The ONE Campaign

The ONE Campaign is a campaign to help bring awareness to global poverty, hunger, and disease, especially AIDS/HIV. The One Campaign is not a political campaign, but a humanitarian work; we are all called to help our fellow human beings around the world to overcome such debilitating burdens. As a unity of almost 2.5 million people, we can help educate and compel our government, state, national, and world leaders to work for this good. Please, help and join the campaign of ONE to help, heal, and save our fellow people!

Join Here:

http://www.one.org/takeaction/

Facebook Causes/Organizations:

http://apps.facebook.com/causes/view_cause/53?recruiter_id=3257533

http://apps.facebook.com/causes/view_cause/47846?recruiter_id=3257533

Official ONE Description Below:

“ONE is Americans of all beliefs and every walk of life – united as ONE – to help make poverty history. We are a campaign of over 2.4 million people and growing from all 50 states and over 100 of America’s most well-known and respected non-profit, advocacy and humanitarian organizations. As ONE, we are raising public awareness about the issues of global poverty, hunger, disease and efforts to fight such problems in the world’s poorest countries. As ONE, we are asking our leaders to do more to fight the emergency of global AIDS and extreme poverty. ONE believes that allocating more of the U.S. budget toward providing basic needs like health, education, clean water and food would transform the futures and hopes of an entire generation in the world’s poorest countries.

ONE is nonpartisan; there’s only one side in the fight against global AIDS and extreme poverty. Working on the ground in communities, colleges and churches across the United States, ONE members both educate and ask America’s leaders to increase efforts to fight global AIDS and extreme poverty, from the U.S. budget and presidential elections to specific legislation on debt cancellation, increasing effective international assistance, making trade fair, and fighting corruption. Everyone can join the fight. The goal of ending poverty may seem lofty, but it is within our reach if we take action together as one. You can start now by joining the ONE Campaign and pledging your voice to the fight against extreme poverty and global AIDS.”

Fun Essay on the Right to Grow Facial Hair In School

At Bishop Brossart High School, there is a certain rule pertaining to the growth of facial hair for the male students. Many including myself feel restricted and insulted by this rule. There is a lack of fairness and reason seen behind it. I mean not to insult or suggest any infliction upon anyone. I ask only that you, Mr. Seither and the Board of Education who create the rules, would consider this plea seriously and earnestly. This rule should be changed or removed from the handbook so as to give students more freedom and equality among the faculty and school community. I wish that you do take this seriously, as much time and effort has and will continue to be put into it. Once again I inform you that this is in no way an attack or insult on anyone or the handbook. I am also very willing, encouraged, and obliged to discuss this issue with you personally. Thank you very much for your consideration of this plea.
Historically, socially, culturally, and even religiously, the beard and ability to grow facial hair has always had much importance and reason. The ability to grow facial hair has always been viewed as a sign and symbol of respect and maturity, along with many other ideas such as health, individuality, and common growth. All men should be allowed this common right and passage of adulthood.

The association of facial hair and respect is historical, religious, and cultural. Historically, facial hair has gifted many with added support and respect. Many of our most respected and successful leaders have born beards and facial hair: Colonel Burnside, the creator of the side-burns; General and President Ulysses S. Grant; and every president between Grant and President Theodore Roosevelt are but a few. For one specific President, and also one of the greatest, the beard played a very large role in his campaign. President Abraham Lincoln was told by a young girl that he couldn’t be taken seriously unless he grew out his facial hair. After this incident, he grew his famous beard, gaining him much support and respect as a more rugged, healthier, respectable-looking man. Even in the classroom the respect given to the bearded is significantly explicit. Before the Christmas break, when Mr. Shonebarger had his beard grown out, many of the students complimented him and there was a sense that students were more quiet and respectful. Students mocked Mr. Shonebarger to his face after he shaved his beard. They said that he “looks like a child” and “shouldn’t be a teacher” and also that he “looks like a student.” I was even told that I should have been sitting up there and looked more like a teacher or professor than he did. Also, juniors Tara Enzweiler and Dave Webster both told me that they too believe that people give more respect to someone with a beard or facial hair. These statements are all evidence of the sense of respect given to those with facial hair. In other cultures and religions the same associations are very relevant. In the Islamic religion and in many other Middle Eastern cultures and religions, the ability to grow facial hair is highly respected and hailed. Moqtada al-Sadr, a political and Shiite religious leader and a main U.S. ally, has been criticized by many of his elders and opponents for his inability to grow a very full and healthy beard. Those same Muslims believe this to be a significant sign of respect since their most high prophet, Muhammad, wore a beard and tells his followers to (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 72, Hadith # 780) “Do the opposite of what the pagans do. Keep the beards and cut the moustaches short.” Along with the respect for facial hair is the ever-present sense of wisdom and solidarity found and given to those behind it. “Father Time,” the respectable old figure of wisdom and sage, is always depicted with his long, white beard. As are two other great figures, the god of gods in Greek religion, Zeus, and our own Lord, God the Almighty, of all Christian denominations. Every artist’s rendition, child’s imagination, and most believers’ depictions show these important figures with great, white beards distinguishing them with the wisdom and respect that they hold. Respect is a very important trait and characteristic associated with and given to many who bear facial hair.

