Physical Violence

Introduction:
Physical violence is a reprehensible, barbaric act that has no place in modern society. It’s not only a physical attack on a victim, but an attack on the progression of society as well. Physical violence is the breakdown of intelligent communication.

Contrast:
We as Homo sapiens are fortunate enough to have a unique capacity to speak to one another through spoken language as well as body language. Given our high capacity for language, it would make even a chimpanzee blush to see such senseless acts of violence that occur within our alleged sophisticated society.

Exposition:
When violence does occur, it is rarely a one-time thing. Often physical violence not only spawns more violence, but engenders a violent lifestyle as evidenced by violent criminals repeating offenses and children of violent parents displaying violent behavior.

Comparison:
Although it often does not end a life like murder, it can be worse because violence can generate more violence on the part of the assailant as well as on the victim’s behalf in the form of retribution or retaliation.

Intentionality:
Physical violence is often seen as a quick reaction or response to a situation. But true violence is not self-defense, but a deliberate act of malice that is only reactionary when one is numb to its effect. If you think about it, it takes a violent mentality to view punching someone in the face as a natural reaction.

Reproach:
This type of acceptance and adoption of a mentality accepting of physical violence as a solution shows an acceptance of failure in communication that was taught to this person while they were young. This type of learning has a tragic past, one that is laced with torture, execution, and endless wars.

Pity:
These people should be shown no pity for their crimes because there comes an age when you can no longer blame your upbringing for the life you live, but you must accept responsibility for the actions you take and the repercussions that your choice brings about.

Legality:
It is legal to punish such crimes as far back as any type of constitution or law has existed. Whether it be the ten commandments or the golden rule, law has historically supported the punishment of physical violence.

Justice:
It’s just to punish this type of act because if it was to go unpunished, we would be living in a ‘strongest survive’ type of world, lacking any type of structure or sophistication that might differentiate us from a group of silverbacks.

Expediency:
It’s expedient to forbid and punish this type of behavior based on its contagiousness. If it is dealt with quickly and firmly, then it will ideally nip the problem in the bud, thus foregoing many of its lasting effects on others.

Honorable/Practical:
Generations past and present agree that violence, especially unfounded violence is at least a blemish on the face of their society and when it goes unpunished, it can be the scourge that leads to the downfall of a society. So it is not only a moral duty to avoid and punish this type of act, but also a practical duty in order to preserve the livelihood of a society.

Plagiarism---

Introduction:
Because every human being is capable of creating his or her own work, plagiarism by students in school is unacceptable. The act of plagiarism is so despicable that anyone that takes someone else's work and call it his or her own does not deserve any leniency for stealing.

Contrast:
Schools have called for an honor code and promote higher learning. We as citizens must not encourage stealing but support our value of honesty and education. Honesty and the need to create one's own body of work, especially for school submissions s a society promotes our values.

Exposition:
The consequences of plagiarism for a student in school is high. Students have failed a paper to failing a course. Some instances have served students to be kicked out of school. If students are not punished for plagiarism, then stealing will become and ingrained value amongst our future leaders.

Compare:
Those who partake in the act of plagiarism are nearly as bad as burglars that steal from a family's home. The stealer in both cases takes what does not belong to him or her and ultimately disrespects the author or homeowner that has worked endless hours for their work's reward.

Intentionality:
It is obvious that students who commit plagiarism do so intentionally. Students have the freedom and all the resources to create their own bodies of work for educational submission. With the time given to them, he or she intentionally steals from another human being and submits it as his or her own.

Reproach:
Anyone that steals for his or her own gain has clearly not been nurtured to have morally established values. It is likely that this person steals more than just words from others.

No Pity:
No pity should be shown to these robbers, and those trying to protect such should not be helped.

Honorable/Practical:
By responding in necessary manner to plagiarism, we are saving countless human beings from experiencing the tragedy of stolen work. It is our duty to protect what is rightfully hers and his, so we must do our duty and not let those that plagiarize free without due penalties.

1. Our economy and the strength of our community relies on hard work, for every person to do his or her part and each individual to pull his or her own weight. Those who choose their own comfort over the needs of their community, who prefer the path of least resistance, should be cast out of the sight of the hard-working people who may be demoralized or shamed at the sight of such selfishness.

2. History praises the hardest workers for they demonstrate the idea of excellence and the greatness achievable through hard work and perseverance. Great men and women like Elizabeth I, William Shakespeare, Jimi Hendrix, Issac Newton, George Washington, Julius Caesar, and Leonardo di Vinci will be remembered throughout time as the benchmark of greatness and will be the role models for every generation, teaching all of us the value of investing blood, sweat, and tears to reach our goals.

3. The lazy man does not understand the virtue of hard work. He considers the hard worker to be a sucker or a loser. While they lay on the couch dreaming of the day their greatness will be recognized, the day their "ship comes in," they borrow money from their working friends and beg their working mothers to pay their rent. In the end, the pity and charity runs out and they must move back in with their mother, continuing their life of leisure on her couch, under her roof, eating the food that she works hard to bring home, and they become fully what they truly are, a grown child.

4. What vice could be worse that laziness? Greed? Gambling? But these both require ambition and work that the lazy person refuses to conjure. Even murder, the worst crime of any society, is more admirable from the sheer virtue that the murderer inspires the public to take precautions and establish a fair justice system, while the lazy person inspires nothing. The only thing comparable to laziness is treason, for while the traitor betrays his country and government, the lazy person betrays his community and himself.

5. If the lazy person can be praised so highly as to have any motivation at all, it is his motivation to stay lazy. Those that refuse to work are, indeed, actively refusing. They gain pity by seeming helpless to the hard workers around them, but this pity, earned pathetically, is the currency that the lazy person depends on. He has spent his life in a reclined position observing and learning from trial and error how to stay in that position indefinitely.

6. The lazy person could hardly be said to have a life, much less a past. Every day of the lazy person blends into the day that came before it and the day that will follow. If a lazy man is asked for the day of the week, he will inevitably think longer on this question than any working man or woman would need to. The lazy man has spent every day of his life in passing and waiting for the next to begin, only marking the days of the week by the TV schedule. To be sure, the lazy man has made a life of being lazy, and left to his own devices, will spend the rest of his life still doing nothing.

7. The lazy man has been given enough pity, from his friends and family members who feel too ashamed to begrudge him a loan that they make from only one day of hard work. He relies on this pity and it fuels his lazy agenda further. No pity should be shown to such a man, for to show him pity his to encourage his behavior only further. Indeed, it could be said that the only true pity that should be given to this lazy person is to refuse him any help whatsoever, forcing him to fend for himself and break his disgusting lifestyle.

8. While a decent democratic society would never pass a law to punish the lazy man and thus begrudge him his right to lead such a meaningless life, it should certainly not pass laws that encourage such choices. Any man or woman, no matter his or her physically or mental disadvantage, can work. This has been shown time and again. In fact,these examples perhaps demonstrate even more than those great men and women previously praised the strength of the human spirit. Thus passing laws that make it easier for someone to work less, to stay at home and do nothing, only hurts our community by making more people choose laziness.

9. It is just to shame the lazy man, to ostracize him, to refuse him charity, and to label him worthless, for just as we offer the highest praise for the hardest workers, these lazy people deserve just the opposite.

