Designer Babies

     Josef  Reuther   811

The article “Designer Babies” by Upfront Magazine author Patricia Smith talks about the scientific advancements that have led to scientists potentially enabling parents to customize their baby. Genetic engineering is close to giving scientists the ability to implant certain traits and characteristics in a baby. However the altering of a human life to make it more ideal raises many questions ethical questions for many people. Certain countries such as Canada, Australia, France and Denmark have already passed laws prohibiting scientists from altering the genetic code of a human in any way that it can be passed down to offspring. Personally the genetic engineering of babies to the likings of society contradicts my morality.

            These recent developments in the field of genetics have led to endless possibilities for scientists for example “what if parents could select the traits their children will be endowed with, picking from a catalog of options like “tall,” “High IQ,” “athletic,” or “musical”?” as Patricia Smith stated in the article. Parents could potentially design and customize their baby to their exact likings. As incredible and fascinating as this appears and seems genetically altered babies are still very new “If you get it wrong, you’re not only getting it wrong for that individual; it becomes inheritable,” as Jeremy Gruber, president of the Council for Responsible Genetics aptly said. The results of genetically modifying babies are still very uncertain with yet to be discovered effects on society. The entire idea of altering humans to perfection in its own seems ironically very inhuman.

            Although these advancements have great benefits in making certain diseases that result from genetic defects things of the past, the genetic altering of the human genome takes it too far. “Every time we get a little closer to genetic tinkering to promote health- that’s exciting and scary,” as Dr. Alan Copperman, director of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at Mount Sinai Medical Center states “People are afraid it will turn into a dystopian brave new world.” These ideal babies will revolutionize the world we live in as well as spring up many new problems between social classes. People who are able to afford to have their child genetically altered to its benefit will bring children into the world that will be considered to superior to the children of family’s that cannot afford to genetically alter their children. These genetic alterations will bring many new problems to the world that we live in.

            Overall although modifying babies to make them appear “perfect” to society will simply arouse problems. The entire science behind it is very new and still uncertain in its outcome. By genetically altering one child one is also altering the genes of its entire offspring to come. Additionally some speculate that through the process of genetically modifying babies some good and positive traits may even be lost.

who was responsible for the deaths of romeo and juliet

Josef Reuther

811

Who is to Blame for The Deaths of Romeo and Juliet?

            In Shakespeare’s play, “Romeo and Juliet”, the two protagonists, Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet, are “a pair of star-crossed lovers” whose tragic death “buries their parents’ strife” In the play, several factors lead to the death of Romeo and Juliet; among these are fate, love and the rivalry between the Montague and Capulet family. The factor that is most responsible for their deaths however is the two families and their feud.

            The feud that exists between the Montagues and the Capulets made it virtually impossible for Romeo and Juliet to love on another. For ages the two families fought each other out of mere disliking for one another. “The continuance of their parents’ rage, Which, but their children’s end, naught could remove” [Prologue]. Nothing could stop the violence between the two families, but the deaths of Romeo and Juliet. “This, by his voice, should be a Montague.
Fetch me my rapier, boy. What dares the slave
Come hither, cover'd with an antic face, To fleer and scorn at our solemnity?
Now, by the stock and honour of my kin,
To strike him dead, I hold it not a sin,” as Tybalt states in Act 1 Scene 5 Line 61. Tybalt only sees Romeo as an enemy he is not capable of accepting him as a normal person. Because the families see each other as no more than enemies, this feud makes it nearly hopeless for Romeo and Juliet to carry on as lovers and in the end results in their deaths.

            Romeo and Juliet know what is at stakes if they choose to love each other and realize that it will all have to occur in secrecy. Both are also aware of how opposed to such love their parents would be. “My only love sprung from my only hate!
Too early seen unknown, and known too late!
Prodigious birth of love it is to me,
That I must love a loathed enemy,” [Act 1 Scene 5 Line 155] Juliet is devastated when she finds out that Romeo is a Montague and that it means that their love would be forbidden. Romeo reacts in a very similar way knowing just as well that the feud would prevent them from loving “O dear account! My life is my foe’s debt.” As can clearly be seen both Romeo and Juliet are very aware that merely because of an ancient feud they will not be able to be seen together and it leads them to take the risks that eventually lead to their deaths.

            One last piece of evidence that substantiates my claim that the family feud is the main factor leading to the deaths of Romeo and Juliet is that Lord and Lady Capulet force Juliet to marry Paris. “To go with Paris to Saint Peter's Church,
Or I will drag thee on a hurdle thither.
Out, you green-sickness carrion! out, you baggage!
You tallow-face!
Hang thee, young baggage! disobedient wretch!
I tell thee what: get thee to church o' Thursday,
Or never after look me in the face:
Speak not, reply not, do not answer me,” as Lord Capulet tells Juliet [Act 3 Scene 5 Line 155-160]. Juliet’s parents force her to marry Paris and threaten to banish her. This gives Juliet very little time to decide how to act. Juliet agrees to fake her death for all of Verona even though the entire plan is extremely uncertain and risky. In the end this leads to both Romeo and Juliet committing suicide, for they would rather die than not be able to love. 