Along with the idea and sense of respect is the physical and psychological maturity associated with facial hair. Facial hair makes our faces healthier by restricting the oils that clog pores and cause acne. Acne causes severe anxiety and stress for many, which acts as a block toward further maturity and learning. The possession of facial hair can thus emulate maturity in thought and feeling in a person, allowing him to be more secure and to focus on the task at hand. Facial hair is also a very clear, significant, and substantial sign of true, physical maturity. “The hair of the chin showed him to be a man” (St. Clement of Alexandria, a Greek-Catholic convert and Church teacher [c.195, E]). Facial hair is a natural and important part of growth and maturity as a man. It shows that we are finally coming into our own. It is a form to show we are shedding our youthful shell and growing into the life of adulthood-as maturity is the essence and purpose of our learning and education, with all of the notes, homework, books, tests, etc. to educate us and bring us into a new, mature, adult world. “The nature of the beard contributes in an incredible degree to distinguish the maturity of bodies, or to distinguish the sex, or to contribute to the beauty of manliness and strength” (Lactantius, an early Christian leader, [c. 304-314, W]). To restrict growth is only to deny the inevitable and take a right of manhood away. “This, then, is the mark of the man, the beard. By this, he is seen to be a man. It is older than Eve. It is therefore unholy to desecrate the symbol of manhood, hairiness” (St. Clement of Alexandria). One part of the physically maturing person is the responsibility to cleanse and care for his growing symbol of maturity and manhood, his facial hair. Facial hair is a very important symbol of maturity and growth into manhood.

In a place in which we are taught and told to be individuals and encouraged to grow and mature, we are ironically suppressed and forced to conform to a few individuals’ ideals, instead of being allowed our own right of expression. This leaves us little for our own preference and expression. Growth of facial hair is truly one of the few things we as individuals have to show for our own development and individualism. One cannot stop another from growing taller or wider, so why should one be given the right to stop students from growing in a way that they are able because of their physical maturity, their individuality? To face the facts, many of us are already very close to being finished in our vertical growth, but if all we have now to show our growth and individuality is such a characteristic as facial hair, why not allow or even encourage that? One’s status does not give him the right or superiority over another to force his own preferences upon another, especially in a true, loving Christian community. Our open community of God would become but a fascist state, disallowing all that is different, where the message of Christ Jesus is to be different and to love and accept all for who and what they are. And to be different in the sense of Jesus’ message is to be loving and accepting of all, as the world around us is full of much contempt, bias, intolerance, and bitterness. We must ask ourselves, “What kind of message are we putting out there if we take Christ’s loving, accepting message and turn it against the world to control and conform all?” Not a very accepting and loving one. We are also sending mixed messages already, and they are there for all to see in the Bishop Brossart High School Handbook. Our school’s philosophy and objectives state respect, maturity, learning, and individuality as goals and virtues, yet page 18 has rules for the dress code and under grooming are these qualifications: “Hair should be properly groomed, neat, and clean.” This I see as important and understandable for the point of maturity and responsibility. “It may not be worn/colored in a distracting manner. Sideburns may be no longer than the middle of the ear. No facial hair may be worn.”

But who is to truly say that something is distracting, especially when we should not base judgments upon looks, and those things can not harm our education? Most find the loud interruptions of others to be much more distracting than the way someone looks, as that would be an insult to call anyone “distracting.” Also, if wearing sideburns or facial hair is a form of individuality, why is it restricted and disallowed to flourish? Is it not hypocrisy and a paradox to say so much about goals of individualism, growth, maturity, and respect, only to go on and completely restrict and suppress students from that growth? Individualism can take many forms, but when restricted in nearly all ways and forms, how are we to grow in those goals?

