Character Analysis For Rabbit Proof Fence

free essays, literary analysis, research papers and term papers

Picarello is a Harvard-trained litigator experienced in religious liberty issues. But predicting the legal consequences of as big a change as gay marriage is a job for more than one mind. So last December, the Becket Fund brought together ten religious liberty scholars of right and left to look at the question of the impact of gay marriage on the freedom of religion. Picarello summarizes: "All the scholars we got together see a problem; they all see a conflict coming. They differ on how it should be resolved and who should win, but they all see a conflict coming."

Dreiser sister carrie analysis essay

Sister Carrie Summary and Analysis Buy From Amazon

Review from
Imagine feeling as if no one understands you and no one seems to really want you. William H. Coles explores these themes in Sister Carrie. The Broward children have just buried both of their parents, rather unexpectedly. The youngest sister is a mere 17 years old and needs someone to take care of her until she reaches 18. They all have excuses, from being busy with their own kids, to not being able to afford her care. Jessie finally decides to relent if the others will help financially.
Jessie and Carrie have very different ideas on how life should be and on what decisions Carrie should be allowed to make for herself. Carrie falls into a relationship with a man rather quickly, leading to a life of mystery and intrigue. Readers are taken on a ride where it is not always clear as to whom they should be rooting for or against. In the meantime, Jessie is lonely and tired of creeps trying to get close to her. Will she ever find happiness, either alone or with a special man?
Watching the characters develop and change over time is intriguing, as their growth is not necessarily what one would expect. Carrie and Jessie are both immature as the story begins, despite Jessie being a bit older. As Carrie experiences her new life and meets difficult challenges, she changes in ways that are not always obvious. Jessie is always down on herself, having difficulty finding happiness in life, despite the efforts of others to include her in their lives. Over time, one sees growth in the way Jessie lives her life, in a very unpredictable way.

Other resources such as literary criticism and essay ideas for Sister Carrie by Theodore Dreiser

From California
Capitol Resource Institute

The History and Danger of AB 606

[Note: Compare this California bill with the move to compel BritishColumbia schools to carry pro-homosexuality materials. See article entitled "Corren Case Moves Forward."]

AB 606 (D-Levine) was recently amended to require broad-sweeping changes toindoctrinate school children concerning homosexual, bisexuality andtranssexuality.

As amended, AB 606 would require California school districts to take specifiedactions to increase awareness and prevent incidences of discrimination andharassment based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender. It wouldalso require curriculum read by young school children to contain information onaccepting and embracing these various forms of sexuality.

If a school district fails to comply with the provisions in AB 606, the statesuperintendent has carte blanche discretion to withhold state-funding from thatschool district.

In order for you to understand exactly how disastrous AB 606 really is, you needto know a little background information.

AB 606 builds on AB 537, the California Student Safety and Violence PreventionAct of 2000 (SSVPA).

AB 537 added two new forms of discrimination (actual or perceived sexualorientation and actual or perceived gender) to the list of discriminationprohibited in California's public schools. In the spring of 2000, Superintendentof Public Instruction Delaine Eastin established the AB 537 Advisory Task Forceto identify, research, and recommend guidelines for implementing the SSVPA. Thegoal was to ensure that "AB 537 did not become another law that sat on abookshelf."

AB 606 is an effort to codify (make mandatory) some of the more outrageous AB537 Task Force recommendations.

The AB 537 Task Force recommended that resources are used to "createpositive, grade-appropriate visual images that include all sexual orientationsand gender identities for use in school common areas throughout the schoolyear."

The Task Force also recommended that public schools "acknowledge lesbian,gay, bisexual, and transgender historical figures and related events, concepts,and issues in the revisions of content standards and curriculum frameworks, whenappropriate."

Additionally, it recommended that public schools "identify and expand theavailable lesbian, gay, bisesxual, and transgender resources for school librarymaterials."

These specific goals are satisfied by AB 606.

AB 606 would repeal current provisions in the law that keep curriculum frombeing forced on school districts in order to advance SSVPA objectives. In otherwords, AB 606 would mandate that curriculum and classroom time be used to teachchildren to embrace homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality.

AB 606 would require all public schools to do what is currently being done atSan Leandro High School in the Bay Area.

At San Leandro High School, a rainbow-flag poster, with pink triangles and othersymbols of homosexual pride, and containing a pro-homosexual message, has beenordered to be posted in all classrooms. Five teachers have protested, based ontheir religious convictions. This has resulted in a standoff between theseteachers and the school administration.

Pushing homosexual indoctrination on young children is being packaged and soldin the name of "preventing violence." No one wants incidences ofviolence to occur on school campus. Violence is never acceptable on publicschool grounds. AB 606, however, goes beyond addressing violence on schoolcampus.

If the goal were simply to prevent violence, legislation could be enacted toensure that public school administrators promptly address all incidences ofviolence when they occur, regardless of what they are about.

