical bullying is exact that they use bodily harm against you. People who go around using force against another person. A lot of school children go through this type of abuse.

Gangs are a group of people who use force against other people because they are not like them.

I have experience indirect bullying, where people sat together and talked negative about me in public places and also behind closed doors.

My own family members have done this time and time again. Because I tend to do things my own way!

I am happy with my own self. Why is that so hard to believe or accept?

People who spread rumors about someone is either sad with their own life or there life is so much in turmoil they need to turn the direction of attention off them onto you.

Or your life is so much interesting to them they have no other choice but to continue minding your business.

When you call a person up on the phone and discuss matters which are serious for you. That same person either allows someone else to listen or then turn around and calls someone else up and stretches the story this is indirect bullying.

When you are in group and people exclude you out the conversation this is social alienation. When you work with people and they refuse to speak to you and actually look at you and walk away. Anotehr type of indirect bully.

We are children from god and we all should accept one another and try to love one another for who you are and not what you would like them to be.

Everyone is different and should be allowed to be different.

I have experience a time in my life where I felt so frighten I had to move in the middle of the night.

I never knew what this type of feeling was until I read some where that it is intimidation.

I was intimidated by the fact that they used forced against me and verbal abuse that I felt like I needed to run and hide.

With face book, My space and Twitter social network, instant messages, emails, text messaging and voice mail.

Teenagers around the world are killing their own self’s and leaving post on these internet sites. Liek good by, I hate to do this, I love you all, I have done something terrible etc

Grown people are killing there self’s and leaving post over the Internet saying good bye because they felt like there life is not worth living any longer;

Bullying has many forms and shapes but the one thing in common is that people are humans with feelings.

There self esteem and inner being is shatter by someone else own issues with their own life’s.

Misery loves company. Happiness is an attitude; we can either make our own self’s happy or miserable.

It takes work either way and its up to you to be strong and fight any thing that brings you harm.

Keep in mind miserable have time to bother you, But if you are a busy and have faith in your own self then there misery behavior will not have a effect on you and your well being. Lets band together and stop the bullying for one another and our children.