I'm crazy, you're crazy, we're all crazy!

What is wrong with people in the world these days? When we are called crazy, it’s natural that we react and we all react in different ways. Depending on which definition and/or our definition of crazy are we actually considered crazy?

cra•zy (ˈkreɪ zi) 

adj. -zi•er, -zi•est, adj.

1. mentally deranged; insane.

2. impractical; totally unsound: a crazy scheme.

3. intensely eager.

4. infatuated (usu. fol. by about).

5. unusual; bizarre.

6. Slang. wonderful.

n.

7. Slang. an unpredictable person; oddball: one nice sister and two crazies.

In Mr. Young’s editorial, he asks whether to execute or not execute a person. His question pertains to a man by the name of Scott Louis Panetti, who was convicted in 1992 for the killings of his two in-laws and in 1995 was sentenced to death, which he then managed to avoid by claiming insanity. With a previous history of schizophrenia and multiple hospitalizations for mental illnesses, Panetti was scheduled to be executed on December 3, 2014, and in an article published in the Texas Tribune, federal appeals court issues stay for Panetti, in which the court halted Panetti’s execution just hours before his scheduled departure. 

Mr. Young states that the insanity plea is often used to get out of extreme sentences and that those who are mentally ill has to provide sufficient paperwork proving insanity or be held fully responsible and suffer major consequences which I most definitely have to agree. That being said, we go back to Mr. Young’s question, to execute or not to execute?

According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, chapter 46 Insanity as Defense, under article 46.05 Competency to be Executed:

(a) A person who is incompetent to be executed may not be executed 

(c) A motion filed under this article must identify the proceeding in which the defendant was convicted, give the date of the final judgment, set forth the fact that an execution date has been set if the date has been set, and clearly set forth alleged facts in support of the assertion that the defendant is presently incompetent to be executed.  The defendant shall attach affidavits, records, or other evidence supporting the defendant's allegations or shall state why those items are not attached.  The defendant shall identify any previous proceedings in which the defendant challenged the defendant's competency in relation to the conviction and sentence in question, including any challenge to the defendant's competency to be executed, competency to stand trial, or sanity at the time of the offense.  The motion must be verified by the oath of some person on the defendant's behalf.

(h) A defendant is incompetent to be executed if the defendant does not understand: 

     (1) that he or she is to be executed and that the execution is imminent; 

and 

     (2) the reason he or she is to be executed.

In an article from the Dallas new, Abby Johnson: If Texas values life, it shouldn’t execute mentally ill man, Ms. Johnson states that Panetti did not even understand why he was being executed. If a prior diagnosis of schizophrenia, multiple mental hospitalizations and the fact that Mr. Panetti does not understand the reasoning for his execution not enough proof or evidence, the state of Texas not only violated his 8th amendment, but also violated the Code of Criminal Procedure, chapter 46 Insanity as Defense, article 46.05 Competency to be Executed.

In all, I agree with Mr. Young. An inmate who is found guilty and convicted for murder (not by self defense), why not save the state and us tax payers the additional amount if it cost more than my annual income just to house a single inmate in a Texas prison. The law is the law and the law is put in place for a reason. We have to abide by them, which punishment has to also be followed accordingly to the law.

You've been sexually assaulted.. That's your fault.

Why is it when we are told no or denied something, we want that something even more? Craving and knowing that you can’t have something makes us crazy and we aren’t satisfied until we have it. Maybe it’s a thrill, excitement or psychological thing, who knows? It’s like we have our definition of “no” confused for “yes” and I’m sure everyone at one point done or took what they can’t have to satisfy that craving. So does that mean that it’s okay to do or take something that was denied to you because knowing you can’t made you want it even more? 

An article published in The Texas Tribune, Two Texas Colleges on Title IX Investigation List, Southern Methodist University and University of Texas-Pan America are Texas’ two listed institutions that are under investigation for possible violation of federal law in they're handling of sexual violence and harassment complaints. The Houston Chronicle published and article in October 2014 that states more sexual assaults reported at Texas universities. 

