Gay and Lesbian

Adoption has long been a way for a loving family who cannot have children on their own, or a family with some extra love to give to have children. Today, adoption has taken a turn for the worse, Gay and Lesbian couples who of course cannot children are adopting kids. I see this as one of our nations number one problems. What kind of message are these kids getting? That homosexuality is all right. If this continues America will have a group of children running around with deviant behavior hardwired into their mind. Gay and Lesbian adoption must end for the sake of the children, for the sake of moral decency, and for the sake of the United States of America.

Children in foster homes and orphanages have enough problems without have to deal with having homosexual parents. Other children and adult for something that they cannot control will persecute them, but their parents can. Even if they attend church they will not get the main Christian value of family. The biggest problem of all is that they might end up thinking that homosexuality is OK or even good, and that is just terrible. All children need the influence of a mother and father (Gay Parent online Magazine). Unfortunately, some children are not able to receive this because of death, divorce, or abandonment, but some just miss out on this because of two greedy homosexuals who what to have their cake and eat it two.
The safety of the children is also in question when kids are placed with homosexuals. Forty percent of child molesters are homosexual, and they only represent ten percent of the population (Statistics website). This fact alone should make anyone want to outlaw homosexual adoptions. Also one of the nations foremost psychologist’s Dr. Laura Schlessinger says that same sex parenting in “despicable” and “a huge portion of the male homosexual populace is predatory on young boys”(Newsweek 52).

The most obvious reason homosexuals should not be able to adopt children is that they really do not what them. If homosexuals really wanted children they would be straight and have them the normal way. If a person chooses to be homosexual there is nothing really the country can do about it, but if they what to bring a innocent child into their life of sin, we as God-fearing Americas must protect the young from this life of sin.
Homosexuals say that outlawing their adoption rights is a form of discrimination. This could not be farther from the truth, the government does not allow drunk-drivers to drive, and it also does not let convicted felons to own weapons. So why should we let these deviants have children? The Gay and Lesbian anti defamation league says that there are not enough adoptive parents for the number children there are. Yes, this is true, but there are also not enough jails, does that mean we should let murders and rapist walk the streets? Of course not, we will just have to find more heterosexual people to take care of these children. It does not matter if it is a one or two parent family, just anything to get the children out of the hands of homosexuals.

Homosexuality sickens me, what sicken me even more is to see a child in the hands of a lesbian woman. It make me think what has our country come to when we let homosexuals adopt child. How could it be that if only thirty-nine percent of the general public favors homosexual adoption rights, why only the state of Florida has a ban on homosexual adoption? This must change and it must change fast to many young lives are at steak.

Works Cited
Gay and Lesbian anti Defamation League website. Located at
Gay Parent online Magazine
Statistics website. Located at
Wingert, Pat “Two Kids and Two Moms.” Newsweek 20 March 2000: pages 50-52.

Madam Bovary

A central theme in Flaubert’s novel, Madame Bovary, is that of reality versus illusion. In this story, Emma Bovary attempts to escape the mundane of normal life to fulfill her fantasies. By enjoying romantic novels, traveling from place to place, indulging in luxuries, and having affairs, she attempts to live the life that she imagines while studying in the convent. It is Emma’s early education that arouses in Emma the conflict against what she perceives as confinement. The convent is Emma’s earliest confinement. Her little contact with the outside world is what intrigues her, the novels smuggled in or the sound of a distant cab rolling along the streets. At first, she is excited about her new environment and enjoys the company of the nuns, “who, to amuse her, would take her into the chapel by way of a long corridor leading from the dining hall.” However, she was a serious student. “She played very little during the recreation period and knew her catechism well.” The church fascinates her and she is always trying to fast, find some vow to fulfill, or some sin to invent for confession. All of the girls living within the protective walls of the convent sing happily together, assemble to study, and pray. But as the chapter progresses, thoughts of escape start to infiltrate Emma’s mind. She wishes to live a life of royalty in a manor house. As her stay in the convent progresses, Emma continues to fantasize images of exotic and foreign lands. The escape technique that she uses to conjure up images of heroines in castles seems to lead inevitably to chaos and disintegration. “Sultans with long pipes swooning on the arbors on the arms of dancing girls; there were Giaours, Turkish sabers and fezzes; and above all there were wan landscapes of fantastic countries: palm trees and pines were often combined in one picture with tigers on the right a lion on the left.” Emma’s strange dreams by this point are chaotic with both palms and pines mixed together with lions and tigers. These dreams continue and change themselves into a death wish as swans transform themselves into dying swans, and singing into funeral music. But Emma, although bored with her fantasy, refuses to admit it and she starts to revolt against the confines of the convent and the discipline, which was against her constitution. When her father finally came to take her, no one, not even the Lady Superior was sorry to see her leave. Emma Bovary’s education at the convent is significant not only because it provides the basis for Emma’s character, but also because the progression of images in this chapter is indicative of the entirety of the novel. Her thoughts progress from confinement to escape to chaos and disintegration. Thus, through the course of her life, Madame Bovary changes from a woman content with her marriage to a women who rebels against the conventions of her society to a women whose life is so chaotic to the point that she commits suicide. Indeed, Madame Bovary’s life is like a mirror that reflects upon her early childhood. Emma Bovary found pleasure in the things around her that quenched her boredom while living in the convent. One was her novels. “They were filled with love affairs, lovers, mistresses, persecuted ladies fainting in lonely country houses.” She also found interest in the sea but only because it was stormy. But all the things that Emma found interest in she soon became bored of, as she did Charles and Leon. This progression of images of confinement, escape, and chaos, parallel on her education and her life as Emma’s journey from boredom in reality to self-destruction in fantasy.


Vegetarianism is a good idea for anyone, whether young or old, healthy or sick. Reasons supporting vegetarianism are inarguable since becoming a vegetarian is scientifically proven to improve one’s lifestyle in several different ways. First and most importantly to many, vegetarianism improves one’s health tremendously. Secondly, it can improve or display one’s spirituality and beliefs. Another reason for changing to a vegetarian lifestyle that most people don’t know is for the ecology and our surroundings. All of the above reasons and many more show that vegetarianism is a wonderful enhancement to anyone’s overall life.

