Prompt: Who are you?
My name is Virginia Marie Darsey, but I have went by Ginny since the day I was born. I was born on Febuary 17, 1989 in Warner Robins, GA, and lived with my mom and dad in Gray, GA until the summer of 1991, when my parents divorced. Six months later my mom had my little brother Paul. About a year and a half later, my mom remarried to the man, B illy, who is my dad today. Although many do not understand how someone could call their step-father "Dad," I always explain that blood is not what makes the dad, its who cares and provides and loves you the most. My mom and Billy then contined to have two more boys, Chris and Jacob.
Until my sixth grade year, I went to Union Elementary school in Macon, GA. Honestly, I would have to admit, elementary school was the best part of life. I learned at a very early age that I have a passion for teaching children, and knew from the time I was about 10 that I wanted to be a teacher. My sixth grade year, my parents moved us to a small little place called Crawford County, which is about twenty miles west of Macon. I was enrolled in Crawford County Middle School, and continued from there to Crawford County High School. In 2007, I graduated, seventh in my class, with high honors, and a yearning to get out in the world and show what I could do. I was ready for the future!
My life now will always have its ups and downs, and it really is like a roller coaster. I always know that even when I am at the bottom of the hill, I am still moving upward to reach the peak, and show everyone that I can do anything I put my mind too. I have always been very stubborn, and after growing up in a family with three boys, I learned quick, if I wanted to do something, I had to do it,and not let anything stand in my way, and be proud of my accomplishment.
Presently I am working at GEICO, as an emergency road service dispatcher. Often it can be a tough job, but a good challenge never made me back down before. The one thing that is necessary to remember while I am working is to not take anything to personal. Although it is a very hard thing to do, I just always remind myself, they are not mad at me, they are mad at their situation. GEICO has a very promising career for me, but I am not sure this is what I want for my life. The idea of teaching young children will always be in the back of my mind, almost like the teaser to remind me that I can do what I want, I just have to takc the first step.
Being a full-time student and full-time employee can have its advantages and its disadvantages. Although it it a lot to handle at some times, I know I just have to stick it out and I will make it. I have always been determined to go to college, and be the first person in my family to have a college degree. I have no plans of detouring from this goal. I will be the first person in my family to receive a degree from college, and I plan to do it well.
I have never enjoyed writing about myself, because I always feel like I am laying myself out on the chopping block for everyone to see the real me. After a person has accustomed themself to have so many layers to keep others out, it is hard to just let them all fall down and let anyone in. After my parents divorse, my "biological father" left my brother and I in the caring hands of my mother. When my dad left I was never really sure why, until now. Being scared in this world is never the best option to take, because you may miss out on the best parts of life. My Dad missed out on watching his two children grow up, because he was scared he did not know how to be a father, and honestly it was the best thing he ever did for me or my brother. It allowed for us to grow into our own person, and to establish our selves in a way that no one can ever change. I will always be stubborn, and the ache I have to learn more will always be there. All I have to learn how to do now is take away a couple more of my layers.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
I'll Do Anything for Love...
Prompt: The Alligator River Story
People often do out of the ordinary things for love with the best intentions. "The Alligator River Story" is a good example of how an event with the best intentions can go so terribly wrong. Although I do not agree with the actions that take place, I can see how the characters of the story may have felt. To rate the characters, I opened up my mind, and considered each one's other options.
I rated Slug, Abigal's friend a one because he was the only one that I could reach out to on some level. Slug's actions were based on seeing his friend in pain and agony, and simply reacted on compassion and heartache. Although it does not make his actions right in any kind of way, he had passionate reasons for why he did beat Gregory.
Gregory would be rated a two. Although is actions do speak louder than words, and he should have still loved Abigal after she allowed another man to do those things to her, he should have been allowed the choice of whether he still wanted Abigal after her stay with Captain Sinbad, without having severe consequences.
Abigal is rated a three. Abigal had other options besides sleeping with Sinbad. Although it would have been inconvenient, she could have drove the 50 miles to the bridge every day, if she truly felt that she was being violated by Sinbad. Also, laughing at a man's pain is never respectable in my book, no matter what the circumstance is.
Ivan is rated a four. I will never respect turning a friend away when they are in a time of need, especially if there is something you could do to help them. Ivan could have stopped the story, and stopped Abigal and Gregory's relationship from falling apart if he would have simply helped his friend.