10. The urgency to handle these lazy individuals exists not only because of the great harm they do to our society, but also as a demonstration that we will not be victims of the same laziness. In order to show the value of hard work and the sin of laziness, we must work hard to end laziness. Anything less would be hypocrisy.

11. Some may think it more practical to throw money at the lazy, referring to cost-benefit analysis charts as evidence that they can't contribute to society more than what society can invest in training these lazy people to work. I argue that their contribution can be measured in something more valuable than money. By reforming the lazy man, we not only reap the benefits of his productivity, but also the pride in having a community where everyone pulls their weight. To write-off the lazy man is to not only soil our community, but to encourage others to take the easy way out.

Introduction: Inflicting intentional harm against a person is a crime that our laws strictly prohibit. Torturing an individual with excruciating pain without end for no reason is certainly an evil that smashes legal and moral principles.

Contrast: We have laws in place to guard against acts such as torture to protect each of our rights. Someone who follows these laws recognizes the need to respect the human rights of others and refrains from infringing upon them.

Exposition: In Ohio, two teenagers set an example of a complete disregard for another's human rights. Cheyenne Blanton and Joseph Nagle broke into a house, intending to steal the family's vehicle. But after missing their chance, the pair instead preyed upon 18-year-old Ashley Clark, who was home alone. The teens beat Ashley about the head, kicked her shaved her head before soaking her in water and forcing her to walk around outside barefoot in snow and freezing temperatures. The pair apparently had no other motive than having nothing better to do.

Compare: While the crime of murder is terrible, torture is much worse. Torturing someone allows the victim to feel pain as long as they are breathing, without any promise of it ending. Torture can also have lasting physical consequences even after the deed is done that the victim has to live with.

Intention: The Ohio teenagers obviously intentionally tortured Ashley Clark. The teens were in Ashley's home without permission to commit another crime. Ashley was physically disabled and could not in any way impede on the pair's plan; she was upstairs alone when the teens decided to go upstairs and commit this evil. They were not forced into this situation.

Reproach: The teens apparently went wrong somewhere in their past lives if they believed it was acceptable to inflict intentional harm upon a physically disabled woman. The fact that they were in the midst of burglary and attempted grand theft auto while torturing Ashley shows that the pair obviously have issues with discerning what is right and what is wrong.

No pity: While you may think that these teens are young and wonder whether they were raised correctly, they deserve no pity. They knowingly and willfully committed a terrible crime against another human being's right to be safe. However, the victim of this crime of torture did not asked to be pulled into this situation. She deserves your pity.

Legality: We have laws in place to defend against crimes such as this. Assault like these teens have committed is strictly prohibited by these laws, and legally, the pair should be punished.

Justice: The pair should be disciplined for the sake of justice. They should be held completely responsible for their actions against Ashley, and Ashley, as a victim, deserves to see her attackers put away.

Expedience: If they are already committing multiple crimes at such an early age, these teens should be locked up before they commit another crime of the same magnitude or something worse.

Honor/Practicality: It will be practical to see these teens punished for their crime. The consequences of their imprisonment will see an example set for others who may be struggling with their own interpretations of what is right and wrong. It is also honorable to punish a pair of people with such disregard for the rights and well-being of others.

Introduction: Sexual harassment creates a poisonous work environment and is an altogether vile and reprehensible act. The most extreme penalties should be prescribed against those who abuse positions of authority to coerce subordinates into unwilling sexual acts.

Contrast: Consensual sexual union is the most intimate of human physical activities. Sung of by poets and countenanced by religions, it holds a singular place in the individual psyche as both a divine gift and an intensely personal expression of love.

Exposition: Individuals who utilize their job titles to exact unwilling sexual acts are interested not in love, nor even in physical satisfaction but, rather, in the utilization of power. They believe that, “Because I have climbed the ladder, it is only reasonable that I be able to exact what I choose, when I choose, from my inferiors.” Such thoughts take nothing into account of the continuing mental and emotional anguish of other human beings. Instead, harassers care only for themselves and are only too willing to use physical and material threats to coerce sex.

Comparison: Some would argue that rape is a far more traumatic experience; however, one needs only to look at the acts to see that rape and sexual harassment are very much the same. Each entails unwilling sex; each is essentially a manifestation of power; each involves the imposition of force and will on one in a diminished capacity; and each is accomplished with no consideration of cost to the victim.

Intention: Those who sexually victimize do so not by virtue of some past harm but, instead, because they have freely chosen. They do so because, to them, inflicting emotional damage on subordinate co-workers is akin to sport; i.e., something which provides a readily available and cheap source of pleasure.

Reproach: This acquisition of perverse “pleasure” is part of a continuing pattern. Such harassment is a practice committed by individuals who have escaped the consequences of their actions previously and, accordingly, feel free to continue denigrating, demeaning and victimizing.

No Pity: Such serial victimization is abhorrent to all sensible human beings. Absolutely no pity should ever be shown to those who choose to wreak sexual havoc. Rather, by exposing them as societal frauds and subjecting them to extreme criminal and civil penalties, their activities will be stopped.

For this reason, the imposition of harsh punishment is merited because:

Legally: No one with a mother or father, a brother or sister, or a daughter or son would ever want them to feel the degradation and humiliation experienced by victims of sexual harassment. A foundation of the law is that we should not allow others to endure that which we would not suffer.

Interest of Justice: No defensible theory of justice exists in which the more powerful are free to prey upon the weak. Rather, a presupposition of judicial theory is that all persons are equal and entitled to fair treatment.

Expediency: Society has previously recognized that such acts cause grievous harm. Accordingly, it has enacted both criminal and civil recourse to dissuade those who would engage in this type of behavior.

Practicality: Vehicles are in place by which to rid society of sexual harassment. Such laws and practices should be utilized to prevent the crimes currently being suffered.

1. Introduction: Violence is wrong and should never be tolerated. To inflict harm on an innocent person you have sworn under god and law to protect is an abomination and should be punished with complete severity.

2. Contrast: From the beginning, our government had set into place laws that punish violence because it has always been understood that attacking another human being, threatening life and inflicting pain, is never an appropriate course of action. People who resort to violence are fear mongering, controlling, selfish and have complete lack of respect for the mental, emotional and physical well-being of anyone but themselves. They are cowards who would rather beat someone into submission than take time to deal with an issue with patience and respectability.

3. Exposition: 20/20 revealed a story about a husband who berated his wife with horrible language and insult, then proceeded to beat and strangle her. The husband forced his 13 year old son to tape the horrible acts and to take part in them, encouraging the son to verbally abuse his own mother. What started the act on tape? The wife asked her husband what he wanted for lunch. This is when the husband had his son tape the argument, so that the “stupidity” of his wife’s question may show his “justification” for beating her. It is truly wicked and shameful.

4. Comparison: Torture is inflicting excruciating physical or mental pain, often as an instrument to control or coerce and it is illegal in the United States, as well as numerous other countries. To use violence against a wife, husband or child is to keep them in excruciating emotional, physical and mental pain. To have the person who should love and protect you use violence instead, creating an environment that should be filled with love and support into one of constant fear and pain, is absolute torture. Everyone in the family is affected by the abuse. Everyone is damaged, disabling them in future relationships and endeavors in life.

5. Intention: The husband knew his constant violence toward his wife and his tactics of turning her own children against her would lead to her fear, her constant will to keep him pleased and ultimately his absolute control over her. He was torturing her on a day to day basis to get complete submission from his family.