Health should be a considerable priority in every individual’s life and vegetarians are proven to be healthier than carnivorous humans in various ways. First, medical studies show that a human being’s body was not made to be carnivorous (for example; humans have no fang s or claws) and because are digestive system was not made to digest meat, a vegetarian diet is much easier and healthier for our bodies. Secondly, as known around the world, the most common cause of death is heart attack and the average man is at a 50% risk while a vegetarian man is at a 4% risk. Another fact most don’t think about is that every one out of three chickens is infected with salmonella bacteria. Speaking of bacteria and disease, the U.S. Department of Agriculture implies that it protects meat-eaters through regular and thorough meat inspection while in reality, fewer than one out of every 250,000 slaughtered animals is tested for toxic chemical residues. As a matter of fact, breast milk of a meat-eating mother versus a non meat-eating mother is 35 times higher for contamination of milk due to pesticides found in meat. Vegetarianism also prevents cancer by 50%, and prevents heart disease, lowering blood pressure, gallstones, kidney stones, osteoporosis and can even reverses diabetes. Finally, maintaining a vegetarian diet will not only make you physically healthier but will improve your psychiatric health also. In fact, many psychiatrists recommend a vegetarian diet to those with violent anger problems. As provided above, becoming a vegetarian would improve anyone’s health and give all nutrition needed including protein.

Many vegetarians do what they do for spiritual reasons and all have much supporting logic behind all the spirituality. Others claim they are spiritual people who are compassionate but how can one who eats meat be so with the knowledge of the suffering animals whose pain are beyond calculation? If one has understanding from God, how can he/she nourish ones’ self by the misery and death of other organisms made to live and be free? When a human kills an animal for food, he/she is neglecting his own hunger for justice. When a human claims to love God’s creatures and then eats meat, he/she is inconsistent and a hypocrite. One should never accept characteristics such as injustice, inconsistency and hypocrisy while asserting spirituality.

There is another beneficial reason for vegetarianism that most never have heard of or thought about. Our environment is affected in many ways by livestock and so on. In fact, every quarter pound of hamburger meat one eats destroys 55 square feet of rainforest, which is already being demolished in the first place. This is because many cattle eaten in the U.S. have been fattened up and raised in former rainforest that was converted to grazing ground. Actually, more than 50% of rainforest destruction has been from animal grazing. Other than the destruction of rain forest, more than half of all water supplies goes to livestock production. Vegetarianism could even improve our world by preventing hunger for 1,300,000,000 humans could be fed by the grain and soybeans fed to livestock each year. Not only does meat eating help destroy our bodies but the world around us.

When it all comes down to it, being a vegetarian is a wonderful, spiritual, and helpful way of life and it could be to all. It could improve health, spirituality, and even the ecology. There are many more reasons supporting vegetarianism and one could always find some that are most important to them. Some think of vegetarianism as a punishment or restriction while true vegetarians and the ones who know most distinguish that it is a fantastic and quick way to refine and add energy, godliness, and will power to anyone’s life.

Elissar Abdul-Khalek


Hiroshima 1. August 6, 1945, 8:15:17sec. 2. The B-29
Enola Gay, flying at 31,600 feet. 3. The Enola Gay was
escorted by to other bombers. 4. Hiroshima bombing alarm
sirens started, but when there were only three planes they
turned them off. 5. August 6, 1945, 8:15:17sec. Bombardier
Major Tom Ferebee made the call. “Bombs away.” 6. At
8:15 in Hiroshima, (One of Japan’s largest industrial centers)
it was an average working day. 7. Looking up, a few people
might have seen a parachute pop open and slowly drift
downward carrying a heavy load. 8. Then at approximately
2000 feet above the cities central business district, a sudden
blinding bright light, brighter than a thousand suns. 9. A 4.5
ton bomb exploded with the force of 20,000 tons of TNT.

10. Its fireball equaled the hear of the sun’s surface, 300,000
degrees centigrade. At ground Zero below the blast it was
6,000 degrees centigrade. 11. Stone buildings and paved
streets buckled. Humans, animals, and all vegetation simply
turned to vapor. All wood within 2 miles immediately burst
to flame. 12. The compressed and heated air expanded at
the rate of 4 tons per square yard and raced outward from
the center at more than 1,000 feet per second. 13. After the
heat and explosion was the radiation and deadly gamma
rays. 14. In days after thousands died of radiation poisoning.

15. 130,00 died in Hiroshima from effects of the bomb.

Appearence Vs. Reality In Hamlet

Hamlet one of Shakespeare’s greatest plays, where the young prince of Denmark must uncover the truth about his fathers death. Hamlet a play that tells the story of a young prince who’s father recently died. Hamlets uncle Claudius marries his mother the queen and takes the throne. As the play is told Hamlet finds out his father was murdered by the recently crowned king. The theme that remains constant throughout the play is appearance versus reality. Things within the play appear to be true and honest but in reality are infested with evil. Many of the characters within the play hide behind a mask of falseness. Four of the main characters that hid behind this mask are Polonius, Rosencrantz (Guildenstern), the king Cluadius. From behind this mask they give the impression of a person who is sincere and genuine, in reality they are plagued with lies and evil. There appearance will make it very difficult for Hamlet to uncover the truth, the characters hide behind.
Polonius the kings royal assistant has a preoccupation with appearance. He always wants to keep up the appearance of loving and caring person. Polonius appears like a man who loves and cares about his son, Laertes. Polonius speaks to his son with advice that sounds sincere but in reality it is rehearsed, hollow and without feeling. Polonius gives his advice only to appear to be the loving caring father. The reality is he only speaks to appear sincere as a politician, to look good rather then actually be good: And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry. This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man. Farewell; my blessing season this in thee! Act 1
Polonius gives his son Laertes his blessing to go away, he sends a spy to follow him and keep an eye on him. This shows his lack of trust for anyone, he gives the appearance of a confident father who trusts his son to go off on his own. In reality he lies about his trust for his son by sending a spy to watch him. His advice he gives his son is rehearsed and only said to give the appearance of a loving father. Polonius further adds to the theme appearance verses reality by ordering Ophelia to stop seeing Hamlet. He lies to her telling her that Hamlet does not love her, he only lusts for her, in truth he does love her: Ay, springes to catch woodcocks. I do know, When the blood burns , how prodigal the soul Through the play Polonius hids behind his mask appearing to be honest loving parent. In reality Polonius lies, manipulates people and eavesdrops on peoples conversation. Polonius helps contribute to the theme appearance verses reality by showing how his appearance is not his true nature, behind the mask there lies someone totally different.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are two of Hamlets childhood friends who when asked by the king, try to find out what is troubling the young prince. Both help to contribute to the theme by showing there appearance of being Hamlets friends. The pair go to Hamlet pretending to be his friends when in truth they are only there because the king asked them to find the truth. There is some irony within the twins, they are asked by the king to find out the truth by hiding within a lie, by pretending to be his friend: A dream is but a shadow Act II.

