Analysis of Articles about Religion - Literature review Example

JOURNALS Mejia, P. . “D.C. Decriminalizes Marijuana, But Congress May Halt Future Legalization Efforts.” Newsweek.com. Retrieved on 23 July, 2014 from http://www.newsweek.com/dc-decriminalizes-marijuana-congress-may-halt-future-legalization-efforts-259973 Summary The information in the above article sparked a controversy in the United States and the world at large in that Washington had allowed residents of Washington, D.C. possess marijuana as long as it weighs less than one ounce. This announcement went viral after Washington’s City Council officer Tommy Wells’ proposed law of legalizing marijuana succeeded. This lined up Washington amongst other 16 states which also decriminalized the hard drug in the recent past. This move carries with it the right to possess less than an ounce of marijuana, and a further reduction of the fines imposed upon being arrested for possession of the same. The previous fines imposed for possession of marijuana were approximately 1000 dollars, but the new law dictates that the sum is reduced to about 25 dollars. Additionally, any possession of the drug in excess will attract a fine of about 500 dollars, or a two-month jail term. The other freedom to be enjoyed by users of the drug includes no frisking or arrests by police officers upon detection of marijuana smell. The law, however comes with some stringent rules such as not driving under marijuana influence, not possessing over an ounce of the same, no public display of marijuana, and using of the same is prohibited in public areas. The law, argues that the legalization of marijuana is a move of ensuring that racial discrimination will be reduced in that black people are eight times likelier to be apprehended for being in possession than whites are. The bill is likely to face contradictions in the future after it was announced that in as much as it had been legalized, marijuana was still overly illegal on federal territory, and that would earn one about 5,000 dollars in fines. Analysis The move by Washington to legalize marijuana possession led to the emergence of controversies regarding the United States’ reputation and role as a world leader. The controversy is twofold; with some wondering whether the move was justified and sufficiently informed, or whether it was a choice in the wrong direction. The following part of the study text analyses both sides of the debate and supports the reason why legalization of marijuana use and possession was uniformed move bound to cause more harm than the intended good. First, the good about marijuana legalization. In the larger context of society, people have grown up being taught that marijuana is an illegal drug to consume, but is a very important medical drug. Marijuana is chiefly used in medical settings to relieve pains caused by disorders such as glaucoma or cancer. It is also used during surgeries as an aesthesia. It is also used to reinstate appetite for patients with eating disorders, and is controllably used to cure people from several addictions (Mejia, 2014). It is therefore sufficient to state that it is an important drug, medically. The effects on “raw” use by individuals are different. People consume it by either smoking or chewing the leaves of the Cannabis Sativa plant, and give different reasons. Some say it calms them down, others say it gives them inspiration, while others enjoy the “high” feeling it provides them with. Generally, the plant is highly associated with persons from the Rastafarian sect who claim it is a holy herb which they use in adherence to their religion. That is as far as the individual good goes. The final advantage that the drug may present is that upon its legalization, it is bound to be taxed, and that means additional income for the federal authorities. Apart from the taxes that this will bring along, the fines imposed upon the breaching of the laws governing it will mean an extra channel of federal income has emerged. It is estimated that about 1.4 billion dollars can be raised from the said taxes and fines. Finally, this law will save the federal authorities about 11 billion dollars after jailed marijuana offenders are set free upon effecting of the law. The negative effects of uncontrolled marijuana use outnumber the good by a wide margin. An addict may suffer from sensory distortion since the drug has a numbing effect on the sensory system, one may develop “panic” and unnecessary anxiety, there may be poor coordination of motor abilities (movement), the heartbeat rate increases thus ups the chances of developing a heart attack, and finally, the drug is addictive. There are longtime effects as well; lowered resistance to common illnesses such as colds, decreased male sex hormones, hallucinations, harm to the respiratory system, an altered immune system, abnormal structuring of brain cells, and abnormal births in the event that expectant mothers use marijuana (Mejia, 2014). The list is inexhaustible. Evaluation