6. Reproach past life: This horrible man began verbally abusing and degrading his wife from the very beginning, forcing his children to join in insulting their mother for years. He began to physically beat her for the first time when she forgot to bring a single item home from the grocery store. He never stopped beating her, using any small excuse--such as her asking what he wanted for lunch--as a reason to begin beating and attacking her.

7. No Pity: Anyone who uses violence against their family should be punished to the very highest extent of the law. There is no excuse and can be no pity for a man who beats, strangles, cuts, berates and threatens the life of his wife--the mother of his children, the woman he swore under God and law to protect. No pity or excuse can be given to a man who instead of teaching his children to be upstanding citizens and human beings, teaches them to use violence against their brethren.

8. Legality: Under law, violence and torture are horrible crimes punishable to up to life in prison. It is important to protect communities against the horrible pain and destruction inflicted by domestic abusers.

Expediency: To protect and prevent any future harm to the innocent, this man must be punished immediately and remove from those he terrorizes every day.

Practicality: Probation is a mere slap on the wrist that allows this terrorist to continue to harm his wife and children. Being locked behind bars is the only just course of action, ensuring this man can no longer inflict pain upon those who spent years as victims of his hateful violence.

Commonplace Against Liars

Introduction: The deed of lying is so terrible it is impossible to feel remorse or show leniency toward someone that behaves in such manner. Usually in the courts of law you are sworn to to tell the truth using a Bible and In the King James version of the Bible it states “Thou shall not lie,” as a commandment.

Contrast: An honest person is someone that tells the truth regardless of whether the outcome will hurt or destroy them or another. This moral value enables one to state facts and views without any bias. Because our past has had several occurrences were acts of dishonesty went unpunished, Our forefathers created a justice system that reflects honesty in order to protect its countrymen from acts of untruthfulness by sworn testimony using the Bible.

Exposition: Liars are deceitful. They are usually cunning and selfish and only for self gain. They are of any being, any creation and of any form. Many honest people have fell victim to their schemes. They exaggerate every sentence. They lie to make themselves feel better, look better or hurt innocent people. They are inconsiderate of ones feeling and emotions and betray people regardless of who that person may be. They portray themselves as good people and prey upon the blameless.

Compare: To be dishonest is bad. But to be a liar is even worst. To lie to the people who love you the most; to lie to people that want to help you; and to lie after swearing on a Bible in the courts is wrong.

Intention: Liars lie in order to hide their truth. They lie because they have accepted their lie as their own truth and believing that their lie is the truth.

Reproach: Liars are not limited. There has been a plethora of lies told before and after our time. Even this day, there have been many cases were people have lied to protect themselves especially in the court of law. Some eventually have told the truth. However there are some instances were people have lied and had no remorse for what they had done.

No Pity: It is normal to be sympathetic for someone who lies whether it was for the good or bad of mankind. But it is also normal to become sympathetic to the victims who have fell for their lies. If there is no resolution to this then the liar will continue to commit these acts of defiance and deceitfulness and influence others to do the same.

Legality. It is right to respect and honor the principles of truth established by the justice system.
Just. It is just to establish penalties against those who violate the laws of truth and honesty.
Expediency: In order to establish a future where honesty is at stake, a liar must be disciplined and held accountable for their actions.
Honorable/Practical: It seems reasonable to punish a liar who has caused pain and harm to society. It will build a stronger and brighter future for generations to come.

Tax Fraud

1. People who commit tax evasion mooch off of the money put forth by descent tax-paying Americans and should be held accountable by the law. While benefiting from programs set up by American tax dollars, they selfishly refuse to contribute anything to society.

2. It is the civil responsibility of every able-bodied American to pay taxes. The taxes paid by Americans support schools that prepare children for the future, fortify the military that protects us from foreign invaders, and fund many of the necessary city programs that beautify our nation.

3. In 2006, a Virginia couple allegedly refused to pay taxes for seven years during which time they earned a combined total of 750,000 dollars. Instead, they spent their money on vacations, jewelry, and a 2005 Mercedes in which they drove on the roads paved with the money put forth by tax-payers. Ironically the wife was an assistant principal in a local school whose salary had been paid by the tax-payers. In all, an estimated 87,000 dollars that should have gone to fund society was hoarded by the greedy couple.

4. Tax evasion is the same as stealing from the poor. Rich people can afford to send their children to private schools, and can afford their own luxuries like swimming pools and personal parks. Poor people on the other hand have to send their children to public schools and rely on public services for their entertainment and healthcare. Those who commit tax evasion might as well break into the homes of the less fortunate and steal what little they own.

5. The Virginia couple that committed tax evasion was openly opposed to federal income tax. It is no secret that American taxes go to fund essential projects in society. Those who commit tax evasion are fully aware that their taxes would go to the greater good of the country. However, they choose to enrich their own lives at the expense of the nation.

6. People like the Virginia couple obviously grow up feeling entitled to take advantage of society without giving anything back. Parents that spoil their children without teaching them the value of helping others breed tax evaders and greedy Americans that put their own desires above the needs of the country.

7. No mercy should be shown to Americans who refuse to pay taxes. People who feel that they can enjoy the benefits that taxes provide without contributing themselves should be severely punished by the legal system.

8. Because stealing is illegal and tax evasion is stealing from the country as a whole, it is perfectly legal to punish those to evade taxes.

9. It is not just that some Americans be exempt from paying for community services, therefore tax evaders must be harshly prosecuted.

10. By punishing tax evaders, the government will be sending a message to the rest of the country that no one can bypass their civil responsibility. The act would be very expedient.

11. Severely punishing tax evaders is the only way to honor the money put forth by Americans who pay their taxes on time. It is also practical in ensuring that America has enough money to thrive.

Paul Montoya

Introduction- The egregious offense of abusing or murdering an innocent animal is so reprehensible that it is difficult to feel any compassion for a person that would commit such a horrible deed. Just as society condemns the torture, murder, and abuse of human beings, so should society condemn such senseless and wanton cruelty directed toward animals.

Contrast- Many moral systems and philosophies have great respect for animals. For example, Buddhism teaches that all forms of life are precious, and that animals, though they have brains unlike those of humans, are conscious beings able to suffer and feel pain.

Exposition- In the early morning of February 27th, 2008, Chris Loyd Brown of Fort Myers, Florida was involved in an argument with his girlfriend. During the course of that argument Mr. Brown is accused of, “throwing her 6-week-old mixed breed puppy into the air and letting it fall to the ground. He then kicked and stomped on the dog, then picked it up and slammed it to the ground.” Brown was arrested by police and charged with animal cruelty.
http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080227/NEWS0110/8...

Comparison- The abuse of animals is almost as bad as the abuse of human babies. This wanton act of cruelty by Mr. Brown is similar in spirit to that of Mr. Lam Luong, who was recently indicted for the murder of his four children. Like Mr. Brown, Mr. Luong was angry at his wife, and in an act of revenge, he tossed his four children off of a bridge.

Intention- There is no doubt that this disgusting act of Mr. Brown’s was completely intentional and cannot be passed off as a mistake or as a result of some temporary loss of control. The tossing of an animal into the air, then kicking and stomping on it, then picking it up again only to slam it into the earth is nothing if not intentional. Furthermore, Mr. Brown was fighting with his girlfriend about ending their relationship, so there is little doubt that he was motivated to hurt or intimidate his girlfriend, and that the abuse of her puppy was an intentional act to achieve that end.

