Clare McCullough

The first prime minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, once said “Failure comes only when we forget our ideals and objectives and principles.” The leader of this new democracy knew the importance of keeping to our principles. A principle is a set of standards that determine the actions a person choses. Operating on principles hold you to a higher level of morality and integrity. Principles generally allow for more structure in life and thereby allow for your mind to ground itself and be used in a more efficient and appropriate way. They make up the fundamental basis of democracy, ethics, and all rules governing behavior.

For a morally right principle to become institutionalized as a norm it must become a standard of behavior. Norms are relative to culture, family, country, etc. and are often subject to change. Norms are the actions that countries are excepted to take based on the preferences of a substantial proportion of any population. Principles are an important part of government as well as pertinent to the integrity of our legacy as a human person. Unfortunately, some principles are purely symbolic and are ignored in practice. Principles are essential to uphold justice and provide the foundation of a functional society because if we agree on a set of standards it would be easier to apply the principles fairly and equally. We can assign basic rights to people and protect appropriately.

Moral actions are justified by the principle that the person acted upon. A person needs to accept universal application, or the norm, of whatever basic truth one acts upon. Principles guide order. A logical chain of reasoning is necessary for a principle to create foundations. There are Primary principles that are universal and secondary principles that apply in cases of exception. According to Aquinas, Natural law states that the basic ethical principle is as follows, “Good is to be done and pursued and evil is to be avoided.” If Principles provide a foundation for being a good person then, they are the single most important thing in your life.

Clare McCullough

If you’re a vegetarian or a vegan in America, it’s a little more challenging to find something tasty and filling to eat. Which of course makes sense; animal products are a huge part of our lives in American culture. Americans eat on average 5.3 pounds of meat a day. (Black)

America loves our meat, but have you ever wondered where that meat came from? I have and in learning about the issue I came face to face with a lot of realities that were hard for me to accept.  One of those realities was how much harm our meat-eating habits were doing world-wide. And, so I propose a grass-roots campaign to spread awareness of the environmental impact of animal agriculture and help curb the rising obesity epidemic. By using targeted reduction of even just one day, our rational consumption changes the narrative for both the health of our bodies and the environment. We need to take into account the full costs of our individual actions on a massive scale.

Animal Agriculture is a huge contributor to climate change, According to WorldWatch, “livestock and their byproducts account for at least 32,000 million tons of CO2 per year, or 51% of all worldwide greenhouse gas emission.” Which is more than all of the transportation sector combined. Yep, that’s the cars, trucks, boats, and planes all put together. We’ve been focusing on wrong areas, instead of transportation, we need to turn our attention to our diets.

Animal agriculture is one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gasses. There are a lot of people on the earth, and to support all of them and still preserve our environment, we need to cut back on energy exhaustive practices- think about how much energy goes into making a burger- grow the cow’s food, feed and hydrate the cow, deal with its waste, give it antibiotics, ship the fat cows, grind the meat, wash, cut, clean, package, ship, and cook. The long processes that go into making that hamburger emit a lot of CO2 and all the while these cows on the farms are emitting upwards to a 150 billion gallons of methane globally per day. (IBT) And if we were to reduce methane, we would see results of a more relieved climate almost immediately (UN)

Going meatless on Mondays would also help decrease obesity. More than 30% of adults in Wisconsin are obese and the effects of obesity are very serious; it is related to heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and certain types of cancer.(CDC) These diseases are preventable, and by doing whatever we can to help, and utilizing Marquette’s deep commitment to the well-being of the whole human family, we can make a difference by cutting out meat for one day a week. Though many people have the conception that vegetarianism is unhealthy, that is clearly untrue.

According to AND, vegetarians are at lower risk for developing: Heart disease, Colorectal, ovarian, and breast cancers, Diabetes, Obesity, and Hypertension (high blood pressure).  Eating a healthy vegetarian diet is typically higher in fiber and lower in fat content. By promoting a vegetarian lifestyle we promote a healthy and sustainable lifestyle. But obesity isn’t the only thing that Meatless Mondays would help curb.

the environmental impact of animal agriculture. We need to take care of this earth, since it’s the only one that we have. It is certain that its destruction, would mean our destruction.

