Why I Believe Governor Ricketts is a Hypocrite

Yes, I did say Governor Ricketts is a hypocrite.

Recently, pharmaceutical companies, many of which are European, have stopped supplying lethal drugs for executions. This shortage of lethal drugs has caused states to find alternatives for their executions. For example, Tennessee has recently passed a law allowing the use of the electric chair again. A firing squad, yes, a firing squad is now allowed in Utah as a backup measure. Nebraska has not executed anyone since 1997. There is currently no execution method legally available for death row inmates due to an expiration of the drug sodium thiopental. Due to the inactivity of the government program, Nebraskan lawmakers voted 30-13 that would abolish the death penalty. However, Governor Ricketts has promised to veto the bill, although the 30-13 vote would override his veto. Still, Ricketts urges lawmakers to reconsider.

Now after hearing that Ricketts would veto the abolishment law, I immediately thought he was a hypocrite and I still do. This all has to do with the pro-life stance he holds. Yes, pro-life is typically associated and defined as "opposing abortion and euthanasia." However, "pro-life" literally has the word life in it. If someone identifies as pro-life, I would think that they support all life and not just a developing child in the womb. For what good is it to support a life in the womb but then not support it when it is actually out in the real world living? If Gov. Ricketts supports life, then he would support it until natural death. This is why I believe he is a hypocrite, because if he values the death penalty, then he does not value life.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/nebraska-repeal-death-penalty-amid-drug-shortage-30371296

Germany Plane Crash is Probably NOT The Pilot's Fault.

Issues with plane crashes and disappearances are becoming more and more familiar to people today. One of the most recent plane incidents was the Germanwings Crash on March 24, 2015. The pilot was 27-year-old Andreas Lubitz who was at the controls and crashed the plane, killing 150 people.

When I first heard of this, I thought it was terrorism. Who else could do such a thing? Then this article came out, revealing that the pilot had a history of depression. In 2009, Lubitz took several months off to deal with his depression. After coming back and reporting to be “healthy”, he was given his pilot’s license by Lufthansa Flight School.

Here’s the catch: the pilot is no longer required to report medical issues now that he is a licensed pilot. All health problems he has that could hinder his ability to work must be self-reported.

There is evidence of ripped up sick notes of an illness that would have prevented him from flying. He did not have one the day of the crash.

This leads me to believe that Lubitz was planning to commit suicide via a plane crash. Why?

First, he has a clear history of depression. Depression does not go away in a several months unless by some miracle it’s just gone the next day. Sure, one can take pills and medications to put away the depression, but what good does that do in healing the underlying sickness? Professional therapy is needed to help an ill person back into a health state of mind.

Second, even though there is no current evidence on whether he was still facing depression after 2009, one thing leads me to believe he did. While I could not find a statistic about this, I know that many people are ashamed of their depression. They feel like that it’s just another weakness of theirs. Since they’re ashamed of it, why report it? Who would willingly report something they’re ashamed of?

I am very saddened by this crash, for both the killed people and the pilot. The people should not have been involved in this seeming-to-be suicide and the pilot should not have been so loosely handled by his work.

I defend the pilot for these reasons: he has a history of depression and mental illness is getting a bad name because of this crash. I know that there are people out there who think that people with mental illness are still able to function properly in the workplace and that this pilot is still at fault. That mental illness is something that can be controlled and handled without any problem.

NO!

Mental illness inhibits the sick person’s ability to think properly. They lose a lot of rational thought and ability to think properly and cave into their illness’s effects. If this pilot still had depression, he is not totally at fault for this! Lubitz’s work should have done follow up checks on him; they should have made sure that this pilot is still stable and healthy. They should do this for all pilots! All flight agencies should do regularly mandated health checks!

This is the one thing I want you to take away from this blog post. Mentally ill workers and people are not at fault for the things they do. They are driven by their illnesses, against their free will and rational thought, to do things and actions that feel right to them. Sometimes these things that they do seem like their only way out to them.

It’s time we as a society stop treating mental illness like it’s something to be dealt with on our own. It’s time we help others feel comfortable talking about it openly to receive help. People with mental illness are still people. We must do something to make these people feel like they’re still worth their lives, because they are.

Let’s not isolate ourselves any longer to mental health issues. Instead, let’s talk about them.

Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/31/us-france-crash-pilot-idUSKBN0MR1EJ20150331

Is There a Correlation Between Church Attendance and Political Parties? Well, No.

Easter day is one of the most important days of the Christian liturgical year, and the Jewish Passover is passing through right now! During these religious seasons, as always, an increase of people attending churches. A term I stumbled upon to describe these people that I enjoyed is CEOs: Christmas and Easter Only.

Dante Chinni, author of this article, stated that a big political predictor is how often people attend Church or a religious service. He used the data from the Romney-Obama 2012 Presidential Election.

The data showed that Obama, a Democrat, had 50% of the Catholic vote while Romney, a Republican, had 48% of the Catholic vote. Romney had much more Catholic voters who attended Mass more frequently than Catholic voters who voted for Obama.

While this data does seem to create a correlation between political parties and Church attendance, I feel that many other factors need to be brought up for NBC's audience to see a bigger picture.

First, Catholics' personal views are not mentioned. What if a majority of Catholics, who just so happened not to attend Mass frequently, felt Obama was a good choice for president in 2012? They may be Republican or bipartisan who decided to stray from their political parties for this one instance.

Also, not all Catholics vote. Not all Catholics filled out this survey. There could be thousands, maybe even millions who could impact the percentages of this survey.

The point is that there are many factors that could impact this survey that were failed to be brought up. A lack of substantial data is also missing. This is just one piece of data: the 2012 Presidential Election.

Finally, I myself don't identify with either party nor am I bipartisan. I maybe would have voted for Obama if he was pro-life. I attend Mass each week. One cannot judge what another's political party is based off Church attendance.


You'll find data tables below from the article to get a better idea of the voter numbers.

Link: http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/bigger-political-predictor-religion-how-often-you-go-church-n335306