Reproach- While the details of his past life are not clear, it can reasonably be speculated that this is not first incidence of cruelty exhibited by Mr. Brown. One indicator of a psychopathic personality is the torture of animals, a characteristic often found in serial killers.

No pity- Save your pity and your sympathy for someone who is worthy of it, and reward Mr. Brown with nothing but steely contempt for his heartless act of cruelty. If a small amount of pity should start to creep into your mind, visualize the 6-week-old puppy, innocent and motherless, wanting nothing but to love and be loved in return, and then imagine the absolute callousness exhibited by Mr. Brown as he went about stomping, kicking, and throwing the puppy into the hard earth.

Legality- Fortunately, the law recognizes the abuse of animals as criminal, and Mr. Brown is being charged with animal cruelty. Imposition of the maximum penalty allowed by law is a completely appropriate response to Mr. Brown’s abusive offense.

Justice- It is only just to punish someone who, like Mr. Brown, has senselessly and cruelly mistreated an innocent puppy.

Expedience- It would be expedient to punish Mr. Brown, for it is only through punishment that he may come to realize his behavior is wrong or at least be motivated to change his behavior. Moreover, the punishment of Mr. Brown could serve as a deterrent to other individuals tempted to abuse an animal.

Honorable/Practical- It would be honorable and practical to punish Mr. Brown. The law demands it. Morality demands it. It is only by showing no tolerance for animal abuse that it can be brought to an end.

Killing anyone is a bad thing to do and is never justified. Anyone in their right mind would agree that killing another man is wrong and is the gravest of sins. The reason behind the act should thus be entirely disregarded.

As a society we are responsible for not just the well-being of ourselves, but also that of the rest of our society. If someone causes harm to someone else, we are responsible for stopping it or responding to it.

After many long years of research and study for his PhD in nuclear physics at MIT, a young man presented his dissertation for approval. Though his work was exemplary, the young man was not granted his doctoral certification from the University on the basis that he was Iranian. After many attempts, and additional groundbreaking research, he was still not granted his PhD. Disillusioned and frustrated by the fact that though he was completely deserving and showed absolutely astounding work, yet had not degree to show for it, the young man went and shot his supervising professor who without reason withheld the approval.

A serial killer relentlessly kills numerous people without reason. Both the student and the serial killer took someone's life. Alas, there is no difference, and no room for reasoning. By killing a fellow human being, both have done the greatest injustice possible. Thus, they are both equally wrong and there should be no consideration for why each may have done what they did. At the end of the day they are both evil and deserve similar punishment.

Though the student had more than enough reason for his vexation and may have been disillusioned, he still murdered the professor objectively as a response to the discrimination at the University. He took the professor's life because the professor in a sense was ruining his, likewise it is apparent that he did it as a response to the actions of the professor.

The student was ridiculous in that he never learned such a basic distinction in what is right and wrong. The thought that he had just such a reprehensible view of justice is disgusting. If he studied and worked hard for so long, he should be intelligent enough to know such basic differences of right and wrong, and to have thought of the results and consequences of his actions.

There should be no sympathy for this man. Though upon first instinct it becomes so easy to relate to his frustration, the bottom line is that he took someone's life which was by far much worse than anything that had been done to him. The professor could have done every negative thing imaginable to the young man, but unless he had taken his life, nothing else remains that would be comparable. Because the young man took the life of a fellow man there remains no need for sympathy for the injustices done upon him.

It would be perfectly legal to punish this person, because we have a proven legal system which describes such a punishment for such wrongdoing. Furthermore it is the law that this person be punished.

It would be just to punish this person, because he has committed a crime against humanity. Because the man did something wrong it is fair to punish him.

It would be entirely expedient to hang this person because that is the right thing to do. An eye for an eye is the best rule, because it brings justice and moreover teaches a lesson to all else. Even if it doesn't undue the man's actions it is the only way to serve justice. This punishment also teaches all others a lesson and reminds them of the severeness of the man's actions.

It would be practical to hang this person, because it is important that our society have simple and straightforward responses to such a situation to keep things moving smoothly. It would only be practical to hang the person because that would serve justice and is the sensible way to resolve such a matter.

Introduction: People who exploit loopholes, glitches, and security weaknesses in multiplayer video games fundamentally violate the game itself, and the enjoyment of its other players. One of the most important aspects to any game is that all of the players must play by the same rules.

Contrast: The role of the game designer, and of the administrative body (GMs, server admins, et. al.) is to ensure a fair playing experience to all players, in order to ensure that all players are equally able to enjoy the game. It is the responsibility of these people to ensure fairness and equal opportunity to all.

Exposition: People who violate the rules and games generally do so in order to frustrate and humiliate other players. Rather than having fun under the systems so carefully crafted by the game designer, they manipulate the system and bend the rules in their favor. This not only shows no respect for any of the other players of the game, it eliminates any measure of skill that would otherwise be required to succeed in the game. Indeed, why bother actually becoming good at the game when you can simply break the rules? This sort of misanthropic disregard for order harms the entire gaming experience, and may even render the entire game virtually unplayable.

Comparison: People who actively cheat within a game constitutes the absolute worst sort of player. Worse even than the people who actively try to annoy, confuse, or be generally obnoxious, these people express the complete disregard for the very order of the gaming system. Even those who act unfairly, but within the system, view people who artificially manipulate the rules as being bad for the gaming environment.

Intention: It is obvious that the intention of these people is simply to boost their own ego, and to frustrate as many other players as possible. After all, if their intent was anything else, such as recognition of skill, advancement of ability, or anything other than complete misanthropy, that goal would be rendered completely moot by the fact that rather than working for the goal, they simply cheated.

Past life: Those who actively attempt to destroy the fun of others never merely a rise out of nowhere. The sort of individual who would cheat exclusively to ruin the enjoyment of others generally has a long history of misanthropy to his peers, probably arising out of his own sense of inadequacy. A bully is just that, a bully; be it in a game, a schoolyard, a company, or a family.

Rejection of Pity: Pity is wasted on these individuals. Whatever the source of their misanthropy, they have chosen to channel their frustration into the wholesale spread of misery to people whose only mistake was to be trying merely play a game.

Legal: It is in the very nature of game design that a violation of the game’s structure and rules is a violation of the game itself. This form of cheating is the most highly punished infraction that can be committed in any online gaming system. In many of these systems, just one offense can have an account automatically deactivated, the online gaming equivalent of a full-blown corporal punishment.

Just: People who violate the rules of the game did not merely violate the game itself. They also violate the rights of the other players to pursue enjoyment of the game in question, and may even damage the image and environment of the game itself to the point where the developers and designers of the game could have their own images tarnished by even a small band of these misanthropic individuals. It is for these reasons that is both just and necessary to punish offenders to the maximum extent allowable.

Honorable: Beyond the enjoyment of the game, even, people who show this flavor of flagrant disregard for the well-being of others must not be allowed to succeed, wherever it is possible to stop them. If this sort of behavior is allowed to continue, it will fester and grow putrid, like a festering wound, stretching out of the realm of the game and into real-world interactions, where there is a great deal of potential for very real harm. Thus, the only honorable solution is to keep this type of behavior in check while it is still possible.

