Historic Presidential Tickets For Both Major Political Parties!

The Axiom Of Realistic Expectations

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Having Realistic Expectations

For Themselves, Their Lives, And Others

With Sen. Barack Obama running for President and Sen. John McCain choosing Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, we can all be very proud of the great strides our country has made this year in equality!

Nevertheless, when you vote this November (and it is important that every eligible American citizen do so!), please keep in mind that Magna Sententia advocates voting for the Presidential ticket you feel will be the best for our country, not just based on their surface attributes, but on their political principles and ostensible character.

Here are links to more information about the Presidential candidates and their platforms. The order of this listing is alphabetical by party and is not meant to give preference to one candidate over the other. We strongly encourage everyone to take a serious look at both tickets and their party’s agenda:

Democratic Party Presidential Ticket

President: IL Sen. Barack Obama

Vice-President: DE Sen. Joe Biden

Obama – Biden 2008 Official Website

Democratic Party Official Website

Republican Party Presidential Ticket

President: AZ Sen. John McCain

Vice-President: AK Gov. Sarah Palin

McCain – Palin 2008 Official Website

Republican Party Official Website

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

Parent Bias Against Male Elementary School Teachers: What About Gender Equality?

The Axiom Of Respect

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Treating Themselves And Others

Respectfully And Respecting

Only Those Who Earn It

Since the mid-1960’s, feminism has ushered in many essential societal changes in America, and today, both women and men are enjoying the benefits of greater gender equality in countless areas of their lives. Nevertheless, complete gender equality is yet to be achieved. For instance, consider the plight of the male elementary school teacher:

Regrettably, there are still those in our society who are not open to men, especially young adult men, being elementary school teachers, and parents are among their chief opponents. Even though males “account for 16 percent of all elementary school teachers, according to a 2003 National Schools and Staffing Survey,” they are often met with prejudice and a suspicious eye. (“The Mistrusted Male Teacher”)

In a discussion “on a Detroit’s parents blog called Momslikeme,” biased comments about male elementary school teachers included “‘personally I think it’s a little weird,’ to men are too rough and ‘if I had a male teacher in my K-3rd grades I would have freaked.’” “‘What’s a young single dude doing teaching fourth grade anyway?!’” was another biased comment recently posted by mother Annie Payne “on the popular Colorado parent blog hosted by the Denver Post, Milehighmamas.” All of theses opinions illustrate the archaic attitudes of a number of parents. (Funny, it seems that after more than 40 years of struggle, women would be the last people to hold such discriminatory beliefs!)

Our society desperately needs strong, healthy male role models for our elementary school-age boys and girls. Female teachers are great, but children must also be exposed to men who are educated and kind. Men and women are inherently different, and it is important for children to be comfortable and familiar with both genders.

Living according to Magna Sententia, we will move forward in abolishing the stringent gender roles of the past: We stifle our society’s growth in terms of acceptance and unity if we give our young children the impression that only one gender is capable of being their teacher.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

It’s Time For America To Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

The Axiom Of Respect

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Treating Themselves And Others

Respectfully And Respecting

Only Those Who Earn It

As a society, we need to start differentiating between religious marriage and civil marriage:

• Religious marriage is usually considered a sacred union between a man and a woman who vow to God that throughout their entire lives they will remain husband and wife and honor one another.
• Civil marriage, on the other hand, is the government acknowledging the intimate union of two people by conferring legal rights upon them, such as tax, estate, inheritance, Social Security, disability, military, and veteran benefits.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws that establish a state religion, along with guaranteeing Americans the right to practice their religions freely without fear of governmental persecution. Due to this essential separation of church and state, the government should not be allowed to force religions to change their definitions of marriage: If Christians want Christian marriage to be only between a man and a woman, then that is their prerogative. However, by this same logic, when it comes to civil marriage the separation of church and state ought to prevent the legal definition of marriage from being dependent on a specific religion’s definition of marriage.

If we as Americans truly believe in the concept that all people are equal, then we will ensure that in the eyes of the law, heterosexuals and homosexuals are treated equally. Under Magna Sententia, it is important that same-sex marriage be legalized since it is discriminatory for the government to only allow heterosexual couples to marry and receive all of the benefits of marriage. We realize that there are many opponents to this idea, but if we are going to be a united society, we must allow people to be their true selves, which most definitely includes their sexual orientation and gender identity.

