{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"38680742","dateCreated":"1304715711","smartDate":"May 6, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"ellagicacid","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/ellagicacid","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1343664898\/ellagicacid-lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38680742"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":" Single-sex school ","description":"Single-sex school
\nElla Nugent
\n
\nThe benefits of a Single-sex school are that the friends that you make are closer and there is more trust. Generally speaking, your closest friends are of the same sex as you, making the single-sex school more trusting or closely-knit. There is no longer the need to impress anybody. Girls no longer feel the need to dress up or wear makeup. Many people will become more comfortable wth themselves and be more down-to-earth. Another benefit of a Single-sex school would be no more distractions.
\n
\nThere are downsides to a Single-sex school aswell. If you only socialize with people of the same sex, you might not how to relate or socialize with the opposite gender. If girls go to an all-girls school, they may not know how to relate with boys. Sometimes, it can be good to have a male point of view in the classroom because opposite genders will see things differently. Another downside would be that there is less variety and diversity. The girls going to a Single-sex school might become biased in favour of their own sex and become sexist.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38673790","dateCreated":"1304706354","smartDate":"May 6, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"fabig1","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/fabig1","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1229012865\/fabig1-lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38673790"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"death penalty","description":"Wiki 21
\n
\nThe death penalty has been around for thousands of years and it is still used as we speak today. Today, 60% of the world lives in a country were the death penalty can still be used against them. This high percentage comes from where the death penalty can be used. China, India, The United States of America and Indonesia all have the death penalty in action to some extent and these are the most populous countries in the world. This goes to show that the death penalty is something that most governments agree on and apply to their criminals. There have been thousands of ways of killing people in the past and today but today, the old methods that tortured the criminals are no longer used like the breaking wheel. The death penalty is an important punishment to have in our criminal justice system because it removes the threat of the criminal and his future actions instead of having him on hold for years and years were he could escape or cause even more problems. The other good thing of the death penalty is also in a way the only way to obtain justice for some of the families that were affected by the criminal and his actions, sometimes prison is not enough for people, like the recent outbreak with Osama Bin Laden and his death.
\n
\nThe death penalty is not effective when you see it deeper inside than just easy way to get rid of the problem. We can see this today with the death of Osama, now Al Qaeda is warning the U.S that there will be more attacks because of it. I think that they warned us and decide that they would attack the U.S more because of the way people reacted to the event and news. Even if he killed thousands of people, a death of a person should not be celebrated like they around the world. It is giving a message out that they are exactly like him that they enjoy killing and death. This goes to show that the death penalty is just a way to give revenge to the people which never solve a problem. Whenever someone does something that I don\u2019t like and I do something to them, It feels good and you think justice has been done, but then I start feeling uneasy because I know I did something wrong that I shouldn\u2019t have. The death penalty also is ineffective for justice because, in my eyes, it\u2019s just an easy way out of the consequences. I would rather die than spend the rest of my life in prison, and I believe that there are other people that believe the same. The last thing is that death is not justice, that\u2019s what the radicals say, like Osama, that said that the U.S was paying for stepping in holy ground, we are saying that the death of him gratifies the thousands of death\u2019s that he caused which is not true.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38670040","dateCreated":"1304703571","smartDate":"May 6, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"eli-picado","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/eli-picado","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1283475869\/eli-picado-lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38670040"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Single-Sex Schools?","description":"Are men\u00b4s brains different from those of women? Do women have a different learning process than men? What effects does the presence of one gender causes in the other? All these questions have to be considered when deciding if a single-sex school is superior that a co-ed school. A single-sex school promises a lot of benefits. They offer less emotional pressure in students and make them less self-conscious. Girls are more outspoken and competitive when boys are not around, and studies support the theory that they achieve more academic success in single-sex schools. In contrast, boys become less competitive and are more likely to collaborate in order to achieve a smooth learning process. There is also a highest percentage of boys attending different art courses and they tend to be more expressive and talkative when studying in single-sex schools. This type of education offers freedom and confidence to students, since it removes the distractions of social pressures.
