The first article for week six is about a girl in the UK who had to take off her ring because her school said it was contradicting with the school uniform. The link is below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6229098.stm
Lydia Playfoot has worn her 'purity' ring since she was 14. For it's a way of expressing her believe. Her father is a pastor, and together with his wife, they introduce and bring forth the SRT (silver ring thing), over 25000 youngsters in the UK have joined already and the number is still growing. The ring stands for a vow among Christians that they won't have any sexual contact until they're married, because of the purity vow (that's means you're not allowed to have any sexual contact). The school has she can't wear the ring, because the school policy on school uniforms says so. But people who are Sikh or Muslims can wear their bangles or headscarves. It doesn't seem fair according by Lydia's lawyers.
I agree with Lydia that she should be able to wear her ring. Why can people who are Sikh or Muslim express themselves with symbols of their religion, and she can't? Doesn't seem fair to me, if the girl wants to wear a ring because it stands for something very important her because of her religion, for God's sake let her wear the bloody ring. Why can others wear religious symbols and she can't? I think she did a good thing by going to the High Court. And for the school, if other people can wear their religious symbols than so can she, so can the Christians.
The second article for this week is about a mother who has been sent to jail for 12 years for sexual abuse of her daughter and another girl. The link is below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/6230072.stm
Caroline Dunsmore has been sent to jail for 12 years. She was married to a man called Billy King, who started the sexual abuse of Caroline's daughter and another girl. This started before both girls had reached the age of 10. After Billy King had died, the girls were sexually by at least three other men. But before Caroline and two men who were responsible for the sexual abuse, were sentenced, three more men (beside Billy King, John O'Flaherty and Morris Petch) and another woman have died before any charges could be brought against them.
I think it's absolutely ridiculous that as a mother you would let your daughter sexually abused by your husband and by other men as well. How can you live with yourself if you've done that? And what I also find quite hard to believe, is that the daughter actually said that she still loved her mother, despite of what her mother has done. I can understand that because it's your mother you could still love her, but looking at the circumstances...I find it to hard to believe. And I think it's a good thing that Caroline has been sent to jail
Monday, 18 June 2007
fifth week articles
the first article for this week is about birth certificates in Britain. the government wants to make that compulsory. with my other blogs the links didn't work any more so that's why i've put the article under my summaries. the link for the first article is below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6756381.stm
This article is about the birth certificates in the UK. The government wants to make the registration of the father's name compulsory. Though the father's name is not always known.
Many people think that children should know who their father is or to whom they need to send a card on Father's Day. But in some cases it's not possible to know the name of the father, like when the mother was raped. The government is still working on this idea.
I don't think you should make the registration of the father's name compulsory. Of course, if necessary you could claim child maintenance payments, but what if you don't want to have anything to do with the father of your child, what if you don't want the money. And if you are the child of a rapist, that your mom was raped, I don't think I would want to know who my father. You could build up such a rage against your father that you might hurt him or something. And I think that people should be able to decide for themselves who registrates their baby and whether they will also registrate the names of both parents. If you're happily married I'm sure you will that, but I don't know about all the other cases. Maybe the government should think about that too.
Birth certificates to name father
Unmarried fathers must register to gain parental responsibilityThe government is planning to make the registration of fathers' names on birth certificates compulsory.
Ministers said they would push forward with the plans once safeguards to protect vulnerable women and children could be put in place.
The Institute of Public Policy Research said the move would send an important signal about fathers' roles and duties.
Currently a birth has to be registered within 42 days, but only one parent is required to do so.
The Department for Work and Pensions said proposals on joint birth registration in England, Wales and Northern Ireland would be brought forward after a full consultation.
Most people will be thanking their fathers tomorrow but many will be wondering who their father is
Kate StanleyIPPR
Some people had been expecting the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, John Hutton, to include the measure in the Child Maintenance Bill.
But it is thought that a rethink was prompted by concerns about women who had been subjected to violence from a partner, and rape victims.