It is a natural tendency to fear the unfamiliar, but discriminating against those who are different from us is not only unloving and cruel, but it also lacks common sense: Sexual orientation and gender identity are inherent qualities that cannot be changed. (While behaviors might be adjusted through religious “counseling” and prayer, the true self always remains.) In fact, it is detrimental to your physical and mental health to attempt to alter your true self, especially just to conform to societal or religious standards. (If you are heterosexual, imagine how it would be if the roles were reversed and you lived in a predominantly homosexual society that discriminated against heterosexuals.)

Our country, communities, and families all must understand that rigid ideas about sexual orientation and gender expression make life extremely stressful for those who are different from the norm, even though they came by their personality traits, feelings, and desires naturally. If you are reading this and you do not fit the norm, please do not let others make you feel badly about yourself because of who you are!

A special note: If your religion is an important part of your life, and it teaches that alternative lifestyles are morally unacceptable, then please be respectful of those who do not follow your religion and/or live differently than you do. A religion worth following allows you to peacefully coexist with those of contrary beliefs.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

[An Oregon Indian tribe recently legalized same-sex marriage. To read more, see “Brides Look Forward To Marrying Under Tribal Same-Sex Marriage Law.”]

Texas Teachers Packing Heat Is Fine By Us

The Axiom Of Realistic Expectations

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Having Realistic Expectations

For Themselves, Their Lives, And Others

It has recently come to national attention that “in an October open meeting that had been publicized,” the school district of Harrold, Texas decided to allow school employees to carry concealed handguns on school grounds. (“Texas Students Pack Bookbags; Teachers Pack Heat”)

The decision was made “after nearly two years of researching the best school security options at the [K-12] school, which is just off a busy highway and 30 minutes away from the sheriff’s office.” Further, according to Harrold Superintendent David Thweatt, there are safety measures in the policy to prevent school employees who are ill-equipped to handle weapons and/or crisis situations from carrying at school: “Each employee who wants to carry a weapon first must be approved by the board based on his or her personality and reaction to a crisis [. . .]. In addition to training required for a state concealed weapons license, they also must be trained to handle crisis intervention and hostage situations.”

Although a number of parents and teachers are pleased with the policy, especially considering the distance from the sheriff’s office to the school, there are also those who are quite concerned: President of the Brady Campaign, Paul Helmke, feels the policy incorrectly “ask[s] teachers to take on the additional job of being police officers,” and mother Traci McKay said, “As far as I’m concerned, teachers were trained to educate my children — not carry a gun. [. . .] I don’t want my child looking over her shoulder wondering who’s carrying a gun.”

With all due respect to opponents of this policy, permitting qualified school employees to choose to carry concealed weapons on school property in no way implies that they are to be held to the same standards as a police officer. In fact, this policy really isn’t about teachers “being police officers”; rather, it’s about allowing individuals to exercise their rights, specifically their right to keep and bear arms.

Gun rights and gun-control laws have been a topic of heated debate for years now, and if you’re inclined to stop reading this article and dismiss it as a nutty pro-gun piece because of our last sentence, please don’t: We appreciate the desire for a safe and peaceful society, and even though individuals have widely varying ideas about the best way to achieve this, we are all really on the same team. Magna Sententia recognizes that differing opinions are healthy and promote a greater understanding; thus, here are our thoughts on this issue:

Why is the Second Amendment so important anyway? One, because it protects the people from the government: Throughout history, dictators and tyrants have disarmed the populace in order to maintain control and prevent revolution. The best relatively recent example is Nazi Germany, which passed Regulations Against Jews’ Possession of Weapons in 1938, “depriv[ing] all Jews of the right to possess firearms or other weapons.” (“Wikipedia: Gun Politics In Germany”) The Jews were left without any means to defend themselves, and from 1938 to 1945, the Nazis murdered approximately 6 million Jews in the Holocaust. The Second Amendment was intended to keep American leadership honest, so to speak, and although our country is free at this time, the choices we make now can most certainly hurt our chances of being free in the future.

