Writing 3 Handout 2

Writing 3 Handout 2 revised

9. Is the Ritalin patch a good idea?

Recently, I followed a discussion on the Web, which raised the question if the Ritalin patch is a good idea or not.

In my opinion too many children are falsely labeled as hyperactive. How do we know if a child suffers from real hyperactivity or only from a simple lack of discipline?

As I see the situation parents and teachers tend to misjudge the behaviour of their children and their pupils. I cannot help feeling that especially the Ritalin patch make it easier for parents to see their children as hyperactive. I think the risk is that the Ritalin patch seems to be the easiest method. Instead of a pill children could wear a patch that releases the medication in consistent levels and could do away the unwanted peaks and valleys. It appears to me that more and more children will use the Ritalin patch although not all are hyperactive.

Furthermore, I am of the opinion that Ritalin is the wrong way to cure children of ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). Even a child is hyperactive and should take Ritalin recommended by doctors, it must give other possibilities. First, parents should avoid going the easiest way, for example avoid saying "I cannot control the kid so put the kid on Ritalin". Second, parents and teachers should work together and should inform very well about ADHD. Third, parents and their children should address to doctors, psychologists, neurologists and psychiatrists. The best thing would be to try first other effective treatments (i.e. psychological treatments, herbal and homeopathic treatments, meditation) before giving drugs.

Last but not least I think that Ritalin is a drug and should be forbidden for children in general. The main problem is that we do not know the long term effects of Ritalin. In my opinion Ritalin is a drug and drugs are addictive. So it is necessary to try every possible other option before drugging a child. It must be very difficult for a child to depent on drugs. Even the Ritalin patch might be in special cases the right decision and even the medication succeeds, how do children try to stop taking it later?

As it is well known that psychostimulants have abuse potential the Ritalin patch should be forbidden at least for children. 384

Try revising this yourself, playing special attention to the boldface text.

Recently, I followed a discussion on the Web, which raised the question if the Ritalin patch is a good idea or not.

In my opinion too many children are falsely labeled as hyperactive. How do we know if a child suffers from real hyperactivity or only from a simple lack of discipline?

As it is well known that psychostimulants have abuse potential the Ritalin patch should be forbidden at least for children.

Writing 3 Handout 2

Writing 3 Handout 2 revised

9. Is the Ritalin patch a good idea?

Recently, I followed a discussion on the Web, which raised the question if the Ritalin patch is a good idea or not.

In my opinion too many children are falsely labeled as hyperactive. How do we know if a child suffers from real hyperactivity or only from a simple lack of discipline?

As it is well known that psychostimulants have abuse potential the Ritalin patch should be forbidden at least for children. 384

Try revising this yourself, playing special attention to the boldface text.

Recently, I followed a discussion on the Web, which raised the question if the Ritalin patch is a good idea or not.

In my opinion too many children are falsely labeled as hyperactive. How do we know if a child suffers from real hyperactivity or only from a simple lack of discipline?

As it is well known that psychostimulants have abuse potential the Ritalin patch should be forbidden at least for children.

10. Old people shouldn`t drive cars anymore

This essay is ment to be a critical dialogue.

I suppose almost everybody of us has already been involved in a dangerous situation on a highway caused by an old aged road user. Due to my job as a football player I spend about fourty thousand kilometres on the highways each year. I can`t remember how often I had to take a few deep breaths to calm myself down, because I knew that I would be late, when I got stuck in a long queue of cars moving very slowly.

The following sentences contain several arguments supporting my thesis. I am expressing doubts about the common state of health of old people in regard of driving cars. The time they need to react to changing conditions, such as a car ahead slowing down unespectively, is way longer than required.

Furthermore it is no secret that old people are not as movable as they used to be when they were younger. For this reason it is quite difficult for them to turn their heads to make sure that they don`t obstruct others when turning left or right. In this case I should mention the ability of seeing, too. People of this age aren`t possibly able to see road signs, for example, as early and as clearly as required to drive savely.

These arguments I mentioned above are facts, based on medical studies, which can`t be defeated. Nevertheless, growing old is less a personal fault than rather a part of life. I don`t want this essay to be interpretated as accusing old car drivers in general. But anyway, there has to be found a way to make the highways safer and reduce the number of injured and killed people in accidents.

On the grounds of doubts, that each old aged car driver can objectively judge his/her ability of driving savely, I would suggest to make everybody beeing checked on the ability of driving in an obligatory examination, who is older than sixty five years. This test could be divided in two parts – a medical check up and a test-drive with a driving teacher sitting next.

If somebody is considered not to be able to drive a car safely any longer, his/her driver`s licence should be deprived.

10. Old people shouldn`t drive cars anymore

This essay is meant to be a critical dialogue.

I suppose almost every one of us has been involved in a dangerous situation on the highway caused by an old driver. Due to my job as a football player, I travel about forty thousand kilometres on the highways each year. I can`t remember how often I had to take a few deep breaths to calm myself down because I knew that I would be late, whenever I got stuck in a long line of cars moving very slowly.

There are several arguments that support my thesis. I doubt that the average state of health of old people is good enough to allow driving cars. The time they need to react to traffic conditions, such as a car ahead slowing down unexpectedly, is dangerously long. It is no secret that old people are not as agile as they used to be when they were younger, and i t is quite difficult for them to turn their heads to look in both directions when turning left or right. Nor do they see well. They are unable to see road signs, for example, as early and as clearly as required for safe driving.

These arguments are based on irrefutable medical facts. Growing old is a part of life, and and I have nothing against old people generally. But a way has to be found to make the highways safer and reduce the number of injured and killed people in accidents.

Since I doubt that old drivers can objectively judge their ability to drive safely, I would suggest to making everybody older than sixty five have a mandatory driving test. This test could be divided in two parts – a medical check- up,and a test-drive with a driving teacher sitting next to the driver. Drivers who fail the test his/her licence should have their licenses revoked.

11. Is it necessary to lie sometimes?

I personally think that it is not necessary to lie sometimes.If one would try very hard it´s possible to never ever tell lies.But why? Why should we work so hard? Why should we work so hard without getting something out of it? A liar is better off than someone who is always telling the truth! 1.Liars have more time Liars have more time than others because of the fact that they are able to save time by telling the untruth. Here is one of thousand examples which you can observe in everyday life: Imagine you are in a food shop.Your only wish is to buy your lonley little apple as soon as possible. But suddenly a man appears next you with a shopping basket full of food. He smiles at you and says: "Would you please be so kind to let me pay first? My woman is pragnent and she is waiting for me in the car. The head of the baby is almost out of her." Who could say no in such a heartbraking situation? 2.Liars have more money Liars have more money because they always have good ideas for asking their friends for money. E.g.: " Oh Tina, your my last chance. Would you please borrow me 500 $ ? Yesterday as I went down the street a terrible gigantic dog who was looking as if it would tear me to peaces stole my wedding ring, so that I now have to buy a new one. Before Klaus will notice that." Who could say no in such a heartbraking situation? It will continue like it is everytime , and how most of us know: The liar will invent new lies to take Tina`s mind off the 500 $ until Tina forgot to ask about the money. Why should we miss such chances to enjoy life? 339

11. Is it necessary to lie sometimes?

I personally think that it is not necessary to lie sometimes. If one tried very hard, one might never ever tell lies. But why? Why should we work so hard? Why should we work so hard without getting something out of it? A liar is better off than someone who always tells the truth!

Why? For one thing, liars have more time Liars have more time they are able to save time by telling the untruth. Here is one of a thousand examples which you can observe in everyday life. Imagine you are in a grocery store. Your only wish is to buy a singlelittle apple as soon as possible. But suddenly a man appears next to you with a shopping basket full of food. He smiles at you and says: "Would you please be so kind as to let me pay first? My wife is pragnant and she is waiting for me in the car. The head of the baby is almost out." Who could say no in such a heartbreaking situation?