And, though I know that Climate change is a bit of a political point, and there are people who deny it, I would still like to bring up facts that often come up in the scientific community about it. Global warming is caused by heat getting trapped in the atmosphere and in effect, disrupting weather patterns and increasing the overall temperature of the earth. The safe level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at its maximum, is 350 parts per million. In 2014, we passed 400. As a result, the sea level is rising due to the ice sheets of Greenland and the Antarctic melting. Oceans are acidifying. “Climate change will destroy, damage, or permanently change every single ecosystem” (Sierra Club)

All of the effects that scientists had warned us about are starting to become a reality, and according to NASA, the result of climate change on the Midwest will entail, “Extreme heat, heavy downpours, and flooding will affect infrastructure, health, agriculture, forestry, transportation, air and water quality, and more. Climate change will also exacerbate a range of risks to the Great Lakes.” One of the ways we can combat Climate change is to start Meatless Mondays since climate change will affect all of us and it’s a small price to pay to prevent the destruction of the planet.

But even if you don’t believe in Climate change, there are still reasons to cut back on meat. According to FAO, livestock or livestock feed occupies 1/3 of the earth’s ice-free land. And, it has so far, contributed to 91% of the deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest, one of the most ecologically diverse places on the planet. This is just one of the many immediate impacts of animal agriculture.

Animal agriculture is the leading cause of species extinction, because deforestation and converting the land to grow feed and for animal grazing. Natural predators in the regions where the land is converted are often killed since they are a perceived threat to livestock profits. According to the center for biological diversity, 30-50 percent of all species could be heading toward extinction by 2050. This loss of biodiversity has been unprecedented since the last mass extinction: The end of the dinosaurs.

The pervasive use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides that are used for growing feed contribute to water pollution and contribute to ocean dead zones. The overexploitation of commercial fishing which has depleted 75% of the world’s fisheries will lead us to, according to national geographic, fishless oceans by 2048. I will be 51 years old, and at that time, if all goes well, my kids will be going to college, just like I am right now. But they might not live in a world like I do. Their world, and mine will be vastly different. It is my wish that, when I am old, I will not have to tell them stories of how the world used to be, but show them how magnificent the natural world is, how I spent my summers camping, fishing, and hiking in the seemingly endless parks with my family. And according to Wannaveg, if just one person participated in meatless Mondays for a year, that person would reduce their meat consumption from 250 pounds to 215 pounds, which is a big difference when you factor in the reduction of over 400 pounds of manure, and the 84,000 gallons of water, 245 pounds of grain, 7,700 sq feet of rainforest, and 15.5 gallons of gas saved, and of course, 1 animal’s life.

It is our responsibility, As citizens of this world to ensure that the spill over of our climate destruction doesn’t only affect other countries but also doesn’t follow us into the future.

Black, Jane. “Oh, Meatless Mondays; the Movement has Legs, but Will it be Able to Get Past the Industry’s Talking Points?” The Washington Post, May 19, 2010, ProQuest Central, https://0-search.proquest.com.libus.csd.mu.edu/docview/304154117?accountid=100.

http://www.ibtimes.com/cow-farts-have-larger-greenhouse-gas-impact-previously-thought-methane-pushes-climate-change-1487502

[youtube=://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma2n2O3p_k4&w=854&h=480]

AHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

When it comes to shedding light on equality and corruption in the art world, the women in the gorilla masks dominate and inspire.

With their unique approach to protest and activism, they’ve drawn attention to many issues in the current art world. Combining statistics, humor and art, they’ve created exhibits, prints and public pieces for us to see and reflect upon. The Guerrilla Girls freely showed all the ways sexism, racism and corruption take place within in the modern art world, on February 22nd, they spoke at the Milwaukee Institution of Art and Design (MIAD).

The women are anonymous but take on the names of famous female artists. Many of these artists which I found myself not familiar with. This drove home the truth of their word that the female gender is underrepresented in art museums and history. The issues that were addressed stemmed from statistics the Guerrilla Girls have followed for decades when they started in 1985 New York. Since then they have become an international phenomenon that people cannot, and don’t want to, ignore.

The Guerrilla Girls have given attention to the entertainment industry. This attention is given mostly through billboards in Hollywood about lack of opportunity and recognition in the Academy Awards. The Oscars that premiered this Spring 2017 proved them to be expanding their diversity. But awards shows are just the product of an industry that has a history dominated by white males. To witness and begin to change the under representation, we must begin with the writers, producers and financiers of the movie/art industry that create the opportunity. In awards shows, the movies are already made, the cast is already hired and the crew has already done their work. We must begin with the script writers and studios executives who create our films. The Guerrilla Girls talked about how the art industry is, and has been, all about money and power. It is time to confront the real issues that are dominating our creative fields. This world we find ourselves in needs a wake up call and the Guerrilla Girls give it to us, with powerful Guerrilla tactics.