Hamlet knows there purpose for their visit is to dig into his soul to find the real reason for his actions as of late. As the play continues the twins are asked again by the king to go to Hamlet and try again to find the real reason for Hamlets behavior. Hamlet insults them at every chance knowing they are lying to him about there purpose of the visit: Tis as easy as lying; govern these ventages with you finger and thumb, give it breath with your mouth…Act III
As the melodrama continues Hamlet goes with the twins to reclaim money that another state owes Denmark. Hamlet is sent by the king to retrieve the assets. In actuality Hamlet is sent off to wither because the king, Claudius knows that Hamlet knows too much and must be killed. The twins show there appearance of being Hamlets friends but in truth they have a hidden reason for visiting with Hamlet. Both show that it will be very difficult for Hamlet to uncover the fidelity hidden within the lies.

Claudius the king of Denmark conduct in council gives him the appearance of an Honest and honorable man. In Act one scene two Claudius in the presence of council shows his true skill and ease of manner at speaking. Claudius speaks well of the spent king by showing a general love for him by all his subjects. Claudius show respect for the old sovereign by speaking kind words of him. In reality he cares little for the old king, he speaks kindly only to give the appearance of loving brother.
Though yet of Hamlet our dear brother’s death The memory be green, and that it us befitted To bear our hearts in grief, and our whole kingdom To be contracted in one brow of woe Act I
As Claudius sends Voltimand and Cornelius off to give the king of Norway the message of Fortibras, he thanks and gives them complete trust, in the deliverance of the notation. This shows his trust and caring for his subjects in front of the council, wining even more consent from the council: We doubt it nothing: heartily farewell. Act I Claudius increases his appearance of a honest and honorable man, in front of the council by showing his respect for Polonius. He gives him the power to let his son Laertes stay or leave for Norway. Claudius speaks highly of Polonius giving him thanks and saying the he was responsible for Claudius becoming king:
The head is not more native to the heart, The hand more instrumental to the mouth, Than is the throne of Denmark to thy father. What woudlst thou have, Laertes(Act I ii, 47-50)
This council would see this as a man who greatly respects his subjects and cares for them. This adds to the difficulty of uncovering the truth for Hamlet later. Hamlet enters the council chamber and speaks with Claudius. The king (Claudius) speaks with Hamlet seeming to be concerned with Hamlet. He gives advice that over grieveing is not healthy, this shows a concern for Hamlets well being. This conduct of Claudius gives him the appearance of being kind in front of council that accepts him even more for his family values: How is it that the clouds still hang on you? Act I Claudius appears to be even more caring when insulted by Hamlet he still shows love and general care for Hamlet. A normal king would have become angry and Hamlet would have gotten into trouble. Claudius shows the council that he is understanding of Hamlet’s grief over his father: A little more than kin, and less than kind. Act I . Claudius gives Hamlet advice that over grieveing can be harmful and not healthy. Claudius tells Hamlet that he is a admirable person for grieveing for so long over his dads death. Yet again Claudius keeps putting on the appearance of the honorable man.

Tis sweet and commendable in your nature, Hamlet,
To give these mourning duties to your father:
But, you must know, you father lost a father;
That father lost, lost his; and the survivor bound
In filial obligation for some term
To do obsequious sorrow; but to persever
In obstinate condolement is a course Act I
Claudius further makes it difficult to uncover the truth by announcing that Hamlet is next in line for the throne of Denmark. This shows that Claudius would let Hamlet become the next king when he is gone. This reveals a love and care for Hamlet to the council and Gertrude making Claudius appear to be kind, loving person: You are the most immediate to our throne; And with no less nobility of love Act I
Claudius final conduct that makes him a difficult truth to uncover, is his care and want that Hamlet remain in Denmark. Claudius is insulted by Hamlet, he asks Hamlet to stay only that his queen Gertrude wants Hamlet to stay. Claudius appears to be concerned with Hamlets well being, Gertrude and council see this ,making Claudius a more deserving person to be king.

As Claudius speaks in council he gives the appearance of someone who is a deserving person that should be king. Claudius is voted in as king meaning he is already approved by everyone. Claudius gives respect to his subjects giving the council the impression that he respects them. The king shows general concern for Hamlet, his nephew. This will make it very difficult to prove the truth about Claudius in the future for he has not only, one the love and respect of council (that voted him in). But also has prevented a attack on Denmark (from Fortinbras) proving that he is good king that can protect the state from harm. Claudius makes it very difficult for Hamlet to uncover the truth about the true nature of Claudius in the future.
Through the characters within the play all help to show the theme, that being appearance verses reality. Polonius, Rosencrantz (Guildenstern) and the king all appear to be good and honest. As Hamlet finds out, all contain lies and have hidden intentions within them. As each character is presented in the play all appear to be good and honest making it a difficult task for Hamlet to uncover the hidden truth about the nature of each character. As Hamlet best said it somethings is rotten in Denmark That being the lies which have replaced or covered the true state of each character.
Shakespeare Essays


This report is on the disease called Pica, it is a eating disorder , it can ucuarr at any time to anyone , this is a serious disease . It causes the woman to have cravings for such things as playdoe or sand .

