Debate Rebuttal

I am respond to Karen Situ's opening statement for her debate on altering DNA.

I feel, based off of what Karen said, that altering DNA can be a good and bad thing. For many, it is good. There are many different diseases around the world, such as caner, than cannot effectively be cured throughout the world population. If gene therapy were to allow a person to become immune to these diseases, then the world's population would not have to endure epidemics such as breast cancer, ect. Obviously, many lives would be saved and new advances in scientific technology would allow us to explore many more possibilities of gene therapy. If gene therapy was used to cure diseases, I feel that it is being used for the greater good.

DNA altering could also possibly become a bad thing. If it was used to create a "superhuman," then I feel that problems would occur. For example, if "superhumans" were created, the original genetics of a human could become potentially lost. If this happened, there would be no turning back with the new human genetics. This could be considered a possible "epidemic" if a problem occurred with this. Also, an inequality could become created in society. "Better" and "lesser" humans would be in a constant battle against each other. This again could create huge possibilities of potential problems.

Obviously, many good and bad results could occur. I feel that in the society we live in now though, unchangeable problems would occur if DNA altering became a option to some. It must be used correctly in order to become positive to society, but the chances of that seem very slim to me.

Animal Farm Mini-Essay

Napoleon and Major both used extremely influential and inspiring language to convey messages to their listeners. In both characters, the influential language was based off of a greater good; the wish to become free from human oppressors. Major, a wise old pig on the farm, started the Revolution by simply enlightening the other animals. He realized that to become free, he would need to inspire the animals, hence his "Beasts of England" song. "Soon and late the day is coming, Tyrant man shall be o'erthrown, And the fruitful fields of England, Shall be trod by beasts alone." He used his power and knowledge for the greater good of the other animals to convey a positive message. His song and speech were triumphant; the animals revolted and created Animal Farm. Once created, Napoleon, on of the pigs on the farm, became the "natural" leader of all other animals. His ideas were based off of Major. He then created the ideas of Animalism. He was an extremely influential character to the others, but the power he gained corrupted him.

Napoleon knew that with his supreme power, he could become the "dictator" of the others, which he chose to do. Unlike Major, who used his power for the good of all others, Napoleon used his power for the good of himself. "All Animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." Napoleon took control and influenced the others to follow him. In a sense, he "brainwashed them." A great example of this is Boxer. Because of the influence put upon him by Napoleon, he only worked harder because it was for the "greater good." Like Boxer, many of the other animals did the same. Napoleon used the ideas of Animalism to create a sense of control on the others; he used events to influence the others. The animals believed him because he was deemed "smarter." Major knew he could influence the animals to revolt, but did not know it would turn into a Communism.

Between both characters, a need was used to influence others; the big difference was the use of their gained power. These events happen all over the world, currently, in Tunisia. Power was used wrongly, and eventually, a new form of government was created. The book Animal Farm was based off of the communist rule in Russia. This book is an extremely important and influential book because it inspires people to do what they think is right.

Opening Statement: Facebook

I personally feel that social networks such as Facebook are more harmful to society than good. This is because they reduce real communication to emails, instant messaging, and friend requesting. There is no true friendship involved in these types of communication.


The definition of friendship is "friendly feeling or disposition."(dictionary.com). In a friendship, you communicate feeling, such as happiness. Friendship cannot exist without feeling. On a social network, there is no way to communicate true feeling. Everything is covered up by the screen in front of you. There is no way of seeing or feeling true emotion. Instead, people use emoticons such as ":D, :(." That is not an emotion. I feel that this lack of emotion could potentially be a source of communication breakdown in the future. Society could possibly base friendship off of technology rather than a "true" friendship. 


Besides a breakdown of communication, I also feel that a breakdown of the English language could potentially occur. With current generations of social network users, "text language" is the popular choice of communication. Many are too lazy to put thought, feeling, or time into what they write. Instead, they choose to write abbreviations, and words that are not in the English language. Words such as "ttul, brb, lol, smh" ect. are used. Currently, I have even heard some people say "lol" along with other words in person; this signifies an extreme cutdown on lack of communication. 


If you ever talk to parents about social networks, they usually always tell you to "be careful." This is because of "online predators" that participate in these networks. They can be anyone, from an old man, to a young adult. The problem is they have no good intentions while on these internet sites. Their intention is to look for little girls/guys for their own reasons. Predators make online socializing dangerous. Many people carelessly become friends with random people. This leads to issues.


Social networks create problems in the society we live in. They stop true communication, and allow for  online predidatoin. These are problems for society that need to be fixed. It is okay to use a social network to some extent, but many are using them past the line of regular communication.  

Political Power

I feel that political power can corrupt anyone in control of it. The problem with this form of power is the obvious fact that corruption faces anyone. The corruption can come in the form of their own desires of another party's desires. Yes, the political representatives can have good intentions, or appear too, but there seems to always be a story behind theirs.

In America, a democracy was created in replace of a monarchy during the American Revolution. In the beginning, the system was used correctly. No control came over it. Currently, that is the exact opposite. Powers such as Wall Street, the Federal Reserve, the Bilderburg Group, ect. have extreme influence over how are government is run. Essentially, in some cases, it doesn't matter if the Presidents of our country have good intentions, because they are controlled by these powers. In most current cases though, such as the Bush Administration, the President willfully took control of this power for simply money.

In America's current situation, "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." America's economy is currently based off of capitalism. It may seem to be that the "American Dream" is easily acquired because of this, but in reality, it is extremely difficult. That is because corporate powers, along with others who have influence in our government, make it this way.