Secondly, liars have more money Liars have more money because they always have good ideas for asking their friends for money. For example, " Oh Tina, you're my last chance. Would you please lend me $500? Yesterday, as I went down the street, a terrible, gigantic dog that looked as if it would tear me to pieces stole my wedding ring , so that I now have to buy a new one, before Klaus notices." Who could say no in such a heartbreaking situation? The liar will get his money, every time. Why should we miss such chances to enjoy life?

12. Laws forbidding help in suicide cases should be loosened

One of the major privileges we have today in our society is the right to decide freely what we want to do in and with our lives. In addition, it is always emphasized that everybody has the same rights. If in a country like England suicide in general is not seen as a crime concerning the laws, people who cannot kill themselves because of their physical abilities should also have the right to die whenever they want to. To forbid these people the help of others would lead to the conclusion that they are segregated by law to be less worth than anybody else. And this would mean that completely physically disabled people are not seen as human beings anymore in our society.

Furthermore, those people, who just want to help, right now will be punished, as the Law of 1961 in England states. Therefore, this law must be changed. Nobody should be punished for helping someone else out of a situation in which the suffering person cannot do anything himself or herself. As the example of Diane Pretty shows, it is not even her husband’s wish to kill his wife, but rather an action, which would relief her from her pain, as well as a favor on his side to fulfill her dream. The suffering person himself or herself undergoes in a situation like Diane Pretty´s already so much pain that people like her should get help.

Finally, one thing must be totally certain. The case itself must be completely clear. This means that the person, who is physically totally disabled must be in such a no-way-out situation, so that help from others is needed. In addition, the desire of this person to end his or her life should be based on the fact that his or her life, as in Diane Pretty´s case, ends in the near future for sure. As well, up to this point the physical feeling of this person is supposed to get worse so that only medication would help him or her to get through this suffering. For such a case now, in which this help would also mean a personal relief for the suffering person, a law should be created, which enables these people to die by the time they want to. Only through such a change in the laws the right of self-determination of all human beings is secure. 406

13. Is Deafness a Lifestyle?

The case of an American lesbian couple who consciously chose their child to be born deaf like themselves has caused discussion about the legal and ethical limits of parenthood.

After their wish for a deaf donator had been denied by several sperm banks one of the women got pregnant using the sperm donated by a deaf friend of theirs; thereby deliberately maximizing the chance of giving birth to a deaf child. The mothers of the, actually only partially deaf, baby boy claim that it was their right to want their children to be like themselves. The two women view deafness as a lifestyle and not as a handicap. Therefore they don’t want their son to wear hearing aid either until he’s old enough to choose for himself.

From my point of view these two women acted out of pure selfishness. Parents should want the best for their children and spare them any kind of suffering whenever it’s possible. But this couple only thought of themselves and not of their child. Wanting their son to be like themselves they purposefully chose him to have a defect which will certainly cause the boy disadvantages in all spheres of life. First of all, his choice of profession will be severely limited not only because he can’t hear but also because he will never be able to talk like a healthy person. But deafness can also cause social isolation because communication with people who can hear is extremely difficult and it’s hard to make friends if you have problems understanding each other. Furthermore he will never know what it’s like to listen to music or the sound of waves or the voice of someone you like on the telephone; these joys of life his mothers deliberately took away from him.

If the boy ever finds out that his parents intentionally made him deaf instead of reducing the chance of having a handicapped child he will surely grow to hate them. What these two women did was sad and morbid but I doubt that there could be a way to legally prevent such cases without classifying handicapped people as second class humans- and that would be even worse than the case of the deaf boy. 374

13. Is Deafness a Lifestyle?

The case of an American lesbian couple who consciously chose to have a child that would be born deaf, like themselves, has caused discussion about the legal and ethical limits of parenthood.

After their wish for a deaf donator had been denied by several sperm banks, one of the women got pregnant using the sperm donated by a deaf friend of theirs, thereby deliberately maximizing the chance of giving birth to a deaf child. The mothers of the baby boy, who turned out to be only partially deaf, claim that it was their right to want their children to be like themselves. The two women view deafness as a lifestyle and not as a handicap. Therefore, they don’t want their son to wear a hearing aid, either, until he’s old enough to choose for himself.

From my point of view, these two women acted out of pure selfishness. Parents should want the best for their children and spare them any kind of suffering whenever it’s possible. But this couple only thought of themselves and not of their child. Wanting their son to be like themselves, they purposefully chose to have a child that would have a defect which will certainly cause him disadvantages in all spheres of life.

First of all, his choice of profession will be severely limited, not only because he can’t hear but also because he will never be able to talk like a normal person. He will also be socially isolated, because communication with people who can hear is extremely difficult and it’s hard to make friends for this reason. Furthermore, he will never know what it’s like to listen to music, or the sound of waves, or the voice of someone he loves; these joys of life his mothers deliberately took away from him.

If the boy ever finds out that his parents intentionally chose to have him because they knew he would be deaf, instead of reducing the chance of having a handicapped child, he will surely grow to hate them. What these two women did was sad and criminal, but I doubt that there is any way to prevent it without classifying handicapped people as second class humans , and that would be even worse than the case of this deaf boy.

14. Are we allowed to lie?

If we think of the education of children, we will remember the rule that a child should not lie. But do we all understand this basis of education in the same way? Is there a reason why children are thought not to lie?

Mothers simply want to have the control about their children

Parents are of the opinion that children have not a reliable sense of responsibility. They think that it is dangerous for children to decide what they want and what is good for them. Therefore parents want to have the control about everything their children do. Unfortunately it is impossible for a mother or a father to be next to the child the whole day. This time of the day can be called the privacy of the child. Parents get nervous when they think about the fact that they cannot influence and control their children during this time. Furthermore they fear that the child could be hurt or could damage something. But is this the explanation why child should not lie?

The certainty always to hear the truth makes a feeling of power possible

We can imagine the situation when a policeman asks a suspected person what the person had done. The policeman feels that he is in a powerful situation. He is convinced that the suspected person depends on him. Can we compare this example to the relationship of parents and children? Parents can give orders to their children like officers in the army.

The child is definitely expected to obey.

This thesis sounds crazy anyhow. But this is exactly the key why children should not lie. The question for certainty is the check whether the child did what was ordered.

When a mother asks whether the child went to bed at eight o’clock the day before and the child says yes, is it really a problem when the child went to bed just at nine o’clock? The mother only wants to know whether her child obeyed. There was no danger for the child because of this hour of less sleep. Despite this, many parents would be angry in a situation like this. 361

14. Are we allowed to lie?

As children we learn that we should not lie. But do we all understand this principle in the same way? Is there a reason why children are thought not to lie?

Mothers simply want to have the control about their children.

Parents are of the opinion that children do not have a reliable sense of responsibility. They think that it is dangerous for children to decide what they want and what is good for them. Therefore, parents want to have control over everything their children do. Unfortunately, it is impossible for a mother or a father to be next to the child the whole day. This time of the day can be called the privacy of the child. Parents get nervous when they think about the fact that they cannot influence and control their children during this time. Furthermore, they fear that the child could be hurt or could damage something. But is this the explanation why children should not lie?

The certainty of always hearing the truth makes a feeling of power possible.

We can imagine the situation when a policeman asks a suspect what he has done. The policeman feels that he is in a powerful position. He is convinced that the suspected person is completely dependent on him. Can we compare this example to the relationship of parents and children? Parents can give orders to their children like officers in the army.

