Image provided by: Clackamas Community College; Oregon City, OR
About The Clackamas print. (Oregon City, Oregon) 1989-2019 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 20, 2004)
^otynmentary October 20, 2004 th^LACKAMA^fifit; t at our rally! jntroversial T’s set teachers the boot Maras its heart. Maybe this would be a laughing matter if it weren’t for the irony of the fact that they were wearing shirts specifically advo- despite the fact that he has pro claimed that he does not listen to public opinion. They did not feel i seems a day cannot pass represented, and they took it upon aut yet another themselves to iy liberal trouble bring democra dr stirring up mis- cy to the leader, rather than the ' — how dare Is* A week does not leader bringing r when some sub democracy to Ave organization the people. the “school The /ps”) break into system of rep ; laving valid tick- resentative gov i a Bush rally, ernment which a/ to promote their we practice in less Communist America seeks ballistic” propa- to find the per ia, such as “pro- fect balance our civil liber- between true e' ■ i democracy and his is ; exactly an aristocracy, happened when which can only Internet Photo t Medford school work if the peo The three teachers model the ‘outrageous’ shirts. lers infiltrated ple’s feelings front lines of the Republican eating the protection of our civil are represented iliring at the Jackson County liberties. (go figure). This balance is just as ¡rounds, wearing t-shirts with The three educators admittedly important—if not more so—than hrase “protect our civil liber- had worn the shirts to get a stir out the system of checks and balances non the front. Talk about parti- of the GOP. After being angered between the Executive, Judicial, rdrivel! The three got what by peaceful protestors being and Legislative branches we learn p to them, though; they got kicked out of Bush rallies, they about in school. :d out of the rally for having decided to do a little test of their When the system starts to fall cene” messages on their own, with a perfectly neutral and out of step with itself it becomes universal American theme such as time for a change. If America has slaybe this situation would be a the protection of civil liberties. been reduced to the point that inci fling matter, if it weren’t for Little did they know how well dents like this seem to indicate, it often such things tend to hap- their plan would work. is time that change must come, and in this wonderful countiy Their intent was to bring their it must be either a change made by h holds free speech so close to message to the President ... the president, or by the people. ? Clackamas Print few speed bumps overkill e Piazzisi ? Clackamas Print ampus speed as: useful, or just alt hell? First let’s < at the facts. The d bumps measure a be 25ffeet wide by jet tall! I may or may le off by a couple of as. Let’s (face it, the !;s are ginormous irmous: when some- t is giant and enor- p at the same time), for one believe that peed bumps are a fit- lit overkill. I myself to purchase a com ity separate vehicle o be able to come to school. I urse found out the hard way. drove to CCC in my 240z, so Id register for the fall term, as as get any information I d need so I could start my college term. Pulling into the lng lot, I came upon a speed ) that I couldn’t even see over, went at it at an angle, just like didn’t register for school that day. A couple of days later, from the safety of my home, I registered online. I was now left with the challenge of finding a new vehicle. One that could climb moun tains—I mean CCC speed bumps! Then the list of cars that could do this started scrolling through my head. My first thought was a tank! No, a Caterpillar—wait, no, an Hl! Shortly after that thought I realized that I had a budget. Sorry, you won’t see me strolling around campus with a tank any time Photo Illustration by Joel Gaynor Clackamas Print soon. got out to see what the problem I’m happy to say I now have a was. I slowly approached the front car that is speed bump compatible; to find that the bumper was resting I just have to go over the speed on the speed bump. If my bumper bumps at 4 mph. If you want to see couldn’t make it over, how would my new car, all you have to do is the rest of the car? I got back in the go out to the parking lot and find car and eased off the clutch, giving the baddest vehicle out there. Then it a little gas. The sound came right go down four cars and over two back. At that point, I turned around rows; I’m parked over there some and went home. Needless to say, I where. everyone else does, when I heard metal scratching and fiber glass scraping. Naturally, I stopped the car and Procreation shouldn’t be the ultimate point ■Hilary Feraasan With the recent hubbub sur rounding gay marriage and a certain unfair constitutional amendment, one main defending argument focuses on a gay cou ple’s inability to procreate. This, in one word, is ridiculous. With the state of the world as of late, we should be commending the gay community for not having children. Until the agricultural revolu tion, the world population hov ered around a mere 10 million. Then came the plow and the population began to grow signif icantly. In 1800, the count reached a whopping one billion, and in only 200 years since the count has exploded to over six billion—and the growth isn’t about to slow. price? What kind of life will our children have if everyone pops out four or five of the ankle biters? There are so many chil dren who will never know a family, yet we have our own. Maybe we should ensure the lives of die children which exist now, instead of throwing more into an unstable situation. Still, some people argue that there’s nothing one can do once they’re pregnant. Here’s an idea: don’t get freakin’ pregnant in the first place! Take it from me, it’s not that hard. It’s