(Introduction) All steroid users should pay a severe penalty for their egregious conduct, but especially those who are professional athletes; they are leaders and role models for children and young athletes across the world.

(Contrast) At the Jubilee of Sports People in October of 2000 Pope John Paul II stated that sports exemplify "A sense of brotherhood, generosity, honesty and respect for one's body... held to build a civil society where antagonism is replaced by healthy competition." Incorporating the use of steroids into a pure event like modern sports is bluntly cheating, dishonest and detrimental to one’s health.

(Exposition)Steroid users are publicly scrutinized and punished accordingly. In the 2000 Sydney Olympics, American track star, Marion Jones won a record five medals, three gold and two bronze. Ms. Jones was accused and found guilty of cheating – using steroids – and was stripped of her record five medals. Three men guilty of supplying these drugs are serving time in prison and Ms. Jones will join them for a maximum of six months says The New York Times. Athletes like Marion Jones are chosen for the Olympics to stand proud for Americans among a sea of the World’s finest representatives. This is an honor and duty which must be filled with the utmost esteem, honesty and strength. Steroid users like Marion Jones are selfish and foolhardy to mock such responsibility and deserve according punishment for disappointing everyone looking to them as leaders and ambassadors for our country.

(Compare) Steroid users are no different than narcotics abusers and dealers undermining the legal system. In either case persons using illegal substances are compromising their physical health for selfish immoral gains and are contributing to the detriment of the youth’s morality and value systems.

(Intention) The pursuit of championship is what drives competition within sports and competition is what sports are founded upon. Athletes must practice and work hard to win, but never must they inject performance enhancing steroids into their bodies to become champions. Using steroids is a bad choice made to gain a competitive advantage over other fierce athletes – e.g. Marion Jones. These gains are often for personal triumph, but no matter their function are cheap attempts at success and are falsely rewarding.

(Reproach) If an Olympic athlete like Marion Jones would risk her worldly success then it is evident that steroid users must begin cheating at an earlier stage in their career. Obviously their competitive morals and values are nonexistent.

(No Pity) Whole hearted athletes devote their lives to succeeding in their sport, only to have their efforts undermined by cheaters using steroids. Athletes are not forced to take steroids at any level of competition and deserve no pity for their immature and dishonest actions.

(Legality) It is lawful and right to reward those pure athletes who hold high standards of and value sports by punishing those who abuse and undermine the legalities of athletics by using steroids.

(Just) And it is just to impose a strict penalty to those who choose steroids in order to prevent other athletes from slipping into this dark world of sin.

(Expedient) Any athlete found guilty of steroid misuse should be made an example of by expelling them from their sport and by retracting their records so that the law may retain its integrity.

(honorable/practical) It would be both honorable and practical to punish these steroid abusers now and ensure the public understands the severity of breaking such a law so that sports remain a pure and honest form of competition.

Introduction: Child molesters are evil; they prey on the young and vulnerable. Many laws are in place to protect children and prevent them from becoming victims. But, sometimes these laws are not enough. Child molesters will use many different tactics to hunt down victims and to avoid punishment.

Contrast: Domestic violence shelters workers and others who help stop violence work hard to help victims. They are honorable ones. They looked out for and help those who find themselves in position of a victim. They generously give their time and efforts to help others and to empower those who do not have a voice within their community. Our system should facilitate these efforts and fight for those who can’t fight for themselves, like children.

Exposition: Child molesters seek out their prey. They seek out innocent children who are young and vulnerable. They prey on those who are weaker than them. Their actions traumatize many children and cause lasting effects. This psychological damage can last through a person’s entire life; these child molesters can nearly ruin a person’s life. Child molesters also harm the families of their victims. They cause parents guilt and trauma as well as the community at large. They knowingly break laws and violate the rights of children. They solicit these activities in places where children should feel safe, such as school, playgrounds, and even websites specifically designed for children. These makes entire communities feel like their safe havens have been stolen from them and used for evil purposes.

Comparison: Child molesters are worse than any other criminal, including murders because they make a life almost not worth living. They deprive an innocent person of their self-respect, and it is worse than murder because it affects the rest of the person’s life and it affects the entire community. Other criminals cause harm that can often be repaired, but child molesters leave their mark from the rest of the child’s life. This is irreparable.

Intention: It is obvious that these people intend to inflict damage. There are many laws that prohibit this behavior, yet these individuals continue to act in the way that they do. If they did no intend to do harm, then they would not break the law. Also, they snaek around and try not to get caught because they know that what they are doing is morally wrong, yet they do it anyway.

Past life: It seems like everyday that we learn of a new scandal involving the most innocent members of society. From church scandals to internet predators, child molesters seem to find themselves in all facets of life and they always hurt people. Most live normal lives apart from their crimes, yet when they begin to hurt children, they seem to continue to want to hurt children. This creates an endless cycle unless these predators are stopped.

Rejection of Pity: Do not feel pity for these individuals. You may feel pity because they are sick, but there are plenty of ways for these individuals to seek help instead of preying on poor, innocent children. There is no excuse for hurting children, they are the future and they still retain their innocence. No pity should be reserved for these predators in our society.

Legal: It is clearly against to law to molest a child. As is should be. Since the law is very clear that this action will not be tolerated, it is legal to seek punishment in court. If not, then the cycle of abuse and hurt will continue without end.

Just: A child molester violates the rights of a person. That is enough to make punishment just, but they deserve punishment even more because they harm an innocent person who has not ability to defend him or herself. It is not only just to punish these people, it is mandatory that we do so to help stop others from repeating these horrible acts.

Honorable: A just society must punish is criminals or it will allow unjust actions like child molestation to continue and to proliferate. The only honorable action is to try and stop these atrocities and to punish those who commit them.

Introduction: Bigots are evil, they discriminate arbitrarily on the basis of attributes that should have no bearing on how a person is treated. Bigots cause undue harm and conflict within society and cause a large number of problems.

Contrast: A compassionate and open-minded person demonstrates respect for all people despite their differences. This virtue enables peaceful coexistence and mutually respect among neighbors; it allows all people to embrace their humanity. We have attempted to create a society in which bigots cannot thrive, our society has changed to protect people from the actions of bigots.

Exposition: Bigots cause a great deal of harm and have unfortunate motives. They want to discriminate and hurt people who are not like them and they espouse hateful messages in order to prop themselves up or gain advantage for themselves at the expense of others. Bigots believe that only people who are just like them have worth. They choose criteria that have no bearing on value and use it to shape their perspectives of people. What’s worse it that they try and often succeed at pushing these hateful message onto other people, perpetuating the harm that they cause. They believe that no matter what, their interpretation of events or of people is always correct and usually have very closed minds, unwilling to consider alternatives to their mindset. We see bigots all of the time. Often, they are in disguise. Some bigots hate others for their skin color. Others hate because of hair color. The tricky ones hate because of belief of action and espouse that those who they hate truly deserve shunning from all people. Unfortunately, they are often able to use the government to help achieve their hateful ends.

Comparison: Bigots share much in common with the ruthless slave traders of long ago and those still in practice today. They both believe that some humans do not have worth or are worth less than others. This allows them to dehumanize their victims and cause a great deal of pain and suffering. They seek to use and degrade people for their own gain.

Intention: Bigots often try to conceal their bigotry, but once it is revealed, they often agree that they hold intense prejudices. They do not reject these prejudices but rather try to justify them as fact. This is clearly an intentional act that causes a great deal of misery.