Two, the Second Amendment protects good people from bad people: Individuals need to be able to defend themselves against someone who is trying to physically harm them. Police aren’t omnipresent or omnipotent, and bystanders don’t always help (“Stabbing Victim’s Cries For Help Ignored”). Moreover, weapons level the playing field for those who are unable to physically defend themselves, such as women, the elderly, and the disabled. Unfortunately, when you make weapons illegal, criminals still acquire and use them. Yes, if you make gun laws strict enough, criminals may not want to risk it, but then you usually end up with an increased number of victims who are stabbed or bludgeoned. In effect, gun-control laws only hurt the law-abiding citizens they are meant to protect.

Realistically, we have to accept that violence will never be completely extinguished from humanity: There will always be greed and envy. There will always be individuals who find it easier to steal from others than work. There will always be pedophiles, rapists, and murderers. There will always be those who are born violent by nature (formerly known as psychopaths and sociopaths, now said to have antisocial personality disorder). In essence, there will always be those who value themselves and their desires (or impulses) over morality and the lives of others.

It is a mistake to try to achieve utopia without factoring in human nature. We must keep our military strong even in times of peace, and it is imperative that our citizens maintain the right to protect themselves.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

“R” Movie Ratings For Smoking Don’t Teach Children Not To Smoke

The Axiom Of Responsibility

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Taking Responsibility

For Themselves And Their Children

The National Cancer Institute, our country’s “leading federal agency on cancer research,” recently released a report entitled “Monograph 19 – The Role of the Media in Promoting and Reducing Tobacco Use,” which found that “depictions of smoking in movies and tobacco marketing promote youth smoking.” (“Govt. Report: Movies Really Do Get Teens To Smoke”) Many tobacco-control activists are hoping that this report is the “impetus for decision-makers to take the bold step to remove smoking from youth-rated films [G, PG, and PG-13], once and for all.”

Here we go again with parents trying to place their responsibilities onto someone else, in this case the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), as well as film studios. Following Magna Sententia, you are responsible for your children until they are 18 years of age, not the tobacco and film industries, and this includes what you allow your children to watch and whether or not they smoke underage. Set rules for your children and explain your reasons for them. If you have developed a good relationship with your children throughout the years, they will ultimately obey your instructions.

We as parents must stop the mentality that everybody else has to parent our children. Demanding that the MPAA give an “R” rating to every film that contains smoking is just ridiculous, especially considering that there is so much leniency in PG-13 movies when it comes to crassness, sex, and violence. (“Smoke Free Movies: The Solution”) Smoking contributes a great deal to characters at times, even in children’s movies if the character is the villain: Can you imagine Cruella De Vil without smoke wafting up from her long cigarette holder?

We can’t protect children from everything, and we shouldn’t try: If you shelter your children too much, you run the risk of them not having all of the tools they need to navigate the world when they become responsible for themselves as adults at age 18. Expose your children to the world in a manner that is age appropriate, supervised, and constructive so that you can teach them the best way to wade through all of the challenging situations and choices they eventually will have to face.

As they age, children have to develop a healthy relationship with movies, meaning they have to understand that movies are just movies. Typically, film is meant to be art, entertainment, education, or a mixture of the three. Parents need to explain to their children that movies aren’t reality or a good reference when it comes to making major life decisions, such as whether or not to try smoking.

Please parents: let’s start acting like the adults in our relationships with our children. They need the direction, limits, and love only we can provide.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

Frazier’s Anti-War T-Shirts Are Disrespectful, But Must Be Protected

The Axiom Of Respect

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Treating Themselves And Others

Respectfully And Respecting

Only Those Who Earn It

In 2007, Arizona enacted a “law against selling products that use military casualties’ names without [their] families’ permission.” (“Judge’s Ruling Protects Man’s Anti-War T-Shirts”) Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Neil Wake “permanently barred Arizona from using [this] state law to prosecute an online merchant [Dan Frazier] who sells shirts that list names of thousands of troops killed in Iraq,” ruling that doing so “would violate the Flagstaff man’s First Amendment rights because his ‘Bush Lied — They Died’ shirts are ‘core political speech.’”

Although Frazier won this time, he must still defend himself against a federal lawsuit filed by Robin and Michael Read, parents of a fallen soldier whose name is listed on the t-shirts. The Reads, who are from Greeneville, Tennessee, “have asked that their case be expanded to cover more than 4,000 casualties and seek more than $40 billion in damages.”