Pica is a serious eating disorder that can cuase you to need surgery . It can also cuase you to need dental work , phosphors intoxication cuased by the match heads , or enviormental poising from the led or mercury .
Some of the cravings that you get from this disorder are clay , dirt , cornstarch , laundary starch , baking soda , chalk , buttons ice , paper , dried paint , ciggerette buts , burnt matches , ashes , sand , soap , toothpaste , oyster shells , or ven broken crockery . The woman who get this disease craves 6 out of the 18 things that are craved with this disease . They named this disease after the latin word magpie , magpie is a bird , they named it after the bird becuase they have a wierd eating habit . It also craves the substances that the Pica patients do .

The most common time for the disease to acuarr is while a woman is pregnant or nursing . This disease can cuase iron deficiecny . Starch is also linked to iron deficiency becuase it lacks minerals .

The eating of clay and dirt has been known to relieve nausea , control diarrhea , increase salivation , remove toxins , and alter odor or taste perception . Some docters say it is a responce to stress , or a habit disorder . Some of the other symptoms that aren’t as obvious are fatigue , lightheadedness , or shortness of breath .
If Pica is detected you might have iron deficiency , spooning of the nails , which is the nail getting thinner , and the edges start rising . You also might experence flatting of the papillae , which are the taste buds .

Rawls View Of Ignorance

Rawls’ View of Ignorance
Rawls theory of justice revolves around the adaptation of two
fundamental principles of justice which would, in turn, guarantee a just and
morally acceptable society. The first principle guarantees the right of each
person to have the most extensive basic liberty compatible with the liberty of
others. The second principle states that social and economic positions are to be
a) to everyone’s advantage and b) open to all.

A key problem to Rawls is to show how such principles would be
universally adopted and here the work borders on general ethical issues.He
introduces a theoretical “veil of ignorance” in which all the “players” in the
social game would be placed in a situation which is called the “original
position”. Having only a general knowledge of the facts of”life and society”,
each player is to abide based on their moral obligation. By denying the players
any specific information about themselves it forces them to adopt a generalized
point of view that bears a strong resemblance to the moral point of view.

“Moral conclusions can be reached without abandoning the prudential
standpoint of positing,a moral outlook merely by pursuing one’s own prudential
reasoning under certain procedural bargaining and knowledge constraints.”
Rawls proposes that the most reasonable principles of justice for a
society are those that individuals would themselves agree to behind the “veil of
ignorance”, in circumstances in which each is represented as a moral person,
endowed with the basic moral powers. What this position supports is that while
each person has different ends and goals, different backgrounds and talents,
each ought to have a fair chance to develop his or her talents and to pursue
those goals – fair equality for opportunity. It is not a race or contest where
the talented or gifted prevail, it should be complete cooperation among all so
that there may be reasonable life for all.

What the “veil of ignorance”brings out is that we can accept
utilitarianism as a public conception of justice only if we are prepared to let
someone be subject to conditions we would not be prepared to subject ourselves.

However, it is not the responsibility of my actions to ensure the fulfillment of
another persons goals. These principles create an equal distribution of the
“pie”, if you will, yet it is not attainable unless pursued or strived for.

There is no room for idle observation, meaning, that while we all possess equal
opportunity as we all are equally moral persons, the choice of what you wish to
possess materially as well as intellectually is the discretion and capability of
the individual.

Why should we accept these principles as principles of justice?
Primarily, these principles promote equality among all. Each individual has the
same basic liberties and opportunities. Each individual has a moral obligation
to accept the existence of every other human being. In doing so, all people
become equal in their position and desires. We are equal in that each has the
basic powers of choice and on acting on a sense of justice. The responsibility
of procedure and growth relies on each and every individual his/her self. By
doing so we may create a level playing field. Is this a form of pure
competition? It would seem so. Competition in that what is desired must be
achieved by one and desired by many perhaps. A benefit of competitive
circumstance is the betterment of all parties involved as they must evolve in
order to surpass one another .

Also,in fair equality for opportunity we may eliminate all forms of
discrimination and discretion of races, ethnic origin, social standards and
religious intolerance and beliefs. All of these characteristics are a component
of the individual person thus making him/her “individual”. Justice is only
succumbed when the liberties of an individual are affected because of an
external opinion of these characteristics, and, in the oppression of these
characteristics upon another. They are nothing more than components of a people.

With the “veil of ignorance” we exempt our responsibility for caring for
that of which we do not know. If we don’t see something physically everyday
should it be an not be a concern or an aspect of our own life? If this were so,
could it not be possible that some things could be ignored by all? The word
ignorance scares me since I am ignorant of many things yet in growth I hope to
become less ignorant through education. Is it only then that I understand
certain circumstances yet since I am not affected personally than I should
continue to ignore. This, it would seem, would then rely on my moral truth or
obligation, yet I will be the one to ultimately decide, this being the
responsibility of all. Can we place that much faith in the moral responsibility
of human kind. It sounds great theoretically yet in practice it almost appears
that this would create more alienation than is present today.Would we become
the exact opposite of what is desired, a selfish and careless society? There
must be caution in placing so much responsibility on moral obligation.

Orlando/orange county

Metropolitan County
Damion Chung
Professor Foreman
15 April 2005

The metropolitan county Orlando/Orange county is mostly famous for the tourist
attraction of Walt Disney, but it has political issues that only the people who are
interested would know about. Members of the Orlando City Council are the Mayor-
Commissioner, elected at-large, (candidates are chosen by all of the vote in the
community, and elected for four year term) and six City Commissioners who are elected
from respective districts. All are elected for four-year terms. Special meetings may be
held at the call of the mayor, there are 6 district commissioners. District Commissioner 1-
5 respectively is Phil Diamond, Betty T. Wyman, Vicki Vargo, Patty Sheehan, Daisy W.
Lynum. Ernest Page who is the mayor and also the District 6 Commissioner he was
elected Commissioner in 1996, re-elected in 2000 and 2004. Became mayor in March 11,
2005 in mayor Buddy Dyer’s absence.

