401 Error: Request Timed Out

Progress: Nil

A Fatal Exception Occured at: 0001IX0020:03001

Between yesterday and today, I have debated my topic internally while awaiting a response from my trusted sources. I'm also currently looking for other possible sources for me to question on my topic, so as to get the widest possible array of viewpoints concerning my issue. I know that this is not one that is very prominent in the forefront of people's minds, yet it is one to ponder while lounging around on a lazy thursday evening when I've ran out of other homework. Merely joking. At any rate, I've decided to maximize the response potential by increasing the questioned audience.

Photo Credit: http://images.google.com/url?q=http://creationontheblade.blogspot.com/2007/07/lions-tigers-ligers-and-tigons-oh-my.html&usg=AFQjCNHdGAxIXXvrBqz1QDkOFVrdXCYE4w

Awaiting User Input 7.5% Completed

I'm currently at a standstill. I have posted a question on the forum that deals with the same issues that I'm discussing in my paper, as well as found contact information of individuals that may be somewhat knowlegable in this same field. As far as the paper goes, i'm still in the research/preliminary writing stage, and until I have more specific information from the individuals in question, I can only give a broad outline of what the issues in question are.

Idea Submitted, 7% Completed

Hokay, so... As I said in my previous entry, I am debating the morality of creating genetically hybridized animals. Between last night and tonight, I've gone to a forum of which I am a member, and read some posts about this topic exactly, as well as posed my question for everyone to entertain. It is my hope that through the insight of others, interviews with experts in this field, and general other testimony from around the web that I will be able to structure an argument that will state my claim and further my cause. As far as actual progress on the essay, there's not much to speak of. As far as research purposes are concerned, we've picked up some speed.

Formatting Text: 2% Completed

Well, not much to report so far other than I've chosen my topic to argue: "Should humans be allowed to forcedly create genetically hybridized animals?"  Some initial points of debate that I'm considering touching upon is the basic morality of the creation of beings that wouldn't naturally be present in nature.  It seems to me that nature works a certain way, and we shouldn't try to modify it for reasons other than the survival of our own species.  

Possible Writing Contract Topics

There are several options that I am considering for my inquiry contract paper, and most of them center around non-human animals.

The first option I'm considering, and what is probably what I'll end up doing, is discussing the morality behind using endangered species for entertainment purposes (i.e. Tigers, African/Asian elephants in circuses, housing endangered species in parks designed for entertainment rather than research-based, etc.). I feel that having these rare animals in these situations in incredibly detrimental to their survival as a species, and every effort should be taken to provide the best conservation efforts possible in an attempt to remove them from the endangered species list, and not onto the extinction list.

Another possibility that I'm considering is the morality of intentionally created cross-breeds (a.k.a. hybrids). Animals such as the liger, zorse, and others that would not normally exist in nature are forced to come about by scientists. There is no telling how the mutations might affect certain individuals, and it may in fact be quite a painful experience.

Health. Care. (Post 27)

Mark Bonicillo makes several good arguments for why the current employer-based system of health care insurance coverage should be changed. He effectively puts a human face on the trouble that thousands if not hundreds of thousands of hard-working Americans face: the fact that some working situations do not lend themselves to proper health care coverage. His suggestion that the responsibility of providing health care coverage be taken off the employer and placed onto the employee would lend itself to a greater generalized coverage that would be more available to the lower-end workers. More importantly, this system would work with our current free-enterprise system of commerce. Subsidies and replaced payment for workers in an effort to encourage the purchase of health care insurance would make universal coverage a more attainable reality.

Slight problem. How can one be sure that with this extra money, people will actually go and buy health care with it? Who's to say that they won't just go and "self-medicate?" As it stands, there are people working several jobs that allows them just enough money to be broke. If you give these people more money with the intention of self-provided healthcare, they may decide to use these new found funds elsewhere and really end up screwing themselves over once it comes time to go visit the doctor.

Mainstream vs. ? (Post 26)

"Mainstream is a Myth."

The main reason that the term "mainstream" can be classified as mythical is in large part due to its dynamic implications. The term "mainstream" refers to what is fashionable and/or acceptable at a certain point in time. However, this notion is constantly changing, and as such the idea of something being "mainstream" changes with it. Moreover, who is to say what exactly is widely acceptable, especially considering the infinite array of viewpoints that may exist over any given topic? The answer is not a simple one, and may vary depending on the region that one may live in. Therefore, it is pure speculation that may lead to the localized definition of what mainstream really is.





Photo Credit: http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/cwl/lowres/cwln198l.jpg