Sinbad, the sex-driven boat captain, would be rated a five, because I see him as a despicable man. Although many of the other characters had many flaws, this man could have easily stopped the path that the story went down by taking her over the river, without such horrifying stipulations. Sinbad truly deserves no respect, and he certanly do not get any from me.
People often do out of the ordinary things for love with the best intentions. "The Alligator River Story" is a good example of how an event with the best intentions can go so terribly wrong. Although I do not agree with the actions that take place, I can see how the characters of the story may have felt. To rate the characters, I opened up my mind, and considered each one's other options.
I rated Slug, Abigal's friend a one because he was the only one that I could reach out to on some level. Slug's actions were based on seeing his friend in pain and agony, and simply reacted on compassion and heartache. Although it does not make his actions right in any kind of way, he had passionate reasons for why he did beat Gregory.
Gregory would be rated a two. Although is actions do speak louder than words, and he should have still loved Abigal after she allowed another man to do those things to her, he should have been allowed the choice of whether he still wanted Abigal after her stay with Captain Sinbad, without having severe consequences.
Abigal is rated a three. Abigal had other options besides sleeping with Sinbad. Although it would have been inconvenient, she could have drove the 50 miles to the bridge every day, if she truly felt that she was being violated by Sinbad. Also, laughing at a man's pain is never respectable in my book, no matter what the circumstance is.
Ivan is rated a four. I will never respect turning a friend away when they are in a time of need, especially if there is something you could do to help them. Ivan could have stopped the story, and stopped Abigal and Gregory's relationship from falling apart if he would have simply helped his friend.
Sinbad, the sex-driven boat captain, would be rated a five, because I see him as a despicable man. Although many of the other characters had many flaws, this man could have easily stopped the path that the story went down by taking her over the river, without such horrifying stipulations. Sinbad truly deserves no respect, and he certanly do not get any from me.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Yes, I Believe...
Prompt: Metaphysical Assumptions
In a world with many different cultures and beliefs, it is hard to state the exact reality of nature. However, metaphysics allows you to look inside your self and take a look at you surroundings, and come to terms with what your belief is. Where you are raised and how you are raised has a lot to do with how you look at the world around you. Since I was raised in the Georgia, one of the states that makes up the "Bible Belt" of America, I grew up in a Christian family, being taught from an early age that God was God, and there is and never will be anyone like him. However, I am also aware that there are so many other beliefs out on the earth, that believe just as fiercely and consistently as I do. Regardless of this, each person is entitled to their own image of what this earth truly is.
As a Christian I believe that one God created man and woman with the intention of making each and every woman after that in a unique way. Each person is different, however still conforming to the image of God set forth hundreds of years ago, when God spoke, and there was light. I also believe that God created everyone equally, with one person not having more importance over another. Each person, regardless of race, gender, or religion is equal. I also believe that yes there are spiritual bodies out there, who watch our every move: bodies such as angels, demons, and Satan. As well, I see that there is pain in the world, but one day there will be a second coming of Christ, and we will all be sent to deal with our fate.
Although my beliefs may sounds like I am ranting or preaching, I am not. I think that just as God gave us our ability to make choices, each person should have the opportunity to make that choice. Hurdles and problems will be sometimes be in the way, but we must never give up. The journey to our self truth is what makes us human: we do not simply comply with nature, we wish to find out why it is, what it is and how it is. These hurdles will help you find your own answers.
In a world with many different cultures and beliefs, it is hard to state the exact reality of nature. However, metaphysics allows you to look inside your self and take a look at you surroundings, and come to terms with what your belief is. Where you are raised and how you are raised has a lot to do with how you look at the world around you. Since I was raised in the Georgia, one of the states that makes up the "Bible Belt" of America, I grew up in a Christian family, being taught from an early age that God was God, and there is and never will be anyone like him. However, I am also aware that there are so many other beliefs out on the earth, that believe just as fiercely and consistently as I do. Regardless of this, each person is entitled to their own image of what this earth truly is.
As a Christian I believe that one God created man and woman with the intention of making each and every woman after that in a unique way. Each person is different, however still conforming to the image of God set forth hundreds of years ago, when God spoke, and there was light. I also believe that God created everyone equally, with one person not having more importance over another. Each person, regardless of race, gender, or religion is equal. I also believe that yes there are spiritual bodies out there, who watch our every move: bodies such as angels, demons, and Satan. As well, I see that there is pain in the world, but one day there will be a second coming of Christ, and we will all be sent to deal with our fate.