\nSingle-sex schools not only provide benefits to the students, but also deprive them of important experiences. Not having to deal with the social pressure during high school might transform the adaptation to real world into a challenge. Not having to do so in high school, students just don\u00b4t learn how to deal with partners of the opposite sex. Another difficulty in single-sex teaching is that most resources and educational designs are not made for single-sex groups of students, what makes teaching hard for inexperienced professors. Also, many people feel this type of education is discriminatory and unethical. These might be part of the causes why this type of education is not fully accepted in society and why it haven\u00b4t stood the test of time.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38642182","dateCreated":"1304655875","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"cecyrodriguez","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/cecyrodriguez","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38642182"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"i <3 my computer","description":"In the modern day, computers have proved to be our friends, our companions, our source of information and sometimes even the place where we find motivation. It is easy to be taken away into the land where endless pages with information are just at your fingertips where you access them with only one click. We have become too dependent on our computers that being in the Internet is part of our lives. Why not? Completing a task is much easier and effective using a computer. For example, buying clothes online. We trust that by using the computer we will manage to pick, purchase, and receive the clothes to our homes safely with no need to do anything physically. We depend on the computers to make our lives easier and at the same time opening more options for us to choose from. More and more, the services and problems are provided and solved by our computers. In the modern days, becoming one with your computer is practically impossible.
\n
\n
\nComputers these days are extremely important when it comes to contacting people and being part of their lives. It is also really easy to be carried away by Facebook or sites like that where you are always connected with the other person. But the truth is we as humans always crave for the physical contact with other humans,, Even if we are satisfied by sending emails or just taking to people over the phone, we still need to see each other to fully be part of each others lives. Computers prove to be a great source where we can reach out to our loved ones, but true love is only shown when both people are present and you can feel the moment with all of your five senses. That\u2019s why a lot of people don\u2019t believe in long distance relationships, because we can depend on the computers to make it easier to contact and be with each other more time, but we cant fully rely on them because it doesn\u2019t work, its not the same. Computers these days solve all kinds of different problems and we tend to rely on them, but we humans can never be too dependent on them, because they cant transmit to us the love and affection that can be felt by another humans.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38637330","dateCreated":"1304647599","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"alabuda","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/alabuda","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38637330"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"death penalty","description":"The death penalty can be able to be useful in some particular cases, especially when it is brought on some really horrible criminals who have done freighting things to others. For example, people have always liked to feel safe in their homes, neighborhoods, and communities. However, as we know, accidents and crimes can happen everywhere. Some people argue that people like Aileen Wuornos did not deserve to live because of the crimes that she\u2019s committed. Aileen was an American serial killer who killed seven men in Florida between 1989 and 1990, claiming they raped or attempted to rape her while she was working as a prostitute. She was convicted and sentenced to death for six of the murders and executed by lethal injection on October 9, 2002. Aileen announced that \u201cThere's no chance in keeping me alive or anything, because I'd kill again.\u201d when her appeal against the death penalty was denied. Should we keep a criminal alive when they openly assure that they would kill once again?
\n
\n
\nDeath penalty, however, can be used foolishly and cause the death of innocent people. Sometimes the court can be wrong and make mistakes that could end a poor man\u2019s life. People fear that justice doesn\u2019t always have to be right. For example, Jesse Tafero was convicted of murder and executed via electric chair in the state of Florida for the murders of Florida Highway Patrol officer Phillip Black and Donald Irwin, a visiting Canadian constable and friend of Black. There is a large debate about whether or not Tafero was wrongfully convicted of the murder of the two police officers. Unfortunately Tafero was executed before the investigation was brought up to life again. Some people also argue that death penalty is too cruel and painful when done unprofessionally, and no human being, no matter their crimes, should suffer like that. Tafero\u2019s case also supports this point. Jesse Tafero was to be executed by electrocution. However, the machine did not perform well and six-inch flames shot out of Tafero's head. In all, three jolts of electricity were required to render Tafero dead, a process that took 13 minutes and 30 seconds. The execution was thought of more like torture than death. Using Tafero\u2019s case the death penalty opponents argued that it should be abolished.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38635620","dateCreated":"1304645692","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"gmurphy3","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/gmurphy3","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38635620"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Death Penalty ","description":"If someone commits a horrible crime, such as murder, should they suffer the same fate? Some say the capital punishment is effective because it is fair; the murderer is killed, so the punishment fits the crime. The only punishment that can measure up to the gravity of murder is death to the person who committed it. \u201cAn eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth\u201d is a phrase from the bible, which states that the criminal should suffer their own crime. Also, the death penalty is used as a deterrent to others by showing the seriousness the crime and demonstrating what happens to murderers. Ideally, murder rates would be lower in countries where the death penalty is effective. Finally, killing a murderer ensures that the perpetrator could never commit such a crime again. People, families of victims in particular, want to see justice done. It provides closure and peace of mind knowing that a loved one\u2019s killer will never strike again.