College is the time for choosing a career path, a road to our future, making new friends and memories. Rape and sexual assaults are the memories I’m sure victims probably wish they didn’t remember. How are victims or potential victims supposed to feel safe when schools sweep claims under the rug and they see their attacker walking freely? Does it mean the school is enabling that type of behavior? Does the school assume that all students are just some young wild crazy partiers that lack judgment and responsibility? Giving the football star a slap on the hand and a second chance to remain on the team, how is that justice served?

Not all claims are true, which there has been false claims and accusations made, however, it’s about how and the way universities handle and investigate these type of issues. It’s important to raise awareness of the issue and making all students feel safe when on or around campus. 

“An investigation done by ESPN revealed that the University of Missouri did not investigate or tell law enforcement about an alleged rape in 2010, possibly by one or more football players, even though administrators discovered the alleged incident more than a year earlier. The survivor committed suicide in 2011.”

Yes, it is our responsibility when drinking/partying. Sober or not, it still doesn’t give anyone the right to violate another person. We need to stop with the “well she/he was asking for it” or “she/he had it coming” because it makes us just as guilty and enabling the behavior. Now just imagine if you were the victim, your family member or your child. What would you do? How would you feel? 

Hey Texas! I have the right to choose or you’re my baby’s father!

The title of Karis’s blog “Pulling Out” caught my attention and out of curiosity I was interested to further read what her article was about. In her blog, Karis argues about the Texas abortion law and how women are being forced with unwanted pregnancies due to the difficulty in getting an abortion from the closures of all except eight abortion clinics in Texas. She makes a very interesting point about how not only do most of these children end up in foster care from unwanted pregnancies, but is the government following up on what happens to these children who end up in the system? Anti-abortionists protest how we should not kill unborn babies and how it’s the life of a child, yet are they going to care or provide for these babies once they’re born?

I’m neither for or against abortion, but I am pro-choice. I have the rights to my body and what business is it to anyone what I choose to do with it? Whatever happened to freedom of choice? I feel that this abortion law, as a woman myself and to other women, our rights are being taken away like we have no power or control to our own body. Motherhood should be a choice of our own choosing because it’s OUR life and not anyone else. The way I see it, if I’m being forced by this law into having a child that I don’t want or can’t afford, is the government or the anti-abortion protesters going to help care and provide for my child? It’s only equal that they should be forced to do so if women are being forced into keeping their baby. 

Overall I most definitely have to agree with Karis’s argument. FREEDOM OF CHOICE! Unless a woman knowingly and purposely implanted with sperm via donor or in-vitro-fertilization, it takes TWO people to get pregnant. If women are being denied the right to choose for themselves, then Texas have no choice or right to deny women help, care or financial support. Babies are not cheap! In that case, from the famous words of Maury Povich, YOU ARE THE FATHER!

SEX... What you do and don't know and what Texas "wants" you to know.

HOORAY! IT’S A GIRL! So exactly what age, when and how do I explain or give her the “talk”? I’ll just make sure she takes sex ed. 

Well, if you live in Texas, the only sex education you’re going to get is by abstinence-only or close to none. Not that teaching sex through abstinence isn’t effective, but by definition, 

ab·sti·nence

 noun \ˈab-stə-nən(t)s\

: the practice of not doing or having something that is wanted or enjoyable : the practice of abstaining from something

Let’s be honest, what teenager is going to abstain from having sex by telling them not to do it and wait until marriage? There is more to sex beyond the preaching of abstinence, and in my opinion, the important information, facts and truth about sex are being withheld from teaching due to religious reasons. In fifth grade, my parents did not allow me to take sex education so I didn’t know a thing about sex or the reproductive system. Had I taken sex ed in fifth grade, I wouldn’t have gone first to my dad about my very first visit from my lady friend or thought I was dying! My family is Catholic and I was raised that way, yet I’m not one bit religious. I was raised that you had to be a virgin and married before you can have sex, that premarital sex and having a child out of wedlock was a huge “SIN”. Well, I did everything backwards so I guess that makes me a sinner and I’m going to hell!

