Melvin Alatorre Per 1/2
Freedom of Speech Essay
NFL players, such as Colin Kaepernick, refused to stand during the national anthem because of how they protested which was found in source a. The main reasons why it was disrespectful for NFL players to take a knee during the national anthem as a sign of silent protest is that they were disrespectful to the flag, to the veterans, and the families of the veterans.
When taking a knee during the national anthem, it is disrespectful to our flag because it is a tradition to stand. People like the descendant writer of the national anthem protested against taking a knee during the national as sign of dishonoring the flag of this country. This was found in source a when the author claims, “Carol Isham,... writer of the national anthem stated that “it just blows my mind that somebody like (Kaepernick) would do what he does to dishonor our flag of this country.” Kaepernick could have protested at a different time and wouldn’t made more people to protest against him. Later, a quarterback in the NFL, Drew Brees, did not like how he delivered his protest and he handled the situation. For example, in source a the author states, “Drew Brees supported Kaepernick message but disagreed with the delivery: “It’s an oxymoron that you’re sitting down, disrespecting the flag that has given you the freedom of speaking out.” As revealed, if Kaepernick protested before or after the national anthem, he would not have disrespected the flag. This method of protesting caused a lot of controversy over sport protests. As a result, NFL players have no reason to protest during the national anthem since they are disrespecting the flag.
Another reason why it is disrespectful that NFL players take a knee during the national anthem is that they disrespected the veterans and the people who fought for this country. The national anthem has symbols and meaning behind it. According to source a, the author explains, “The national anthem pays respect to the people who risked their lives, been injured, or died defending the United States of America.” This is such a big deal because veterans or people who are fighting right now is protecting this country and with out them, we might not have been here on this day. The president of the United States that currently there, Barack Obama, had his own opinion on how NFL players protested “When it comes to the flag the national anthem and the meaning that holds for our men and woman in uniform and those who fought for us -- that is a tough thing… to hear what his [Kaepernick] deeper concerns are. For instance, I would have disrespected the veterans who fought for me and this country if I did not stand in the national anthem. As a result, another reason is that NFL players who kneel disrespected the families of the veterans.
Families of veterans felt that they were disrespected when NFL players approached to kneel during the national anthem. Malcolm Jenkins, an NFL player for the Eagles, supported Kaepernick’s ideal but his grandfather fought for the military, In source a, the author reveals, “Malcolm Jenkins supported Kaepernick’s message but said, “My grandfather served in the military. So, me not standing for the national anthem isn’t really going to get me the results I want.” If I had someone in my family who fought for our country, I would respect the national anthem. I wouldn’t disrespect it because if I do then that is a sign that I am disrespecting my family member when he has done something a hero would do. A fan of the Cleveland Browns stated, “Taking a knee during the national anthem these days screams disrespect for our flag, country, and our troops. My son and the entire armed forces deserve better than that.” So sitting or not standing will make families of veterans for mad about the situation.
As a result, it is disrespectful for NFL players to take a knee during the national anthem since it disrespects the flag, the veterans who fought for this country, and the families of veterans. This is significance to our society because people shouldn’t protest and dishonor the people who fought for our country. Even though all people have the freedom of expression in the U.S., that does not mean that you have the reason to not stand during the national anthem, disrespecting the flag that gives you the freedom of expression.
Melvin Alatorre
Per ½
12/19/17
Freedoms Essay
Breaking news! Trump blocked twitter user who were tweeting about how Trump’s actions were wrong. After this occured, a free-speech institute demanded for Trump to unblock the twitter users since they have the freedom to express what they think about everything. These twitter users who were blocked filed a lawsuit against Trump, arguing that he took away their freedom of speech. But there are reasons why Trump had the right to block those twitter users. The president of the United States, Donald Trump, has the right to block certain twitter users because he is a private citizen, twitter has first amendment rights of its own, and Trump’s account is not a designated public forum.
One reason why Trump has the right to block twitter users is because he is a private citizen. Private citizens have their own rights on Twitter and they are allowed to block other users on Twitter. For example, the Twitter rules state, “ Freedom of expression means little if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. We do not tolerate behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another person’s voice.” As mentioned, I can not just go to someone's tweet and start hating on them. This is because it leads to people who are being harassed being silent and having no freedom of speech. Twitter also allow users to block anyone they want for any reason which allow Trump to do it too. As stated in the article, the author illustrates this when he, “ That includes allowing users to block anyone they choose, for any reason.” For example, I could block any celebrity I want. I can also block someone I do not know but are harassing me. This indicates that private citizens like Trump are allowed to block other users if they pleased to.