\n
\nHowever, the death penalty is not effective because two wrongs don\u2019t necessarily make a right. Killing a murderer does not bring the victim back or make the crime any less serious. Also, capital punishment does not achieve one of its main goals, which is to prevent future murders. The death rates are no different, and in some cases higher, in countries with the death penalty in affect. For example, the murder rate is higher in the USA (where the death penalty is in affect) than in The UK and Australia, both which have outlawed death penalty. Finally, many religious groups, such as Buddhists, believe that it is wrong to take a life, no matter the circumstances. They argue that the death penalty is completely hypocritical. It does not make sense to kill as a punishment for killing.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38632244","dateCreated":"1304641535","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"marinacoccaro","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/marinacoccaro","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38632244"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Death Penalty","description":"It is common to hear, especially from religious people, that God is the only being with the right to take someone\u2019s life away. It is not only a great and merciless sin to murder someone, but also a depravation to that person\u2019s right to live. Since the first second a human being is born, he or she is rewarded with the most precious and valuable things in the world: life. And no one has the right to abuse of their freedom and their will to remain alive. All humans are the same under the eyes of God, no matter how rich or poor, intelligent or ignorant, saint or sinner\u2026nobody will live an exemplar life free of any type of wickedness and evil. God is the only one that has the right to judge your actions from right to wrong, and He will decide when, or how, someone should die. If God was the one that gifted people with life, He will be the only one responsible to take it away from them as well.
\n
\n However, justice and fairness enter in such discussed argument in infinite types of ways. Why would a murderer that has taken away the right to live from hundreds of innocent people deserve to remain alive? Or rapists and pedophiles that enjoy abusing of pure human beings such as children still run free through the streets? Someone that has committed a severe crime doesn\u2019t deserve to remain free while he has been held responsible for the death of others. A murderer is not only a risk to society, but also a threat to those that want to abuse of their right to live. It is particularly hard to believe that such a complex and virtuous thing as living can be destroyed in such a quick instance. To give life consists of such a long and perfectionist period of time, but to take it away seems to be so easy. A cut, a pulled trigger, and many other quick actions can end with the most precious thing a person has: its life. So why let someone take that away from you if living is what you must yearn for? The person that has committed such cold-hearted act should suffer the same way he made his victims suffer. All actions have consequences, and everything in life has its own price. If a human being purposely takes away the life of an innocent person, it would be more than fair for his life to be taken away as well.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38626986","dateCreated":"1304634678","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"lottej95","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/lottej95","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38626986"},"dateDigested":1531973913,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"lotte jansen wiki question 21","description":"Should creationism be taught in public schools?
\n
\nCreationism should be taught in public schools because it gives the students a different (or the same) perspective of how the world came to be as it is now. It also gives insights and can motivate students to compare and contrast creationism and evolution. Creationism introduces several world religions, which can be very interesting as well as educational for students who want to know more about different cultures of the world. Meanwhile, the ideas also let them decide on what they want to believe. The comparing and contrasting of both terms can help students learn how to decide for themselves as well as improve their debating and reasoning skills for future references. As long as the ideas of creationism as well as evolution do not offend any student personally or harm them in any way, they are essential because they give both perspectives of the creation of the universe. As long as several versions of creationism are emphasized, then it is beneficial. Students can learn both sides of the story.
\n
\nCreationism should be taught in public schools because it goes against some student\u2019s beliefs and can be very offending contradicting the idea. Students should not be obligated to listen to the idea of evolution, which contradicts the concepts of creationism completely. Every student has the opportunity to attend a Church to be able to learn about creationism by a person who has the same beliefs instead of learning about it at school. Evolution is the only concept related to the formation of the earth that should be taught in public schools to be able to avoid conflicts between the students as well as the government and rest of the nation. If public schools teach creationism to the students, not only do they violate the person\u2019s belief system but create conflicts with the separation of church and state. Some people, who are very conservative when it comes to religion, would become very angry and cause several conflicts. These conflicts could become widely known and damage the reputation of the school.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"38627036","body":"Sorry for the second paragraph, it should say "creationism should NOT be taught"","dateCreated":"1304634754","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"lottej95","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/lottej95","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"38609710","dateCreated":"1304616146","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"luisuarez","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/luisuarez","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/pic\/1302804674\/luisuarez-lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38609710"},"dateDigested":1531973914,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Death Penalty","description":"
\n1. Is the death penalty effective?