However, a Department for Work and Pensions spokeswoman said it was never intended that the proposal would be in the bill, as birth registration was not in the department's remit.
The government was still committed to the idea, she said.
'Equal role'
If the parents are not married, the father has to be registered on the birth certificate in order to gain parental responsibility.
If no father is registered he will be listed as unknown.
The IPPR said fathers had a vital role to play in the life of their children and were more likely to be actively involved if they were there from the outset.
It also said that unless fathers were registered, they could not be traced and encouraged to make child maintenance payments.
Mr Hutton is said to support these arguments.
'Important signal'
The institute's head of social policy, Kate Stanley, said: "Everyone should know who to send a card to on Father's Day.
"Most people will be thanking their fathers tomorrow but many will be wondering who their father is and why they have not helped support their family.
"Requiring fathers to be registered on a birth certificate sends an important signal about the duties of parenthood.
"It communicates the message that fathers have an equal role to mothers and that they must take their responsibilities seriously."
the second article for this week is about women who drink and drive. The rate of women that do so is rising in the UK. the link is below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6762585.stm
The number of women driving while they have been drinking has been rising over the years. It has become so dramaticle that the government is considering to lower the drink-drive limit to half a pint of beer. In that way they hope that the number of accidents and deaths in traffic will go down.
I think it's a good idea that the government wants to lower the drink-drive limit. But I don't think they should do that just because of the women rate. I think they should do that to make the traffic more safer for everyone. And maybe lowering the limit doesn't even lower the rate of people who drink and drive. Maybe that would require a chance in society.
Women drink-drive numbers rising
The Liberal Democrats say women drink drivers should be targetedThe number of women found guilty of driving under the influence of drink or drugs rose by almost 60% in nine years, the Liberal Democrats have warned.
Figures for England and Wales revealed by the party suggested there was an increase in all age groups - from 6,793 in 1995 to 10,765 in 2004.
This is a 58% rise of 3,972, compared with a slight fall among men.
The government is considering lowering drink-drive limits. The Lib Dems said women drivers needed to be targeted.
'Socially unacceptable'
The research also suggested that, during the same period, the number of women aged under 30 found guilty of driving under the influence of drink or drugs rose from 2,636 to 3,863 - an increase of 47%.
This compared to the number of men of all ages, which dropped by 0.25%, and the number of men aged under 30, which rose by 4%.
Lib Dem transport spokesman Alistair Carmichael said: "Instead of focusing drink-driving campaigns only on men, these figures show women also need to be targeted.
"Drinking and driving must remain socially unacceptable."
The party also said provisional estimates suggested that, comparing the 1996-98 average and figures for 2005, there was a 6% increase in the number of people killed in reported drink-drive accidents.
The estimated number of people killed in non-drink-drive accidents fell by 12% during the same period.
Government proposals
The government is considering lowering the drink-drive limit to the equivalent of half a pint of beer.
Ministers are looking at whether to drop the legal limit from 80mg to 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, in line with European standards.
It would be roughly the equivalent to a half pint of strong beer or one 175ml glass of standard wine - depending on body size and other factors.
The government will hold a consultation on drink-drive laws later this year.
This article is about the birth certificates in the UK. The government wants to make the registration of the father's name compulsory. Though the father's name is not always known.
Many people think that children should know who their father is or to whom they need to send a card on Father's Day. But in some cases it's not possible to know the name of the father, like when the mother was raped. The government is still working on this idea.
I don't think you should make the registration of the father's name compulsory. Of course, if necessary you could claim child maintenance payments, but what if you don't want to have anything to do with the father of your child, what if you don't want the money. And if you are the child of a rapist, that your mom was raped, I don't think I would want to know who my father. You could build up such a rage against your father that you might hurt him or something. And I think that people should be able to decide for themselves who registrates their baby and whether they will also registrate the names of both parents. If you're happily married I'm sure you will that, but I don't know about all the other cases. Maybe the government should think about that too.