Although my beliefs may sounds like I am ranting or preaching, I am not. I think that just as God gave us our ability to make choices, each person should have the opportunity to make that choice. Hurdles and problems will be sometimes be in the way, but we must never give up. The journey to our self truth is what makes us human: we do not simply comply with nature, we wish to find out why it is, what it is and how it is. These hurdles will help you find your own answers.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Is Bush truly capable of World Domination?
Prompt: America as an Empire?
In Why Are We At War?, Norman Mailer makes some valid points on why he believes that Bush, and his board of advisors, are trying to create a global empire. Although I do agree that Bush may want this for himself, I do not believe this is his core reason for going to war with Iraq. Even though I have not always been in to politics, I have noticed that Bush seems to be like a puppet, and he is controlled by someone in the background. An example of this would be Bush's speeches. Mailer himself states that Bush does not have the best rhetoric and speeching making abilities, but he brings up Bush's use of the word "evil." Do you honestly think that someone who has a hard time even writing or reading the speeches would have the ability to perceive that the word "evil" is like a narcotic to the American people? No!
Besides, if Bush or his board of directors who have been working with presidents for an underestimating amount of years truly wanted a global empire, don't you think they would have achieved by now? I honestly can tell you that I feel this is not Bush's goal, and that he truly did go to Iraq and in to this war for the reputation of America and to find the people who intentionally attempted to bring America down to her knees. Yes, Bush may want to gain unlimited power over the oil in the Mid-East, or he may even want to be able to control the Iraqis for a short time, but I do not think that he is able to create a global empire, if for anything, the simple fact that today, in the twenty-first century, not too many companies would allow themselves to simply be taken over. If that were to ever happen, Bush would be stopped just as Hitler was in World War II, and the leader of Korea was in the Korean War. We, as a group of patriotic Americans, must believe that we have a leader we can trust, and that he will continue to do what is best for the people he is leading.
In Why Are We At War?, Norman Mailer makes some valid points on why he believes that Bush, and his board of advisors, are trying to create a global empire. Although I do agree that Bush may want this for himself, I do not believe this is his core reason for going to war with Iraq. Even though I have not always been in to politics, I have noticed that Bush seems to be like a puppet, and he is controlled by someone in the background. An example of this would be Bush's speeches. Mailer himself states that Bush does not have the best rhetoric and speeching making abilities, but he brings up Bush's use of the word "evil." Do you honestly think that someone who has a hard time even writing or reading the speeches would have the ability to perceive that the word "evil" is like a narcotic to the American people? No!
Besides, if Bush or his board of directors who have been working with presidents for an underestimating amount of years truly wanted a global empire, don't you think they would have achieved by now? I honestly can tell you that I feel this is not Bush's goal, and that he truly did go to Iraq and in to this war for the reputation of America and to find the people who intentionally attempted to bring America down to her knees. Yes, Bush may want to gain unlimited power over the oil in the Mid-East, or he may even want to be able to control the Iraqis for a short time, but I do not think that he is able to create a global empire, if for anything, the simple fact that today, in the twenty-first century, not too many companies would allow themselves to simply be taken over. If that were to ever happen, Bush would be stopped just as Hitler was in World War II, and the leader of Korea was in the Korean War. We, as a group of patriotic Americans, must believe that we have a leader we can trust, and that he will continue to do what is best for the people he is leading.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Can I really blame him... I don't think so!
Prompt: Why Are We At War?
Through out Why are We at War?, Norman Mailer states some very clearly organized and well written ideas, going from Bush, the mastermind who wants America to be the Rome of the twenty-first century to the simple need for the Middle East's oil supply. As I read Mailer's ideas, I realised that I actually agreed with his ideas, although in a different way.
For instance, Mailer states that Bush wants to make America a global empire. He states that Bush wants America to be like Rome, with the Iraqis as our Greek slaves. My response? Name one person who has ever been president who did not want the United States of America to be recognized as a world power, and hopefully a global empire. Bush is not the first man to become president and do something crazy to try to gain more power. Is power not the reason that people become president, or a high-up official? I can not blame Bush for wanting these things, because these same accusations would be thrown at any other person in office.
Mailer also states that the U.S. troops are in Iraq so that America can obtain the oil supply there. According to the statistics Mailer uses in his book, Iraq alone controls 11% of the world's oil supply, with only Saudi Arabia ahead of them. Mailer goes on to state that America uses19.5 million barrels of oil per day, or almost 26% of the world's supply. Can you honestly blame Bush for having this as one of his incentives to go to Iraq? And, I do not want to hear any complaints out of anyone who drives a vehicle that requires gasoline. What would you do with out it?