It might be possible that the decision to legalize marijuana is based largely on economical advantages than it is about creating racial justice. This fact is based on the notion that laws against the drug have always existed, and it is only in the recent past that states have begun legalizing it. Again, the decisions are made by a minute segment of society, meaning they could be easily misinformed. Medically, or in controlled situations, the drug is beneficial and its use is justified. However, raw use of the plant with all the 400 chemicals it contains is bound to be harmful as it was earlier highlighted (Mejia, 2014). The health effects are far much weightier. It is wrong to trade people’s health with the financial gain which is expected, not to mention that upon its legalization, the medical expenditure will obviously shoot up. This is so because the mentioned health effects and addictions will force many to seek medical assistance or rehabilitation. These will inflate the medical budget. Again, claiming to “control” its use by imposing fines for excess possession or public display is insufficient. This is so because people may stock up their homes with such, and from there, excessive consumption and trafficking even to federal (restricted) territories will be made easier. Finally, the criminal activities emanating from disrupted decision-making abilities are likely to increase as well. In short, the decision was ill-informed. Conclusion In conclusion, it may be recommended that Congress reviews the increasing decriminalization of marijuana and if possible, nullify it until sufficient studies are conducted to bust the controversies surrounding the drug. This is so because legalizing it means the lifelong bans that existed on free use of marijuana were uninformed, which might be quite a big mistake. As such, more research should be conducted and the issue should be based on the welfare of the people rather than the mean economic good that is expected to benefit a few individuals. Society comes first. Magid, S. (2014). War Is Not “Hell” It’s “Sin”: Jews and Muslims Hunger Strike Against Violence. Religion Dispatches. http://religiondispatches.org/war-is-not-hell-its-sin-jewsmuslims-hunger-strike-against-violence/ Jews and Muslims Hunger Strike Against Violence Summary War Is Not “Hell” It’s “Sin”: Jews and Muslims Hunger Strike Against Violence by Shaul Magid is an article meant, at reviewing the similarities in the Jewish and Muslim opinion towards violence. It begins by pointing out that the 17th day of the Hebrew month of Tammaz which is a fasting day happens to fall exactly in the middle of the holy month of Ramadan, a month when Muslims fast to commemorate the teachings of Prophet Mohammed. Ironically, it or on the same date that Hamas and Israel threw rockets and bombs aimed at killing each other. In response to this occurrence, Muslims and Jews decided to take this coincidental day to have a “Hunger Strike against Violence.” The fast is supposed to be a fast of protest and repentance. In the Jewish doctrine only a war suctioned by a prophet is a commanded war the others are non-obligatory wars (Magid, 2014). This implies that war is an act of destruction, even in occasions when it is done in self-defense. This is why in the Jewish culture shooting in self-defense would be referred to as “shooting while crying” and the soldiers would literally cry while doing it. The unfortunate thing is that the idea of “shooting and crying” is no longer exists. Even the Muslim understanding of the consequences of war has vanished. Instead, anger reigns. “Hunger against Violence” is supposed to be an act of repentance for involvement in war while at the same time resisting war. This gesture is likely to bring an end to the lengthy conflict between Jews and Muslims. Analysis The fact that both the Jewish and Muslim doctrine condemns war can tell allot about the fact that the two sides have been in constant war for a very long period. It shows that at some point both sides had forsook what is expected of them by their religions, but instead followed their human feelings such as anger. Looking at the history of the war between Israel and Hamas someone will notice that both sides will always blame the war on the other side. Everyone would say that they are involved in the war for the sake of defending themselves. However, what is clear is that both doctrines do not in any way advocate for the war that has been here for many decades. As both sides continue to insist that they are in the war for self-defense tells that both sides have in a way lost their focus on religion (Magid, 2014). Fasting is always an act of peace and during a day when people are fasting, peace should always be on the top of their priorities. This is something that both doctrines can agree on. The Muslims do have the holy month of Ramadan when they fast and are expected to avoid any involvement in sinful deeds including the act of violence. That same would apply to the Jews. 17th