Another reason why Trump has the right to block other users on Twitter is because Twitter has their own first amendment rights. If Trump was forced to unblock the users, it actually violates their rules. An example of this is stated on Bloomberg.com, “A judicial decision forcing Twitter to make Trump unblock followers would actually violate Twitter’s First Amendment rights.” For instance, Trump has the right to block anyone and noone can not stop him from doing what he did. This would also mean that anyone that file a lawsuit would lose. According to an article on Bloomberg by Noah Feldman, he explains, “... if a lawsuit were brought against Twitter to force Trump to unblock followers, Twitter would be able to argue successfully that its free speech rights allow it to institute any rules it want.” For example, if it was a different social media platform, it would be different situation. This is because Twitter is a private company. This leads to the next reason why Trump has the right to block Twitter users is because Trump’s account is not a designated public forum.
Trump’s account not being a public forum is why Trump has the right to block twitter users. This means that people can not just rant on Trump’s account because it is not public. As referred in an article on Bloomberg.com, it states, “Trump’s account can’t be a designated public forum… because it isn’t public… Trump’s account is a stream communication that’s wholly owned by Twitter.” If I talked bad about Trump on his tweets, I could get blocked because there is no right to free speech on Twitter. Trump blocking the twitter users is not wrong to do. This was explained in Bloomberg, “... If Trump’s decision to block some followers was found to be a state action, it still wouldn’t be a free-speech violation. That’s because Twitter can’t be a designated public forum.” I could do the same thing that Trump did and not get in trouble for it. Everyone has the right to block anyone so it is equal to everyone.
Since Trump is a private citizen, twitter has first amendment rights of its own, and Trump’s account is not a designated public forum means that he has the right to block any twitter user that he likes block. This is significant because people might say that he was wrong for blocking people only because they hate him or it’s because he is very on social media but, that does not take away his right to block people on Twitter.
Team Titanium: Mariana Jaimes, Alejandra Solis, Melvin, David Arellano, Erika Ruiz
12/18/17
Period ½
Junk Food Essay
Junk food has been a problem in schools over the past 15 to 20 years and is a big reason why many kids are obese. That is the reason man schools are starting to ban junk food and making state/school laws regarding the issue. People believe the junk food in schools is the main reason why kids are obese but junk food is not the only factor why there is a percentage of a high risk obesity. There are other factors that are not considered to keeping junk such as calorie limits, exercise, and people incomes and is the reason why junk food should be kept in schools.
One reason is that obesity has been a problem for many years now but banning junk food won't solve the problem, it is also exercising and the parents decision on whether or not to keep their kids active. Some kids are different from others due to junk food consumption that does not explain about their weight. As stated in source D, the author illustrates this point when she states, “ For 95 percent of Americans who do not fall into extreme weight category, junk food consumption does vary” That means that junk food consumption does not really explain the differences in their weight.” This demonstrates that if someone consumes junk food, it does not explain about their weight. There are also ranges of ages that are mostly obese. For example, in source E, it claims, “ Nearly 17 million U.S. children ages 2 to 19 are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).” This could mean that most kids do not eat healthy or do exercise because of their parents choices. Furthermore, exercise could be a problem for kids who are obese and other reasons like calorie limits and low income.
Along with parents decisions on whether or not to keep their children exercising or not to the amount of calories a school serves as a snack.School snacks have to fall under a category to be considered an able to sell snack. According to Roberta Alexander and Nina Lincoffin “Battle intensifies to keep junk food out of school lunch rooms” it states that “ To qualify as a snack or a side dish, the food must contain 200 calories or less; the limit for entrees is 350 calories” This being that calories will be put off in physical ed, even if you don't do well you still exercise. To go along with the calories topic as states by Roberta Alexander and Nina Lincoffin “Battle intensifies to keep junk food out of school lunch rooms” , “there are low-calorie, low-caffeine options, and beverage choices largely consist of water, low- fat or nonfat milk, and 100 percent fruit and vegetable juices.” as it is stated to be low calories at schools so there is not much fat going into one’s system. As this being one of the leading reasons for junk food to not be banned incomes also contribute to this matter.