The child is definitely expected to obey.

This thesis sounds crazy , but it is the key to why children should not lie. The question for certainty is the check whether the child did what was ordered.

If a mother asks whether the child went to bed at eight o’clock the day before and the child says yes, is it really a problem if the child did not got to bed until nine? The mother only wants to know whether her child obeyed. There was no danger to the child because of this hour less of sleep. Despite this, many parents would be angry in the child disobeyed.

15. Dear Editor,

As you wrote at the end of your article, I am the opinion, too, that it is irresponsible to think, that we are safe from extremism. Underestimating the movement to the right in France as well as Japan, could lead there to a new era of terror and persecution. Although history shows us the consequences of extremism of the right and of the left wing, it does not mean, that it cannot happen again.

For the majority of voters it is often not clear, how easy it can be for an extremist party to gain power. There are only three main factors needed for this kind of development: Recession, a vacuum of power and a charismatic leader figure.

During the last decade not only Japan has suffered from recession, also the rest of the world, including many European states, such as France. The result of every recession in economy is, that the rate of unemployment increases tremendously. Then this economic problem becomes a political one, because many people will blame the government for the actual situation. As a result , dissatisfaction and disappointment with the government and politicians will push many of the voters into the arms of extremist parties. Other voters will decide not to vote at all, what will be useful for an extremist party again. For example, many of the French voters even vote in favour for the ultra-rightest Le Pen in oder to show their dissatisfaction to the actual government.

If this sort of economic decrease comes up with the political factors, mentioned before, a stable democratic system could change easily into authoritarian regime. In Japan corruption and incompetence of the government together with a weak opposition has already created something like a power vacuum. In this situation it is very easy for a charismatic person (in this case for the populist governor of Tokyo Ishihara) to attract many of the Japanese with promises, speeches and statements full of nationalistic phrases, xenophobia and racism.

In conclusion, I want to add, that all the other states should not ignore this movement to the right, especially in Japan. In France the majority of the French were shocked by the results of the first electoral round. As a result many of them demonstrated against Le Pen and against right extremism. This will probably help Jospin in the second round. Unfortunately, nothing similar has happened in Japan yet. 400

15. Dear Editor ,

As you wrote at the end of your article, it is irresponsible to think that we are safe from extremism. Underestimating the movement to the right in France as well as Japan could lead to a new era of terror and persecution in both countries . Although history shows us the consequences of extremism of the left as well as the right, it does not show us how to prevent them.

Most voters do not realize how easy it is for an extremist party to gain power. There are only three main factors needed for this development: recession, a vacuum of power and a charismatic leader.

During the last decade, Japan and many European countries have suffered from recession. The result of any recession is that the rate of unemployment increases tremendously. Then this economic problem becomes a political one, because many people will blame the government. As a result , dissatisfaction and disappointment with the government and politicians will push many of the voters into the arms of extremist parties. Other voters will decide not to vote at all, which will be also aid the extremist parties. For example, many French voters voted for the ultra-rightest Le Pen to show their dissatisfaction with the current government.

If this sort of economic problem occurs at the same time as the political factors mentioned before , a democratic system can easily change into an authoritarian regime. In Japan, corruption and incompetence of the government, together with a weak opposition, has already created something like a power vacuum. In this situation it is very easy for a charismatic person (in this case the populist governor of Tokyo, Ishihara) to attract many of the Japanese with grandiose promises, nationalism, xenophobia and racism.

In conclusion, I want to add that we should not ignore this movement to the right, especially in Japan . The majority of the French were shocked by the results of the first electoral round . Many demonstrated against Le Pen and against right extremism. This will probably help Jospin in the second round. Unfortunately, nothing similar has happened in Japan yet.

16. Raise the smoking age?

In Germany people are allowed to smoke when they have reached the age of 18. With the age of 18, which means with majority, everyone can legally buy cigarettes and tobacco. It´s a fact that 90% of all smokers pick up the habit to smoke before the age of 21. In connection with this the question arises if the smoking age should be raised to the age of 21. That means weather raising the age for buying, possesing or receiving tobacco products to the age of 21 or not.

One argument of the peole who support the consideration of raising the smoking age to 21 is that young people (younger than 21) can be discouraged to smoke. They believe or hope young peole wouldn´t smoke in such a high number, if smoking would be something illegal.

The reasons for beginning to smoke are different. I personally don´t smoke and I never had, but I assume that people, or better in this case teenagers , don´t take the law into consideration when they begin to smoke. Althougt it is forbidden to smoke, many teenagers do it. A high number of teenagers start to smoke because of the so called "Gruppenzwang". Maybe they think it´s cool to smoke and some want to seem older as they really are by smoking a cigarette. Others begin to smoke because they are curious and want to know how it is to smoke. Or the motiv can be just the kick of doing something forbidden.

The existence of automatic cigarette machines makes it easy for everyone to get cigarettes. In addition, often nobody reacts when under age people smoke in publicity. Here, the existing law doesn´t work.. Why should a tightening up of the law work?

I doubt that the problem of the young smoking age can be solved by a new law which raises the smoking age to 21. It is already more than difficult to enforce current laws that apply to those who are under 18. I am of the opinion that the government should focus the attention on enforcing existing laws and intensifiying prevention programs. Anyway, everybody is

responsible for himself. 364

16. Raise the smoking age?

In Germany people are allowed to smoke when they have reached the age of 18. At the age of 18, that is, of legal adulthood, everyone can buy cigarettes and tobacco legally. Since 90% of all smokers pick up the habit of smoking before the age of 21, the question arises whether the smoking age should be raised to 21. Would kids then start smoking a year or two later?

One argument for raising the smoking age is that people younger than 21 would be discouraged from smoking . The reasons for beginning to smoke are various. I personally don´t smoke and never did, but I assume that people, in this case teenagers , don´t take the law into consideration when they begin to smoke. Although it is forbidden to smoke, many teenagers do it. A large number of teenagers start to smoke because of peer pressure. Maybe they think it´s cool to smoke, and some want to seem older than they really are, which they try to do by smoking a cigarette. Others begin to smoke because they are curious and want to know how it is to smoke. Or the motive can be just the kick of doing something forbidden.

Cigarette vending machines make it easy for everyone to get cigarettes. In addition, often nobody reacts when minors smoke in public. Here, the existing law doesn´t work. Why should a tightening up of the law work?

I doubt that the problem young people smoking can be solved by raising the smoking age to 21. It is already more than difficult to enforce current laws that apply to those who are under 18. The government should focus attention on enforcing existing laws and intensifying prevention programs.

17. Global Fund tries to fight AIDS.

(cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/04/26/global.aids.fund.ap/index.html)

The Global Fund to fight the worlds deadliest diseases, AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria will spend an amount of $ 378 Million to 31 countries. The Fund was created last year and donors are governments, foundations, corporations and individuals. Donors contribute money which the Fund collects and spends on prevention and treatment of the three diseases. The Fund distributes the money to foundations that will buy drugs and support the use of medicaments. A lesser percentage of the money goes to prevention programs. Africa will get 52% of the money and the rest is scattered among other regions. There are 36.1 Million people estimated to be infected with AIDS and HIV. For that reason the main aim of the board of the Fund is to halt the spread of HIV. Most of the affected people live in poor or third world countries. In Sub - Saharan Africa 25.3 Million people are infected, which are nearly 2/3 of all people with HIV and AIDS in the whole world.

The director of the group Life AIDS International, Brigitte Syamalevwe, said that "any diversion of money away from the treatment is an act of cruelty to those with the virus". I agree with her because I think it is necessary to give medical help and drugs to the people to increase their quality of life and to improve their condition. But I also feel the situation can not be changed only by treating the disease.