AB 606 is not about safe schools, it's about molding and shaping the minds ofyoung children to accept various forms of sexuality regardless of what theirparents or religious beliefs tell them.

AB 606 will surely conflict with parental rights and the religious beliefs ofboth parents and students.

Theodore dreiser sister carrie analysis essay


Sister carrie hurstwood analysis essay

Tom Valentine, “Vietnam War Draft” (National Archive statistics), . For a comprehensive review of draft resistance, see Michael Steward Foley, Confronting the War Machine: Draft Resistance during the Vietnam War (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003).

New essays on sister carrie | Peer Post Fotografie

Tactic 1: Broaden the debate

Lamont's audience that day included gay and lesbian teachers, as well as an"adjustment counselor" and a school librarian.

Lamont gave them an "umbrella" talking point he said was developedwith the help of the National Education Association: "Addressing anti-LGBTharassment in schools creates safer and better schools for students."

Teachers were advised how to use that talking point to justify things such aspro-gay curricula and GLSEN's student clubs.

But one gay activist in the audience objected: Why do we have to give in to the"other side's" argument by putting the emphasis on "all"students? Why can't we just be up front about wanting to focus on gays andlesbian kids?

Lamont's response was revealing: Most students in GLSEN's 3,000 clubs areactually heterosexual, he said. And the majority of complaints regardinghomosexual-related harassment come from "straight" kids.
So, "use this tactic of broadening" to "every child," hesaid.

It's a smart strategy: Not only does it mask the fact that there aren't enoughgay students to warrant the immersion of entire student bodies in pro-gaypropaganda, but it also gives GLSEN convenient heterosexual student"allies" who put themselves in the role of defending perceived gay"victims."

How to respond:

As good as this tactic is, it's still possible for parents to counteract itby exposing it as a Trojan horse, said Caleb Price, a research analyst for Focuson the Family.

"Make it a fairness issue," he advised. "While it's true thatevery child needs a safe school, there's no need to create a special class ofcitizens who get more protection than others. Parents can point out thatapproximately 80 percent of school kids experience some form of bullying atschool -- so why not give attention to all children who need protection --including those who are overweight, wear glasses, etc."

. . . .

Even Brenda High, whose son committed suicide after being bullied, has opposedsafe-school policies that create special categories for homosexuals.

"The efforts to include definitions of classes of victims, also excludesother victims, making it more difficult to protect kids," shesaid.

Parents can also expose GLSEN's true agenda -- one of its student manuals, forexample, mentions getting homosexual themes "fully integrated intocurricula across a variety of subject areas and grade levels."

Tactic 2: Make it personal

Lamont also revealed that GLSEN put together focus groups of kids todetermine which messages resonated most powerfully.

The conclusion? Moms and dads have the most influence. After that, "themost effective tactic proved to be personalization" -- i.e., stories kidshear from their peers or other people who are personally affected byhomosexuality.

To illustrate the point, Lamont related what happened when researchers showedthe group a video featuring Judy Shepard, whose son, Matthew, was murdered in1998 in Wyoming.

"I'm glad I was behind glass, because I almost fell out of my chair,"Lamont said.

The very first comment from a focus group kid was, "How much did that[profanity referring to Judy Shepard] get paid?" Lamont remembered."Because to them it looked like a paid celebrity preaching to them."

But when researchers replaced the video with the "personalization"method, he said, "one of the kids even came out in the focus group."

"Wow, that's powerful," one teacher commented.

Which is why GLSEN is working tirelessly to get gay speakers into publicschools.

How to respond:

If your school invites a homosexual speaker, challenge the school to openthe forum to other perspectives, including ex-gays.

To find local ex-gay speakers, contact Exodus International.

There is solid legal backing for this approach: At least one federal court hasruled that school districts are illegally engaging in "viewpointdiscrimination" by excluding ex-gay and conservative perspectives whenaddressing homosexuality.

Tactic 3: Threaten lawsuits

"This is almost our trump card," Lamont told his audience."Make it a money issue."

When all else fails, he said, threaten a lawsuit. Warn schools they're"legally liable for not protecting young people."

"In all the cases brought, to date, the student either prevailed aftertrial or achieved a settlement," read a handout distributed at theworkshop.

How to respond:

But what GLSEN doesn't tell schools is that, rather than deflectinglawsuits, they may actually become more vulnerable to them by adopting policiesand curricula that single out gay and lesbian individuals, said Mike Johnson,senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a legal group based inArizona.

"Schools are better off using blanket-protection policies," he said,"that shield all students from bullying or harassment."

The dark side of sexual-orientation policies advocated by GLSEN, Johnson said,is that they often trample on the free-speech rights of students with opposingviewpoints.

"Organizations like the Alliance Defense Fund have won hundreds of freespeech cases nationwide and are willing to stand in the gap for parents,students and school officials," he said.