Ernest Page’s work experience includes, Ernest Page Realty, Valencia Community
College, (adjunct instructor, real estate), CNA Insurance Company; (division manager),
Customer Service, accounting collections, security, record administration,
telecommunications, purchasing, fleet administrator, Xerox Corporation, (marketing and
sales), Martin Marietta Corporation; property management, buyer, employment specialist,
Orange County School Board, (classroom teacher). Page’s stated that, “On March 11,
2005, I assumed the role of Mayor of Orlando and I am honored to serve this great City
in this capacity. As I begin my service as Mayor, I will work daily with senior staff and
the Cabinet to ensure we will maintain the excellent level of service that our citizens have
come to expect and deserve. Please be assured that the City will operate with the same
consistency and efficiency as we have in the past”
Chung 2
Requirements for Qualification as Candidate for Office of Mayor-Commissioner or
City Commissioner. Each candidate for the Office of Mayor-Commissioner or District
Commissioner of the City of Orlando shall have been, at the time of qualifying as a
candidate for such office, both a bona fide resident of the City of Orlando and a
registered elector of the City of Orlando for at least one year prior to the date of
qualifying to run for City office.

Each candidate for a City of Orlando district Commissioner seat shall have been, at
the time of qualifying, both a bona fide resident and registered elector of that district of
the City of Orlando for at least one year prior to qualifying. Provided, however, in the
election following the decennial redistricting required by section 4-1 of this Chapter,
district commissioner candidates shall only have to meet the requirements of subsection
above. For qualifying purposes, residents of areas that are annexed into the corporate
limits of the City of Orlando within one year prior to the election qualifying period shall
be considered residents of the district to which their area has been annexed and shall be
eligible to be a candidate for Mayor-Commissioner or City district commissioner if they
have been a bona fide resident and registered elector of either the City or the annexed
area for one year prior to the date of qualifying
At the time of qualifying, candidates shall be required to submit proof satisfactory to
the City Clerk that they have met the requirements of this section. If satisfactory proof is
not submitted prior to the end of the qualifying period, the City Clerk shall not qualify
that person for the office sought and their name shall not appear on the ballot.
Satisfactory proof of having met the residency requirements of this section shall include
Chung 3
submission all of the following applicable items for the one-year period prior to
qualifying: homestead exemption documentation, residential property lease, utility bills
which reflect usage of utilities at a level indicating actual residence, and Florida driver’s
license registration. Candidates may also submit to the City Clerk any other
documentation that shows their intention to be a bona fide resident at their qualifying
address. Candidates must also submit documentation that they have been a registered
elector as required by this section for the one-year period prior to qualifying. As a
condition of qualifying, all candidates must sign a release authorizing the City Clerk to
verify the information that they have submitted.

On March 11, 2005, Mayor Dyer was served with a Grand Jury indictment charging
him with a felony violation of the state elections law, Pursuant to his authority under the
Florida Constitution, Article IV, Section 7 (C) and the provisions of Section 112.51,
Florida Statutes (2004), Governor Bush suspended Mayor Dyer from office. Under state
law, this suspension will continue until such time as the criminal charges resulting from
the indictment are resolved. Should these charges by resolved favorably, then the
suspension shall be revoked “forthwith” by the Governor. Should these criminal charges
be adversely, the Governor is required to remove the Mayor from office. By operation of
state law, the City Charter procedure for filling permanent vacancies must be utilized to
fill the temporary vacancy during the term of Mayor Dyer’s suspension. Therefore, City
Council must meet within ten days of March 11, 2005, to set an election date within
forty-five days that meeting.

Whoever is elected in this special election will serve as Mayor during “the period of
Chung 4
the suspension, not to extend beyond the term.” Article IV, Section 7 (C), Florida
Constitution. At the point the criminal charges are resolved, Mayor Dyer will either be
restrained or removed , in which event permanent vacancy in the office will result and
need to be filled in accordance with the City Charter provision found in Chapter 2,
Section 1. If the remaining term exceeds one year, City Council will again call a special
election under the provisions previously discussed. If the remaining term is less than one
year , the remaining members of City Council shall, within forty days of the vacancy,
elect by majority vote a person to fill in vacancy.

This resolution by the City Council of the City of Orlando, Florida , authorizes a
Special Municipal election to be held on Tuesday, May 3, 2005, with a Run-Off
Municipal Election to be held if necessary, on May 24,2005, for an interim Mayor to
serve during the period of Mayor’s Dyer’s suspension. It also authorizes a Special
Election on the same dates to fill any vacancy created by any City Council Member who
resigns their seat in order to run for Interim Mayor.

Council is also asked to authorize the City Clerk to execute a Contact for the use of
Vote Processing Equipment and other special election requirements with the Orange
County Supervisor of Elections after review and approval by City’s Office of Legal
Affairs. Due to the suspension from office of Mayor Dyer, under the Laws of the State of
Florida and the Charter of the City of Orlando, Florida, it is necessary to hold a Special
Election to elect an Interim Mayor for the term of Mayor Dyer’s suspension (but not to
exceed the length of his term which ends May 31, 2008); In the event any current City
Commissioner(s) decide to resign in order to run for Interim Mayor, it will be necessary
Chung 5
to hold a special election to fill their seat(s)for the balance of their term(s);
When Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer was indicted last month, he was in the middle of a
budget crisis and projects ranging from redeveloping the city’s poorest neighborhood to
overseeing a building boom downtown. The five mayoral candidates competing to
replace Dyer will have to jump into the middle of what the mayor left behind. How they
deal with looming deficits, the economy and downtown’s development will help define
Orlando’s future.