I think prevention and informing about the diseases is important as well, because the spread of the diseases increases. People must learn how HIV can be passed on. There must also be spend money on vaccination against Malaria, and to see to it that the hygienic conditions are improved for the people living in the poorer regions of the world.

We can gather from the map that in the rich industrial countries less people are infected. The reason for that phenomenon may be on the one hand that people are better informed by the media, and this facilitates it for everybody to protect himself for example by vaccination or by condoms. And due to a well established health system in those countries everyone can afford those measures. But although the Fund receives a lot of money, it will not be enough to solve this global problem in a few years. 398

17. Global Fund tries to fight AIDS.

(cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/04/26/global.aids.fund.ap/index.html)

The Global Fund to fight the world's most dangerous diseases--AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria-- will spend $378 million in 31 countries. The Fund was created last year. Donors are governments, foundations, corporations and individuals The Fund spends the money on prevention and treatment of these three diseases, distributing it to foundations that will buy drugs and support the use of these medications (?) . A lesser percentage of the money goes to prevention programs. Africa will get 52% of this money, and the rest is scattered among other regions. There are 36.1 million people estimated to be infected with AIDS and HIV. The main aim of the Fund is to halt the spread of HIV. Most of the affected people live in poor or Third World countries. In sub - Saharan Africa 25.3 million people are infected, which is nearly 2/3 of all people with HIV and AIDS in the whole world.

The director of the organization Life AIDS International, Brigitte Syamalevwe, says that "any diversion of money away from the treatment is an act of cruelty to those with the virus." I agree with her because I think it is necessary to give medical help and drugs to the people to increase their quality of life and to improve their condition. But I also feel that more has to be done.

Informing people about the diseases is important as well, because the the diseases are spreading at an increasing rate. People must learn how HIV is passed on. Money must also be spent on vaccination for malaria, and the hygienic conditions of the people living in the poorer regions of the world must be improved.

We can gather from the map that in the rich industrial countries fewer people are infected. The reason for this may be, on the one hand, that people are better informed by the media, and this helps everybody protect himself by vaccination or by using condoms. Due to a well-established health system in those countries, everyone can afford those measures. But although the Fund receives a lot of money, it will not be enough to solve this global problem anytime soon. 398

18. Children's alcoholism becomes serious problem in our society. Statistics show that some 80 percent of teens will experiment with alcohol before they graduate from high school.

Children, especially teenager, may be involved with alcohol in a various ways. Experimentation with alcohol during adolescence is common. Unfortunately, children often don't see the link between their actions today and the consequences tomorrow. Some of them will experiment and stop, or continue to use it occasionally without significant problems. Others will develop a dependency, causing significant harm to themselves or possibly others. Adolescence is the time for trying new things. In this time teens use alcohol for many reasons, including curiosity, because it feels good, to reduce stress, or to feel grown up. It is difficult to know which teens will experiment and stop and which will develop serious problems. How can parents recognize in time whether your kid use alcohol? Warning signs of teenage alcohol abuse may include both physical and emotional aspects, such as fatigue, red eyes, personality change, irritability, irresponsible behavior, depression, and a general lack of interest. Furthermore, troubles in school, in family can be signs of this problem. Parents may recognize signs of trouble but hardly can they make the diagnosis. An effective way for parents to show care and concern is to openly discuss the use and possible abuse of alcohol with their teenager. But how can parents prevent using of alcohol by their children?

I think parents must have strong, loving relationships with their children, teach standards of right and wrong, set rules for behavior, know the facts about alcohol and other drugs, and really listen to their children. Parents should develop a value system by their kids. Talk about why values such as honesty, self-reliance, and responsibility are important, and how values help children make good decisions. Children who decide not to use alcohol often make this decision because they have strong convictions against the use of these things that are based in the value system. 331

18. Child alcoholism is becoming serious problem in our society. Statistics show that some 80 percent of teens will experiment with alcohol before they graduate from high school.

Children, especially teenagers, may be involved with alcohol in various ways. Experimentation with alcohol during adolescence is common. Unfortunately, children often don't see the link between their actions today and the consequences tomorrow. Some of them will experiment and stop, or continue to drink occasionally without significant problems. Others will develop an alcohol dependency, causing significant harm to themselves and possibly others. Adolescence is the time for trying new things. Teens drink for many reasons-- because they are curious, because it feels good, because they want to relax, or because they want to feel grown up. It is difficult to know which teens will experiment and stop and which will develop serious problems. How can parents recognize in time whether their kid use alcohol? The warning signs of teenage alcohol abuse may include both physical and emotional effects, such as fatigue, red eyes, irritability, irresponsible behavior, depression, and a general lack of interest in normal activities. Trouble in school or in the family can be signs of this problem. Parents may recognize signs of trouble, but they can hardly make the diagnosis. An effective way for parents to show care and concern is to openly discuss the use and possible abuse of alcohol with their teenager. But how can parents prevent their children from drinking?

I think parents must have strong, loving relationships with their children, teach standards of right and wrong, set rules for behavior, know the facts about alcohol and other drugs, and really listen to their children. Parents should develop a value system for (?) their kids, talk about why values such as honesty, self-reliance, and responsibility are important, and how teach them that values will help them make good decisions. Children who decide not to use alcohol often make this decision because they have strong convictions that are based in the value system.

19. Should so called "soft drugs" like marijuana be legalized?

From my point of view, there is very little to say against a controlled marketing of soft drugs in pharmacies. The assumption, consuming marijuana leads to the abuse of hard drugs like cocaine or heroin, hasn`t been proved. Studies in the Netherlands did not bring out any result that marijuana is a gateway drug. I don`t think it`s the right way to sell soft drugs in cafes or coffee-shops, like the Netherlands do, but I`m sure a state controlled sale is the best way to get rid of illegal drug dealing.

As far as I know, consuming marijuana does not contain dangers for one`s health, except the inhale of tobacco smoke. Smoking isn`t banned and alcohol isn`t as well, so why should marijuana not be legalized? Of course, any kind of abuse, which means exaggerated consuming, contains its problems. It may lead to getting out of touch with reality, to loose your job and social contacts. But that`s the same with alcohol, and no one really cares. I don`t want to demonize alcohol or tobacco, I sometimes enjoy a cigarette or a drink myself. If soft drugs were really that dangerous, consuming wouldn`t be allowed in some other countries.

The most important thing is to inform, especially young people, about the effects of abuse. In my opinion, it´s easier to ban soft drugs than to think about why people might abuse it. By strictly demonizing you don`t get to the problems behind, especially if you talk to teenage people. Blaming soft drugs and alcohol for causing people`s problems is the wrong way. Instead of, problems cause abuse. Thus, politicians, parents or teachers better should spend some time on determining especially young people`s problems, instead of discussing whether to legalize soft drugs or not.

I talked to some teenage marijuana smokers some weeks ago, and I wasn`t able to give them a single reason they weren`t able to refute, why marijuana should not be legalized as long as tobacco and alcohol isn`t forbidden. They seemed to be very well informed about the dangers of abuse and did not hang around sleeping and vomitting like the drunken teenagers at our village`s youth-club.

That acquisition should only be allowed to people older than 18 goes without saying that and was even those teenager`s statement. 390

19. Should so-called "soft drugs" like marijuana be legalized?

From my point of view, there is very little to say against a controlled marketing of soft drugs in pharmacies. The assumption that consuming marijuana leads to the abuse of hard drugs like cocaine or heroin hasn`t been proved. Studies in the Netherlands have not produced any evidence that marijuana is a gateway drug. I don`t think soft drugs should be sold in cafes or coffee-shops, as in the Netherlands, but I`m sure state-controlled sale is the best way to get rid of illegal drug-dealing.