One other reason that Mailer mentions is the need for revenge on Iraq for the damage done on 9/11. This one I know no one can argue, for we all have this mind set: THEY MUST PAY. Or, at least, we did. What we, as Americans, need to realize is, Bush is doing what we all pushed him to do 6 years ago, after that dreadful day when so many American lives were lost. Would it have caused any less stress for him if he had ignored the calls for war, and had not done anything? Would he still be as unpopular as he is today in America's society. Yeah....that's what I thought too.
Through out Why are We at War?, Norman Mailer states some very clearly organized and well written ideas, going from Bush, the mastermind who wants America to be the Rome of the twenty-first century to the simple need for the Middle East's oil supply. As I read Mailer's ideas, I realised that I actually agreed with his ideas, although in a different way.
For instance, Mailer states that Bush wants to make America a global empire. He states that Bush wants America to be like Rome, with the Iraqis as our Greek slaves. My response? Name one person who has ever been president who did not want the United States of America to be recognized as a world power, and hopefully a global empire. Bush is not the first man to become president and do something crazy to try to gain more power. Is power not the reason that people become president, or a high-up official? I can not blame Bush for wanting these things, because these same accusations would be thrown at any other person in office.
Mailer also states that the U.S. troops are in Iraq so that America can obtain the oil supply there. According to the statistics Mailer uses in his book, Iraq alone controls 11% of the world's oil supply, with only Saudi Arabia ahead of them. Mailer goes on to state that America uses19.5 million barrels of oil per day, or almost 26% of the world's supply. Can you honestly blame Bush for having this as one of his incentives to go to Iraq? And, I do not want to hear any complaints out of anyone who drives a vehicle that requires gasoline. What would you do with out it?
One other reason that Mailer mentions is the need for revenge on Iraq for the damage done on 9/11. This one I know no one can argue, for we all have this mind set: THEY MUST PAY. Or, at least, we did. What we, as Americans, need to realize is, Bush is doing what we all pushed him to do 6 years ago, after that dreadful day when so many American lives were lost. Would it have caused any less stress for him if he had ignored the calls for war, and had not done anything? Would he still be as unpopular as he is today in America's society. Yeah....that's what I thought too.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Of course I'm your side... if thats what everyone else wants too
Prompt: Human Rights v. Majority Rule
Life sometimes seems to throw situations at you that, in the end, will have an outcome that will affect more than just yourself. In some cases, it could affect the generations after you, or it could affect the generations here now. To make a decision that will affect anyone besides your self is often a difficult decision to make, but each and everyone must be made. In today's society, you have to decide whether you will follow the rights you believe should be given to everyone, or if you will follow the ways of others around you.
For this prompt, it brings up the topic of whether society would want a homosexual person teaching in an elementary school, and influencing our children. In all honesty, because of the way I was brought up, my answer to this question would be NO. However, after considering the question I realized how hypocritical this sounds. How is it my right to tell someone that they can not work with children because they have a different preference than I do? To tell a homosexual man or woman that they can not work with kids because they chose to be different is rediculous. Yes, I agree that there are certain people on the Earth that have done some very terrible things to lose their privelages to their human rights, such as rape, murder, and other crimes. Men and women who do not think the same way that the "majority" does should not trialed and condemned as a criminal. They are people as well.
However much I would love to say that I would automatically sway towards my own opinion on human rights, I am aware enough to realize that I would most likely go with the majority opinion ninety-nine percent of the time. Many people often go the path their peers have set before them, no matter how deadly or dangerous it may appear, and only because we would rather appear ignorant than to appear different and go our own way. I believe this is why our society in America is the way it is today. We should not condemn people for being different and we should not follow the opinion of others, and state it as our own. More often than not, that opinion usually causes a problem for us anyway.
Life sometimes seems to throw situations at you that, in the end, will have an outcome that will affect more than just yourself. In some cases, it could affect the generations after you, or it could affect the generations here now. To make a decision that will affect anyone besides your self is often a difficult decision to make, but each and everyone must be made. In today's society, you have to decide whether you will follow the rights you believe should be given to everyone, or if you will follow the ways of others around you.