Basically, America's government is largely controlled by other powers. These in turn influence the "President" of our country. Like in "Animal Farm," I feel that our country will soon(hopefully) revolt. The people cannot stand this much further. A revolt will idealy occur in which the democratic government is rightfully controlled.

I feel that George Orwell's opinion on political power would be that it can be easily corrupted. Obviously from reading his views based on "Animal Farm," he feels that without the correct governmental ideas, rightful political control will not be existent, as seen in the book. The book is based off of Communism, which always goes wrong; Democracy is harder to corrupt.

In essence, I feel that political power is controlled by not only the "leader" of the country, but can also be controlled by other powers.

Responce Post to Communication

I read an interesting blog post from Amber Chan entitled "Communication."

"I can no longer remember the days when I used to have to send mail or make a phone call from the house phone to talk to a friend or relative that didn’t live very close to me, or just meet with them face to face. "

I feel this is true. Much of our society relies primarily on technology to communicate with others, whether they are friends or not. This is the new standard. Unfortunately, for many, it is a communication breakdown. Communicating solely with the use of internet and face-to-face are two majorly different forms of communication. With the internet, you can talk and have interesting conversations, but really, you will not be able to truly understand a person, their feelings, etcetera. Face-to-face allows people to truly communicate with each other and understand each other. Now, people are more and more relying on internet for communication.

With technology in use for communication, you cannot sense or feel any emotion between one another. A new language is also being created, such as what you use when  you text or IM. Unnecessary words are being removed and messages are usually very short to the point. With that, feeling is removed too. Eventually, people will not know the difference between "you" and "you're;" "there," "their," and "they're." Hopefully, humanity will not rely on pointing and grunting in the future. I feel it is much more pleasant to express yourself with talking with other people; that is true communication; not "?" for "I have a question," and "<3" for "I love you." As anyone can see, that is not true communication and never will be.

What most have forgotten is the fact that you can do what is called grammatically writing one another with correct vocabulary and expressing feeling with one another, through texting, IMing, and even emailing. Our standards for communication have changed and should not because with that change, society will be impacted for the worst. Emotion will no longer exist. I have even read a book call "1984" by George Orwell and in that book, lack of communication is used to control society. Communication is an art that we cannot loose.

Ender Game Post 3

At the beginning of "part 3," one of the most important event in the book happened. Ender was progressed to the position of being a commander. He is now forced to give orders, and to discipline. This new role change showed me an important connection; Ender is very very similar to Colonel Graff. In particular cases, Ender picks on a "launchie" named Bean. Although it may seem like he is pointlessly doing so, he truly cares about him and wants to help him. Ender believes Graff is using him, but does not know that Graff wants to help Ender too and cares about him. Some manipulation must be used to train his army, like Graff used to make Ender a commander.

Because of Ender's newfound success, Ender has made enemies. He truly is competing with the teachers, not the other armies. He wants to beat them. However, Ender's anger with the teachers caused him to make enemies, one in particular named Bonzo. He is eventually forced to fight him, and severely hurts two people. Immediately after the fight, he is forced to fight an impossible battle. This in a sense seemed to break Ender. He no longer cared about winning afterwards; he only cares about having no more enemies. When he left Battle School, the similar feelings of indifference towards life returned.

Ender again returns to school, this time Command School. He does not want to go back because when he does, he is forced to become Peter again. When he destroys the Buggers, he is the only one who does not celebrate because he is sad he destroyed another enemy. He simply wants to have no enemies. Ender also felt manipulated because he never knew he was actually fighting the buggers; he just destroyed their humanity. Although the was was justified, Ender is the only one who thinks humanity could have been saved without war.

When Ender leaves, he colonizes to the bugger worlds with Valentine; Peter would use him if he returned to Earth. He dedicated his life to understanding the Buggers and they both come to the understanding that they never meant to harm one another. The buggers forgave Ender for what he did because they knew he never wanted to hurt them. Ender finally finds his freedom because he has chosen the path he wants to follow, not someone elses.

Responce To Luise's blog post on substitutes

I found an interesting blog post that Luise wrote about substitues.

"I hate it when people try and take advantage of substitutes like if they do not even know the rules of the school. In my old school, taking advantage of substitutes continuously happened throughout the year. I admit it I also used to take advantage but sometimes there is a limit. Some people take it too far."

I have the same feeling about taking advantage of substitutes.  Many if the substitute teachers I have encountered at ASTI are extremely nice. They constantly try to give us meaningful information and do their best when subing, rain or shine. I find that whether or not students like a substitute or not, they still take advantage of them.

An example of a great substitute teacher at ASTI is the one Mrs. Corbally always hires. He is a great English teacher in general. He always has great topics and ideas to discuss regarding lesson plans and never asks much of us. He unfortunately cannot control a classroom properly. Literally, when he talks, no one listens to him; they talk in their own conversations. Yes, he may be boring, but the fact is, he wants to teach us and cares about what we learn. Does nobody understand that? When you are extremely disrespectful to a substitute like him, you are disrespectful to your own education.

I feel that no one respects substitute teachers because socially, that is accepted. I feel this is wrong. Substitutes were once teachers too. The only difference is their job is temporary now. They still care about us and our education. For example, Ms. Corbally's substitute has taken the time to learn all of our names. I have never seen a substitute ever do that. He also takes the time to try and teach us meaningful information. In a sense, you are almost slapping a sub in the face if you disrespect them like many do.

Subs want to help us and care about all of us. We need to in turn show our care for them too. If you don't appreciate your education, leave the classroom instead of wasting the sub's time. Teachers are extremely important figures in society and everyone should realize that; they care for our future, even subs.