            As can be seen due to the great feud that divided the Montagues and the Capulets, Romeo and Juliet ended up dead. They could see each other as no more than enemies and would never willingly accept the love between Romeo and Juliet. Both the feud and the sudden forced marriage to Paris contributed to the unfortunate deaths of the two lovers.

Should a Hated Word Be Banned

Josef Reuther

            The article “Should a Hated Word Be Banned?” by Jodi Rudoren focuses on the ever pressing and controversial issue of passing a bill “that would make it a crime to call someone a Nazi or any other slur associated with the Holocaust.” However the passing of such a bill would infringe on peoples right of free speech, making a decision on this bill a complicated one. It is wrong for a certain group of people to ban the use of a word for an entire nation and population.

            One piece of evidence that substantiates this claim is that by banning a word for an entire people you are infringing on their basic right of the freedom of speech. “The bill is the latest clash involving Israel’s insistence on being both a Jewish state and a democratic one, where free speech is a guiding principle and minority views are protected,” as the article stated. Banning these words would contradict many of the teachings and laws that Israel stands for. Additionally using the word Nazi or words related to it, as a synonym for something else would also become a crime an example of this would be Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be put in jail for the way that he compares Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the former Iranian president, to Hitler. Infringing the right of freedom of speech for an entire people is not write for the Israeli Government to do.

            Another piece of evidence that corroborates this claim about the new bill, which would ban the public use of the word Nazi and other words related to the Holocaust in Israel is that simply it has become “a response to the increasingly casual use of such terms in everything from Israeli politics to teenage trash talk as well as what they see as a rising tide of anti-Semitism around the world.” Many Israelis have become upset with the careless of Nazi related terms and feel the need to act against it. It is wrong for some Israelis to ban the use of the word for an entire population because they feel that people have become to flexible with how they use these Nazi associated terms.

            The banning of Holocaust related terms for an entire nation would be wrong for the way that it infringes on the right of the people to have freedom of speech. As can be seen there is a select group of Israelis who believe that words such as Nazi are being used in too far a “casual” way. By making the use of such words a Federal crime the government is getting awfully close to denying the Israeli people their right to the freedom of speech. This highly controversial issue will continue to become an ever-pressing topic in Israel.

Sonnet

Josef Reuther
Sonnet

Shall I compare thy to a great full moon
who's light shines bright even in the darkest place.
Jealous stars dance to your marvelous tune
you illuminate my world with such grace.
Regardless of where, you love to beam clear
your reflection glistens on the river
you are so far away yet you seem so near.
But when clouds rule the sky you become hidden.
Dark my world becomes when you are absent
To the clouds in the sky you are forbidden
However my thoughts are about you constant
You guide me when no one else seems to care
and lead my path when no one else is there.

Martin Espada

Josef Reuther

Martin Espada

                  All of Martin Espada's poems talk about discrimination in our world and try to raise awareness to this subject specifically for Latin Americans. Espada's poems talk about the injustices done to Latinos and how in some cases others are denying even their culture.

                  One piece of evidence that substantiates this claim about the discrimination found in Espada's poems is his poem called "The New Bathroom Policy at English High School." In this poem Espada focuses on a High School where a principal hears Spanish being spoken amongst boys in the bathroom and cannot understand anything besides his own name. "The boys chatter Spanish in the bathroom while the principal listens from his stall / The only word he recognizes / is his own name," as Espada writes. As a result the principal decides to abuse the power entrusted in him and bans Spanish from being spoken within the bathroom of the school. This principal is denying these Spanish boys a part of their culture and is discriminating against their race simply because it is different from his and because he cannot understand what they are saying. As can clearly be seen this poem focuses on the discrimination of Latinos and the attempt at removing a part of their culture like their language.

            Another piece of evidence that supports this claim about discrimination being featured in Espada's poems, is his poem "Revolutionary Spanish Lesson" which focuses on what Martin Espada would like to do every time his name is mispronounced and not in the authentic Spanish way. "I want to buy a toy pistol, / put on dark sunglasses,/ hijack a busload/ of Republican tourists," Espada writes. He targets Republicans, for he feels they tend to discriminate and show less kindness to Latinos. "And wait/ for the bilingual SWAT team / to helicopter overhead, / begging me / to be reasonable," Espada adds. Rather ironically the people discriminating against him have the SWAT acting as their little protective angels when he himself has no protection against discrimination. As can be seen the discrimination that Martin Espada and other Latinos face clearly frustrates him to the point where he thinks about going to such extremes.

                  One last piece of evidence that corroborates this claim about discrimination in Espada's poems is his poem called "Two Mexicanos Lynched in Santa Cruz, California, May 3, 1877" which focuses on the hanging of two Mexicans by "gringos" in 1877. "When forty gringo vigilantes / cheered the rope / that snapped two Mexicanos / into the grimacing sleep of broken necks," as Espada wrote. These Mexicans were killed for no apparent reason by whites who overpowered them. The fact that Espada uses the word gringo for whites expresses a certain dislike he has towards them.  Espada talks about the injustice and brutalities done to these Latinos merely because they looked different from the whites doing this to them.

                  Espada's poetry tries to get people to think of Latinos who are being discriminated against. Discrimination and the denying of a certain culture is a common global issue and Martin Espada's poems raise awareness to this pressing topic.