Mandatory Attendance is for Bad Teachers (by anon)

I paid $3,597 for this semester's classes. That money contributes to a variety of things, but most importantly, my teachers' salaries. So when it's the first day of school and I find out that my teacher will be taking roll every day and attendance will be part of our grade, I am pissed!

This isn't because I am a slacker and would rather watch "Rescue Me" on Netflix for hours on end (even though I would.)  It's because my grade should be based on the material I acquire by attending class. If I don't attend, I lose out on that material and therefore, my grade suffers in that way.

Also, as I eluded to in the beginning, I PAY TO BE HERE!!! That should be a good enough reason for me to get my ass out of bed in the morning, but if it's not, well then the teacher is getting paid the same amount for teaching one less student, and shouldn't complain.  It is the teacher's responsiblity to make class interesting, challenging, and necessary to attend because that's how you get a good grade.

So I think the only teachers that take attendance are those that make it too easy to pass without attending, and therefore need to take roll if they're going to expect students to show up. When the teacher goes off just powerpoints (an example of a bad teacher), then posts those powerpoints to D2L, why would anyone bother showing up? Unless of course, it's part of your grade.

I am an adult, please start treating me like one.

Abortion…the whole topic is dumb (by anon)

Like, does anyone have anything better to talk about?  So many people make this out to be such an important issue.  Michelle Bachmann just called it, “the watershed issue of our time.”  Oh please.  Cry me a river.

So what if some people abort their fetuses?  Seriously.  What’s the big deal?  The world economy could slide into a huge recession.  That is a big deal.  Many people would be affected in really bad ways.  There are major protests against dictator-like governments in the Middle East, even civil wars.  Those are big deals.  There are millions of people starving all over the world.  That is a big deal.  The enslavement of North Koreans.  That is a big deal.  The resurgence of terrorism, religious intolerance, increased murder rates, the world’s energy crisis, natural disasters.  Those are big deals.  Whether Jane has an abortion or not…that’s not a big deal, especially when you are not Jane.

The point: there are so many actually important things to talk about and get motivated to do something about than abortion.

When does life begin?  Who cares?  Like we will ever know.  That whole question is so arbitrary that I want to slap someone who finds that it is THEE question of the century.  “But the unborn baby has rights!”  That’s pretty debatable, but the mother certainly has rights.  So side with what we know and let the mother have her rights over her own body.  People wanting to legislate over other people’s bodies like that need to climb back into their holes.

But face it.  Abortion is primarily a political issue hyped up to motivate certain demographics to vote in particular ways.  Republicans love to bring it up to energize their conservative base to vote.  And you know what that means, don’t you?  It means that secretly Republicans never want the abortion issue to be settled in their favor because then they would lose that motivation to get people to vote for them. 

Yep, so we’ll still be hearing about abortion for the next 100 years or so…Oh God, abort me now!!

Argue your ass off!

Has something ever bothered you on campus?  Ever pissed off at your teachers, university policies, politicians, media, the general public, or an "ism"??  If so, write about it and send it to us at The Critically Pissed.  All submissions will be posted as ANONYMOUS.

The only requirement is that each post be a “reasoned” post.  No bald rants.  We want reasoned rants so that your views can try to persuade to agree with you.  And if people don't agree with you, well...they'll probably tell you why in the comments!

The hope is that this kind of “critically pissed” forum can be a venting place for critical thought as well as a possible place to start changing the way people think about things.

SEND YOUR POSTS TO: criticallypissed@gmail.com

- All posts will be anonymous, but you can create a catchy alias if you want :)

- Word limit: greater than 100 words

- Come up with a title for your post (or else we will).

- Leave particular people’s names out of your posts, unless you believe they are really needed.

- Make sure you are giving REASONS for your view.

American Rights? (by anon)

“Rights.” It appears to me that this word instills are great sense of “defense.” It’s my right! You’re violating my right to free speech! ect. So what happens when this word is used when on the “offense?” I’m speaking more or less but not limited to Obamacare.

Heath care is a service rendered. When did the government get the power to force me to buy something, such as government health insurance? Collective rights, one might say. The collective want government enforced health care so the United States gets government enforced health care. That in and of itself doesn’t make sense. How can it be my right to violate your “rights,” then neither of us has any “real rights.”