As far as I know, consuming marijuana does not endanger one`s health, except for the inhalation of tobacco smoke. But smoking isn`t banned, and neither is alcohol, so why should marijuana be illegal? Of course, any kind of abuse, which means exaggerated consumption, causes problems. It may lead to getting out of touch with reality, to losing one's job and social contacts. But that`s the same with alcohol, and no one really cares. I don`t want to demonize alcohol or tobacco. I sometimes enjoy a cigarette or a drink myself. If soft drugs were really that dangerous, consuming them wouldn`t be allowed in some other countries.

The most important thing is to inform young people, especially, about the effects of abuse. Unfortunately, it´s easier to ban soft drugs than to think about why people might abuse them. But demonizing them doesn't explain why teenagers abuse them. Blaming soft drugs and alcohol for causing people to abuse them is the wrong way to try to solve the problem. The problem is abuse, and we need to find out what drives people to that. Thus, politicians, parents and teachers should spend more time determining what young people`s problems are instead of discussing whether to legalize soft drugs or not.

I talked to some teenage marijuana smokers some weeks ago, and I wasn`t able to give them a single reason they weren`t able to refute why marijuana should not be legalized, as long as tobacco and alcohol aren't forbidden. They seemed to be very well informed about the dangers of abuse, unlike some of the teenagers at our village`s youth club, who get drunk on a regular basisThey agreed with me, in fact, that only people 18 or over should be allowed to

20. Reflections on history

Since the conflict in the Middle East escalated some months ago in a most if not the most severe manner since the 1960ies, Germans have been caught up again by their history as can be seen from the German role in the conflict. Despite broad European and German criticism of Israel, there is also a strong bias towards the Israeli position and the rejection of neutrality. Presuming that the conflict can only be solved by calling in a neutral mediator or a group of such, Germany would be excluded from this function because of its history. Knowing about the sensitivity of this matter, I don’t think that history should be given so much power that it can bind present and future generations.

Politicians who refuse to be neutral in this conflict argue that Germany can’t afford a neutral position, because Nazi Germany executed millions of Jews sixty years ago. What might look like a logical explanation on the surface is nothing more than the conviction that history is the decisive factor in making current politics. Imagine some German interest groups developed a promising peace plan requiring compromises on both sides and an active role of Germany as peacemaker, it could never be implemented under a German government that rejected neutrality. This doesn’t seem logical to me, because the prospect of peace would be sacrificed in favour of some rigid historical awareness.

Using history as an explanation and legitimisation of present policies is a misuse of history. This applies to the leftist pro-Palestinian position as well which is the result of a historically motivated view of the present, referring to the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Besides, the use of history does not only affect foreign reactions but is the origin of the conflict itself. Only because both sides have been arguing with history the conflict has become a vicious circle.

What the conflict needs is a neutral mediator, be it Germany or any other state. But as long as historical awareness prevents the solution of present and even future problems and thus, history is misused for political purposes in one way or another it is not possible to make reasonable politics. Especially Germany must find its way of dealing with the past. Only then it can determine its role in the world and maybe contribute to solving the conflict in the Middle East.. 395

20. Reflections on history

Since the conflict in the Middle East escalated some months ago in a most, if not the most, frightening manner since the 1960s, Germans have been caught up again by their history, as can be seen from the German role in the conflict. Despite broad European and German criticism of Israel, there is also a strong bias towards the Israeli position and the rejection of neutrality. Presuming that the conflict can only be solved by calling in a neutral mediator or a group of mediators, Germany would be excluded from this function because of its history. Despite the sensitivity of this matter, I don’t think that history should be given so much power that it can punish present and future generations for the sins of their fathers and grandfathers.

Some people argue that Germany cannot be neutral because Nazi Germany executed millions of Jews sixty years ago. But what might look like a logical explanation on the surface is nothing more than the conviction we are directly responsible for the misdeeds of previous generations. Therefore, no peace plan, no matter how promising, requiring an active role of Germany as peacemaker could never be implemented. This doesn’t seem logical to me, because the prospect of peace would be sacrificed in favour of some rigid historical awareness.

Using history as an explanation for and legitimisation of present policies is a misuse of history. This applies to the leftist pro-Palestinian position as well, which is the result of a historically motivated view of the present, referring to the Israeli occupation of Palestine . Besides, the use of history does not only affect foreign reactions but is the origin of the conflict itself . Only because both sides have been arguing with history has the conflict become a vicious circle .

What the conflict needs is a neutral mediator, be it Germany or any other state. But as long as historical awareness prevents the solution of present and even future problems, and is thus misused for political purposes in one way or another, it will not be possible to solve the conflict. Germany, especially, must find its way of dealing with the past. Only then can it find its proper role in the world and maybe contribute to solving the conflict in the Middle East

21. Should it be illegal to take a pregnant teenager across state lines for an abortion?

In my opinion this question cannot be generalized. It depends on every single case.

But first of all this question only occurs in countries where abortion is illegal, for example in Thailand. In all other countries where abortion is legal teenage girls and their families do not get into such a situation. But it is a fact that in some countries abortion is illegal and if teenage girls get pregnant the question of abortion may come up. In my opinion those teenagers should first of all carefully weigh the pros and cons in order to define their situation. There is always another solution. I think that if somebody feels mature enough to have sex, he or she should be mature enough to take the consequences. Pregnant teenagers should contact advice centers, such as "pro familia" in order to get information about alternatives, for example adoption. Alternatives should always be taken into consideration. If still abortion seems to be the only solution, in my opinion it should be the decision of the teenage girl who is pregnant and her family or adults. But if there is a law which forbids abortion in the home country of a pregnant girl, it shouldn’t be illegal to take a pregnant teenager across state lines for an abortion.

But it is still my personal opinion, that abortion in general isn’t necessary. There are a lot of possibilities for a teenage mother to bring up a child (material help, financial aid, caretakers, etc.). If she absolutely does not want the child she could agree to an adoption. But killing a child, and that is what abortion is all about should never be a "solution". So I think that this question isn’t really a good question. It is more important to think about the sense of abortion in general, than about the possibility of having an abortion elsewhere by taking the risk of a fine or sentence. 339 words

21. Should it be illegal to take a pregnant teenager across state lines for an abortion?

In my opinion, this question cannot be answered in a general way. Every single case is different.

But first of all, this question only arises in countries where abortion is illegal, for example, in Thailand. In countries where abortion is legal, teenage girls do not get into such a situation . But in countries where abortion is illegal, teenage pregnancy is a serious problem. In my opinion, a pregant teenager in that situation should first of all carefully weigh the pros and cons of … . Abortion is never the only solution. I think that if somebody feels mature enough to have sex, he or she should be mature enough to take the consequences. Pregnant teenagers should contact advice centers, such as "pro familia," in order to get information about alternatives to abortion, for example, putting the child up for adoption. If abortion seems to be the only solution, it should be the decision of the girl who is pregnant and her family. If there is a law which forbids abortion, it shouldn’t be illegal to travel abroad for an abortion .

It is my personal opinion that abortion isn’t necessary . There are a lot of possibilities for a teenage mother to bring up a child (material help, financial aid, caretakers, etc.). If she absolutely does not want the child she can put the child up for adoption. But killing a child, and that is what abortion is all about, should never be a "solution." So I think that this question isn’t really a good question . It is more important to think about the sense of abortion in general than about the possibility of having an abortion in another country by taking the risk of a fine or sentence.

22. The truth about alcohol

In today’s world, alcohol is not often thought of as a drug - largely because its use is common for both religious and social purposes in most parts of the world. It is a drug, nonetheless, and drinking in excess has become one of modern society’s most serious and pandemic problems.

