Filed under: books and articles | Tags: cannabis, drug war, Hillary Clinton, legalize, marijuana, Nancy Regean, war on drugs
i’m writing a paper (its on the rabbinic interpretation of Psalm 81:1-6 as presented by James L. Kugel in his essay, “Two Introductions to Midrash.” that means i’m smart.), and my friend Justin is studying for a criminal justice final, and this is what he just read to me:
There is no evidence that marijuana is physically addictive or necessarily leads to the use of harder drugs (Nadlemann, 1997; see also Zimmer & Morgan, 1995). Furthermore, the legalization of marijuana would lead to the separation of the cannabis and hard drug markets so that, in the course of buying marijuana, people would not gain access to harder drugs. Finally, legalizing marijuana would reduce the prison, jail, and probation populations and decrease law enforcement costs considerably.
Like, Duh with a capital D.
Source: The Politics of Injustice: Crime and Punishment in America, 2nd ed., by Katherine Beckett and Theodore Sasson. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2004. 193.
Filed under: books and articles, quizzes, religion | Tags: quizzes, religious literacy, religious studies
A quiz by Stephen Prothero
Christian Century, 00095281, 9/4/2007, Vol. 124, Issue 1
- Name the four Gospels. List as many as you can.
- Name a sacred text of Hinduism.
- What is the name of the holy book of Islam?
- Where, according to the Bible, was Jesus born?
- President George W. Bush spoke in his first inaugural address of the Jericho road. What Bible story was he invoking?
- What are the first five books of the Hebrew Bible or the Christian Old Testament?
- What is the Golden Rule?
- “God helps those who help themselves”: Is this in the Bible? If so, where?
- “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of God”: Does this appear in the Bible? If so, where?
- Name the Ten Commandments. List as many as you can.
- Name the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism.
- What are the seven sacraments of Catholicism? List as many as you can.
- The First Amendment says two things about religion, each in its own clause. What are the two religion clauses of the First Amendment?
- What is Ramadan? In what religion is it celebrated?
- Match the Bible characters with the stories in which they appear. Draw a line from one to the other. Hint: Some characters may be matched with more than one story or vice versa.
Adam and Eve Exodus Paul Binding of Isaac Moses Olive Branch Noah Garden of Eden Jesus Parting of the Red Sea Abraham Road to Damascus Serpent Garden of Gethsemane
Copyright of Christian Century is the property of Christian Century Foundation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Filed under: books and articles, religion | Tags: plualism, religious studies
By Timothy Renick
Christian Century, 00095281, 9/4/2007, Vol. 124, Issue 18
ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, my job got a lot easier. I had been toiling for 15 years to establish a department of religious studies at my university. Its strongly secular faculty, sensitive to political winds in a southern, conservative state, feared that such a program would inevitably be dominated by evangelical Christians. State legislators, suspicious as always of college professors, feared that religious studies in a university set ting would mean state-sponsored attacks on Christian belief. The university resident had nightmares about headlines in the local paper. Besides, the university had more pressing needs. Religious studies seemed either a luxury or a potential headache–something the university couldn’t afford or didn’t need.
Until September 11, that is. The dialogue about religious literacy changed that day. It was not merely that my arguments extolling the importance of students understanding world religions no longer fell on deaf ears; the arguments began to be made by others. The university president mentioned our efforts in religious studies in his standard stump speech to state legislators. The press began to call the university in search of expert opinions on religious sects and practices. Our Islam scholar began to appear on CNN. A major donor decided to endow a faculty chair–not in Christianity but in world religions. By 2005, the university not only had created an undergraduate department of religious studies; it had added a master’s program as well.
In a world shaped not merely by 9/11 but by conflict in Iraq, Bosnia, Kashmir and the West Bank–not merely by abortion but by gay marriage, intelligent design, euthanasia and stem cells–Americans increasingly accept the idea that we need to understand religion better. What we haven’t quite figured out is where and how this should happen.
Two important new books target the challenges posed by the so-called new religious pluralism, exploring ways in which religious diversity is shaping public life. Stephen Prothero makes a case for teaching about religion in public schools. Thomas Banchoff offers 15 essays by leading scholars that examine the complex contours of religion in the public setting. Both books suggest that Americans have not paid enough attention to how religious diversity has altered the dynamics of public life and the demands of citizenship.
Filed under: books and articles
This book has officially destroyed my confidence in reality. Totally obliterated. Instead of being a badass combo of sensation and intellect, now I’m just a little memory-cupcake being scarfed down by Heinlein’s suma wrestler-sized imagination. Outer space scares the shit out of me. I’m going to go play some Britney Spears records and make pictures with my Lite-Brite.
Filed under: books and articles
301.08 Potential Conflict Of Interest In Amorous Relationships
[Added 14 April 1997]
Introduction
People in positions of authority within the university community need to be sensitive to the potential for sexual harassment (see Section 206.03 of the Faculty Handbook, Section 6-1 in the Classified Employee Handbook, and p. 18 of the GSU General Catalog for the Sexual Harassment Policy of the university) as well as conflict of interest in amorous relationships with people over whom they have a professional power/status advantage. The individual in authority bears the primary responsibility for any negative consequences resulting from an amorous relationship. It is in the interest of the university to provide clear direction and educational opportunities to the university community about potential professional risks associated with consensual amorous relationships between members of the university community where a power/status advantage exists.
Status/Power Advantages
Faculty Advantage. A faculty member always will be treated as having a power and status advantage when that faculty member has authority to assign grades; serves on thesis, dissertation, or scholarship awards committees; provides research and/or training opportunities, etc. Status and power advantages also can occur between junior and senior faculty and faculty and administrators.
Staff Advantage. A staff member will always be treated as having a power advantage
when the staff member has the authority to evaluate, determine salary, and/or make
employment decisions.
Professional Risks
Conflict of interest. Relationships that the parties involved view as mutual and consensual may be viewed by others as exploitative and may adversely affect the work environment in that serious conflicts of interests may be perceived to exist. In particular, the parties to an amorous relationship should be aware that such relationships often create general conflicts of interest and the fear from co workers or other students of unfair treatment in terms of promotions, grades, etc. Individuals entering into amorous relationships where power/status advantages exist must recognize that: the reasons for entering, maintaining, or terminating such a relationship may be a function of the power/status advantage; it often is the case that the individual with power or status advantage in the relationship will be held responsible if the relationship ends and sexual harassment is claimed. It is almost always the case that the individual with power or status advantage in the relationship will bear the accountability. Any university employee who enters into an amorous relationship with a student or subordinate employee where a power/status advantage exits must realize that, if a charge of sexual harassment is subsequently lodged, the fundamentally asymmetric nature of the relationship will make it exceedingly difficult to prove mutual consent. A defense based on mutual consent under such circumstances has not been well received in national litigation.
Therefore, Georgia State University strongly discourages such relationships.
(Source: Approved by Senate Faculty Affairs Committee, 14 April 1997)
And to me, all this legal jargon translates into: go for it.