All in all, I believe that the growth of facial hair is a very important symbol of respect, individuality, and maturity, all things which are clearly relevant and present today. To rob one completely of this right and growth is feckless and can only lead to the unhappiness and loss of that responsibility, individuality, respect and maturity. I believe that our own Bishop Brossart Handbook is one of the best pieces of evidence to prove my point and to move our school into a much more accepting path. The Philosophy and Objectives of Bishop Brossart High School on page 3 states these objectives and responsibilities:

“The integration of religious truth and values with the rest of life is brought about at Bishop Brossart High School by:

-providing a distinctive, Catholic environment based on Gospel values.

-stressing love and responsibility to God, self, family, Church and world community.

-providing a structured atmosphere conducive to learning.

-advancing the level of competency.

-encouraging the exercise of self-direction, critical thinking and creativity both intellectually and morally.

-emphasizing, for faculty and students, recognition of and respect for diversity of individuals.

-providing programs that encourage the development of the entire person through intellectual, social, and athletic programs.

I believe these missions best support and describe my own in liberating our students from the restraints of conformity and allowing our maturing, respectable, and individualistic students to have the same freedoms as adults and faculty in the subject of facial hair. Facial hair is a very important and long-standing historical, social, cultural, and religious symbol of respect, maturity, and individuality. The restricting and insensitive rule should be changed or taken out from the handbook immediately to allow our students to grow and mature and receive the same respect and freedom as our faculty.

Persuasive Political Essay Against the Execution of Saddam Hussein

Saddam Hussein wears black ironed pants, an ivory white shirt, a luxurious, black topcoat, and burnished black shoes, with his hair dyed black and silver beard trimmed. He wears plastic handcuffs and his legs are tied together. After being read his sentence and speaking to a Sunni cleric, Saddam is led into a large, cold room, with the stench of death and a large gallows. The guards in black help the ex-Iraqi dictator up the stairs of the gallows. “I am not afraid, I have chosen this path,” Saddam tells a top Iraqi official. He refuses to put on a black hood over his head. “He was holding tight. He was not scared,” says Munqith al-Faroun, the prosecutor against Saddam. As Saddam approaches the floor of the gallows, he repeats his prayers a second time, despite the direct insults and antagonizing from guards and officials. The hangman asks for silence, the floor drops, and snap! The “Butcher of Baghdad” is dead.

There are many who believe the trial and execution of Saddam Hussein to be righteous, deserving, necessary, and more than fair for such a ruthless and horrifying dictator. “An important milestone,” Bush calls Saddam’s execution, that “closed a terrible chapter” for Iraq’s new government. Saddam had killed so many people, enemies and innocents. Newsweek’s “CW” jokes, “Onetime strongman gets some bad noose. No tears for the Butcher of Baghdad.” But I believe that Saddam’s execution is another grave mistake that only deters us further from our mission. Our Christian and humane morals, the skewed and messy trial and execution, and extended anger and violence caused by his death all cause me to believe that the execution of Saddam Hussein is wrong.

My own Christian, humane, and democratic morals and values cause me to believe that the execution of Saddam Hussein is wrong. Our scriptures, laws, and human nature tell us not to harm, hurt, or kill others, no matter what the circumstances. I believe firmly in this. A humanitarian group asks, “How does killing people who kill people bring peace?” The simple answer is; it does not. Christian values and morals tell us to help, save, love, and forgive one another. “Do unto others as you would have them do to you,” Jesus tells us. “For this is the Golden Rule.” Each World Religion, such as Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam, has one Golden Rule. This Golden Rule is universal through the entire world: “Love others as your self.” That means that this is not just a Christian value, but general humane value. Our God and Jesus Christ are both loving and compassionate beings that call us to bring justice and righteousness to those who hurt us, through love, teachings, and forgiveness. Referring to the old Jewish law, Jesus tells us that “You have heard, ‘love thy neighbor and hate thy enemy.’ But I say to you love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you.” We are also told, “Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not and you will not be condemned. Forgive and you will be forgiven. For with the same measure you use it will be measured back to you.” This is another teaching of Jesus Christ, who many in America declare to be their Lord and follow; but how are we following in his footsteps and guides if we allow and encourage the same immoral behavior as those we are trying to stop? How does condemning and killing Saddam Hussein for his horrendous crimes of genocide and mass murder, really solve anything; especially when Saddam has been out of power and out of the picture for the last three years? George W. Bush himself, after saying how “important” his execution is, told the same reporter that he is sad and ashamed with how it was handled and how inhumane Saddam was treated before death. Also, America declares this war to spread democracy and wants to influence and guide Iraq to be a more forward, democratic state. One of the major parts of democracy, however, is the unalienable right to life. Yet, the U.S. allows such a brutal, inhumane, and socially ancient act of murder to occur. Furthermore, the execution proves to be a huge folly in itself. All involved are called in and rushed to the location at 3:30 in the morning. Saddam is ready and accepting of his punishment, but even right before death his enemies must inveigh, flaunt, and antagonize him. Not only do the reports of this incident prove my point, but to make things much worse and apparent, the execution was taped by camera phone. Now most of the world has the capability to see this horrible sham of justice with their own eyes, only further proving my point. This immoral, inhumane, and dictatorial event proves that the execution of Saddam Hussein is just that and should not have occurred.