Researches have shown that alcohol consumption especially among teenagers has increased over the last couple of years. This may be due to peer pressure and wanting to be accepted by a new social group, or, for many, testing the limits of independence for the first time. Most teenagers forget that alcohol can be very dangerous, because it is a „legal drug", but it is a little - known fact that alcohol is one of the most difficult and dangerous drugs to detoxify from after an extended period of heavy use.

Drinking alcohol leads to a loss of coordination, poor judgment, slowed reflexes, distorted vision, memory lapses, and even blackouts. Alcohol can damage every organ in your body. It is absorbed directly into your bloodstream and can increase your risk for a variety of life threatening diseases, including cancer. Alcohol depresses your central nervous system, lowers your inhibitions, and impairs your judgment. Drinking can lead to risky behaviors, including having unprotected sex. This may expose you to HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases or cause unwanted pregnancy. If you are around people who are drinking, you have an increased risk of being seriously injured, involved in car crashes, or affected by violence. At the very least, you may have to deal with people who are sick, out of control, or unable to take care of themselves. Drinking large amounts of alcohol can lead to coma or even death. So understand the facts : Alcohol affects your brain, your body, your self - control. It can hurt you - even if you are not the one drinking and it can kill you. 325

22. The truth about alcohol

Today , alcohol is not often thought of as a drug - largely because its use is common for both religious and social purposes in most parts of the world. It is a drug, nonetheless, and drinking in excess has become one of modern society’s most serious and pandemic problems.

Researchers have shown that alcohol consumption, especially among teenagers, has increased over the last couple of years. This may be due to peer pressure, from wanting to be accepted by a new social group, or, for many, it may be a way to test the limits of their independence for the first time. Most teenagers forget that alcohol can be very dangerous, because it is a „legal drug", but it is a well(?) - known fact that alcohol is one of the most difficult and dangerous drugs to detoxify from after an extended period of heavy use.

Drinking alcohol leads to a loss of coordination, poor judgment, slowed reflexes, distorted vision, memory lapses, and even blackouts. Alcohol can damage every organ in your body. It is absorbed directly into your bloodstream and can increase the risk of a variety of life- threatening diseases, including cancer. Alcohol depresses your central nervous system, lowers your inhibitions, and impairs your judgment. Drinking can lead to risky behavior, including having unprotected sex. This may expose you to HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases or cause unwanted pregnancy. If you are around people who are drinking, you run an increased risk of being seriously injured, e.g., in car a crash. At the very least, you may have to deal with people who are sick, out of control, or unable to take care of themselves . You may end up in a coma, or even dead. The fact is that alcohol affects your brain, your body, and your self - control. It can hurt you - even if you are not the one drinking - and it can kill you.

23. Dear Editor,

As far as the possible reasons for the school shooting in Erfurt is concerned, I totally agree with you. I’d like to focus on some of your points but I also want to add some other reasons that might have influenced Robert Steinhäuser to kill 17 innocent people.

Firstly, violent games and videos might cause brutality and aggression. Secondly, it could be said that the society is a reason for frustration and resignation. Thirdly, the legislation of weapon’s possession might not be strong enough otherwise the 19-year-old Robert would not have had guns and ammunition. Finally, family, friends and teachers have not recognised Robert’s psychological problems.

Violent media shows brutality, weapons and ways to kill people. Movies like "The Exorcist" can be watched in the evening on TV. This is rather contradictious if you compare those movies with sex movies that are forbidden because children could watch them. Isn’t it dangerous for children to watch brutal films? Shouldn’t we think about possible consequences? Aggression might be taken over by children. It might be easier for them to solve problems with brutality rather than with communication because movies show them to do so.

Another reason for that catastrophe could be the society. The lack of perspective by young people, big unemployment rates and poverty cause frustration. Robert Steinhäuser had to leave school without examination. It is very difficult to find a job without qualification, particularly in the Eastern part of Germany where the unemployment rate is high. Society produces levels of anger, frustration and destructive energy.

In addition, the laws that allow someone to have a gun might not be secure. Policemen should have a gun, of course, and it should be possible for shooting clubs to practice shooting with different weapons. However, everybody possessing a gun should acquire a license and do psychological tests which are at least every two years. Consequently, mentally ill people are not allowed to possess weapons.

Moreover, Robert’s mental illness was not recognised by his family, friends and teachers. He forged and therefore was kicked out of school. Nobody was interested why he forged. Instead of solving his problems teachers kicked him out. Consequently, Robert got more problems. His divorced parents did not know that. Social problems might have led to deep frustration.

In conclusion, many factors are necessary that a person is willing to kill. Different problems might cause such an school shooting ending. 402 words, www.wsws.org/articles/2002/apr2002/germ-a29.shtml

23. Dear Editor,

As far as the possible reasons for the school shooting in Erfurt are concerned, I totally agree with you . I’d like to focus on some of your points, but I also want to add some other factors that might have caused Robert Steinhäuser to kill 17 innocent people.

Firstly, violent games and videos might cause brutality and aggression. Secondly, our society breeds frustration and resignation. Thirdly, the gun control laws are not strong enough. Otherwise Robert would not have had guns and ammunition. Finally, his family, friends and teachers did not recognise Robert’s psychological problems.

The media are full of brutality, weapons, and killing. Movies like "The Exorcist" can be watched in the evening on TV. This is rather absurd, considering that sex movies are forbidden in the evening because children could watch them. Isn’t it at least just as dangerous for children to watch brutal films? Shouldn’t we think about the possible consequences? The aggression they see over and over again on TV might be understood by the children as acceptable. They might learn that it might be easier for them to solve their problems with violence rather than with communication, because movies show them that this is so.

The lack of prospect for young people, high unemployment rates, and poverty cause frustration. Robert Steinhäuser had to leave school without a diploma. It is very difficult to find a job without a diploma, particularly in the eastern part of Germany, where the unemployment rate is particularly high. Thus society itself produces high levels of anger, frustration and destructive energy.

In addition, the gun control laws are not strict enough. Policemen should have a gun, of course, and it should be possible for shooting clubs to practice shooting with different weapons. However, everybody who possesses a gun should have a license and take psychological tests at least every two years. This would prevent mentally ill people from possessing weapons.

Robert’s mental illness was not recognised by his family, friends or teachers. He cheated on a test and was kicked out of school. But nobody was interested in why he cheated. Instead of looking at his problems, the teachers kicked him out. Consequently, Robert got more problems. His divorced parents did not know that . His social problems might have led to deep frustration.

In conclusion, many factors are necessary for a person to reach the point where he is driven to kill. (402 words) article: www.wsws.org/articles/2002/apr2002/germ-a29.shtml

24. Assisted suicide not allowed

Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Brian Pretty, husband of Diane Pretty, a terminally ill woman, would not be protected from prosecution if he helps his wife commit suicide. Pretty`s wife is disabled (paralized from the neck down) and suffers from motor neurone disease which is an illness that will soon affect her breathing muscles. This will make her painfully die of suffocation.

Diane Pretty`s case again shows the dilemma of our culture, jurisdiction and medicine. On the one hand to protect life uncompromisingly, on the other hand to deal reasonably with demands such as that of Diane Pretty. There is a woman who assumes she will maybe die soon under terrible circumstances and will have to "undergo degrading treatment or punishment in a hospital", as Pretty`s lawyers argued. Should a doctor or, in this case, a relative be allowed to help someone to commit suicide? The question is as easily asked as the answering is difficult. But we have the scale of rights that define what is right or wrong.