day of the Hebrew month of Tammaz is a fasting day for the Jews and coincidentally falls in the middle of the holy month of Ramadan. The other coincidental and unfortunate thing is that on the same date Hamas and Israel threw rockets and bombs aimed at killing each other. The occurrence of a war on such a date shows that both sides had in a way forgotten some of the fundamental values of their respective religions. However, all was not lost for both sides. The hope of their restoration was brought back when both sides came to the realization of the fact that there is nothing that could justify war even if it was for self-defense. The war between the Jews and Muslims has definitely gone far beyond self-defense. It has gotten to the level where both sides are acting on their emotions. Both sides condemn war because of the destruction that always results from wars. War leads to deaths, leads to hopelessness, and make widows and orphans. The fact that the Jews previously believed in “shooting and crying shows just how much the doctrine was against wars. In fact that only way that is advocated fro by the Jewish doctrine is that which is commanded by a prophet. The Muslim religion also condemns the act of violence, especially in cases where it leads to hopelessness and loss of lives. The good thing is that the Jews and the Muslims took advantage of the fact that the 17thday of the Hebrew month of Tammaz which is a fasting day happens to fall exactly in the middle of the holy month of Ramadan to collectively fast in repentance of having been involved in the war on the same date. The “Hunger against Violence” is also aimed at protesting against war, which they have both witnessed to be destructive. On this particular day both Jews and Muslims collectively fast for peace while at the same time making sure that it is known that they condemn war. They highlight the fact that war does not only lead to hopelessness and loss of lives, but is also a sin in accordance to both doctrines. Both doctrines advocates for peaceful co-existence and it is shocking that the sides have engaged in war for decades (Magid, 2014). The “Hunger against Violence” initiative is a good one given that Hamas and Israel has been here for a long time. It is not a coincidence that the date comes on a day that both sides are supposed to be fasting. The alarming thing is that the war between Israel and Muslims has highly been politicized to an extend that even religious people no longer pay attention to what their religions expects from them. This can explain the high rate at which wars are occurring between both sides. However, “Hunger against Violence” is a brave move towards restoring peace between the two sides first by reminding each other the war is termed as a sin by both sides. The “Hunger against Violence” also acts as a period during which both sides repent for their involvement in war. Stephen, W. H. (2014). Why gay rights are not the new civil rights. An argument for Difference, 38 (2). From: http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/07/why-gay-rights-are-not-the-new-civil-rights Summary This article gives a discussion about why gay rights should not be termed as the new civil rights. The content of this article tries to argue that gay marriage is illegal and gays should not be given marriage rights. The author tries to argue against and oppose the arguments of many gay advocates who try to convince people that gay marriage is just similar to straight marriage. The author points out how many of the gay marriage advocates have put much effort in trying to convince millions of American citizens that same sex marriage is the same as opposite sex marriage it does not cause any harm. However, the author tries to point out that these two types of marriage are quite different. This article gives a comparison of the history and culture of black Americans with that of gay marriage. The author points out that gay advocates claim that denying gays their rights is similar to denying black Americans their civil rights. Gay is believed to be the same as straight marriage because it does not cause any harm to those who are involved as well as the society. Additionally, the love that gays experience in their marriage is the same love straight couples experience. However, the opinion of the author of this article is against this assumption. He concludes by pointing out that there is a very great difference between gay marriage and heterosexual marriage. Although it is widely argued that these two types of marriage are similar, Stephen warns people to acknowledge that this assumption is totally wrong. Analysis To the supporters of gay marriage who like making analogies to the Civil Rights Movement of African American, this journal entry supports implementation of gay marriage rights. In this analysis, I provide my reflections on the things that people can learn by comparing these social movements. To begin with, most of the gay marriage advocates have put much effort in