To wed or not to wed

The views on marriage in the story “Marriage Is A Private Affair,’ are very much seen as old fashioned in our society today. And it is a rare thing that parents are consulted when it comes times for a guy or girl to choose their mate. In some homes, a teen can go on a date or two with another without having even met the parents first. My parent’s views and the views presented in this story are different from one another, but to some degree there is a similarity. I don’t believe my parents would ever try and force me to marry a person that they knew I did not like or could not love. I know that my parents have my best interest in mind and they only want what is best for me. I’m sure that they know that an unhappy marriage would bring much sorrow and misery in my life. Although I’m an adult I do consult my parents on such matters. My parents have been married for over 26 years, which to me is a big deal since there are such high divorce rates in America today. So being that my parents have so many other people beat out there, I think it wise that I listen to their advice. To have been happily married for such a long time, they must be doing something right, and it would be foolish of me not to listen and pay attention to what it is that they have to say. I believe that there are several types of men that would be hard for my parents to accept that I marry. I think that one of the top things would be to marry someone outside of my faith (not that I would plan on doing that anyway). Please don’t get me confused. I don’t have a problem with people practicing their other religions, and neither do my parents. But great difficulties would arise if I were to marry someone outside of my faith. If a person takes it seriously, one’s faith or religion is a great part of who they are, and I take the words of the bible to heart. “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” Amos 3:3. So I could definitely see that being difficult for my parents to accept. But besides that, there are many other qualities my parents would have an issue with. I could see them having a great issue with any man that would be overbearing. I know that I, and I’m sure my parents as well, would have a hard time seeing a truly happy marriage that were in a situation like that. But even if I were to do something like that, I’m pretty sure my parents wouldn’t disown me like that man in the story. Overall, we have become quite the independent generation when it comes to things like this. But if one has parents, I think it would be wise for the daughter or son to speak with them on such matters. It may be that the parents can see things in a person that we may not see yet.

Cute little Doll's House

I am discussing the first writing topic from the story “A Doll’s House.” The story was pretty long but I wanted to keep on to get what the point of the whole play was, then once I found out the point of it all, I kept reading because I wanted to know what the outcome of her situation would be. The main character in the story, Nora, seemed rather childish or immature to me at times. And as I continued reading the story, I came to realize that she was a little too materialistic and rather selfish. I first noticed she was a little too much into herself and not really one to take the time to listen to others when her friend Christine stopped in. She took the time to be polite and cordial, but she went on bragged about her life, children, and husband’s job, which really wasn’t the time to do it since her friend was in the state that she was in. She should have been more of a support which is why I think that she was acting selfishly. When it comes to her children, I think that she was acting selfishly also. All those questions that arose in her mind after the incident with her husband shows that she really wasn’t ready to be a wife or mother, so running out on them now really doesn’t help the situation. It is as the saying goes, “you made your bed now sleep in it” At the time she was only concerned about herself and fixing her own problems without really taking into consideration the lasting effect those choices would have on her children. Its not like she was in an un-fixable condition. She came to realization of her problems, but then that is the time where you do your best to fix it and not to repeat the same problems. As far as her walking out on her marriage is concerned, I’m not too convinced that it was a heroic thing. Sure Nora wasn’t the only one with the problems, her husband obviously had some problems too, and yes there marriage was hollow and pretty shallow too. But at least Helmer was willing to work things out, he wasn’t too quick on giving up on the whole thing. In dealing with the alternate ending to the story, from what I stated above I think its clear that I would think this ending to be a better one. Sacrifice seems to be such a belittling term these days, and I’m sure it was that way back then also. But I think that that if she were willing to sacrifice her own wants and desires, which from the story doesn’t seem like something she is used to doing, things may end up better in the long run for both her and her family. That is of course if she were willing to make it work. You can’t force a person to do a single thing, people will do what they want to do.

I can't see you

Well, I decided to write about how people some of the people around me are invisible, and how I am guilty of not seeing others. I found this to be a very interesting topic, although it is not always easy to share with others the things you are guilty of, but I thought that it would be beneficial if it could give some type of advice, for me included, or found to be edifying. When I am out and about, people cross my paths all the time. Many people I see only so briefly, I barely have time to even process it, like when I’m riding in a car and so on. I’d have to say that one way I’m guilty of having people invisible to me is because I will not stop and take the time to know the person. Of course it is impossible to remedy this problem for everyone we meet on a day to day basis, events in our lives simply won’t allow for this, but there are times when the opportunity does present itself to us. I am somewhat of a shy person, I’m fine and comfortable around my friends and family, but when it comes to people I’m not too familiar with, I usually don’t have much to say to them, unless they initiate the conversation. So there are many cases where people I come in contact with remain invisible to me. I think that another way in which I could be guilty of not seeing others is looking only on the exterior, in other words, judging a person. I think that it is all too easy to make conclusions about people from what we see on the outside, and conclude in our minds that we already know the person and what they are about from what we see, or think that we see. But in reality, I’d have to say that the person is still invisible in many different ways. How are they invisible? Well one way is that you still really do not know the person you are judging. What I may think I know about the person is shallow to say the least, and may also be a complete falsehood. Not to say that observation always gives us a non-trusting point of view on things, but observation alone simply will not due. If I were a doctor, how could my simply looking at a patient help me know for sure if the patient were healthy or not. If I wanted to be sure about it, I’d have to take a close examination of the patient, maybe do some x-rays etc. So I think it would be best for me and everyone else to not assume that we know everything. Much information is only gained through deep study. And so with people I would have to say that, if I wish for less people to be invisible in my life, I would have to take the time to really get to know the people that I come in contact with.

Collateral Damage

I decided to write about issue of collateral damage found after the poem by Hanan ‘Ashrawi. When I looked at the term collateral damage, I had a basic idea of what the word meant, but just to have a deeper understanding of the term, I went and looked up the definition. So in the case of the military, one type of collateral damage would be an accidental injuring or death of a civilian in the process of some type of military operation. Being that collateral damage is an accident, its hard to go around those sorts of things. Even here when we are about our daily lives, all sorts of accidents happen all the time. Like when we are driving around in our cars, people get into accidents every single day. But I find it interesting that when we get into accidents here, we have to pay the consequences, especially when we are the ones at fault. And if the person is killed in an accident, you can be charged with involuntary man slaughter, and worse penalties will come about if you try to flee the scene and not take responsibility for your actions. But this is not always the case when it comes to military conflict. Many times, nobody takes responsibility for these sorts of things. I can see how there could be more collateral damage when the conflict is some type of civil war within a country. Because then their battles can easily take place within towns and such, where more innocent lives are at stake. Then there is the collateral damage that is caused by one country fighting another. I don’t think that instance or the other is more justifiable. Just in my opinion, I don’t really see how the taking of an innocent person’s life, or the injury of an innocent person, accidental or intentional can be morally justified.
There is another type of collateral damage though. I think the worst is when innocent lives are at stake, its impossible to replace a loved one that has been lost. Then there is the type of collateral damage that affects buildings, equipment and so on. It’s a sad situation either way, and unfortunate but I can see where this could be more justifiable when it comes to the damage of non living things, and through time and effort these types of things that have been lost can be replaced.
In the event of World War II, there was so much damage done on both sides, and especially when it came to the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands upon thousands of lives were lost in those bombings, not to mention the complete destruction of both of those cities. Some may feel that these bombings were justifiable because it helped to end the war. Some say that if the bombings were not done, that the war would have continued and more lives would have been lost. So the bombings did help to end something dreadful, but at what cost?