Birth certificates to name father
Unmarried fathers must register to gain parental responsibilityThe government is planning to make the registration of fathers' names on birth certificates compulsory.
Ministers said they would push forward with the plans once safeguards to protect vulnerable women and children could be put in place.
The Institute of Public Policy Research said the move would send an important signal about fathers' roles and duties.
Currently a birth has to be registered within 42 days, but only one parent is required to do so.
The Department for Work and Pensions said proposals on joint birth registration in England, Wales and Northern Ireland would be brought forward after a full consultation.
Most people will be thanking their fathers tomorrow but many will be wondering who their father is
Kate StanleyIPPR
Some people had been expecting the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, John Hutton, to include the measure in the Child Maintenance Bill.
But it is thought that a rethink was prompted by concerns about women who had been subjected to violence from a partner, and rape victims.
However, a Department for Work and Pensions spokeswoman said it was never intended that the proposal would be in the bill, as birth registration was not in the department's remit.
The government was still committed to the idea, she said.
'Equal role'
If the parents are not married, the father has to be registered on the birth certificate in order to gain parental responsibility.
If no father is registered he will be listed as unknown.
The IPPR said fathers had a vital role to play in the life of their children and were more likely to be actively involved if they were there from the outset.
It also said that unless fathers were registered, they could not be traced and encouraged to make child maintenance payments.
Mr Hutton is said to support these arguments.
'Important signal'
The institute's head of social policy, Kate Stanley, said: "Everyone should know who to send a card to on Father's Day.
"Most people will be thanking their fathers tomorrow but many will be wondering who their father is and why they have not helped support their family.
"Requiring fathers to be registered on a birth certificate sends an important signal about the duties of parenthood.
"It communicates the message that fathers have an equal role to mothers and that they must take their responsibilities seriously."
the second article for this week is about women who drink and drive. The rate of women that do so is rising in the UK. the link is below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6762585.stm
The number of women driving while they have been drinking has been rising over the years. It has become so dramaticle that the government is considering to lower the drink-drive limit to half a pint of beer. In that way they hope that the number of accidents and deaths in traffic will go down.
I think it's a good idea that the government wants to lower the drink-drive limit. But I don't think they should do that just because of the women rate. I think they should do that to make the traffic more safer for everyone. And maybe lowering the limit doesn't even lower the rate of people who drink and drive. Maybe that would require a chance in society.
Women drink-drive numbers rising
The Liberal Democrats say women drink drivers should be targetedThe number of women found guilty of driving under the influence of drink or drugs rose by almost 60% in nine years, the Liberal Democrats have warned.
Figures for England and Wales revealed by the party suggested there was an increase in all age groups - from 6,793 in 1995 to 10,765 in 2004.
This is a 58% rise of 3,972, compared with a slight fall among men.
The government is considering lowering drink-drive limits. The Lib Dems said women drivers needed to be targeted.
'Socially unacceptable'
The research also suggested that, during the same period, the number of women aged under 30 found guilty of driving under the influence of drink or drugs rose from 2,636 to 3,863 - an increase of 47%.
This compared to the number of men of all ages, which dropped by 0.25%, and the number of men aged under 30, which rose by 4%.
Lib Dem transport spokesman Alistair Carmichael said: "Instead of focusing drink-driving campaigns only on men, these figures show women also need to be targeted.
"Drinking and driving must remain socially unacceptable."
The party also said provisional estimates suggested that, comparing the 1996-98 average and figures for 2005, there was a 6% increase in the number of people killed in reported drink-drive accidents.
The estimated number of people killed in non-drink-drive accidents fell by 12% during the same period.
Government proposals
The government is considering lowering the drink-drive limit to the equivalent of half a pint of beer.
Ministers are looking at whether to drop the legal limit from 80mg to 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, in line with European standards.
It would be roughly the equivalent to a half pint of strong beer or one 175ml glass of standard wine - depending on body size and other factors.
The government will hold a consultation on drink-drive laws later this year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)