trying to convince millions of American citizens that same sex marriage is the same as opposite sex marriage it does not cause any harm. Therefore, gays should be given right of marriage. This is because; implementation of this right would cause any alterations or damages to the revered institution. Take for example, in the early 1960s, there was an argument that both blacks and whites are the same in all aspects and racism is well and alive. Some of the American political leaders were highly sympathetic to the black Americans and decided to implement laws that supported sameness by emphasizing that Africans were really white. These arguments are so fundamental that the issue concerning racism in America changes every now and then. Any person who tries to argue about the difference between blacks and whites is accused of being a racist. Even those black political leaders who try to comment about the achievement of the blacks in the history of American are being warned to shut down. Therefore, there are no pride movements of blacks, no discussions concerning the culture of the blacks, and nobody is permitted to reflect the uniqueness of the blacks’ life in the United States. Blacks are still having their culture and history, although nobody is supposed to name, analyze, or celebrate those differences. Blacks are currently termed as the same as the whites for the social justice purposes. Of course, Civil Rights in America were won in a different fashion, which is a very essential thing. The whites not only learned to recognize the rights of African Americans but also their lives as well as their contributions and views towards the culture of American. It is not really that Black Americans were white for them to win the Civil Rights Movement, and also they were not supposed to forget their blackness in order to become Americans. The case with the gay marriage debate is not the same. According to many supporters of gay marriage, gays who wish to marry one another are just similar to straight couples. The way they carry out things is not different from how things are done in heterosexual marriage, for instance, they have the desire to have children, they observe the rite of courtship, and they also make reverences for tradition just the same way heterosexual couples do. This has resulted in those who point out the differences between straight marriage and gay marriage being banned. Every person knows these differences, but Americans treat them as irrelevant and minor. To make the matter worse, anyone who tries to discuss about these differences is accused of racism. Most people argue that gay marriage should be given the rights of marriage because expanding such marriages will not bring any negative impacts to the society. One of the aspects that are relevant to their support of gay marriage is that gay marriage is similar to opposite sex marriage and that gay marriage is as good as straight marriage (morally not harmful to the society). However, in most countries, gay marriage is illegal and those few who do it do it in secret. Denying gays this essential right is similar to denying African Americans their civil rights. The support of gay marriage has widely spread, thus erasing the difference between heterosexuality and homosexuality. The love of gays has its history just like the Civil Rights Movement and if Blacks were given their Civil Rights, Gay marriage rights should also be implemented. Supporters argue that gays should be given right of marriage because they experience sexuality the same way opposite sex does. Conclusion My opinion is that gay marriage is different from straight marriage and the two should be treated differently. However, it is widely argued that these two types of marriage are similar but people should acknowledge that this assumption is totally wrong. Such an assumption is counterintuitive, bold, and no one should believe it. Even though a large number of gays lie upon this assumption, the government should find means of not explicating it. Most gays claim that: the anus is similar to a vagina. The love gays enjoy in their marriage is the same as that of straight couples. I do not think many people support this statement, and if it is not acknowledged by many, the government should implement laws making gay marriage illegal. References Magid, S. (2014). War Is Not “Hell” It’s “Sin”: Jews and Muslims Hunger Strike Against Violence. Religion Dispatches. http://religiondispatches.org/war-is-not-hell-its-sin-jewsmuslims-hunger-strike-against-violence/ Mejia, P. (2014). “D.C. Decriminalizes Marijuana, But Congress May Halt Future Legalization Efforts.” Newsweek.com. Retrieved on 23 July, 2014 from http://www.newsweek.com/dc-decriminalizes-marijuana-congress-may-halt-future-legalization-efforts-259973 Stephen, W. H. (2014). Why gay rights are not the new civil rights. An argument for Difference, 38 (2). From: http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/07/why-gay-rights-are-not-the-new-civil-rights Read More