stefaniedunn's Class

There are no postings in your class

Student

|
Student

|
Student

|
Student

|
Student

|
Student

|
Student

|
Student

|
Teacher

|
2 years 11 months ago

I appreciated reading your article and I do agree with your opinion that the laws of bill 101 should be loosened and that the relationship among English and French speaking individuals should become better. As a person living in Quebec who speaks both English and French I can say that there are people who judge my friends and I for speaking in English. I’ve personally had people come up to me and tell me that we are in Quebec and that in Quebec we only speak French when I spoke to someone in English. I’ve also had teachers judge my family and I when we were trying to speak in French saying it was not good enough because we spoke with an accent. I believe that people should be able to speak whatever language they would like and we should not be judged for doing so. Being bilingual should not be seen as a horrible thing it should be seen as an advantage.

2 years 11 months ago

Your article about food waste being a problem in Canada was really well said, you were able to explain the underlying issue of food waste and show proof of how Canada has been wasting 31$ billion dollars’ worth of food each year. I do think that it would be good if you elaborated on how other countries like France are decreasing food waste. In the article "French Law Forbids Food Waste by Supermarkets" written by Angelique Chrisafis for the Guardian, France is lowering food waste by having supermarkets donate a substantial amount of food to homeless shelters and are forcing supermarkets to sign documents with homeless shelters to donate food.

Source:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/04/french-law-forbids-food-wa...

3 years 1 month ago

I am commenting on a post that was put online basically 3 years ago, with things obviously happening since then, impacting Syria. However, ignoring such things and focusing in the year 2013, it's such a fine line whether or not the United States should intervene in Syria. I think I must give a slight edge to intervening with Syria, however not with brute military force and more chaos that is already affecting the country. Instead, I believe the United States and perhaps even other countries if possible could contribute and intervene in other ways, such as giving food and water packages for the innocent people who are unfortunately suffering in their very own country. Even some currency if necessary, to help civilians move to a safer part of the country or even flee to another country. The bigger power countries must also do their part and have open arms and at least accept some refugees is the problem does not get better anytime soon. If any negotiations with the Syrian government are to be made, it should be done peacefully and as quickly as possible to resolve the terrible actions occurring in a country where its people are defenseless and unsafe.

3 years 1 month ago

It is unfortunate that to this day, there are countries in the world that are ruled by dictators who abuse their power over extended periods of time and threaten the lives of millions of civilians. Fortunately, there are many people like you who keep their heads up and work towards providing help for those whose lives have been ruined or are in danger. It is important to do our part in society and help those who are struggling to the best of our abilities. This is a story of inspiration.

3 years 1 month ago

The part that attracts me while I was reading the title was the word escalating. Racial problems do escalate in our society and this is why we need to make some changes regarding our beliefs and views. What I appreciated the most in your article is that statistics were present to back up your arguments on the topic. Ethnicity is something that has always created tensions among people and racial issues are important in our society since that it still creates major conflicts. Back in time, people have fought to obtain their rights regardless their skin color, religion and sexual orientation and I have the impression that all the progress we have made result in nothing. What I found the most outrageous is that we are still treating people differently based on their appearance, gender and lifestyle. It makes no sense that a white police officer gives a different treatment to minorities than to white people. Everybody should be treated equally and police officers should apply the law equally to all individuals as they are told to do. No one deserve to be treated as inferior due to their race. For example, being more aggressive toward a black individual or accusing him for something that he may not even have done just because of his skin color is unjustifiable and should not occur nowadays.

3 years 1 month ago

Actually, I believe that the fact that women now have the right to vote in Saudi Arabia is a big change in their country. Maybe for us, it doesn't seem to be a lot because it now makes 76 years that women have the right to vote all over Canada but this change will be followed by a lot more changes in their country. The fact that women can vote in Saudi Arabia is important because with this right, women will be able to determine who is going to be the leader of their municipality. This future leader could be against the unfair power that a man can have over women, not that he thinks that they should be equal but simply that men should control less women, give them a little bit more freedom. Also, now, women can be part of the election and run for office. This could really help the progress of a modern spirit (right now, they really think in a old way). If a women is in power, even if it's for a little territory, she will be able to make changes, good changes for women freedom. Those two changes really help the progress of genre equality in this country because without it, men would never vote for a women so it would be impossible for a women to be elected. And the question is; how can religion take place in the society without depriving the human rights? For some country, it's hard to have both (strong religion and no violation of women rights). In Canada, as it is said, in 1900, women had the same right than women in Saudi Arabia today. Now, in Canada, Religion is still in place (maybe less strong than before) and women have close to the same rights that men do. There still is some little things that isn't the same for women and men (swimsuit, women can't be topless in the street, sometimes the salary, etc.) but overall, women have strong rights and nothing is depriving their human rights. I believe that one day, with the globalization, Saudi Arabia will be able to get over their religion (not to loose their faith but to give less place to religion) and that women will have close to the same rights as men.

3 years 1 month ago

I found that both the article and the users comment are interesting. I do agree with what the article and the user said that there are no moral sides to this conflict, in the sense that no matter which side you pick there are positive and negatives aspects to both sides of the argument. If you pick Palestinians side of the conflict then you are in agreement with the notion of the government using its people as a human shield, if you agree with Israel in this conflict then you are agreeing with the deaths of many Palestinians. Even though I do agree with most of what the user said I do however not agree with what the user said that Palestine is more moral out of both countries. Both countries have done inexplicable damage to its country and those living in it. I also do not agree with what the user said that Israel pushed Palestine off their land. Israel was given this land by the United Nations after world war 2. Overall, I do not believe that there is an moral on either side of this conflict, what I do believe is that this conflict has been going on long enough, it is even known to be one of the most important conflicts in the past century. It is time for this conflict to finish, no more civilians should die as a result of this conflict.

3 years 1 month ago

I totally agree with the author of this review [Zachary “Shankface” Bradley] here, this conflict is definitely one of the most important of the past century and definitely not the simplest one to understand. For years I’ve heard comments on the radio about the terrible acts of Hamas, without ever knowing that there was more to it than terrorist acts from the violent minority of a long suffering nation. People often criticize without knowing or in the case of Ali A. Rizvi’s article; claim being objective while showing subtle sings of bad judgements towards one side or the other, in that case towards Palestine. But, don’t get me wrong, I do not blame Rizvi for having an opinion, it is impossible not to have one and he seemed to have done his best not to show it. My only problem is that most western media platform also claim having that impartiality of judgement while showing somewhat biased documentaries about the awful war acts of Hamas. I think that sadly most of our media, put up that kind of trick, which seems to often work.
Now that I have done some researches on this complex conflict, I tend to stand more on the Palestinian side, again knowing that both sides did plenty of wrong to one another. I can only imagine what it would feel like to slowly lose your home and country to some culturally divergent invaders. On the other hand, the biggest mischief is not on either side but on those who, to lighten their conscience had to come up with such an idea; to give back a symbolic part of land that was not theirs to give. The problem here is that some powerful countries exterminated Jews in the first place. Thus, they had something awfully wrong to redeem themselves from.

There no collaborative classes

About the author