Pro Life Without Parole Or Pro Death Penalty?

Jeanne Woodford is the former director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. She is also the former warden of San Quentin State Prison. During her career of 30 years she was part of four executions; the reader may conclude she is knowledgeable and a respectable source because of her first hand experience with the issue.The author is trying to reach LA. Times readers, which tend to be on the more liberal side. Jeanne Woodford has written this article with the intention of persuading them to not consider the death row as a solution to a “safer world”. The author relies mostly on moral and sentimental values to make her case. Death penalty is a sentimental and moral driven issue, for this reason her argument is effective.Jeanne Woodford also introduces some key facts to bring the argument together. Some of the pro death penalty supporters she has encountered argue about what it was cost the tax payer to keep an inmate on a life sentence. She clarifies to the reader that performing a death execution is much more expensive than keeping a criminal in prison for life. She states that it costs the tax payer “$117 million pursuing the execution of those on death row” and “housing inmates on death row costs an additional $9,000 per prisoner per year above what it would cost to house them with the general prison population”.Jeanne Woodford gives the reader a strong example from which to conclude and form their opinions: Robert Lee Massie was imprisoned for the murder of a mother of two, during a time California was facing a temporal ban on death row. This led for the release of Massie, as she refers to him, a couple of years later he was imprisoned for murder once again this time with the sentence of death.The author tries to persuade the reader into thinking that by using the capital that is currently used on death row on assuring the mental and physical security of foster children like Massie; crimes like this could be prevented. Woodford is implying that the death row does nothing for the society and we could help prevent more episodes like those of Massie, by funding prevention methods instead of directing the capital to take a life that took another life. The United States has 38 states that currently allow the death row penalty; 37 currently hold prisoners with the intention of performing the ultimate of penalties, the death penalty; California being one of these states. The author seeks to share her experience with hopes of changing some minds, and making a difference. As voters, we hold the power to persuade our government into denying or allowing the death penalty. This is the link to the original article. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-woodford2-2008oct02,0,6847008.story

Nature and Nurture reasons of homosexuality?

Recent findings show that being “gay” is ought to ones brain anatomy. Despite advances in technology and knowledge we do not posses the key to answer how much of this is influenced by nurture, and to what degree nature affect our sexual preferences.
Neuroscientist Ivanka Savic believes she found “the most robust measure so far of cerebral differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects”. Jerome Goldstein a well known neurologist and gay activist is interviewed about this recent findings in this article. He declares he had an attraction for the sex same at age 8. Jerome also talks about his first homosexual “experience” and how shortly after this life changing event he began his quest to fix his behavior, searching for medical and psychiatric help.
In 1991 Simon Levay was accused of being part of a “gay political agenda” after his discoveries of the dissimilarities between straight and homosexual brains particularly in the section of the hypothalamus which development is manipulated by “the levels of intrauterine testosterone”. Simon Levay discovering where found to be “nonreproducible” and “controversial” becauseof the lack of open minded individuals perhaps?
I find this article interesting and a must read for those who are still taking a prejudice stand towards homosexuals. We have traveled a long way. Up until the 1970’s homosexuality was a cause for psychiatric intervention. In some states being gay is still consider to be unacceptable neglecting the rights of many Americans whose only sin was to be a victim of nature and nurture.