There are really two issues at hand here: one, whether or not Frazier should be legally allowed to sell his shirts without getting family members’ permission, and two, whether or not it is respectful for Frazier to sell his shirts without permission, even if he has the right to do so.

First, regardless of how we feel about other people’s views and ideas, a truly free country never silences its citizens. Although we are not attorneys, it seems to us that newspapers and other media publications qualify as products (“Goods: Definition From Answers.com”), and that because of this, a law that bans “selling products that use military casualties’ names without families’ permission” could easily be used to violate First Amendment rights. The media, in all of its various forms, capitalizes on the dissemination of information and opinions all day, every day, and to protect our freedom of speech, we need to be able to print information and opinions freely.

Clearly, Frazier has a very negative opinion of President Bush, along with his administration and the way he handled the Iraq war, and Frazier has the right to publish and promote his views. That said, we feel it is disrespectful of Frazier to list the names of fallen soldiers on t-shirts (not in a thoughtful article or other publication, but on t-shirts!), especially since so many families object. We have the greatest respect for the Reads’ son and all who have given their lives for our country and our freedom, and every American needs to treat our soldiers and veterans respectfully, as well as honor their sacrifice.

In order to unify our country, we must carefully consider the feelings of others when we exercise our own rights. Recognizing how our actions affect others is an integral part of Magna Sententia and something we can all do to bring America together.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

Teachers Need To Be Able To Discipline, But Spanking Isn’t The Answer

The Axiom Of Responsibility

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Taking Responsibility

For Themselves And Their Children

Unfortunately, in our nation’s schools today, teachers frequently do not have the ability to control their classrooms. In addition to many children arriving at school unprepared for their day, without the required supplies, proper sleep, and a good breakfast, educators are often confronted with parents who are unsupportive when their children require discipline at school, blindly siding with their children and assuming the school is at fault. This ties the hands of teachers and administrators: Classrooms become unmanageable and fellow students become frustrated, forcing teachers to either give up and provide lower quality instruction or head for the door to find a profession in which they can get the respect they deserve. Ultimately, this inability of teachers to discipline their students causes learning to suffer.

Given that this atmosphere is prevalent in numerous schools throughout our country, the fact that “more than 200,000 kids were spanked or paddled in U.S. schools during the past year” is all the more surprising. (“More Than 200,000 Kids Spanked At School”) We seem to be suffering from one extreme or the other.

Teachers spanking, paddling, or physically disciplining students is something that should be completely abolished in America. According to Magna Sententia, it is the parent’s responsibility to determine if corporal punishment is appropriate for their children, and if so, it is the parent’s position to administer such punishment.

It is also the parent’s job to make sure their children behave when they are at school. Educators are not there to teach your children how to behave; rather, your children should know how to behave when they arrive at school. Teachers are only responsible for one thing: doing their best to educate their students according to the curriculum of their classes, and in order to accomplish this goal, they must be able to control their classrooms. Thus, parents need to support administrators who suspend and/or expel their children because of discipline problems. If the school is having difficulty with your child, you must work with your child so that they do not disrupt the learning of all the other students in his/her class.

There is no place for spanking at school, but there is also no place for discipline problems. Parents raise your children to know you expect excellent, cooperative behavior from them when they are away from you. Their behavior is your responsibility. And please, when the school does have a problem with your child, listen open-mindedly: You provide your children with important life tools when you make them accountable for their actions.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

The Amethyst Initiative: Lowering The Drinking Age Treats Adults As Adults

The Axiom Of Responsibility

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Taking Responsibility

For Themselves And Their Children

“College presidents from about 100 of the nation’s best-known universities, including Duke, Dartmouth and Ohio State, are calling on lawmakers to consider lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18” because they feel that “current laws actually encourage dangerous binge drinking.” (“College Chiefs Urge New Debate On Drinking Age”)

Led by the former president of Middlebury College, John McCardell, the Amethyst Initiative hopes to inspire a “national debate” on lowering the drinking age, but they are already running into fierce opposition from Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), which contends that “lowering the drinking age would lead to more fatal car crashes.”

