Monday, January 27, 2014

Apprentice Scholar Insight for THurs. Jan 30th


We will be discussing personal allegiance -- With whom are you allied?

RIpped From The Headlines!  
Please to pick a current event to review with the class:  We will be using it in our discussion

This week we will be discussing the book, Freedom Factor
This week we will be reciting the Preamble - Hope all can pass off.  Here is the schoolhouse Rock version.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30OyU4O80i4

Our discussion will also include the threes species of government, republican (also called democratic), monarchical (also called autocratic)  and despotic (oligarchy). 
http://www.trschools.k12.wi.us/faculty/JPERKINS/Forms%20of%20government-%20democracy.pdf

 We will also discuss the failure of the Articles of Confederation and the need for the Constitutional formation.

Current Event Assignment

For this week's class--This THURSDAY--Yes, January 30, please come prepared to tell us about one current event.    Just the basics, Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How does it affect me.

Use one of these ideas, or select your own.

Utah's Protest at the Capitol in Defense of Marriage:  January 28th.  http://le.utah.gov/publicweb/JENKISK/PublicWeb/13256/13256.html

Snowden and industrial espionage  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/26/edward-snowden-nsa-industrial-sabotage

Justin Bieber drunk driving arrest

Son Stabs Senator father then commits suicide
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/26/politics/creigh-deeds-attack/index.html?hpt=us_t3

Egypt revolution for freedom   http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/world/2014/01/26/sayah-egypt-anniversary.cnn.html

Murder at the Mall  http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/police-id-assailant-in-columbia-mall-shooting/2014/01/26/e9cf39ec-8696-11e3-916e-e01534b1e132_story.html

French President sets aside his Girlfriend for his Mistress
 http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-01-26/what-french-presidents-affair-and-separation-say-about-love-politics-and-french

Freshman Congressman from Florida caught with Cocaine, resigns.

La Manif Pour Tous:  French Youth calling for Protests and changes for better Morals in Government
http://www.lamanifpourtous.fr/en/

Legalizing Marijuana in Colorado  

NJ Govenor Chris Christie's bridge legal woes
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/20/politics/guadagno-denies-claims/?iref=obinsite

North Korean dictator calls for the death of his uncle and his uncle's family
 http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/27/north-korea-purge-report/4933815/






Second Semester KOL Writing Prompts

Why is America different from nations in the past and why have we lasted so long?

Should we vote in men of faith and character or men of knowledge? 

What powers do you have in making new laws?
Does Congres have too much power or not enough? 
Power to declare war?  Which branch should have this power.

Have Supreme Court rulings had positive or negative effects?

If you were to make an amendment to the Constitution, what would it be? 

What would life be like without the Constitution

Does the right of free speech give persons the right to go to a public park and swear around children?

If a person is suspected of evil, should the government be allowed to search his house without him knowing?

Is it an unalienable right to intoxicate oneself?  Does the government have power to take our unalienable rights?  Explain.
____________________________________________________
Now you know and understand our Constitution, what is your part in making sure it is not trampled by power-seeking men?  

What are you Willing to Sacrifice for What You Believe?

http://ldsmag.com/article/1/13854

When Gene Schaerr agreed to be the lead outside counsel to Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes in defending the state’s marriage amendment, it was no small decision. You wouldn’t suppose that it would take courage to fight for traditional marriage, religious liberty and the consent of the governed. These are foundational pillars of our American understanding.
After all, it was only 20 years ago that a Defense of Marriage Act passed Congress by a majority vote of 85%. How times have changed.
What has been little noted is that Schaerr had to leave Winston and Strawn, his major international law firm with 17 offices across the globe, where he was chair of the Appellate and Critical Motions Practice to take the case.
Law firms, of course, are about the business of adding clients—and the state of Utah could be one of those—but instead Schaerr had to exit to take the case. On the one hand he had major, powerful and high-paying career and on the other the defense of something he believes is critical to the well-being of our society.
As journalist Ian Millhiser noted, “Simply put, lawyers do not typically resign from law firms because they take on a new client — taking on new paying clients is exactly what makes a law firm’s partners valuable to the firm.” Schaerr clearly had to make a difficult choice of maintaining his association at Winston and Strawn or defending marriage, leading Millhiser to ask “Are Anti-gay Clients Now Too Toxic for Big Law Firms?”
Winston and Strawn has been opaque about why Schaerr left, but it is easy to see some parallels with an earlier case.
Three years ago Atlanta-based law firm King & Spaulding agreed to represent the Republican-controlled House of Representatives to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, when only one week later they pulled out. The reason? Coca-Cola and other of the firm’s top clients made it clear that there would be recriminations for defending marriage. Though a Coca-Cola spokesman refused to comment on the case he did point to the company’s long-time public history of support for equality and diversity.
Other of their clients confirmed that if the firm defended marriage, they could foresee problems both internally and with customers.
When King & Spaulding pulled out of defending DOMA, former Solicitor-General Paul Clement resigned publicly to take the case.
Fred Sainz, a Human Rights Campaign spokesman, told the media , “Law firms are probably most attentive to two issues: Their clients and potential new recruits. When you start messing with either of those from a reputational perspective, that's when they stand up and take notice when there's a problem," Sainz said. "We were launching a very targeted campaign at both of those."
In other words, watch out if you are a big law firm and think to defend marriage. We will watch and you will pay. High-powered law firms in New York and Washington DC want to stay clear of defending marriage because the costs are high.
The old lawyerly ideal that every one deserves legal representation and their day in court apparently does not hold where defending traditional marriage is concerned. Oh, how the noose does tighten around the speech and choices of those who defend marriage.
In this case, however, it wasn’t just Gene Schaerr who made a tough choice. So did Winston and Strawn. They let one of their powerhouse attorneys, with sterling credentials, leave.
Publius Online said, “It’s notable that Schaerr served as law clerk to US Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren E. Burger and Justice Antonin Scalia and is regularly rated as one of the best attorneys in the country, including recognition by U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers® 2014. He was also named in Best Lawyers in America in the specialty of appellate law in 2009-2011.
He has an 80% win rate in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals and has won 75 percent of federal appeals he has argued. He has handled more than 100 cases in federal and state appellate courts and has argued many times before the Supreme Court.
Apparently, no amount of excellence can make up for the fatal flaw of supporting traditional marriage. Our hats are off to Gene Schaerr for the courage to step forward in this watershed moment in our national culture. We acknowledge that he is paying a dear price.

