The article Life after Death written by Steven Paulina’s is pretty self explanatory. He opens the article with a simple but complex question, “Do you believe in life after death”? Pavlinas line of attack is unique for the simple fact that instead of taking the usual spiritual approach. Pavlina tries the scientific approach, stating that “Too often I find that the subject of death is addressed with goofy speculation, closed minded stubborness, or outright fear and avoidance”. He first realizes that you cannot live an effective life if you don’t know what happens when you die .He argues that you might be wasting your time engaging in activities that will only benefit you for the moment, when you could be preparing for eternity or the lack of. In which case you should live every day like it’s your last and gets everything you can out every moment.  He goes about this by first stating some obvious observations such as you can’t take anything with you when you die, your body doesn’t vanish or disappear and that since all the physical stuff stays here that all we’ve learned in the modern, how to text or e-mail someone won’t be of much use. He breaks it down to two scenarios. After we die we retain some part of our consciousness, but all the physical parts of our existence are lost. Or after we die we cease to exist. Our consciousness gets wiped out along with the physical. But he in fact goes on and on about the same thing consciousness or oblivion and he came to the conclusion that it all depends on what you believe.

What I got from this article or paper was nothing what I was looking for. Pavlina says that “Too often I find that the subject of death is addressed with goofy speculation, closed minded stubbornness, or outright fear and avoidance”. But his paper is indeed another example of just that he dose nothing but chase his own tail the whole paper for example,” This uncertainty about death presents a serious problem though. In order to live my life in a manner I feel is intelligent, I’d really prefer a clear answer here. If I know that option 1 is correct, I’m going to live my life very differently than if I know option 2 is correct. I can’t do both at the same time because they seem incompatible. I’d set different goals on one side vs. the other.” He says this over and over rewording it of course, but the same thing none the less. Only to end the paper by saying it all depends on what you believe. It took him seven pages to state what I just said in one sentence.

The Myth by Kevin J. Seamus Hasson is an essay about the myth of religious liberty in America

 He posses the simple question how do you live with people when you disagree with them about what life means in the first place. Breaking down the myth that the pilgrims fled England because of religious persecution but in fact they weren’t in England but in Holland and fled because their youth where being influenced by the culture and where looking for a place where they could be left alone to govern a pure and righteous people free from impurity. And that as long as there are competing religions there will never really be a true form religious freedom so we need to reform our government and way of thinking to religious expression even from competing religions.

In short I agree with what Hasson has said but he has turned the essay into more of a history lesson than an examination or critique on religious freedom in America he reaches to far back to discuss events that are currently happening all around us. True the founding fathers of this great country in some part where very hypocritical but such as human nature to try and sway others to what you find as truth as Hasson also states in his essay

“A Modest Proposal”,an essay by Bruce Chapman written as an answer or an counter to Pinkers “Why they kill their Newborns”. In chapmans essay he basiclly says the Pinker is giving the girls an excuse or trying to take human or moral factor out of the problem by using scientific words to say what it real is the murder of an inocent infant.

On this siotuation I under stand what Pinker is getting at by saying that the mental state of the teenagers isn’t developed enough to deal with the situation but then again I plenty of young parnts that have children and yeah it’s hard but they didn’t murder their child and I understand Chapmans take to Pinker I can see how he would think that pinker was trying to dehumanize the act or mack it more exceptable  or under standable murder is murder no matter if you use a big scientific word to call it it’s still murder and like it or not you have to face the consequences.

and if not my sorrow some one elses sorrow, for example I DJ every friday night but every friday as i’m walking in I see kids in cars sleep while there parentts are in club having a good time if I call the cops the parent has grieve cause she mighht get them taken child has grief cause now there in foster care 

Stop what your doing, stop the drinking/

the cursing and the lusting/

You are are all in danger of hell firer/

If christ parted the sky right now do you know, where  you would go/

If you died right now do you know where you would spend the rest of eternity/

And if your thinking cause your a good person the answer is heaven then the answer is no!

Listen you hear the trumpet!/

Look!/

Look up in the sky I told you so!/

Man look at all the saints get caught up/

hold up where is he going! I know he aint leaven a wait a minute you forgot me JESUS!

Is it me? the hyprocrite that they show on T.V./

I mean sure I have my own private demons, but I only curse when I get mad

Lust I’m only a man

I dont smoke or gamble I just bye lotto tickets and newports to support my local corner store/

But I go to church & read my Bible all the time I guess my night life was to active/

Man all that reading and I still got left behind but the good thing is this is only a poem Please dont make this your life story.

I wrote this as sort of a rebuke for myself and and to let others as well as my self it’s not enough to look holy or look saved but you have to be holy.

p.s. when i said nightlife i was refering to things that you may do that no one else  knows of that is wrong or sinful or shameful that may be in the day or night, pretty much any secret sin…  

I knew something was wrong everybody else was packing but my mother was seating in the recliner with her eye’s closed   I taped her, to wake her up when slowly opened her eye’s  and gave me a weak smile of recognition. And at that moment I knew that she was dying all the joy and excitement about moving left and now I was in a panic. I said a silent prayer to God to let her live. The next day I came home and she was gone I thought o.k. maybe she’s at work 6pm,8pm still a no show 10pm my stepfather came home with the news that my mom was in the hospital.The next day we went to see her she said that the doctors didn’t know what she had but she had a drem that she was on a train and everybody on the train had a dirty gray complection and they where straped down as the train kept traveling the train became sarounded by flames and she could smell sulfer and hear screaming she said she realized she was on her way to hell a man in white came to her and told her it wasn’t her time when she came to the nurses and doctors where about to put down the time of her death. She died that night, thank god for a little prayer 

In The red corner wearing black and red trunks with pink tassels Steve Almondcoutner attacks for all americans with his article”The Bloom Is Off The Mark”.Almond stays on the attack with a few names and sarcastic remarks of his own. And he stays on the attack by defending some of the novelist that bloom attacks and throws in some of his own writers whom he thinks are worthy of recognition. But wait in a stuning turn of events Almond stops the onslaught and hugs Bloom agreeing with some of the statements he said about the decline of american literature and that they could’ve choosen a better person to give the “distinguished contribution”award to someone more deserving but hope is not lost Almond comes back to say that Blooms rants and raves are missed placed and that he should be talking about “the true opponents of creative enlightenment  A short list would include: the deification of consumerism, the decline in funding for public education, the economic inequality that has become the hallmark of late–model capitalism. This culture discourages creativity, and deep thought, because such actions are not profitable”.

The winner of tonight’s bout by unanimous decision  is Almond.Almonds approch is better yes he dosent agree with every thing that going on in literature. He looks at the brighter side of things Bloom on the other hand just bashes everyone except for his favorites.