The 14th Amendment Will Help Gay Marriage

     Adrienne Morris states her opinion on gay marriage and how the 14th Amendment is the means for the ratification of legal gay marrriage. She starts by proving that homosexuals are discriminated against to a point that they are denied their right to marriage. Then she states that this discrimination takes place due to the majority opposition. It is implied that the 14th Amendment was put into place to protect such a scenario: the rights of citizens cannot be limited out of discrimination and opposition.

     It is my personal belief that sexual orientation is not determinned to be a factor of discrimination in the constitution for the founding fathers were not concerned of the such. I do not think that gay marriage should be legalized in America, and I, personally, do not think that it is supported in the 14th amendment.

The article by Adrienne Morris is found at the following link:http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opinion/mailbag/gay-marriage-and-the-th-amendment/article_997a96b9-f7b9-5aae-82f6-9146fb29e079.html

Tillis Wins the Race

     This blog is a response to my earlier blog reporting the outrageous cost of the North Carolina senate race. The race totaled 81 million in outside funders and Tillis came out on top. Each of the 114,000 TV ads was vital to his victory as he only trumped his opponent, Hagan, 48.95 percent to 47.14 percent. He won by 125, 000 North Carolina voters. The victory gave majority Republicans to the senate and marks one of the quickest rise in politics for Tillis, as he was a simple town commissioner just eight years ago.
     I think that it is inevitable for a race so highly advertised to be so close; I am frankly surprised that more voters just decided to vote for the independent candidate out of annoyance of advertisements.


The information above was taken from the following link: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-senate-tillis-defeats-hagan-as-gop-reclaims-senate/ar-BBd58Xg?ansObserver11

SD looking normal

     Many have been speculating about the probability of a non-republican senator being elected into the South Dakota senate, which does not happen often as South Dakota is largely Republican. However the article found at the following link: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/sd/south_dakota_ senate_rounds_vs_weiland-4091.html puts all of these claims to rest. The article provides that the race is between three main candidates: Rounds, Weiland and Pressler. This means that the likely winner will only need roughly 40% of the votes. The poles listed on the site state that Mike Rounds has won the hearts of 42% of Americans as of October 26th.
    I do agree with the conservatives strategies of Republicans, so if Mike Rounds truly supports these ideals I definitely hope that the information of this site is accurate.

A Big Budget

     The article by Mark Trumbull provides a shocking statistic for its readers. Kay Hagan and Thom Tillis have been on pace to spend over 100 million dollars in ad campaigns to win the hearts of North Carolina. This would be the most expensive race in senate history. The candidates have already spent 11 million dollars themselves and 70 million has been spent by their sponsors. They are already approaching the previous North Carolina record of 77.3 million set by Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren.


    The race is neck-in-neck therefore the candidates view the ludicrous ad campaigning as necessary. They are spending  the ads in order to inform the citizens of the faults of their running mates and their own accomplishments.


    I can only hope that the ads produced by these sponsorships and spending contain true information.


All of the above information is found at the following link:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2014/1021/North-Carolina-on-track-to-have-costliest-Senate-race-ever

Who Are We to Judge?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/14/world/vatican-backtrack-gays/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

      The Vatican recently published a statement which enticed a positive outlook on homosexuals. The statement made was that "Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community. Are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?" This statement is not an official declaration, but the concept of the statement is highly controversial in the Church and is being debated by many officials. Many conservative Catholics view the statement to lack solid foundation in Sacred Scripture. However, Pope Francis continues to truly mimmick the life of Christ by being an example of a simpithizer to sinners when he states "Who am I to judge?"
    The world responds to this story in a variety of ways. Some will view the Vatican as falling to the values of a secular world. Many liberals support the statement of the Vatican to recognize the Homosexual community, but most will come to recognize the Vatican showing interest in caring for the oppressed.
   I believe that the Vatican will continue to clarify on this topic until the conclusion will be made that will show less prejudice on homosexuals, all Catholics will be reminded that who are they to judge. However, I believe there is more clarification to come on the "gifts and qualities homosexuals can offer to the Christian community.

Senate's View vs. President's View

     The article found on the following link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/08/senate-debates-focus-on-obama-economy/ provides a great example of the division of the senate based on the support of the executive branch. The article states many issues and prepositions that are highly debated by senators; each topic focuses on President Obama and the Economy. One headline is the affect of Virginia's support of Obama's plan to create jobs and how it ended up hurting the economy.


     The article continues to provide information on "hot-topic's" in political debate but the author does not go into extensive detail. However, the article is informative on the fact that reforms are being debated and contested to assure what is best for individual state's economies and how our president stands on each issue.

WWF Releases a Harsh Statistic

     The World Wide Fund for Nature's Living Planet Index released that the animal population on earth has diminished to less than half it was 30 years ago. This index, which is the main animal census for over 3,000 species, is made every two years. This article contributes the immense decrease rate to human eating too many animals at too high of a rate. It states the animal consumption that humans have become accustomed to can only be sustained by one and a half earths.
      The rapid decline of animal population could have tremendous economic consequences because many industry rely on natural recourses for profit: the fishing industry is a perfect example.
     I agree with the concern stated by this article in that the only way for the life on our planet to be sustained is moderation, but I do not believe that the sole cause of animal depletion is the human race simply having a big food appetite. I think that the industries exploiting ecosystems with high natural resources are the ones who need to mainly be moderated. The industry will only ultimately hurt themselves by dropping majorly in profit when the natural resources they depend on decrease too much. If our ultimate goal is to sustain our earth and economic state so that it may grow and continue to prosper, our use of natural resources simply needs to moderate to an efficient effort and a use that was constant 40 years ago.


http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/30/business/wild-life-decline-wwf/index.html?hpt=wo_t2