On May 3, voters will choose a temporary replacement for Dyer, who is suspended
until an allegation of an election-law violation is resolved. It remains unclear how long
his replacement will serve. If Dyer is acquitted, he could retake the mayor’s post, but if
he’s convicted, voters will have to approve a permanent replacement in another election.
Orlando’s leadership crisis comes at a crucial time for the city. Economic and budget
issues are at the forefront.

City finance workers predict at least a $27 million deficit for next budget year. That’s
higher than the $23 million deficit Dyer inherited in 2003 when he replaced Glenda
Hood, who became Florida secretary of state. City staffers originally predicted a $27
million deficit this year as well but say they may avert the problem by slashing spending
and not filling some jobs. The cause of the deficit is partly because of higher salaries and
rising health-care costs, including retiree health benefits. Since the early 1970s, city
employees who work at least 20 years receive free medical care for life. None of the
candidates suggested that it’s time to raise taxes after 14 years without rate increases — at
least not yet — but they have different ideas about what should be done.

Candidate Bill Frederick, Orlando’s mayor from 1980 to 1992, wants to examine the
Chung 6
Orlando Utilities Commission’s finances with an eye toward a bigger annual dividend
payment to the city. Last year, the city received about $32.7 million in dividends from
OUC and about $19.7 million in franchise fees. Dyer created controversy by hiring
consultants to quietly study the possibility of the city taking over OUC’s water utility and
selling it for $322 million. The idea of selling part of OUC appears dead, and OUC is
completing the study. If the city’s expenses continue to outstrip revenues for several
years, then city leaders will have to cut services or raise taxes, Frederick said. But
Frederick added that he won’t raise taxes in the coming year. Candidates Billy Manes,
Ken Mulvaney and Sam Ings had no immediate financial solutions but said an audit
should be conducted of the city’s $600 million budget to look for waste.

Candidate Edward Lopes wants to impose a 99-cent “impact fee” on every plane ticket
sold at Orlando International Airport. But Carolyn Fennell, a spokeswoman for the
Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, said a 1973 federal law forbids that kind of tax.
Lopes said he hasn’t researched it, but he wasn’t convinced that it couldn’t be done.

Creating a stable and diversified economy is a priority for our City as we move into t
he 21st century. The City is using the economic prosperity brought about by the region’s
enormous tourism industry to attract new targeted industries that will provide a better
balance to our economy. This will allow our community to achieve economic prosperity
while preserving a high quality of life.
To accomplish Orlando’s goal of economic prosperity, the City will focus on the
following areas:
Chung 7
I. Promoting the City’s targeted growth industries;
II. Nurturing and cultivating small business development;
III. Engaging in innovative programs that educate the workforce;
IV. Supporting neighborhood economic development; and
V. Encouraging infill and redevelopment within the Traditional City.

1. Allard, Edward
current resident of Orlando (3 years)
2. City Council. City of
7 April 2005
3. Orlando Sentinel
7 April 2005
4. Orlando, The City’s Magazine
April 2005
Orlando Business Journal Magazine
March 2005
5. Orlando: City of Dreams (Making of America)
by Joy Wallace Dickinson.

Rubin v Coors Brewing Co

CASE CITATION:Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co. (514 US 476), 1995
The rules and principals of commercial law are of ancient origin. Throughout the centuries merchants engaged in trade and commerce have recognized customs and usages which regulate and control their conduct. Gradually over the years a body of law developed (Robert & Corley, 312) Commercial speech arose in 1942 when the Supreme Court announced that the First Amendment does not protect it. As the years went on, on the Bicentennial of our Republic, the Courts position was reversed and they declared that the First Amendment protects commercial speech. But they court did say that commercial speech should receive less protection then noncommercial speech. That brings us to the definitions of commercial and noncommercial speech.
Noncommercial speech, embodied in the phrases freedom of speech and freedom of expression, is entitled to virtually full first amendment protection; hence, the speaker is
granted considerable latitude in stating a positionCommercial speech is generally
considered to be communications that have the sale of a product or service as their
ultimate goal. Content regulation of commercial speech is allowed to prevent false,
deceptive, or misleading information from being transmitted(Boedecker and Morgan, 1).
Some cases that have affected the First Amendment and Commercial speech are: Valentine v. Chrestensen (1942), the U.S. Supreme Court first declared that the Constitution placed no restraints on government regulation of commercial advertising. Until this time there wasnt anything that distinguished between commercial and noncommercial communications. Then in 1975 in Bigelow v. Virginia the court said that the, the government cannot restrict advertising where the commercial activity itself is legal and further noted that the activity advertised pertained to constitutional interests(Boedecker and Morgan, 2). There were limitations placed on time, place, and manner and the court could also enforce rules that dealt with false, deceptive, or misleading advertising. Five years later, the Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission (1980) developed a four-part breakdown for commercial speech. Throughout the courts case it used these four steps, (1) Determine whether the expression is protected by the First Amendment, that is, does it involve lawful activity and not mislead the audience? (2) Does the government have a substantial interest to be achieved by restricting the speech? (3) Does the regulation directly advance the governments interest? (4) Is the regulation more extensive then necessary to achieve that interest? (Boedecker and Morgan, 1) this was a significant move in the direction for commercial speech. The currently used Central Hudson test creates an artificial distinction between commercial and noncommercial speech (Coach, 3). The issues involved in Central Hudson represents a change in direction in terms of deciding what degree of protection to grant commercial statements. It includes a judgement about the importance of regulating the subject matter or activity in question and therefor withdrew some of the protection granted upon commercial speech in the previous year.In summary, more types of communication are moving toward the commercial speech category, which means more first amendment protection for commercial speech. Therefor, there are two problems that marketers face when it come to commercial speech, identifying commercial speech and applying it to the commercial speech standard.