Past life: Bigots have a long history of harm. They are found in every society that has ever existed. In the United States, they have caused conflicts ranging from workplace discrimination to slavery and the bloody civil war. Sometimes a person commits only a small crime and we can forgive him if he admits that he is wrong and vows to change his ways. But, a bigot will do not such think because he does not believe that he is wrong, rather he internalizes his hatred and uses it against other people.

Rejection of Pity: You may feel pity for a bigot, but this pity is ill placed. Think of the tremendous harm that a bigot causes and spreads to other people. Think of the countless innocent victims of bigotry and hatred, they deserve our pity and sympathy, not the person who caused the problem.

Legal: A bigot that causes physical harm should be punished by the legal system. Hurting other people physically for any reason is always illegal and should continue to be illegal. We must use the swift and harsh hand of the law to punish those who hurt others. It would erode our legal system if we allow these criminals to go unpunished.

Just: It is entirely fair to punish a bigot when they hurt other people. They deserve a punishment that is proportional to their crime and that will deter future violent actions. If the bigot’s actions are offensive but not violent, then society should punish him by refusing to do business with him and rejecting him from their society. This is also just because no society should embrace an individual that is going to cause harm and inflict pain on that community in any way.

Practical: It is always practical to punish someone who deserves it. It will make society a better place to stop violent criminals and to denounce the hateful words and actions of bigots. To truly stop bigotry, all we really need is hope and an open mind which will recognize the humanity in all of us.

Drugs

Intro-If someone is involved caught using and trafficking illegal drugs, providing to the growing number of addicts, then that person should be punished for that crime. The selling of drugs, making it easier to the public to get, is a problem that has been around for some time and needs to be stopped.

Contrast-The making of drugs where probably not made to use as a resource to get involved with to the point of addiction just for fun as young adults do at first. They probably don’t want to spend their lives imprisoned by drugs. The makers of these substances probably made them in hopes that it would be of useful purposes. For example, medicines aren’t made to be addictive, but to help in relieving one’s pain, in hopes of bettering their health. These substances, now given the ugly title of illegal drugs, are what they are today because of what they do by being misused.

Exposition-The use of drugs has been around for a while but was not a major issue until it got into the wrong hands. I believe that when teenagers got involved with them and suffered the consequences of their addictive power, the government saw it as a growing problem that needed to be stopped. The trafficking of drugs has been a business for many years involving big time people but since it was a money making business nobody really complained about it until its addictive consequences came to light.

Compare-If drugs where illegal but not pursued to punishment, it would be easier to be used and dispersed among many more people and misused even more. Because there is some fear of being caught, it is less likely to see someone involved with it. It is better to see less people involved than to have many more lost to the prevalence of drugs and its addictive powers.

Intentionally-The marketing of illegal drugs was not just a mishap but an intentional way of doing business and making money out of it. Drug marketers want more people to use drugs and become addicted so that they will have more business which would lead to more money and riches.

Reproach-The business man behind the trafficking of drugs was not a good person before he became involved. He was used to hanging out with the wrong crowd and was involved in the many illegal activities before he became a big time seller of buyer. He obviously started small but he could have easily taken a different path.

No Pity-This person does not need to be shown pity too because if we do, his business will continue to grow and more and more people will become involved with it and a lot people will suffer the consequences of its addictive power.

Argue-It would be legal to put an end to this and punish those involved with the use and trafficking of drugs

It is just to break the cycle because it would end many sources of where drugs would be provided for users and end many suffering caused by its use.

It would be expedient to end this problem so that more people would not get involved in its problems.

It would practical to end this because a lot of people would not have to know and suffer the consequences drug have on their lives.
Anadeli De Jesus

Prostitution---

Introduction:
Uninhibited sexual promiscuity - specifically prostitution, the profession that encourages and perpetuates this moral pitfall - must be combated to the fullest extent in any civilized society.

Contrast:
As a society, we must resist animalistic impulses in favor of moral composure. Sexual restraint and monogamous relationships are at the foundation of advanced and functional civilization.

Exposition:
The consequences of uninhibited sexual promiscuity are tremendous. The prostitution profession is an ideal breeding ground for a devastating STD epidemic. Any increase in this corrupt activity would certainly lead to an increase in unwanted pregnancies and relationship problems that would make our moral framework crumble. If unchecked, this activity will bring ruin to American society.

Compare:
Those who profit from the exchange of sexual services are nearly as bad as the drug dealer pedaling addicting substances on the same dimly lit street corner. In each case, the offender is taking extreme advantage of an individual's compromised constitution, pulling them into a dangerous underground world of sin.

Intentionality:
It's clear that this act is committed intentionally on both sides, with a premeditated cost/benefit analysis in the mind of the seller and the buyer. While one individual is consciously accepting cash payment for service distribution, the other is consciously considering the impact that the deed will have on his/her family life, his/her health, and his/her status in the eyes of the almighty - unfortunately primitive impulses often win this battle.

Reproach:
Anyone that sells sexual services or seeks them out has clearly been deprived of moral guidance and crucial family values in their upbringing. It's highly likely that this individual has committed adultery, has a number of illegitimate children, or something even worse.

No Pity:
No pity should be shown for these terrible people, and those giving into this vice should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, with mandatory relationship counseling following shortly after.

Honorable/Practical:
By taking such necessary actions, we are saving countless marriages, keeping countless families intact and functional, and preventing an epidemic of epic proportions. It's our duty to one another to see to it that the judicial system protects us from our destructive potential.

-Daniel Kietzer

Commonplace: Steroids in Baseball

Introduction: Because baseball bans steroids and their usage by its players, any player who is caught using the illegal substances should be punished. Anyone who is willingly taking steroids is a cheater and are not only hurting themselves but are also poisoning the game of baseballs integrity.

Contrary: The creators of the game developed it as “America’s Pastime” where the players would play with their god given talent and ability only. They envisioned a pure game rich in diversity with skill players, some that run fast some that throw hard and some that hit the ball. To know now that their pure vision has been tainted with steroids would appall them and make them turn over in their graves.

Exposition: Steroid users like Rafael Palmero and Jose Canseco had no sense of morality. These steroid users and others like them openly cheated during their big league careers and show no signs of remorse now. They did it under the guise of secrecy to cement false legacies and put up hall of fame numbers in a selfish attempt to guarantee they were enshrined. They cared little about the team aspect of baseball, and were solely concerned with making themselves better as individual players by using the “body by syringe,” workout.

Comparison: A thief is distasteful and mean, but a lying thief is worse. By taking steroids to increase their performances then denying it, these offenders are stealing records away from people who attained them all natural and ruining their integrity. These cheaters are cheating the entire game of baseball by doing steroids.

Intention: Anyone who is taking steroids is doing so by their own free will because they want to get an edge on the rule abiding competition. Nobody forces a player to take steroids and because they are illegal in the sport nobody is advocating their use. A player, who wants steroids, seeks them out by themselves, finds a seller to buy them, and then injects themselves with the substance to attain a desired result although they are banned.

Reproach: While it is unlikely to know anything about a steroid users past, or why they thought they had to cheat, the fact that they have at some point decided to cheat makes them guilty. Using steroids is not ok, and with the enormous contracts that many athletes have, they can afford to take extra time off to heal without steroids and be at no risk of becoming impoverished. Taking steroids is not a necessity it is a choice, and it is a wrong choice. Those who have openly broken the rules in the past will most likely break them again in the future and should be dealt with firmly and swiftly.