All you humanitarians settle down, the answer to your question before you scream it is NO. I would not let a man die simply because he didn’t have health insurance. I do not think any doctor would deny a dying man treatment. But, I do think that that person should pay for that service himself. If someone consciously doesn’t where a seat belt crashes, and is put in a comma. The doctors, I’m sure would save his life. But, as for the bill is concerned that is his responsibility, not mine. He rolled the dice and lost, he will be paying off a debt for a long time. Such is the nasty way of freedom of choice.

I do however see no problem in giving this service or right to children. Children are omitted from the argument simply because they are children. Do you not pay for education once you’re an adult? Why, yes you do. If Obamacare was rendered to only children I would have absolutely no argument against it.

I understand that when the status quo is being changed, rights are sometimes broken or changed. It was once man’s right to own another man. Although, I don’t think you truly can relate slavery to government enforced health care. Regardless of whether the change is better or worse there still is a change. Rights are, well, rights are they not. So the real question is how long before the next right is broken or altered? The answer I think is that none of us really have any rights. Since rights are not this sacred undeniable defense/right, but something to be vexed and twisted to whatever the collective wants.

1) Rights protect citizens and should not be taken away by ANYONE.

2) If rights are violated and the law/people find out then the violator is punished according to the law.

3) If the law makers violate a citizens right and the law/people know it, and the law makers go unpunished then the right was not a real right. Because Point 1 and 2.

If individualists unite to fight collectivism, doesn’t that make them a collectivist…

My favorite professor **said with major snark!** (by anon)

Dear Professor,

     I understand that we live in a world of fascinating technology, and this technology can help with all sorts of things like research and socializing but according to you, it helps a lot with teaching ourselves the material, which in the long run does us good.  You even graciously allowed us to pay a total of $37.00 for a database system that is not compatable with most computers, and which we can access for FREE through the library.  You also had us pay for an amazing online text book, when there is a text book rental on campus once again for FREE.  On top of it, you were one of the AUTHORS of the book through the rental. Does this mean you dont believe the information you helped create?  So now I wasted all of this extra money for an inadequate database, and on a professor who doesnt teach. So now, im left with a shitty database a big hole in my wallet, and the amazing professor who didnt think any of this through.  Did I mention I have not LEARNED anything yet? I love professor's who dont teach with all of my heart. I really do.

Sincerely,
your patient kind loving student

Who's "assassinating" what? Use words correctly! (by anon)

Police call shooting an "assassination attempt"

Assassination attempt

Wait a damn minute here. Where did these people go to school. This was not an assassination attempt. Someone just shot at these dudes and missed.  For example, Biggie and Tu Pac were not assassinated. These two dudes, unfortunately, got shot and died. The murderer has not been apprehended, not the assassin has not been apprehended.  JFK got assassinated. Lincoln got assassinated. It would be incorrect to say that Jack Ruby assassinated Lee Harvey Oswald but correct to say that the Oswald assassinated JFK, regardless of your position on the assassination. Jack Ruby shot and killed Oswald.

Here is a short headline from a Canadian paper about a mafia leader whacked:

The patriarch of Montreal's most notorious Mafia family — Nicolo (Nick) Rizzuto — has been killed in his home in a slaying that caps months of escalating attacks against the embattled crime clan. 

They got it right. It would be incorrect to write that Nick, may the deities have mercy on him, was assassinated.  This dude, like Biggie, Pac, and Oswald was shot and killed. Period.

Lets limit the word "assassination" to prominent public figures. Because it would sound weird for us to start saying that John assassinated his wife, or the wife and her boyfriend assassinated her husband, or, on a honeymoon cruise, Mike assassinated his wife by pushing her off the boat. Try this one on for size OJ "assassinated" Nicole and Ron Goldman.

My advice - lets sick with the word murder or attempted murder in the case of the State Journal. It still works well. Imagine a headline, Casey Anthony is on trial for allegedly assassinating her daughter.

My final point here is that we all should learn to use words correctly.

What did you say?? Professors with foreign accents (by anon)

I would first just like to say that I'm not one of those "Speak English or go home!" kind of people. The issue I'm having in classes though is i can't understand some of my professors. Three of my six teachers are Immigrants and have some sort of accent. And its not the kind of small entertaining accent that people on TV have, there really thick and hard to understand. There have been many times in those classes were The Professor has asked a question or addressed another student and they have to repeat themselves two or three times because the whole class asks, "what are you saying?" I think if you have a job were you spend your day speaking to English speaking students and you have a thick accent, you should be required to take some form of speech program to lessen the thickness of your speech.