this magical little thing called the birth con- i trol pill—-take it. Let’s take this one step fur ther. Maybe China had it right when "they mandated that fami lies could only have one child; that would definitely slow the population boom. Here’s another suggestion: a Ißt fruitful and maltiplq... Now divide. Now, turn your attention to the thousands, if not millions, of parentless children around the world. Many of them spend their youth never knowing the emo tional stability of a loving fami ly. Some are bounced from fos ter home to foster home. Still worse, some of these children are sold into sweatshops or forced into prostitution as young as 7 or 8, boy or girl. This being said, I am able to make my point: people shouldn’t be procreating. Within the next century, the population is expected to reach 10 billion! This means more housing developments, wider freeways, less agriculture and less oil. If you thought rush hour was a hassle now, just imagine another couple billion people trying to merge into your lane. It is still undetermined if the cur rent agricultural system is going to be capable of feeding every one. When I see a family of more than two or three kids, I see a selfish family. Yes, we all want to have children, but at what parenting license. The govern ment makes us take classes and a test to do the easiest of tasks, such as fishing and driving, yet they’ll let any old idiot get knocked up. Parenting takes a lot more effort and expertise than rowing a boat to the middle of the river and casting a line. What’s even more infuriating is that some people have kids specifically for the tax breaks. The government should punish families for having more than one biological child. (This would exclude multiples, such as twins.) Perhaps, then, people would think twice before decid ing not to wear a condom. Methods of birth control should be made cheaper and more accessible to the public. This could also prevent thou sands of unwanted births. I’d like to leave you with one final thought: a child is a privi lege, not a right. The govern ment insists on dictating every other aspect of our lives, so why not the one that makes the most impact on the life of not only the child, but the world in general? | Opinion Editor oting can be overwhelming, but don't let that stop you *The following article originally appeared in the October 17 issue of The Oregonian. Trista Cornelius is an English Instructor at CCC. * rlstalc o rne I ius ntributing Writer y the time I turned 18, I’d been it that voting was my civic and choosing not to vote was r shameful. So I voted during 10s, but I voted ignorantly and puch of the ballot blank. joking back, I realize I thought isn’t smart enough to vote, ips that’s one reason why the :ntage of twenty-somethings g is so low. uring my first college semes- ny philosophy professor asked raise our hands if we voted for sure 5, which limited property i and shifted the responsibility finding schools to the state in ised my hand proudly, not because I believed in the measure I’d voted for, but because I’d voted, and that’s what I thought mattered. My professor looked disappointed ly at those raised hands. I’ve since had more than a decade to learn how Measure 5 rocked the founda tion of Oregon’s public schools. I was too embarrassed then to admit I didn’t really understand the measure. When I could have been organizing voter parties during col lege, gathering other young voters to discuss the issues, I was hiding in my bedroom trying futilely to read the Voters’ Pamphlet. Near the end of my 20s, my embarrassment about barely voting finally overcame my shame about not feeling smart enough to vote. Now, in my early 30s, I have a sys tem. Last week, I ran into my philos ophy professor from 10 years ago. We fell into a discussion about vot ing. I suggested that maybe the Voters’ Pamphlet is a bit hard to read. He agreed, “Oh, yes.” He said he thinks many people make their decisions based solely on the Voters’ Pamphlet’s one-page summary because the onslaught of all the other media becomes over whelming. I sighed a bit of refief and agreed witii him because I’m one of those very people. Then I dared to explain my vot ing method. During an election sea son, I leave the Voters’ Pamphlet out on the coffee table. Even though often exhausted and frus trated, I read a little bit each evening, making notes and drafting my decision before penciling it in permanently on the mail-in ballot. (My passionate-about-politics husband has helped tremendously in this process, starting with a dia gram of the three branches of gov ernment during a commercial one night, not letting me feel ridiculous for not already understanding this.) My former professor said he practices a similar method, as if this arduous way of voting is normal, expected even. I don’t know if current twen tysomethings feel the same as me, but voting seemed like a duty to perform as a citizen, like stopping for a red fight. Somehow, the rigor ous intellectual exertion voting can require hadn’t been described to me. I thought if I was unable to sit down and fill out the ballot like an easy pop quiz, I must not be smart enough to vote. Voting is talked about as if it is the most natural role of a citizen, like jury duty. But it’s not easy. We don’t all understand the systems we five within, and as they grow more intricate, some of us fall behind and are afraid to admit it. I’m a natural-bom citizen but I’m thinking about taking a citizen ship class. My husband dreams of launching a civic literacy founda tion to engage tentative voters with doughnuts, coffee and workshops about the issues and candidates. Maybe it all starts witii sitting around the coffee table each evening before the election dead line, reading the Voters’ Pamphlet, checking local newspaper endorse ments, then making one careful, conscientious decision at a time.