Rejection of Pity: It is natural to feel pity for an athlete who has been sidelined by injury or has lost some of their former star power in the twilight of their career and feels the need to take steroids as a way to gain back some prosperity. However, it is even more natural to feel pity for the players who have been injured and re-hab their way back legally only to lose their spot to someone who took the easy and illegal way out back to health or the young new comer who wants a shot at the big leagues but cant have it because a player whose best years are behind them are hanging on through the illegal use of a banned substance.

Arguments

Legality: If these substances have been banned, and every major league player has been given a period to get them out of their system before being given a clean slate, then it is lawful to punish all violators who are tested and shown to have steroids in their system.

Justice: It is just to impose a penalty to fit the level of the crime being committed. If a player has used steroids to gain an edge, then that edge should be taken away, and a serious punishment should follow.

Expediency: To prevent future violators from committing these crimes against the sport, all known violators must be flushed out and punished promptly for their indiscretions. All players must know that it is not ok to use steroids and baseball should take it upon themselves to make examples of those that disregard the rules.

Practicality/Honorability: It is easy to punish players that take banned substances. To do nothing and continue letting baseball players take steroids turns baseball into a game of cheaters and places a black veil over a game once considered “America’s Pastime.” Punishing them cleans up the game and restores its innocence in the eyes of the players and the public.

Introduction- American culture is founded on the belief that through hard work, a person can better their situation in life and create their own “American dream.” In some instances, however, individuals choose to throw away their hard earned money through habitual gambling. Instead of supporting their families, gamblers waste away inside casinos and bars in the hopes of getting rich quickly. Gamblers systematically ruin their lives and the lives of those around them in pursuit of “the big win.”

Contrast- A strong work ethic is a virtue that can improve an individual’s place in life by providing discipline, opportunity, and often monetary rewards. Habitual gamblers do not possess strong work ethics, but instead are driven by the desire to get rich without putting in the necessary time or effort. In a sense, they are attempting to cheat the system on which the American economy is founded.

Exposition- Habitual gamblers are often men who hold or could hold paying jobs. Those with jobs could use the money they earn to support their families and improve their quality of life. Often habitual gamblers are struggling to put food on the table because of unemployment, but are so fixed on the idea of winning money (rather than earning it) that they end up squandering what little they have.

Comparison- Gambling is essentially stealing from the individuals that could benefit from money that is wasted in casinos and bars. Families of habitual gamblers can be forced to scrounge for food and go without proper clothing because of the gambler’s habits. The gambler steals the livelihood of dependents that count on that income to survive.

Intention- Some argue that gambling is an addiction, much in the same way that smoking or drinking are “addictions.” Gambling, however, is not a substance on which a person can become physically dependent but a choice an individual makes for the chance of winning. An individual must be responsible for the consequences those choices bring.

Reproach- The word “habitual” implies that gambling has become a way of life for this person, not a temporary digression. A person who has sunk into habitual gambling has been stealing money and time from people in their lives for a significant period of time.

No pity- Proponents of the “addiction” theory must hold that it is acceptable to put a family’s well being in jeopardy for the sake of the thrill. Habitual gamblers deserve no pity because their actions are done intentionally for their own pleasure.

Legality- It would be lawful to punish habitual gamblers from stealing from their families and putting their well being into jeopardy.

Justice- Habitual gamblers should be punished because they are doing harm to those who depend on them most. Scheduling interventions with a gambler’s family, shutting them out of casinos, or forcing them to attend educational classes on the astronomical chances of winning would be just actions because they would require the gamblers to face the consequences of their actions.

Honorable/practical- Habitual gamblers deserve to be dealt with harshly because they are wasting their money attempting to cheat the system of hard work and earned rewards.

1. No one should stand as a hindrance to God's plan. This is a deadly sin that invites punishment... The mother has no right whatsoever over the body of her child, who is a completely different person, a separate being.

2. Listen to what the Old Testament says: "They were initiated into secret rituals in which parents murdered their own defenseless children. It was your will that our ancestors should destroy those people, so that the land which you consider the most precious of all lands would be a suitable home for your people." (Wisdom 12:6-7).

3. A husband, wife & their little child were present for a retreat. The child's kidney had deteriorated and not more than a six months time for him was predicted by doctors... Miraculously, the child was cured and now, even after six years, he is healthy.

4. A women's uterus can no way be made a slaughter house. Whoever join their hands to erase life will have to answer for this deed in front of God.

5. Some people try to vindicate this malicious deed for many reasons. Some think that they can hide it from public. Some others do this to forget about what they did. Many others consider it as a way of family planning. Few others think that the child born through illegitimate relationship may grow perverted.

6. During retreat the husband was revealed of his past sins who had spoiled many women and forced them for abortion.

7. Since nobody stands by these innocent people, God, the creator of life, will punish those who commit this atrocious crime.

8. The law allows for freedom of choice; therefore it is illegal to 'legally' punish women who abort.

It would be just if a woman was raped.

It would be inexpedient to advise women to abort.

It would be much easier if we created a law that did not allow the freedom of choice.

1. Because laws exist that prohibit its occurrence, and we have seen that most of the victims are innocent bystanders, drinking and driving should never be tolerated. Drinking and driving is an illegal action that can endanger everybody.

2. Those who choose not to drink and drive do so with great responsibility. These individuals know the dangers and illegality associated with the act. When modern automobiles began to take hold, the effects of drinking and driving would have to have been unknown. Through research and past experience, though, drinking and driving has proved to be a fatal choice, and those who abstain show the most accountability.

3. In December of 1999, a girl name Jaqueline Saburido was hit by a 19 year old drunk driver. Her car was totaled, and she was stuck inside the car as it burned. By the time she was pulled out, she had suffered severe burns on 60% of her body. Jaqueline survived the crash, but today she is severely deformed and still undergoes medical procedures. The 19 year old that hit Jaqueline was put in prison.

4. Deciding to drink and drive is a very irresponsible choice. If you drink and you have to drive there should always be someone who is sober to drive. Since other people’s lives depend on your choice, killing someone while drinking and driving is just as bad as murder.

5. It is easy to know when you have had too much to drink. Not finding another ride home, having someone else drive, or just walking is a choice that is made by the person that is drinking and driving. Therefore, any tragedy that results is due to the fact that you made the decision to drink and drive. Any choice you make that you know can have disastrous consequences is as good as committing the action intentionally.

6. Anyone that drinks and drives does so despite the fact that we have all been taught of its dangers. Ignoring such good advice only demonstrates further that those who drink and drive do so because they are ignorant, have no respect for the law and lack responsibility.

7. Anyone that is caught drinking and driving should be shown no leniency. There is absolutely no reason that anyone should get behind the wheel while they are drunk. Nothing good can come of the situation.

8. There are plain laws that prohibit drinking and driving. Punishment that is derived according to these laws is well-deserved. As a society we must adhere to the laws to maintain order.

Imposing punishment on those who drink and drive is just. The punishment is in line with the law, and following the letter of the law provides justice in our society.

Punishment would be expedient because of the laws being broken. Also, those that drink and drive show bad qualities and must be reprimanded so that they may improve.

Any punishment for drinking and driving is honorable because someone else’s life might have been saved. In fact by punishing someone for the act, you may be preventing others from drinking and driving as well, which would make the original punishment even more honorable.