I believe comprehensive sex education is the most highly effective and best way of educating teenagers about sex and the possibilities and/or outcomes, for example, unplanned pregnancy or STDs. According to The State Sex Education Laws in Texas, schools by law are not required to provide sex education or information about STDs/HIV/AIDS, however, if a school district chooses to provide such courses, information on abstinence until marriage must be included. Honestly, does Texas or the Republican Party truly think by teaching abstinence-only sex education really effective? Or, by teaching abstinence they are hoping that their now current teenagers won’t get that same feelings of emotions, desire or urge and act on those feelings like they once did as teenagers? Ah, interesting! NARAL Pro-Choice Texas states that repeated studies show that abstinence-only education did not stop teens from having sex or reduce sexual activity.

I came across an article that sparked my interest published in The Texas Tribune. In Texas, Less Progress on Reducing Teen Pregnancy. In the article, the now 21 year old mother of two, Charmaine Carbs, states how at 17 dropped out of school after getting pregnant, not receiving sex education at school, no knowledge about pregnancy risks and ended up in a homeless shelter after her second child. Charmaine thinks she may not have gotten pregnant if she had more support.

In all reality, teaching sex by telling them to not have sex and wait until marriage, we are denying them the real important knowledge of what could effect or change their lives. Good or bad. I mean we were all teenagers once at one point. Do you truly believe with abstinence-only sex education that you would have abstain from having sex? Like I said, I guess I’m a sinner and I’m going to hell.

It's MY Body....Not Your's!!

Since when was my body under the control of other’s decisions and choices? I thought we were in control of our own body. No? America is not much of a free country if they are going to deny me a service that I wish to have if I knew it was the right choice for me. What’s the purpose and meaning of “I have the right” if government is saying no to our rights?

Abortion has been a topic of debate for quite some time now and I came across an article that caught my interest entitled “Women’s and Children’s Health Suffers in States Like Texas With More Abortion Restrictions” written by Natalie San Luis, published October 1, 2014 in a Texas political based blog Burnt Orange Report. In the article, Ms. Luis provides information from research reports, government data and studies conducted. Sources include Center for Reproductive Rights and Ibis Reproductive Health. According to a study they have conducted, it was reported that “states with more abortion restrictions have the poorest health outcomes for both women and children.” The five topic areas of health indicators that were analyzed during the study were: abortion restrictions, women’s health outcomes, children’s health outcomes, social determinants of health, and policies supportive of women’s and children’s well-being.

In an article “Recipe for Disaster” by the Center for Reproductive Rights, the author states that it’s an “insidious and devastating move” for limiting women’s access to abortion services. The article addresses procedures like liposuction, vasectomy, colonoscopy, and D&C after a miscarriage childbirth are also serviced in facilities that do not meet the requirements of a Ambulatory Surgical Center or mini-hospital. Not only are these procedures not required to be done in facilities that meet requirements, these procedures have rates of complication equal to or higher than abortion. So how is abortion's health risk any different from the other procedures provided? I think that if the other procedures are just as equivalent to abortion, then they should all be required to be serviced at facilities that meet requirements of a hospital. It's not about the health risk, it's firm anti-abortion and pro-life believers. 

Ms. Luis states “until Pro-Life and Jodie Laubenberg team up to fully fund pap smears and pre-K education, these laws are dangerous, extreme, and a poor substitute for the health care policies that Texans actually need.” 

As a result, Ms. Luis definitely did her research to back up her argument and provided her sources. I definitely agree that these laws are extreme and a poor substitute for health care policies. They are not thinking about the health, safety or the well-being of women, but of what they believe is “the right thing.” What exactly is “the right thing” for me, you, anyone? I thought our life was the decision of our own choosing, not in the decision or choices of others. Our freedom and rights are useless otherwise.

Hours of work and a little paycheck?!