In broad terms, is the speech actually commercial? This is one of the simplest issues throughout a commercial speech case. So if the answer is yes and the speech is found to be commercial, then should it receive a lesser degree of protection? Throughout all the commercial speech cases during the years this has been the question. But, the legal issue dealing with the First Amendment in Rubin v. Coors Brewing Co. was, is there a First Amendment right to disclose the alcohol content of beer on the label? The case also dealt with the idea of strength wars. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) in the U.S. Treasury Department had prohibited beer labels from displaying alcohol content because of the fact that it would cause companies to have wars, as to which beer had the stronger alcohol content. The courts answer was yes, Section 5 of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, prohibiting beer labels from displaying alcohol content, held to violate commercial speech protections of Federal Constitutions First amendment.(Rubin v. Coors Brewing Company Case, LexisNexis, 1)
The majority opinion of the court was that the Federal Alcohol Administration Act of 1935 violates the brewers First Amendment rights. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion of the court. The opinion states that the brewer went to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) to get permission to use labels that disclosed the alcohol content of the beer. Their application was turned down because it was said to violate the Federal Alcohol administration Act (FAAA). The brewer than filed case saying that their Constitutions First Amendment Rights were violated. The Court for the District of Colorado stated that the ban was necessary for the mere fact that displaying the alcohol content would cause strength wars between brewers. If brewers were free to list the alcohol content then they might try to compete by selling increasingly potent products (Seligman & Moore, Fortune, 1). After appealing the case, the Tenth Circuit of the Court of Appeals agreed with the District of Colorado in saying that is was necessary to omit the alcohol content from beer labels. However, the District Court questioned the matter of whether there was a relationship between the ban of alcohol content and the goal of avoiding strength wars. After going through several different appeals, the court of appeals came to the conclusion that; the Government failed to demonstrate that the prohibition in any way prevented strength wars. The court found that there was no evidence of any relationship between the publication of factual information regarding alcohol content and competition on the basis of such content (514 U.S. 476, Lexis Nexus, 5). The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reviewed the Tenth Circuits decision that violated the First Amendment and they concluded that the ban infringed the respondents freedom of speech, and affirmed the courts decision. (Lexis Nexus, 5) In conclusion, both the District Court and the Court of Appeals found that the Government had failed to present any credible evidence showing that the disclosure of alcohol content would promote strength wars.According to the District Court, nothing that was heard during the trial led them to believe that having alcohol content on the labels will promote strength wars. So they concluded that banning the alcohol content on the labels of malt beverages has really nothing to do with the type of advertising that promotes strength wars (Rubin v. Coors 514 U.S. 476, Lexis Nexis, 9). After the Supreme Court reviewed the case and found that is failed the Central Hudson Test, they affirmed the decisions of the lower courts.
In the case of Rubin v. Coors there was one concurring decision by Justice Stevens. He gave this reason for concurring in the judgement,
I write separately because I am convinced that the constitutional infirmity in the statute is more patent than the Courts opinion indicates. Instead of relying on the formulaic approach announced in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation v. Public Service Commonwealth of N.Y., I believe the Court should ask whether the justification for allowing more regulation of commercial speech than other speech than other speech has any application to this unusual statute (Rubin v. Coors 514 U.S. 476, Lexis Nexis, 10).
According to Stevens the prohibition is unacceptable because commercial speech should not be treated any different under the First Amendment. He stated that the speech at issue here is an accurate statement, on the label of a bottle of beer, of the alcohol content inside. Stevens reiterates that this is what the majority defines as commercial speech. In my opinion I believe that Stevens used an excellent analogy when explaining why this is commercial speech. He said, if a non-profit consumer protection group were to publish the identical statement, Coors beer has 4.73% alcohol by volume, on the cover of a magazine, the court would not label the speech as commercial (Rubin v. Coors 514 U.S. 476, Lexis Nexis, 12). This suggests that the reason the label is considered to be commercial speech is because according to Central Hudson, the intent of the label is to sell a product. In conclusion, Stevens felt as though there were other ways to go about the problem of strength wars without violating the First Amendment. He sees no reason why if varying alcohol strength are lawful then why brewers may not inform their customer that their beverages are stronger or weaker than competing products.
In my opinion, this statute is unconstitutional because, regardless of the standard of review, the First amendment mandates rejection of the Governments proffered justification for this restriction. Although some regulation of statements about alcohol content that increase consumer awareness would be entirely proper, this statutory provision is nothing more than an attempt to blindfold the public (Rubin v. Coors 514 U.S. 476, Lexis Nexis, 14).

In conclusion, there was basically a majority opinion even though Stevens felt as though there were some more issues to be discussed. In summary was Stevens argued is true, truthful speech about alcohol content of beer would be protected by the First Amendment in many contexts, and should not be less protected because it appears on a container label (Stewart, 2)
As to what effect the case had on society, Rubin v. Coors brewing company changed the FAAA regulation on advertising the alcohol content on beer labels.But the decision will also have a major impact on governmental regulation.
The immediate consequences will be that the government will have to prove that any prohibited speech invites some real harm; that the regulation directly advances the interest; and that the regulation is sufficiently tailored to that interest in order for the government to regulate that commercial speech (Cava & Massin, 3).
The decision in this case may also take a step toward the Supreme Court ruling that commercial speech should have the same protection as other speech, except, of course if the commercial speech is false or misleading. This case also has a major impact on the business world, for instance in advertising or marketing. Currently, companies or organizations can publicize any information about their products or services, as long as they are honest, not misleading, and not harmful to government interest. Since this case, marketers will have the right to publicize all kinds of information, even information that has been prohibited in the past (Cava, 3). Another way the case has had an effect, was on a preceding case. In an opinion by Justice Stevens in 44 Liquormart v. Rhode Island, he referred back to the case by saying, Last term we held that a federal law abridging a brewers right to provide the public with accurate information about the alcoholic content of malt beverages in unconstitutional. We now hold that Rhode Islands statutory prohibition against advertisements that provide the public with accurate information about retail prices of alcoholic beverages is also invalid (517 U.S. 484, 1996). So in sum, there wasnt a drastic change in how the law is used from this case but it did have some effect on society, future cases, and governmental regulations. In my own opinion, I think information pertaining tot his case is very important, because advertising has a huge effect on society and plays a big role on influencing why what consumers buy.
Robert E. Rubin, Secretary of the Treasury, Petitioner v. Coors Brewing Company (514 U.S. 476) 1995.

i.News Report
Seligman, Daniel; Moore Alicia Hills. The Winding Road to the First Amendment. Fortune Jul. 1995: 211.

