marriage is not religious

Wolfson defines marriage as love and commitment and dedication to another person. He makes this his first task so that you know what he is basing his argument on. If he didn’t do this you could make up your own definition of marriage and all of his arguments could be made untrue and unreasonable. I think he definition of marriage is the way that most people would define it. Others would add in a religious aspect to it, but in reality religion is not marriage. Marriage is a commitment of love between two people. For the things Wolfson is arguing for, the rights that come with a legal marriage, this definition and not a religious definition is sufficient. Others who add in the religious marriage, must take notice that he does not want religious rights, he wants civil rights. That is what I think people get hung up on.

airplane down?

You don’t want to be on the plane that has a 32% accuracy. You want to be on the plane that has the closest to 100% as they come. Single parent families statistically do not produce mentally healthy or successful kids. “Normal” families (Santorun’s normal) have a much higher success rate. The analogy is illustrating that normal families work better and therefore should be promoted.
Santorum in this article does admit that non-normal families can be successful, but I don’t think he talks about it enough. Of course he does this on purpose to make sure his point is the obviously better one, but I still think it looks like because he glossed over this it shows that he knows there are many successful non-normal families but doesn’t want to admit it. I think he should have spoken about it more to show that this is not what he was doing (but perhaps this is what he was doing?).

surprised much?

The reason Vasquez waits to tell you that these men are straight is because she does want you to think that they are gay. She wants it to be a shock when she tells you that they aren’t. She is making a point to say that people are judged by their appearances all of the time and sometimes appearances are just that, they are not how the person truly is. I don’t think that knowing some victims of antigay violence are heterosexual changes the issue. I think that violence regarding antigay movements are equal no matter who the victim is. They are still sending out the same message. It is not the message we want stopped. Everyone has their own right to say that they think being gay is wrong or immoral, or whatever they think. What they do not have the right to do is violently attack and demonstrate this. No view on a lifestyle is worth violence.

be a lady

Be strong, be what ever you want to be, let your voice be heard. Be a mother, teach your children well, watch what you say as to not offend anyone. Be nice, play with others, include others. Be a mother, wash the clothes, don’t let your father do that laundry, he will shrink everything. Be self sufficient. Cook dinner on time for when your husband gets home. Make one dinner and if you don’t like it, tough luck. Be a mother be self sufficient, don’t stress yourself out. You can’t control everything. Pray every night before you go to sleep. Pray for others before yourself. Care about others, put others before yourself. Don’t let others under appreciate you. Let your voice be heard. Be a lady follow the rules, this is proper etiquette. Keep your hands in your lap while you eat. Don’t play with your food. Don’t swear, ladies don’t swear. Keep your morals. Have high standards for yourself and others, but don’t be disappointed if you or someone else fails to achieve them.

manly man?

Manliness and sensitivity can exist in society together harmoniously, but they don’t usual exist equally within one person. People can be both manly and sensitive, but they are not 50/50. If a person is manly, it is not likely that they will openly show their feelings. They could however, enjoy a romance novel, or something that has been deemed sensitive, although they would never announce this to society. Someone could be sensitive, but not necessarily fight people just for fun. They could be a fit person and lift weights, or enjoy some other ‘manly’ activity. They both exist within each person, its society that makes people pick which one to show. They exist within the person, but outwardly they may not been known.

its his own fault he's the last

The reason Gilbert thinks that Eustace is the last American man is not only because he is the last man to live like those of the frontier, but because of his mindset. Eustace is not the last because no one else can do this. Of course there are other people out in this country who could become entirely self-sufficient. There could be others. The reason that the is the last is because he sets such high standards. There is a difference between just being self sufficient and being self sufficient in Eustace’s mind. Eustace shuts himself off from the rest of the world in his self sufficient-ness. He tries so hard to get people to be like him but there really is no way he can get that to happen because he has closed himself off from the rest of the world. In my opinion Eustace is working his ass off trying to get all this done, but because he is so, well Eustace, he cant see that it is never going to happen for the very reason of him trying to do it.

cooking cleaning having babies is democracy

Tocqueville says that women in Europe are seen as equals of men in every way. Women are told that they can do or be whatever they want. They are complimented and are put up on a pedestal. Tocqueville doesn’t like this because he thinks this makes weak men and disorderly women. This would then lead to a failure in society. In America women and men are in separate spheres. Each has their duties and responsibilities. Each is allowed to excel as far as they want within their sphere. This creates equality between the two because there is no competition or comparison. This he says is democracy.

older brothers stick up for the little sister

When I was little I learned the story of how Hansel and Gretel got lost in the woods and ended up in the witch’s house about to be eaten. I of course learned from it that I should follow the rules and not go into the woods when my dad told me not to. I can’t say that this was my favorite story when I was little, but I thought it was a good one that exemplified what a lot of stories I was told taught me. In the story, whenever something goes wrong Gretel just cries and cries while Hansel fixes everything and comes up with a plan. This story and many others told me that I was supposed to sit back and always let the boy take care of me. The brother, or the boy will always stick up for you. Of course now I have learned that I can stick up for myself, but before I was really old enough to think for myself this was what I thought. I thought the boy would just always stick up for you. I now know, sometimes you have to stick up for yourself, or even the boy.