Miad Event and the Milwaukee Art Museum:

Miriam Nei

With so many medical technological advances being made in today’s society, we seem to be regressing when it comes to rhetoric surrounding women’s healthcare. While Congress focuses on the controversial topic of abortion, albeit an important topic, they are neglecting with other issues relating to reproductive health such as sexual and reproductive education, maternity care, mental health care and access to affordable contraceptives. Our society is progressing in so many different fields and we need to start taking bigger steps to ensure progress does not slow and the protection of women’s right to health care, no matter what type is upheld.

Before the Obama administration passed the Affordable Healthcare Act (ACA), health insurance companies applied what is referred to as “gender rating”. Gender ratings determined how much a person would be charged in monthly premiums, based off their gender, (Healthline) and is comparable to car insurers charging higher premiums for young teenage drivers. According to healthcare.com, before the ACA was passed, women were paying up to 50-81% more in monthly premiums than men (Healthline). Insurance companies justified this inherently discriminatory action on the basis that women live longer and give birth therefor requiring more medical care, and thus requiring more costs, than men. However, thanks to the ACA, it is now illegal for health insurers to use gender rating along with requiring basic birth control and women’s wellness exams to be covered in full under every plan (Healthline). The Trump administration has upheld its intent to repeal the ACA showing no concrete alternative to replace it. Women’s reproductive and basic healthcare is in jeopardy because of this push.
With the election of Trump came the rising wave of women flooding doctor’s offices to get intrauterine devices or (IUD’s) before their care is irreversibly compromised. Women have had strong reactions, and with good reason, even with the successes of the ACA in regards to reproductive healthcare, there are still dire issues. According to World Health Organization (WHO), about ⅓ of the health issues in women ages 14-44 are caused by sexual and reproductive problems with 222 million women not getting the contraceptive services they need. Deaths were around 300,000 from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth, most of which could have been avoided with access to proper family planning and basic services (WHO). It’s time our government and medical professionals make women’s health a priority.

Abortion already being a touchy and highly controversial subject, a turning point occurred on February 8th in Oklahoma, with two House Bills (HB) being presented that would potentially compromise women’s already imperiled healthcare options. The first bill, HB 1549, would keep women from having access to an abortion due to the fetus having a genetic abnormality, no matter how early a woman sought termination. This bill was struck down after it concluded that it was not the imperative of the government to question why a woman elected to have an abortion as long as it was before the time of fetal viability (The Intercept). This means that as long as the fetus was aborted before the state’s cutoff date (usually around 22 weeks) the government can have no say as to why a woman is electing termination.
The second bill, however, was even more alarming. Presented by representative Justin Humphrey, HB 1441 would require any woman looking to undergo an abortion to acquire written consent from her sexual partner before an abortion could be performed. (Jordan Smith) This bill would also potentially allow the procedure to be forestalled if the father of the fetus wished to contest paternity. HB 1441 has the potential to put women in extremely dangerous situations, both physically and mentally, especially for the victims of domestic abuse. With the presentation of this bill, women were essentially being told that they have no right to make a highly personal and difficult decision about their own body without the permission of a man, something that is downright archaic. Luckily, this bill failed to pass, much like a similar provision that was turned down in 1992 (Smith). The presentation of this bill alone, however, I believe is an affront to women across this nation.

According to The Intercept, Humphrey justifies HB 1441 by stating he believes men are “excluded from these kinds of decisions” despite the male-dominated Congress. Women have a right to make choices about their own bodies, but without their needs being represented there would have been violations for their right to healthcare.
Humphrey states he understands that women feel their body is their own, but in a recent statement, women are actually what he refers to as a “host”, stating women should not decide to go back on being a good “host” once she’s pregnant (The Washington Post).

Where we stand today, not only is the rhetoric surrounding women’s health care is at best subpar. We as a society need to focus more on general and preventative health care. Also, we should encourage healthy decisions through sexual and reproductive education, and ensure that women have access to the proper care they need and most importantly are represented in government. It is time for a revolution within the healthcare community.

References

Theintercept. “Oklahoma Lawmakers Want Men to Approve All Abortions.” The Intercept. Jordan Smith, 13 Feb. 2017. Web. 01 Mar. 2017.

Somashekhar, Sandhya, and Amy B. Wang. “Lawmaker Who Called Pregnant Women a ‘host’ Pushes Bill Requiring Fathers to Approve Abortion.” The Washington Post. WP Company, 14 Feb. 2017. Web. 01 Mar. 2017.

Bustreo, Flavia, Dr. “Ten Top Issues for Women’s Health.” WHO. World Health Organization, 8 Mar. 2015. Web. 01 Mar. 2017.

Written by Rose Rimler | Published on June 13, 2016. “Should Women Pay More for Healthcare Services?” Healthline. Healthline Media, 13 June 2016. Web. 01 Mar. 2017.