Stewart, David O.Business Talk: Supreme Court Continues to Struggle with Commercial Speech Doctrine. ABA Journal 81 Sept. 1995: 40-42
Rubin v. Coors: Supreme Court Rejects Prohibitionism. Washington legal Foundation: Legal Opinion Letter 5 June 1995: 1-3.
b. Two additional analysis/commentary
Boedecker, Karl A; Morgan, Fred W. The Evolution of First Amendment Protection For Commercial Speech. Journal of Marketing 59 (1995): 38-48.

Coach, Aaron A. Recent Development: Free Speech and Freer Speech: Glickman v. Wileman Bros. & Elliot, Inc., 117 S. Ct. 2130 (1997). Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. 21 Spring 1998: 623-638.

c. One article from scholarly journal
Cava, Anita; Scott S. Massin. Marketing and the Law. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 24 Spring (1996): 184-187.
Rubin v. Coors Brewing Company. Landmark Briefs and Arguments of the Supreme Court of the United Stated: Constitutional Law. Ed. Philip B. Kurland, Gerhard Casper. Vol. 236. University Publications of America, 1994.

Robert, William J., Robert N. Corley. Dillavou and Howards Principals of Business Law. New Jersey: PrenticeHall Inc., 1967.

EBSCOhostCommercial LawRubin and Coors
LexisNexisCaseRubin and Coors
LexisNexisNewsCommercial Law
LexisNexisNewsRubin and Coors
Library CatalogSubjectCommercial Law
A.1. Full Supreme Court Decision
Robert E. Rubin, Secretary of the Treasury, Petitioner v. Coors Brewing Company (514 U.S. 476) 1995.

2. Periodical Literature
a. Contemporaneous Articles
i.News Report
Seligman, Daniel; Moore Alicia Hills. The Winding Road to the First Amendment. Fortune Jul. 1995: 211.

ii. Two Analysis/commentary
Stewart, David O.Business Talk: Supreme Court Continues to Struggle with Commercial Speech Doctrine. ABA Journal 81 Sept. 1995: 40-42
Rubin v. Coors: Supreme Court Rejects Prohibitionism. Washington legal Foundation: Legal Opinion Letter 5 June 1995: 1-3.
b. Two additional analysis/commentary
Boedecker, Karl A; Morgan, Fred W. The Evolution of First Amendment Protection For Commercial Speech. Journal of Marketing 59 (1995): 38-48.

Coach, Aaron A. Recent Development: Free Speech and Freer Speech: Glickman v. Wileman Bros. & Elliot, Inc., 117 S. Ct. 2130 (1997). Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. 21 Spring 1998: 623-638.

c. One article from scholarly journal
Cava, Anita; Scott S. Massin. Marketing and the Law. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 24 Spring (1996): 184-187.
3. Other Literature
a. Reference Book
Rubin v. Coors Brewing Company. Landmark Briefs and Arguments of the Supreme Court of the United Stated: Constitutional Law. Ed. Philip B. Kurland, Gerhard Casper. Vol. 236. University Publications of America, 1994.

b. General Publication Book
Robert, William J., Robert N. Corley. Dillavou and Howards Principals of Business Law. New Jersey: PrenticeHall Inc., 1967.

EBSCOhostCommercial LawRubin and Coors
LexisNexisCaseRubin and Coors
LexisNexisNewsCommercial Law
LexisNexisNewsRubin and Coors
Library CatalogSubjectCommercial Law
Landmark CasesRubin v. Coors
U.S. ReportsRubin v. Coors
Justices who voted majority:

My Left Foot, The Elephant Man, And Mask

My Left Foot, The Elephant Man, and Mask
The Movies My Left Foot, The Elephant Man, and Mask are all movies about
people with disabilities. These three movies depict the lives of three men and the way
society treats them and their disabilities. My Left Foot is about a man who can only use
his left foot because of cerebral palsy and alcoholism. The Elephant Man is about a man
who has very large, severe tumors on his whole body. Mask is about a young man who
has a very large face that looks almost like he’s wearing a mask. Society doesn’t realize
how important the little things are to people with disabilities.

The Elephant Man, John Merrick, was displayed in a freak show as a beast. He
was really a very gentle man who loved everyone, the only thing wrong with him, was he
wasn’t as healthy or pretty as everyone else in society. Society basically avoided him,
and when they did see him, they ran, screamed, pointed, or stared. John dealt with his
disability by locking himself out from the world. One day, he went to the opera, and that
was the most important thing in his life. Many people take things like going to the opera
for granted, but to John, there couldn’t have been a greater pleasure.
In the movie Mask, Rocky was a boy with a disfigured face. Doctor’s told him
that he was going to die, since he was three, but he lived for much longer than three
years. Rocky was a very nice boy, and a lot of people liked him. Society looked at him
as a funny creature because of his large face, but because of his strength, he made most
people get past that and see the real him. Rocky had a great attitude and was very big on
joking around, so he used comedy as his defense in tough situations. I think to Rocky
one of the most important things he got to do was go to a school with normal children.
Most people don’t realize how important being with normal people is when you’re
In the movie My Left Foot, Christy Brown was forced to overcome cerebral palsy
and alcoholism. Society was very rude to Christy and many people looked down upon
him in the beginning. He became a world-renowned author and artist. The most
important thing to Christy was being able to write and draw due to his disability of only
using his left foot. Many people can write, but few are forced to do it with only their left

Society doesn’t realize how important the little things are to people with
disabilities. All three of these movies were very good. I think they depicted the
disabilities of the characters well. I believed that every one of these actors had the
disabilities that they were acting the part of. Movies like this kind of make you think
about how good you have things and how lucky you are. Many of us take too many
things for granted and these movies make you step back and look at life and how good
you have things.
Movies Cinema and Films Essays