\n Death penalty has been something that has caused a lot of problems; it has been very controversial in the last centuries. In the past, many leaders executed people that had committed crimes, or simply didn\u2019t agree with their point of view. Death penalty was seen as a \u201csolution\u201d; for the leaders saw it as \u201csolving\u201d problems that were caused by infidels, and those who committed crimes. One way that death penalty can be seen as \u201ceffective\u201d is in terms of risk and security. Death penalty is the only thing that can grant a country or an organization that certain people won\u2019t escape and \u201creturn\u201d again with the crimes they did. For instance, when Saddam Hussein, was sentenced with the death penalty, it was the only way to grant that he was \u201cover with\u201d. That granted the Americans, that he wasn\u2019t going to be rescued, or brought to freedom again. Death penalty for the Americans was in this case \u201ceffective\u201d, even though death penalty is something cruel and inhuman. Therefore, death penalty is a way to ensure that a problem is dead, (in this case Saddam), and effective because it\u2019s the easiest way to \u201csolve\u201d a problem.
\n Capital Punishment, or death penalty, by definition is \u201cthe sentence of death upon a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offence.\u201d Death penalty is also seen as something \u201cinhuman\u201d and \u201cmorally incorrect\u201d. This is because; some people think that taking the life of someone is not up to humans, but from God himself. Only God can decide who \u201cstays or goes\u201d, and therefore taking the life of someone is \u201cdisrupting\u201d God\u2019s plans. Many people argue that, it is a savagery to take the life of someone, no matter what crimes he did. Let\u2019s not forget that \u201cGod forgives everyone\u201d; but should we? If someone has committed a mayor crime, against many people with no mere reason that simply cruelty, then I believe that this is unforgivable. Even though it might be \u201cunforgivable\u201d, we still don\u2019t have the right take someone\u2019s life. So it might be effective to completely wipe someone off the Earth\u2019s face, but still this is not something \u201chuman\u201d,. Taking someone\u2019s life in any country, is something bad, and shows that there\u2019s still a lot to learn, and to discuss about in the place we call Earth.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"38607532","dateCreated":"1304614132","smartDate":"May 5, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"cristinarojas1","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/cristinarojas1","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/davidgarethw-books-b.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/38607532"},"dateDigested":1531973914,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Law enforcement cameras ","description":"Of the fifty states in the United States, twelve forbid the recording of video or private conversation without the consent of all parties, and prohibit the use of such evidence in a court of justice. Ironically, law enforcement cameras record and video tape, millions of people every minute globally. A person\u2019s image is his or her private property; it should not be available for public viewing without personal consent. However, law enforcement cameras, record millions of people during their daily activities without them knowing or even having the chance to disagree. Just because modern day technology allows us to access private information and hold records of personal files about average class citizens, it doesn\u2019t necessarily mean it is acceptable to indulge in such information. Security cameras are placed under the assumption that people will break the law and that the camera will be there to document the moment, nevertheless, to catch one person disobeying the law, the privacy of tens of thousands of people needs to be violated in the process. Whenever you believe you are experiencing a moment of personal privacy, weather you it is reading a book in the park or even simply readjusting your undergarments, you may very likely be under observation. This in many ways and levels is wrong. Law enforcement and safeguarding are not a justification when it comes to invading the private space of law-abiding citizens. Technological advancements are valuable tools in the improvement of our global community; however are we really prepared to use these tools wisely and justly? As technology grows and advances, crime simultaneously rises to the challenge and becomes more sophisticated. Many argue that the use of security cameras today, is crucial in order to moderate or even reduce the crime rate implemented globally in the present; that without the use of these devices we would have to resort to older and more traditional methods of capturing criminals, and that these would prove to be very costly and often unsustainable. So instead of using surveillance cameras, we could reinforce our cities with more trained police men but, admittedly, the cost for taking such measures would result to be such a great expense that it would not even be worth it. While security cameras are becoming even more affordable and available to average citizens. The use of these devices is increasing significantly; they play a big role in the level of security that needs to be implemented today and of course they help people live more peaceful lives. Surveillance cameras are currently used in a variety of different settings ranging from schools and businesses, to even personal homes, these simple devices provide many people with the security of knowing that they are protected and watched over twenty-four hours a day. Yet our history is plagued with examples of \u201csolutions\u201d that seemed great at the beginning but ended up leaving behind a trail of regrets and complications for which we later had to find alternative corrections. Playing with privacy or tampering with an individual\u2019s sense of space and rights is a very delicate matter and one that should not be entered in with such light consideration. Sometimes the best, easiest, or even most practical solutions are not the necessarily the most correct.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]}],"more":true},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}