For this prompt, it brings up the topic of whether society would want a homosexual person teaching in an elementary school, and influencing our children. In all honesty, because of the way I was brought up, my answer to this question would be NO. However, after considering the question I realized how hypocritical this sounds. How is it my right to tell someone that they can not work with children because they have a different preference than I do? To tell a homosexual man or woman that they can not work with kids because they chose to be different is rediculous. Yes, I agree that there are certain people on the Earth that have done some very terrible things to lose their privelages to their human rights, such as rape, murder, and other crimes. Men and women who do not think the same way that the "majority" does should not trialed and condemned as a criminal. They are people as well.
However much I would love to say that I would automatically sway towards my own opinion on human rights, I am aware enough to realize that I would most likely go with the majority opinion ninety-nine percent of the time. Many people often go the path their peers have set before them, no matter how deadly or dangerous it may appear, and only because we would rather appear ignorant than to appear different and go our own way. I believe this is why our society in America is the way it is today. We should not condemn people for being different and we should not follow the opinion of others, and state it as our own. More often than not, that opinion usually causes a problem for us anyway.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Give us what we want, and no one, well maybe no one, will get hurt
Prompt: Hijack!
Honestly, this question is probably one of the hardest so far to answer. Since September 11, 2001, The United States' foreign policies, especially towards those nationswho had an connection at all terrorist group responsible for the massacre, has tightened and become much more strict. In the case that another plane was hijacked and the terrorists had some form of ransom that they would accept for the release of the hostages, I think there would be several things to consider. I would first consider what the loss would be if the demands were not met. I know this would be a very hard thing to decide, because every human life is worth the same. I then would have to think about what the costs would be if we were to let the criminals go free. Would more people die as a result? Would the terrorists on the plane truly let the hostages go, alive?
These questions would be very difficut to answer, and I think in the end the answer would come out the same. I would love to give in to the terrorists demands, and say that we, as a nation, will turn the criminals over to the terrorists, and that everything would be great from there. However, what is the actual probability of these terrorists, men who care nothing of their own life, or other people's lifes, and who would die for such a cause, would let these people go alive. What happens if I let the criminals go, the terrorists still blow up the plane, and now, there are more terrorists in the world to be worried about, and those people still died. I know that if it were my family member or my friend on the plane, I would want someone to turn over the criminals and pray that they made it off the plane alive. But, looking at it from a third party standpoint, I feel that more lifes would be saved if the criminals were kept in jail, and an alternate way of catching the terrorists was found. I would not release the criminals from jail, and would have to deal with any fallback that came afterwards.
I know that many believe that the terrorism situation the United States is currently in is completely what ever president's fault. However, I feel that if we, as citizens, would like to place the blame on someone, we must also include our selves, because at one point we were all glad that the president at the time was taking action over those "foreigners." Yes, we all feel bad now, and yes, we know that they are simply not "foreigners," but people who need a country to provide protection and safety.
Honestly, this question is probably one of the hardest so far to answer. Since September 11, 2001, The United States' foreign policies, especially towards those nationswho had an connection at all terrorist group responsible for the massacre, has tightened and become much more strict. In the case that another plane was hijacked and the terrorists had some form of ransom that they would accept for the release of the hostages, I think there would be several things to consider. I would first consider what the loss would be if the demands were not met. I know this would be a very hard thing to decide, because every human life is worth the same. I then would have to think about what the costs would be if we were to let the criminals go free. Would more people die as a result? Would the terrorists on the plane truly let the hostages go, alive?
These questions would be very difficut to answer, and I think in the end the answer would come out the same. I would love to give in to the terrorists demands, and say that we, as a nation, will turn the criminals over to the terrorists, and that everything would be great from there. However, what is the actual probability of these terrorists, men who care nothing of their own life, or other people's lifes, and who would die for such a cause, would let these people go alive. What happens if I let the criminals go, the terrorists still blow up the plane, and now, there are more terrorists in the world to be worried about, and those people still died. I know that if it were my family member or my friend on the plane, I would want someone to turn over the criminals and pray that they made it off the plane alive. But, looking at it from a third party standpoint, I feel that more lifes would be saved if the criminals were kept in jail, and an alternate way of catching the terrorists was found. I would not release the criminals from jail, and would have to deal with any fallback that came afterwards.
I know that many believe that the terrorism situation the United States is currently in is completely what ever president's fault. However, I feel that if we, as citizens, would like to place the blame on someone, we must also include our selves, because at one point we were all glad that the president at the time was taking action over those "foreigners." Yes, we all feel bad now, and yes, we know that they are simply not "foreigners," but people who need a country to provide protection and safety.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)