Thursday, January 23, 2014

Our Debate on Uniform Modesty Rules at School

Hey class, great responses on debate topics.  I think you really gave it some thought and then dared speak out.  Well done.  Below are a more samples of some arguments pro and con on one of the interesting issues.
Way to go.  Watch for the topic for next week.  You rock.  

The Modest Uniform Dress Code Debate:     

Pro,  Yes We need a code,  
Con:  No, We should not have a dress code.  
  1. Yes, because if no code, where does the line draw?  PJ’s to school?  What if you don’t wear PJ’s to bed?
  2. No, free speech.  Free expression.  I am not defined by what I wear. 
  3. Yes, because so much of our world is defined by what we wear like power suits, military uniforms.  It is a serious disadvantage to look poor trash and act poor trash. 
  4. No, because trash is in the eye of the beholder and too much is left to personal discernment and old fashioned prudery.  
  5. Yes, because the culture of society is based on founding principles of community and getting along means defining social mores and having a safe law in place. (creeps and indecent exposure.)  
  6. No, because we must trust in the goodness of basic human nature.  We get what we expect, so expect the best.   
  7. Yes, in a perfect society but we are dealing with teen infallibility and immaturity and in reality you can’t choose whether it’s that cute guy from the football team you are wowing, or the sixty-year old shop teacher.  
  8. No, because such a code insinuates that men can’t control themselves.
  9. Yes, Despite the fact that people think guys shouldn’t be normal guys, I shouldn’t have to be perpetually humming a hymn to stay focused at school. 
  10. No, I exercise my free speech and power by choosing what I wear.  We know appearance is power, one would argue all advertising is based on this concept.  So if I want to use my appearance as power, who are you to stop me. 
  11. Yes, because having no dress code would not help economics.  We need to spend for America!
  12. No, because if we want to change a culture, we must start somewhere.  We can be the voice for change if we just stop seeing bodies as sexual objectification, like being naturally naked in Africa. 
  13. Yes, Because Africa has AIDS, so we should have a modest expectation for a dress code.    
  14. No, my actions don’t dictate your actions.
  15. Yes, because we don’t live in a vacuum of perfection and everybody is a part of the circle of life. Ebbing, flowing, and (how long do I have to talk?)
  16. No, why is this such a big deal.  If you make it a big deal it will be a big deal.  Just Chill.  
  17. Yes, we need a dress code because pure science proves the natural man is built to respond to natural women, and wearing clothes that encourage normal autonomic responses is distracting.  Stop trying to stop me from being normal. 
  18. No, I think people need to be able to put forth all they have and stop pretending and concealing by hiding the real them.   And I’d love it. 
  19. Yes, the less you reveal, the more people wonder.  Don’t bare yourself and soul on fb and twitter while you are at it.  Hold something back people. 
  20. No, if science says we are so desperate to procreate, I’m just helping along the process. 
  21. Yes, despite the cultural norm of letting it all hang out, it’s time for some privacy.  We don’t need to see it all and it’s not attractive any more when you do. 
  22. No, why should I care what anyone else thinks. 
  23. Yes, Rules/Laws are created to help us all live together peaceably.   

Wednesday, January 22, 2014

The Debate Club link

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club

Get latest stats and citations for debate at this address.  Fun to review and read current event topics.

Monday, January 13, 2014

FLASH MOB PARTS

Here are your parts for the flash mob.  If you want to do more than one, just let us know.



PARENT BRUNCH

Saturday is our First Semester Award Parent Brunch 
See the LFAA Calendar 
TIME:  11:00 a.m. 
PLACE:   Sapulpa LDS Ward House Cultural Hall 

950 Pioneer Road
UNITED STATES

Don't forget THREE THINGS:



  • Send your one liner to Sis. Cummings this week:


Freedom means:


  • Lunch Pot luck signup:


  Call to tell us if you want to bring cornbread, hoppin john, rice, or bar cookies.

You choose.

BUT CALL FAST so you Don't get stuck with something you don't want to bring.


  • Flash Mob memorization   Get your part down.  This could be so awesome!!!



Be there to help set up at 10:30 please.


Thanks!

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

SECRET, SECRET! ITS A SECRET ! ! ! FLASH MOB PLAN

Flash mob at the parent brunch?  

Everyone pick one part of the Declaration of Independence that you want to memorize and recite.

JUST ONE!   EASY PEASY!


Then during the meal, we will start the flash mob and stand and recite wherever we are and it will rock!!!!

Sign up fast by calling, texting or writing in the comments, or your preferred paragraph will be claimed first.

1.     When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,
2.     a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
3.     We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—
4.     That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --
5.     That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
6.     Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;
7.     and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
8.     But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
9.     Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
10.                        In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.
11.                         A [person]  whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be [over] a free people.
12.                        Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our [sic] brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
13.                        We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
14.                        They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
15.                        We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare,
16.                        That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved;
17.                        and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.  
18.                        And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.