I keep telling myself that one day I will hit the lotto. I can only dream, but hey, you’ll never know. I can be the next big millionaire. Unless you were born in a family with money, some of us average working citizens are killing our backs working long hours and over time just to put food on the table and make rent on time. I’ll admit, I’m a little bitter about it because most of them are just your typical spoiled brats (ex: E!’s reality show Rich Kids of Beverly Hills) who don’t know what hard work is and will likely never know.

An opinion piece by an unknown writer with the heading of “Congress needs to increase the minimum wage” found on the Dallas News, it seems like Congress is the target interest for attention. The writer did not do a good job persuading because it definitely did not persuade me. In the article the writer states “minimum wage erodes buying power of low-paid workers” and that an increase would benefit Texas. Texas has a higher share of low pay workers on the edge of poverty with Dallas being the third with the highest poverty rate among major U.S. cities.

At sixteen, my first job, I was paid $5.50/hour. I can definitely relate to those who have worked hard and long hours to earn a small paycheck every two weeks. Starting from $5.50/hour with no work experience, I’ve moved up to $16.48/hour after years of experience. I’ve always been a hard worker and I’ve worked hard to prove myself within a company, so yes, I do feel that with my years of work, experience and dedication that I should be paid what I deserve.

According to the statistics obtained by the writer from the “Future Dallas” report, Boston and Washington, D.C. showed the worse income inequality. I’ve worked years to prove myself and worked my way up to $16/hour so exactly how is it “equal” to give someone who has no/less work history or experience as myself the same base pay rate that took me years to earn? Honestly, wouldn’t you be pissed? 

The writer then goes on to state that even with a rise in minimum pay, it’s not a certain way out of poverty because “better education and skills are the answers to poverty.”  The article is then finished off with its time to help low-income workers by giving them a boost in pay so they can help themselves. I’m not exactly sure what the writer is trying to say. Raise minimum pay so we’re not in poverty, yet it isn’t the key out of poverty because education and skill is the answer to poverty? I’m not arguing that I am against raising minimum pay because believe me I’ve been there. I am a broke, single mother, working, college student and I have busted my butt off working a full time job at the hospital, part time for my family business, going to school part time all while raising a five year old at the same time. I do know how important it is to have an education and how it can benefit my future. If you want something you have to work hard for it to earn it and with my years of hard work earned me a higher starting pay rate and to give others with no/less experience and qualifications does not seem fair or equal.

Overall, the article was an interesting read and the writer provided lots of information, however, I feel the clarity of the article was not convincing.

Record development puts drinking water at risk

In a recent news article found on KXAN published by Robert Maxwell on September 12, 2014, talks about how record development puts drinking water at risk. According to environmental experts, due to record numbers of development projects going on in some counties ranging from Williamson County to the north, south through Travis and Hays County; saids that a major source of cleaning drinking water which is stored in the Central Texas Edwards Aquifer, is under an increasing threat of contamination or pollution and that they are concerned that the state agency in charge of enforcing rules to protect that water source will fall behind. 

Development plans that were submitted to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) were at an all-time high in 2014 fiscal year. “Records show the state received pollution mitigation plans from 768 construction projects this year.” These mitigation plans are to show how a contractor put measures in place to control the flow of dirt and other contaminates from reaching the aquifer, which once native vegetation is removed from a construction site, a good rainstorm can wash contaminates into the aquifer through creeks. 

Susan Jablonski, who is TCEQ’s Area Manger, states “We are working actually on outreach for companies and contractors and sprucing up our website to have more resource available.”

Clearly, Texas is expanding and it’s not likely that the growth will slow down anytime soon. With more job offers in Texas, people will relocate and we have to put these people somewhere. What we once saw that was open land are no longer open land. They have been developed into businesses or house/apartment complexes, etc. So as the population in Texas grows, if we don’t try to help preserve what/how much we use and if developments/construction aren’t careful not to damage the aquifer, we will soon run out of clean drinking water. 

Our body can survive for more than three weeks without food. Look at Gandhi, he survived 21 days of complete starvation, however surviving without water is a different story. Our body can only survive three to four days, a week maximum depending on the person and the current environmental temperature. Just like the saying, “You never know what you had until its gone,” and once it’s gone, how or what will we do for water?