The English law is clear: assisted suicide is a crime. The Strasbourg judges only had to decide whether this represents a breach of human rights. They could not come to another decision as there is no human right to die painless with dignity. There is only the right of self-determination but this does not include the right to assist an ill to commit suicide. Who is able to draw the line between unlawful murder and relief in case of a fatal illness? Diane Pretty writes on her Web site: "If I were physically able I could take my own life. That is not illegal." But committing suicide cannot be prosecuted because there is no one to be punished afterwards, therefore this statement can not serve as an argument. Those who try to take their own life and fail are not asked whether they need some help because what they do is legal. On the contrary, they are sent to a hospital.

In our culture, that has been formed considerably by Christianity, life is considered to be the most precious gift for everyone. That’s what our jurisdiction is based upon. Therefore we can not accept assisted suicide if someone is disabled at the moment but anticipates a painful death in the future. Then doctors are allowed to give narcotics until they can no longer save one`s life. This is the reason why the judges could not decide differently. 386

24. Assisted suicide not allowed

Yesterday the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Brian Pretty, the husband of Diane Pretty, a terminally ill woman, would not be protected from prosecution if he helped his wife commit suicide. Pretty`s wife is disabled (paralysed from the neck down) and suffers from motor neuron disease, which will soon affect her breathing muscles. This will make her die painfully of suffocation.

Diane Pretty`s case again shows the dilemma of our modern medicine. On the one hand, doctors are supposed to protect life uncompromisingly, and on the other hand we expect them to deal reasonably with demands such as that of Diane Pretty. Here is a woman who assumes she will die soon under terrible circumstances and will have to "undergo degrading treatment or punishment in a hospital", as Pretty`s lawyers argued. Should a doctor or, in this case, a relative be allowed to help here avoid this by committing suicide? The question is as easily asked as the answering is difficult. But we have the scale of rights that define what is right or wrong.

English law is clear: assisted suicide is a crime. The Strasbourg judges only had to decide whether this represents a breach of human rights. They could not come to any other decision, as there is no human right to die painlessly or with dignity. There is only the right of self-determination, but this does not include the right to assist afatally ill person to commit suicide. Who is able to draw the line between unlawful murder and relief from terrible suffering? Diane Pretty writes on her Web site: "If I were physically able I could take my own life. That is not illegal." Committing suicide cannot be prosecuted, because there is no one to be punished afterwards. Therefore, this statement can not serve as an argument. Those who try to take their own lives and fail are not asked whether they need some help because what they do is legal. On the contrary, they are sent to a hospital.

In our culture, which has been formed considerably by Christianity, life is considered to be the most precious gift for everyone. That’s what our legal systems are based upon. Therefore we cannot accept assisted suicide because someone is disabled and anticipates a painful death in the future. Then doctors are allowed to give narcotics until they can no longer save one`s life. This is the reason why the judges could not decide differently

25. Since 2001 homosexual people in Germany have the right to live in relationships that lawfully have the same value as marriages of heterosexual people. This progress raises the question if homosexual people shouldn’t also have the right to adopt children in order to build ‘complete’ families.

To discuss this topic, first of all one has to think of those about whom one decides: of the children who will be adopted. Would the adoption make their life easier, better or would it even make it harder for them?

Having a look at those children’s daily life which normally takes place in institutions where they are only part of the mass shows that this kind of life is in no way preferable to life in a family. The responsibles don’t have enough time to care for them as parents would do and to give to all of them the support they need in order to develop to self-conscient and happy personalities. If homosexual people had the right to adopt children, more of them could get out of the institutions and experience family life, even if it would be different to other families. But at last it is better to live in a less ordinary family than never knowing what family life means.

Besides, it doesn’t mean that homosexual couples are worse parents only because they may be different to other families. In some cases those differences may even make them better parents. For example you can be sure that their decision of wanting children is taken freely, with full consciousness of their responsibility. When those couples adopt a child, they had enough time to think about the consequences that will follow their decsion. Their children will never be an ‘accident’ they don’t know how to live with, as it can happen to other families.

Another important fact that has to be regarded is that no one should be discriminated because of his or her sexuality. Homosexual people should also have the right to build families and to live like anyone else in order to become more integrated in society. So their way of living will perhaps be accepted and tolerated officially and in every-day-life.

To sum up, it would be a positive progress giving homosexual couples the right of adopting children because it would not only improve their own lives, but also those of the children. 394

25. Since 2001, homosexuals in Germany have had the right to live in relationships that lawfully have the same value as marriages of heterosexuals. This raises the question whether homosexuals shouldn’t also have the right to adopt children in order to build ‘complete’ families.

To discuss this topic, first of all one has to think of those about whom one decides: of the children who will be adopted. Would the adoption make their life easier and better, or would it even make it harder for them?

The daily life of orphans normally takes place in institutions where they are only part of the mass, and this life is in no way preferable to life in a family. The responsible people don’t have as much time to care for them as parents would , and cannot give all of them the support they need to develop into self-confident and happy people. If homosexuals had the right to adopt children, more orphans could get out of the institutions and experience family life, even if it would be different to other families. But it is better to live in a less ordinary family than never know what family life means at all.

Besides, homosexual couples are not worse parents only because they may be different to other families. In some cases those differences may even make them better parents. For example, you can be sure that their decision to adopt children is taken freely, with full consciousness of their responsibility. When those couples adopt a child, they have had enough time to think about the consequences that will follow their decision. Their children will never be an ‘accident’ they don’t know how to live with, as can happen to other families.

Another important fact is that no one should be discriminated against because of his or her sexuality. Homosexuals should also have the right to form families and live like anyone else in order to become more integrated in society, so their way of living will someday be fully accepted.

To sum up, it would be a step forward to give homosexual couples the right to adopt children because it would not only improve their own lives, but also those of the children.

26. The topic of this essay is that schools today are obviously not safe from crimes .

Today many children and juveniles spend a lot of time watching television or playing computer games.

Comparing to former years the number of children that watch television at least once a day increased as examinations have proved. The television program today consists of more violent movies and the time these movies are shown has become earlier. The reason is that even younger children can watch these movies before they are going to bed. Another reason is the technical development of computers and computer games that have become more cruel and realistic than ever.

So parents should pay more attention to their children watching not violent movies and playing not violent computer games as long as they are not able to come to terms with it according to their age.

As crimes often reveal, criminals or amuck runners possess weapons that were not bought in legal weapon shops but that were sold by gun-runners to them.

Seldom does it happen that policemen, who search the house of the perpetrator, find a gun-license or indications for any affinity to weapons. In most cases it remains unclear how those persons acquired their weapons. Police have warned for some time that weapons, particularly from Eastern Europe, are available on a lively black market.

Since more and more criminal activities in the United States and Europe take place governments must try to enhance the observation of black markets which could be achieved by a higher number of cover agents, for instance.

Latest attempts show how bad safety standards in schools are.

The deed in Erfurt has pointed out again that assassins or amuck runners can easily smuggle weapons in school buildings. Therefore it gets also clear that something has to be done to prevent this. Exemplarey, airports have high safety standards that disheaten many criminals from taking weapons with them. Only by well elaborated plans assassins are sometimes able to smuggle weapons or other metal objects through airport detectors as the attempt at the Empire State Building last year has shown. But these standards do not only contain metal detectors but also well organized and drilled security services and observation systems.

Finally, I am of the opinion that it has to be lawful that especially high schools get security systems that consist of metal detectors, observation cameras and a particaluar number of security agents. 405

25. The topic of this essay is that schools today are obviously not safe from crimes .

Today many children and juveniles spend a lot of time watching television and playing computer games.

