Casey Anthony: Radioactive

Tonight, I started searching ABC news clips because although I should have been studying for my finals, and I found not only a way to avoid them, but also the latest video on Casey Anthony.

For those of you who are not familiar, Casey Anthony is a 22 year old woman who was accused of murdering her three year old daughter, Caylee in 2008, but despite the evidence proving her guilty, the Florida jury found her not guilty, and the case caused public outrage. 

However, she has been on probation for a few misdemeanors for several months, and has been serving those months in an undisclosed location. Casey has also been making "video diaries" on her computer, and the alleged "personal diaries were recently leaked. 

Although the leaked video of Casey Anthony was interesting in and of itself, what really struck me was the way ABC news framed the story. In the ABC news video, legal analyst Dan Abrams describes Casey Anthony as "radioactive". In saying this, Dan suggests Casey is unstable and dangerous. Although I do agree with what the analysts had to say about Casey, it seems as though every news story choose to frame her as a self absorbed, malicious human being. 

Maybe Casey is a crazy psychopath, but that's not the fact I'm interested in. The real question I have is if the media should be able to construct a news story with a bias. This is similar to how some history teachers feel history should be through cold hard facts whereas others believe analyzing history helps to better understand it. Does the presentation of media cause the same controversy? 

Why NOT Free the Green?

The legalization of recreational marijuana in the United States has yet to happen, but I find this controversy fascinating.

The reason I'm so interested in this topic is not because I want to use copious amounts of marijuana, but because there are so many reasons why legalization makes sense, but yet so many U.S citizens refuse to allow it. After seeing countless videos in middle school health class about 'saying NO to drugs', I was totally against legalizing this drug. "Why would I want a bunch of high teenagers around?"- I'd ask myself. It was not until my sister showed me an article published by TIME magazine in spring of '09 that explained the numerous and obvious benefits to legalizing marijuana.

For example, legalizing marijuana would save the U.S a ton of money. Not only could tax on marijuana like crazy, but according the TIME magazine article, the US spends "$68 billion per year on corrections, and one-third of those being corrected are serving time for nonviolent drug crimes". And of all the drug related arrests, 47.5% of them are marijuana related! We put so much money into our correction facilities when we could save millions (if not billions) of dollars just by legalizing one of the most popular reasons for arrest in the United States. 


Like any drug or medicine, marijuana does have health risks.  As promoted by the Above the Influence organizationn, using marijuana at a young age can result in structural and functional deficits of the brain. Marijuana may not be perfectly safe, but there are countless health risks associated with other legal drugs, many of which are harsher than marijuana. Alcohol for example does damage to the brain, stomach, liver, kidneys, and muscles- especially in teenagers.  (Above the Influence) It is a choice to use either drug, (or any other for that matter) so why not make it legal, and help out our terrible economy in the mean time? 


This is the part I find fascinating. WHY do people ignore the fact that marijuana is just as, if not better for one's health as alcohol, but yet remains illegal? Is it because we've taught our kids to "make the right choices"? What image do you think many Americans want to avoid? 

Offensive or a "Dream in a Cloud"?

As I sifted through news clips on CNN today, I came across a video that describes the outrage among Americans caused by a building proposal for a condo complex in South Korea. The problem? The proposed building looks like the burning twin towers of 9/11.

The Dutch architecture firm claimed that they "never intended to design a project looking like an exploding building, why on earth would we?" 

Although the architects did apologize, I was most definitely disturbed by the proposal and the fact that the architects said: "looking like an exploding building". The twin towers are not just exploding buildings. They are the buildings that stole thousands of lives, and marked one the most dreadful days in United States history. I am not offended because the building looks like it's exploding; I am offended because the complex is a reminder of a horrific attack on our home soil.

One might argue that not only did the firm do this unintentionally (allegedly), but this is a building planned to be built in South Korea. How much say to do we really have?
I find this to be an outrage, even if it plans to go up halfway around the world. If someone planned to build a structure that looked like the Auschwitz sign commemorating the Holocaus, would it be the same idea? 

I'd really like hear your thoughts on this. Let this building rise or stop it before it starts? 

The Kiss of Life

Ever wonder why humans kiss? If you've ever stopped and watched 2 people kiss, you'll probably notice how odd the activity really is. How has this strange ritual evolved into one of the most expressive gestures in our society?
I genuinely wanted to find the answer so I went hunting on the internet, and found an article about the possible origins of kissing.

The author of this article, Joshua Foer, explains that there are two basic theories about the kiss. 1.) Kissing is a human universal; an innate trait. OR 2.) We invented it.

As odd as it is, I've come to the conclusion that humans created the act of kissing because kissing is not the same in every culture. If it was a human instinct, it would have the same meaning for all humans all over the world, and it most certainly does not. For example, the Chinese do not value kissing the way Americans do. In fact, Foer claims that in 1990, the Beijing-based Workers' Daily advised its readers that "the invasive Europeans brought the kissing custom to China, but it is regarded as a vulgar practice which is all too suggestive of cannibalism."


"Suggestive of cannibalism"?! This blew my mind out of the water, but only because I've been raised in the United States and the US values kissing and romance very highly. Just look at box office statistics. The epic romance film Titanic is the 2nd highest grossing movie in US history (IMDB)! (Don't hate- I've seen it 13 times)


We love romance in America! And a huge part of that has to do with the American Dream. At least for me, romance is part of the "American Dream Equation". Grow up, go to school, meet your soulmate, fall in love, have babies, and happily grow old together. It's the way life is supposed to work, right?
Any other ideas why we all (Yes, I know you do too) cherish a good kiss?