There is research supporting both sides of this issue: Members of the Amethyst Initiative claim that “the 21-year-old drinking age ‘pushes drinking into hiding, heightening its risk’” and that “rais[ing] the drinking age from 18 to 21 may not have saved lives.” On the other hand, “MADD CEO Chuck Hurley said, nearly all peer-reviewed studies looking at the change showed raising the drinking age reduced drunk-driving deaths.”

So then, what are we to make of this conundrum? First, it seems important to factor in that it’s hypocritical to tell 18-year-olds that they are mature enough to vote, have sex, get married, smoke, sign contracts, get the death penalty for their actions, and give their lives for our country, but then treat them as though they’re too immature to be responsible with alcohol. Besides, spend time on any high school campus, public or private, and you’ll find that the current drinking age isn’t preventing minors from drinking.

As for the 21-year-old drinking age increasing binge drinking, the presidents of the Amethyst Initiative may have a point. Forbidden fruit is usually more attractive. (It’s just human nature!) Nevertheless, we feel that binge drinking on college campuses is a problem with a different source: students not taking responsibility for themselves or their behavior. Clearly, no law can fix this lack of personal responsibility, for parents need to teach their children this starting from early childhood.

In our country and under Magna Sententia, 18-year-olds are legally considered adults, which means they must accept adult responsibilities and society must hold them to adult responsibilities. Why, then, are we treating them like children? We can’t protect college students from themselves, and it’s not society’s job to try.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

Focus On The Family Action: Pray For Manners, Not Rain

The Axiom Of Respect

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Treating Themselves And Others

Respectfully And Respecting

Only Those Who Earn It

Clearly, Focus on the Family Action does not support Sen. Barak Obama for President, and their political opinion is their right. What is not right is the disrespectful video their director of digital media, Stuart Shepard, made and posted on their website asking Christians to “pray for ‘rain of biblical proportions’” during Obama’s acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. (“Video Had Asked Prayers For ‘Rain Of Biblical Proportions’”)

Whether or not it was meant as a joke, behavior such as Shepard’s is one of the many reasons we wrote Magna Sententia: As Americans, we need to be reminded of the importance of treating others respectfully, regardless of our conflicting viewpoints. Having respect for someone is about your opinion of them, while treating others respectfully is about your opinion of you. What kind of person do you want to be: The kind who treats people well as long as they agree with you, or a better kind who is respectful of everyone? Treating others respectfully is vital to having a society that is united and strong.

We must learn to agree to disagree because there are always going to be times when we disagree. Wishing or praying for harm to come to someone else is rude, divisive, and quite infantile. Further, there are good, honest, and respectable people who are different than we are, who have different lifestyles than we have, and who worship (or not) in a different way than we do.

Doesn’t Focus on the Family Action realize that there are Christians (along with those who represent a myriad of other religions and those who have no religion at all) on both sides of the political aisle? Let’s grow up and learn to be more thoughtful when we disagree with one another.

“Praying To Rain On Obama”

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society

Consumer Product Safety Measure A Welcome Relief For Parents

The Axiom Of Responsibility

Individuals Demonstrate Valid Behavior

By Taking Responsibility

For Themselves And Their Children

Parents throughout the country can breathe a little easier knowing that an “expansive consumer product safety measure” signed into law last Thursday will soon make many children’s products safer. (“New Toy Safety Standards Become Law”)

Recently, “major toy and product recalls have dominated the headlines,” adding yet another worry for parents who are concerned for their children’s safety. Senator Daniel K. Inouye of Hawaii admitted, “The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has been a neglected agency for too many years,” vowing that the new law “puts an end to that neglect.” We applaud this legislation and hope it will drastically decrease the number of product-related deaths per year, which is currently “more than 27,000.”

While today there is a tendency to over-legislate, this law is one we actually need because improved product safety standards benefit everyone in our society, not just parents and children, and it will supposedly “ensure that products Americans find on their store shelves are safe and that the regulating agencies have the resources they need to enforce law.”

One word of caution: Don’t let your guard down just because products are said to be safe. Safety standards never make us completely safe, so we need to scrutinize our purchases, especially toys and children’s products. Ultimately, it is up to us to watch out for our own safety, as well as the safety of our children. While this new legislation is a great step forward, please make sure you are an educated and vigilant consumer.

Anna and Ellie Sherise
Creators of Magna Sententia
Authors of Magna Sententia: The Logical Cure for Our Society