Another leading factor as to why junk food shouldn’t be banned, besides exercise and calories and limits in low income. Low income is a big contributing factor to obesity. Actually kids whose parents have a lower income tend to be more obese. The article “Battle Intensifies to Keep Junk Food Out of School Lunchroom” backs this up saying “Fifth-graders were most likely to be overweight or obese if they attended a school in a low-income neighborhood. They were least to be overweight if they lived in a wealthy neighborhood” we can assume that kids in poor neighborhood wouldn’t just be buying snacks. The richer neighborhood parents can buy more expensive healthy foods, the source “Battle Intensifies to Keep Junk Food Out of School Lunchroom” by Roberta Alexander and Nina Lincoff, Elizabeth Velten a Public Health Advocate proclaims “Their parents also lack nutrition knowledge and face steep prices for healthful fare she said” it’s not just at school but also at home. Parents should also be blamed junk food at schools would do little to no difference in the obesity of children.
Around the world 1 of 3 kids are equal to 25,000,000 other kids who are either overweight or obese. This is one of many reasons why children are bullied, teased, or rejected daily about their size and weight. This isn’t why junk food should be banned from schools, the real reason is mainly because of the parents choice for children to exercise, or it could be the calories limits and even their income. This topic can relate to ethics, big idea, and unanswered questions because it is to be based on how parents make / don’t make kids exercise, their calorie watch / equal portions and limits and how much money parents waste on their kids junk food.
12/18/17
Period ½
Junk Food Essay
Junk food has been a problem in schools over the past 15 to 20 years and is a big reason why many kids are obese. That is the reason man schools are starting to ban junk food and making state/school laws regarding the issue. People believe the junk food in schools is the main reason why kids are obese but junk food is not the only factor why there is a percentage of a high risk obesity. There are other factors that are not considered to keeping junk such as calorie limits, exercise, and people incomes and is the reason why junk food should be kept in schools.
One reason is that obesity has been a problem for many years now but banning junk food won't solve the problem, it is also exercising and the parents decision on whether or not to keep their kids active. Some kids are different from others due to junk food consumption that does not explain about their weight. As stated in source D, the author illustrates this point when she states, “ For 95 percent of Americans who do not fall into extreme weight category, junk food consumption does vary” That means that junk food consumption does not really explain the differences in their weight.” This demonstrates that if someone consumes junk food, it does not explain about their weight. There are also ranges of ages that are mostly obese. For example, in source E, it claims, “ Nearly 17 million U.S. children ages 2 to 19 are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).” This could mean that most kids do not eat healthy or do exercise because of their parents choices. Furthermore, exercise could be a problem for kids who are obese and other reasons like calorie limits and low income.
Along with parents decisions on whether or not to keep their children exercising or not to the amount of calories a school serves as a snack.School snacks have to fall under a category to be considered an able to sell snack. According to Roberta Alexander and Nina Lincoffin “Battle intensifies to keep junk food out of school lunch rooms” it states that “ To qualify as a snack or a side dish, the food must contain 200 calories or less; the limit for entrees is 350 calories” This being that calories will be put off in physical ed, even if you don't do well you still exercise. To go along with the calories topic as states by Roberta Alexander and Nina Lincoffin “Battle intensifies to keep junk food out of school lunch rooms” , “there are low-calorie, low-caffeine options, and beverage choices largely consist of water, low- fat or nonfat milk, and 100 percent fruit and vegetable juices.” as it is stated to be low calories at schools so there is not much fat going into one’s system. As this being one of the leading reasons for junk food to not be banned incomes also contribute to this matter.
Another leading factor as to why junk food shouldn’t be banned, besides exercise and calories and limits in low income. Low income is a big contributing factor to obesity. Actually kids whose parents have a lower income tend to be more obese. The article “Battle Intensifies to Keep Junk Food Out of School Lunchroom” backs this up saying “Fifth-graders were most likely to be overweight or obese if they attended a school in a low-income neighborhood. They were least to be overweight if they lived in a wealthy neighborhood” we can assume that kids in poor neighborhood wouldn’t just be buying snacks. The richer neighborhood parents can buy more expensive healthy foods, the source “Battle Intensifies to Keep Junk Food Out of School Lunchroom” by Roberta Alexander and Nina Lincoff, Elizabeth Velten a Public Health Advocate proclaims “Their parents also lack nutrition knowledge and face steep prices for healthful fare she said” it’s not just at school but also at home. Parents should also be blamed junk food at schools would do little to no difference in the obesity of children.
Around the world 1 of 3 kids are equal to 25,000,000 other kids who are either overweight or obese. This is one of many reasons why children are bullied, teased, or rejected daily about their size and weight. This isn’t why junk food should be banned from schools, the real reason is mainly because of the parents choice for children to exercise, or it could be the calories limits and even their income. This topic can relate to ethics, big idea, and unanswered questions because it is to be based on how parents make / don’t make kids exercise, their calorie watch / equal portions and limits and how much money parents waste on their kids junk food.