You’re most likely to empathize with people who are like you and those who have been kind to you. Empathy is vulnerable to bias; you must choose who you believe; choose who is important. Paul Bloom describes this as a “Spotlight effect” in his book, Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion – we focus on certain tragedies while unable to empathize with those who are affected by them every day. We shouldn’t be trying to be empathizing while making decisions, because we’ll always play favorites and we won’t know where to put the bright-line. Ask yourself if altruism is really the best tool to solve these problems. While It’s okay to feel outrage for someone; it’s okay to feel grief for someone but, those who devote themselves to compassion are not using their empathy. Doctors do not focus not on feeling bad for others. It’s useless to live suffering vicariously through others, that will only leave you sad, drained and ashamed. Instead focus on the problems that causes that suffering, even when we use empathic ideals and galvanize people in order to get things done.

With this “We have to do something” mentality we laser-focus on certain issues we empathize with, and as a society the issues that we chose to address are not to those who actually may need our help. Our existing biases aided and reinforced mostly by an empathetic largely white mainstream media, while never trying to solve the root causes. People still do nothing; being empathetic is not only useless but a unsustainable mindset to use a framework. Often, our gut feelings are not good policy. Sometimes military intervention is necessary but there is too much suffering in the world. We cannot alleviate all of the harm done, and most of the time we do more harm than good. The reason for military action shouldn’t be based on empathy, it should be based on effectiveness.

As Barack Obama stepped down and continued the tradition of peaceful transfer of power, another man with radically different political goals took his place. Donald J. Trump was elected November 8th 2016 and since then his administration has begun sweeping changes via the dismantling of regulatory executive agencies such as the EPA, and other executive orders, such as the ban on travel between us and seven Middle Eastern and African countries. But what does the leader of the free world really do? 

A very important power of the president is called an executive order. In the first two weeks of his presidency Donald Trump has used his single-most powerful tool liberally. Presidents have been getting stronger since the beginning of our government. Executive Orders, according to NBC, “stem from a president’s desire to bypass Congress. The legislative body is not required to approve any executive order, nor can it overturn an order. The best it can do if it doesn’t like an executive order is to pass a law to cut funding for the order’s implementation. But even then, the president can veto such a defunding law.”

The President is the Chief Executive Power; Commander in chief of the army, his decisions affect every aspect of our government. The president’s role isn’t covered in the constitution extensively, so its hard to say where the limit was intended to be. Throughout our history the presidency was shaped by the wearing down of time. 

Franklin Roosevelt expanded the power of the presidency in the New Deal by issuing over 3,000 executive orders over the course of his presidency. With the start of World War II, FDR issued the executive order to force any US citizen of Japanese descent into internment camps, which has been regarded as one of the more deplorable acts in US history. FDR was also the only president that had served for more than two terms. Another time decades later, during the 70s, Nixon reluctantly begun the Environmental protection agency and passed the Clean Air Act due to public pressure. 

According to the Constitution, Congress should be the center of lawmaking as well as deciding whether or not we go to war. However, during the cold war, the president was given unilateral authority over the CIA, which during this time was doing a lot of shady things abroad to say the least. (Klein) A president has tried to wage full out war without congress’s approval, which ended up as the 1973-war powers act which checks the President’s power to commit to conflict.

Which brings us to the fact that our separation of powers; checks and balances itself but it doesn’t operate the way people think it does. The president is the leader of party, country, and entire executive branch. But he’s not all powerful. He’s not superman. He needs cooperation from party and the nation. Guantanamo bay is a good example of party blocking, for example; Bush was blocked and Obama was blocked by both his own party and the GOP. He had to sidestep congress and execute his executive order just like so many presidents before Obama.

In 2014, Obama tried to revamp immigration processes and help undocumented migrants in his executive order but was blocked by the state of Texas along with 26 other states; In United States v. Texas, No. 15-674. Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general, stated “Today’s decision keeps in place what we have maintained from the very start: One person, even a president, cannot unilaterally change the law, This is a major setback to President Obama’s attempts to expand executive power, and a victory for those who believe in the separation of powers and the rule of law.”

While a President’s executive orders were ultimately meant to further the quality of life for the common American and therefore fulfill their duty, a check of powers is necessary in order for a government to work sustainability and service its people properly. A solid democratic and representative Government is not based on the whims of a single administration, or a single group of people. It is based on the strength that our diversity and our reason brings us.

 http://www.cnbc.com/2014/01/28/executive-orders-what-they-are-and-how-they-work.html

https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/japanese-relocation

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/obama.html

Klein, Naomi. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. New York: Metropolitan /Henry Holt, 2007. Print.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/supreme-court-immigration-obama-dapa.html