The handling and interferences in the trial and execution are further proof that Saddam Hussein should not have been executed. The trials were very messy and handled very unskillfully; sessions often ended in yelling and fighting from both sides. Some involved, such as attorneys and a judge, were beaten and or killed; one killed right outside the court building. There were too many skewed views and voices interfering in things as well. The Kurds are a mostly peaceful people who are part of Iraq and control all of Northern Iraq. They eventually tried to overthrow and hurt the power of Saddam Hussein. Saddam held genocide on them during his rule, killing tens of thousands of them, mostly with chemical weapons supplied by the U.S. The Sunni sect of Islam and its followers believe that the prophet Muhammad is the last sent from God. The Sunnis are the majority of the Islamic world except for in a few countries; they are minorities in Iraq. The Shia, or Shiites, is the other main sect of Islam which believes that there were twelve other prophets after Muhammad. They are also minorities in the Islamic world, except for Iraq, where they are a very poor and very large majority. After the death of Muhammad, the schism fell into an all out war. For hundreds of years they were primarily peaceful until the first Iraq war when the U.S. interfered then as well. Saddam Hussein had been a Sunni believer. The Shiites, believers of Shia, were executed, suppressed, and persecuted by Saddam and his rule. Vengeful Shiites along with the Maliki regime, which is Shiite, wanted a rushed, quick trial and execution. They did not allow Saddam to go under any other trials for his other crimes. The Kurds are upset because they wanted to keep Saddam alive so they could give him and his crimes the correct justice and damnation that they deserve. The Kurds wanted to put him on trial for his genocide of tens of thousands of Kurds in Iraq, mostly by chemical warfare; they should have been given this gesture. Many were hurt and persecuted by Saddam, but the bias of the powerful did not allow things to take their course. In the end, Saddam was sentenced to death for the killings of about 130 male Shiites, but before death, he would have to listen to his enemies chant against him and then have them flaunted for all to see with the internet. All of these interferences and the handlings of these events hold much proof that Saddam Hussein should not have been executed.

The execution of Saddam Hussein has caused much more anger, offense, and violence as well. As said, the Kurds are infuriated and frustrated that they do not get the chance to take Saddam to trial and receive justice for his genocide against them. Much deeper a wound dealt and problem now is how Sunnis see and feel Saddam’s execution to be an insult to injury. Many Sunnis interpret it to be a direct attack to them. They are only fueled with more anger towards the Maliki regime, Shiites, and U.S. Furthermore, his execution completely negates the last three years of healing. The weeks after Saddam’s execution, a spike in Sunni killings and even higher anti-American feelings became apparent. All of that due to our fatal mistake of handing Saddam Hussein over to his enemies for them to carry out their vengeance. Also adding to the Sunnis anger and hate towards the U.S. and the Shiites is the video and exploitation of Saddam’s execution, with taunts and flaunting against him right before and after death. The further anger, hate, and violence caused by Saddam’s execution are additive proof of the transgression of his murder.

The execution of Saddam Hussein is proven to be wrong and that it should not have happened. All of these reasons more than depict and support this fact. The skewed and messy trial and execution, our own Christian, democratic, and humane values, and the heightened hatred and violence caused by Saddam’s death are all perfect evidence of the injustice and malice of his execution and that he should not have been killed.