1)Because all students that attend college, all share the same goal of learning and gaining wisdom to become scholars in a given field, all must complete tests and papers without the assistance from others. Using words or ideas that are not your own is wrong; those who make this offense should be punished.

2)The founders of all universities and colleges planned a curriculum on the basis that students would work individually on assignments, tests, and papers in order to earn their grades. The founders would be ashamed of a student that copied from someone else’s paper or used words in an assignment that were not their own.

3)Students that cheat are often smart and skillful individuals that are too lazy to study and complete their assignments. They feel as if it is easier to use other people’s knowledge than use their own capable brain to create their own ideas. Many cheaters feel pressured by parents to make a certain grade and resort to cheating instead of spending a few extra hours in the library studying. Cheaters are only hurting themselves because they are not learning the information they should have learned in any given assignment.

4)Not only are you hurting yourself by cheating but you are also stealing someone else’s thoughts and ideas. So when you cheat you are also considered a thief. Moreover, you are committing two crimes which is twice as worse as committing just one.

5)The act of cheating is always committed intentionally. A cheater has to work extra hard to cheat than if they just did the work themselves. Instead of just taking the test or writing a paper they have to act sneaky during a test when glancing over at someone’s bubble sheet answers or pay a website or outside person for a paper. Cheaters often seem content with their choice, because they receive a grade that they believe they could not have earned by themselves.

6)While it is unlikely to know all the offenses of a past cheaters life, it can be assumed that they have committed this offense more than once. Once a cheater always a cheater. These people erase the notion that cheating is immoral. Cheaters have convinced themselves that this is the only way to live up to their parents or any other outside persons (ie employer, graduate school etc) expectations.

7)Even though there are people who are about to flunk out of college, it is there own fault for not applying themselves both inside and outside of teh classroom. Students go to college to learn, not to steal from others through the act of cheating.

8)The law exists to protect those from stealing from others. In this case, stealing words, thoughts and ideas. When a person breaks this law they are considered a cheater (or in more specific instances, a plagiarizer.)

Since those people who copy or steal from others instead of completing there own work are acting in an unjust manner; it is just to punish them.

It is expedient to stop cheaters to not only create a fair and just learning environment but to also inform others of the severe consequences for cheating on academic assignments.

It is much easier to punish those who cheat now, because if the harsh consequences for cheaters are publicized then prospective cheaters will be deterred from committing the crime.

1. Because all responsible and able citizens ought to work and thereby contribute to society, the able-bodied person who harasses passers-by for money ought to be punished and held in contempt. Giving money to people who are not willing to work for it only encourages their misguided and offensive behavior, which ought to be discouraged and stopped.

2. America was founded on the notion that anyone who is willing to work and contribute to the system can pursue happiness in peace. Asking shamelessly for free money from hard-working people was not part of this vision.

3. These people who beg for money on the street are often young and able-bodied. They often have tattoos, jewelry, nice clothes, and even pets. They are not in dire straits, unlike many genuinely impoverished people-- they would rather be idle and useless than work like the rest of us for their money. Moreover, many of them use the money they collect from the gullible to finance drinking and drug habits which only decrease the likelihood that they will put themselves to some use.

4. Though thieves and muggers assault passers-by and take money by cunning or force, and therefore are worse than beggars, beggars manipulate the emotions of decent people in order to take money that is not rightfully theirs, and this is but a hair away from stealing.

5. No one is twisting a beggar's (fully functional) arm and forcing him to beg me for money. On the contrary, beggars choose not to seek employment in favor of the life of a useless idler. They often seem quite content with their choices, too.

6. Though it is impossible to know all of a beggars past actions, but judging from their disrespectful behavior and entitled attitudes, it is clear that many of them have come to their present situation through their own faults. They have likely made a series of poor and irresponsible decisions, which culminate in the poor and irresponsible decision to swindle people out of money.

7. Though there are people who have fallen into homelessness through no fault of their own, many beggars have come to their station in life by their own choices. Many are addicts, gamblers, or drunks. Moreover, they choose to continue a life of idle depravity rather than try to work and improve their lot in life. Such people deserve no pity.

8. Our laws exist to protect our hard-working citizens. It is therefore legal to punish those who do not work hard but only take advantage of those who do.

Since those who beg for money rather than earning it are acting in an unjust fashion, it is just to punish them.

It would be inexpedient to allow such people to harass good people freely; this would encourage bolder behavior along with encouraging others of their ilk to take part. Therefore it would be expedient to punish them and nip the problem in the bud.

It would be much easier to punish those who beg now, than to have droves of idlers to deal with at a later time. It is easy to manage a problem when it is relatively small, but harder when it has grown out of control. Therefore it is practical to punish them.
Ajai Raj

1. In recent years, Blockbuster has raised movie rental prices from around a dollar to nearly five dollars, sucking the pockets of the innocent American population completely dry. It is impossible to feel pity for Blockbuster, since they are cruelly depriving impoverished Americans of movies and middle-class Americans of money.

2. Unlike Blockbuster, I Love Video and Vulcan charge barely over two dollars for a rental and give you more time to watch it, allowing you to enjoy your hard-earned escapism. Clearly, they can still profit from their actions, since they succeed in the Austin area; Blockbuster's greed simply knows no bounds.

3. Since I work in a Blockbuster store, I have seen firsthand how this evil corporation bankrupts ordinary citizens. One young girl and her family came into my store to rent several movies for a scholastic project and ended up paying upwards of $30. The girl had been unable to find some of the movies at the library, since they were made by the Weinstein Company, with whom Blockbuster has an exclusive contract. $30 for a project? For every family in the class? Should homework cost that much? Truly, Blockbuster is completely evil and steals from children.

4. Normal theft is bad, but normal theft can sometimes be excused, whereas corporate theft never can. A normal thief usually needs the money; he or she has turned to theft because ordinary work has proved unsuitable. Blockbuster clearly has other avenues for income -- other movie rental galleries do well enough without charging $5 per rental -- but it clearly chooses to steal, making this instance much worse than ordinary theft.

5. Blockbuster justifies its actions by claiming that they eliminated late fees, so they need extra money from rentals to make up their revenue. But not everyone keeps movies past their due dates; most people, being virtuous, get their movies back on time, and are forced to pay more money for no reason. The intent to steal here is clear: they just wanted money, so they think it's all right to take food from the mouths of average citizens.

6. In the past, Blockbuster was not as it is today; it rented movies for one or two dollars. While in some cases a virtuous past can excuse present evils, Blockbuster's past only highlights the depths to which it has sunk. It deserves no mercy for past actions.

7. Since it has been proven that theft is wrong and that Blockbuster's theft is even worse than ordinary theft, no mercy should be shown, even for its virtuous past. Since Blockbuster has intentionally been stealing for years, it should be shown the ultimate penalty.

8. It would be legal to pursue Blockbuster and force them to give money back; price-fixing is illegal unless directly supported by the government, as in milk prices.

It would also be just, since theft must be punished and Blockbuster's punishment would be a return to normal pricing.

It would be somewhat inexpedient, since trials for large corporations take time, but it would be worth it.

It would be both honorable and practical, because justice would be returned and the punishment for Blockbuster's actions would be both a return to normal pricing and some charitable donation to an appropriate cause; the punishment would fit the crime.