The number of children that watch television at least once a day has increased, as studies have shown. Television programming today consists of more violent movies, and the time these movies are shown has become earlier. The reason is that even young children can watch these movies before they go to bed. Another reason is the technical development of computers and computer games, which have become more brutal and realistic than ever.

So parents should make sure their children do not watch violent movies or play violent computer games, as long as they are not old enough to handle them .

As crimes often reveal, criminals or amuck runners possess weapons that were not bought in legal weapon shops but that were sold by gun-runners to them.

Seldom does it happen that policemen who search the house of a perpetratorfind a gunlicense or indications for any affinity to weapons . In most cases it remains unclear how those persons acquired their weapons. Police have warned for some time that weapons, particularly from eastern Europe, are available on a lively black market.

Since crime is increasing in the United States and Europe, governments must try to enhance the surveillance of black markets, which could be achieved by using more undercover agents, for instance.

Latest attempts show how bad safety standards in schools are.

The shooting in Erfurt has made if clear again that people can easily smuggle weapons into school buildings. It is also clear that something has to be done to prevent this. Airports are exemplary for their high security standards that dishearten many criminals from taking weapons there with them. It is not easy to smuggle weapons or other metal objects through airport security procedures, . which include not only metal detectors but also well-trained security personnel surveillance systems.

High schools need such security systems, too.

27. Reading comics is beneficial

I know many adults who criticize comics. They accuse comics of preventing the children from reading a book. Moreover, they say that a comic contributes to the childrens´ worse ability of expression. And the adults fear that this sort of media would have a stultifying effect on their children. They also affirm that a child gets a wrong idea of the life by using a comic.

Me, on my part, I refuse to condemn comics. I appreciate this form of expression, and I think that it includes many positive aspects.

Indeed, the comic is a book. The comic makes it possible that a child gets in touch with a work. He holds it like a book, and then he flips through the pages. And that is the way he´ll be accustomed to the activity of reading.

Besides, comics are often designed by people with talents for drawing.

Thus, they enable that the young reader gets in contact with another form of expression: The drawing, or in this case called illustration. And that plays an important role because he learns another method to express his thoughts and feelings.

And most of all, the comic allows them to discover historical places and ages of empire which is represented in a very funny way. As a result, they´ll be well prepared when the teacher introduces the history of the Roman Empire.

And along with, when the child reads a comic, he discovers different countries of the world: Such as the desert Sahara and the pyramids in Egypt. One of the most popular comics is Asterix. Not only the children but also the teachers regard Asterix & Obelix as a comic to which one will always return with pleasure.

For that reason, the argument which says that reading a comic is mind-numbing, is totally wrong.

In conclusion, I think that a comic has effective qualities. I admit that there are some comics which are not adequate to their socialisation, but it´s sufficient if a child learns to read selected comics. Furthermore, the young reader should learn to distinguish between a futurist drawing and a qualified illustration. And also the distinction between an intelligent and a stupid scene should be done by the children. Finally, a child has the possibility to combine both the reading of a comic and the reading of a book. 395

27. Reading comics is beneficial

I know many adults who dispprove of comics. They say comics of prevent children from reading books. Moreover, they say that comics hinder the development of the childrens´ ability to express themselves. They fear comics will have a stultifying effect on their children, and that they will get wrong ideas about life.

For my part, I refuse to condemn comics. I appreciate this form of expression, and I think that it includes many positive aspects.

Indeed, the comic is a book. The comic makes it possible for a child to get in touch with a work . He holds it like a book, and then he flips through the pages. In this way, he becomes accustomed to the activity of reading.

Besides, comics are often made by people with real talent for drawing.

Thus the young reader comes in contact with another form of expression: the drawing, or in this case, what are called illustrations. This is important because he learns that thoughts and feelings can be expressed in pictures as well as in words.

Most of all, the comic allows children to discover historical places and events, which are represented in an entertaining way. As a result, they´ll be well prepared when the teacher introduces the history of the Roman Empire.

Also, when the child reads a comic, he discovers different countries of the world, such as the Sahara desert and the pyramids in Egypt. One of the most popular comics is Asterix. Not only children but also teachers regard Asterix & Obelix as a comic to which one can always return with pleasure.

For that reason, the argument that reading comics is mind-numbing is totally wrong.

In conclusion, I think that comics have positive qualities. I admit that there are some comics which are harmful, but a child can learn to read selected comics. Furthermore, the young reader should learn to distinguish between a futurist drawing and a good (?) illustration , and between an intelligent and a stupid scene. Finally, a child can always do both--read comics and books.

28. The aramean family and the aramean woman

In my freetime I write for a Aramean magazine which called Mardutho D - suryoye. At the moment I write a new article about the Syriac / Aramean family and the Aramean woman. To understand the Aramean family and the Aramean woman in particular, you have to know about their history. The Aramean people constitutes a Christian minority coming nowadays from areas that are mainly Islamic in character. A Aramean person is born within the Aramean community and ist Churches. That is why religion plays an important role in their lives. Since they do not have a nation of their own, the family, the relatives, the language and the Church represent the links reflecting their heritage and their nationality. As in many Middle Eastern countries, the Aramean woman also comes from a traditionally male - dominated society. The Aramean woman's most important role was set out by the structures of past feudalism. She was the child bearer, the householder and the one who held the family together. Nowadays her role has changed a bit. She is still the one who holds the family together, but one different terms. In the last two decades, the Aramean woman has changed considerably. Today she is speaking openly about equal rights and responsibilities and about her role in peace building. She is getting an education and seeks to get herself a career outside the household. The family is stll very important to her, but she expects , and also receives, help from the Aramean man. Both are working side by side on the same terms to create a peaceful and equal society. The Aramean family has adapted itself very well to the new societies it has moved to. Of course, there are still problems with unemployment and criminality, but that occurs mostly when society neglects ist responsibility towards ist citizens. If you are trying to tell people how they should be, instead of understanding them and their culture, of course they will revolt and will not intergate into the society. With ist strong relations within family - life and religion, the Aramean people has brought many positive ideas and experiences in making businesses. When a Aramean person starts a business the whole family helps and is involved in the business. I hope with this little article you learn a little bit more about my culture. 398

27. The Aramean family and the Aramean woman

In my free time I write for a Aramean magazine which is called Mardutho D - suryoye. At the moment I am writing an article about the Syrian / Aramean family and the Aramean woman. To understand the Aramean family and the Aramean woman in particular, you have to know about their history. The Aramean people constitute a Christian minority coming nowadays from areas that are mainly Islamic in character. A Aramean person is born within the Aramean community and its Churches. That is why religion plays an important role in their lives. Since they do not have a nation of their own, the family, the relatives, the language and the Church represent the links to their heritage and their nationality. As in many Middle Eastern countries, the Aramean woman also comes from a traditionally male - dominated society. The Aramean woman's most important role was established by the structures of feudalism. She was the child-bearer, the housekeeper and the one who held the family together. Nowadays her role has changed a bit. She is still the one who holds the family together, but on different terms. In the last two decades, the Aramean woman has changed considerably. Today she speaks openly about equal rights and responsibilities and about her role in peace-building. She gets an education and seeks to get herself a career outside the household. The family is stll very important to her, but she expects , and also receives, help from the Aramean man. Both work side by side on the same terms to create a peaceful and equal society. The Aramean family has adapted itself very well to the new societies it has moved to. Of course, there are still problems with unemployment and crime, but that occurs mostly when society neglects its responsibility towards its citizens. If you are trying to tell people how they should be, instead of understanding them and their culture, of course they will revolt and will not intergate into the society. With their strong family and religious relations, the Aramean people have brought many positive ideas and experiences to the business world. When a Aramean person starts a business, the whole family helps and is involved in the business.

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws