Hi.
I have four pets right now! They are two puppies and two female dogs. The first one, and my favorite is Almendra, and i have her since one and a half year ago. The second one is Lulu, and she is in my familyu since the summer of this year. The puppies are called Hansel and Gretel (like Grimms brothers stories). The puppies were born four months ago, and are of Almendra.
I think that people keep pets because they are a good company, in fact, some people think that they even are loyal (sometimes more that people).
Dogs are good pets, and cats too. I prefer dogs because they are more loving and friendly.
About the idea of that pets owners live longer, i think that is possible but not sure. I mean, when people have any pet they don't feel to alone sometimes, and pets don't need nothing else that eat and love. Pets aren't complicated, and they are lovely!. Besides, the reason to have pets is that you'll enjoy with them, so if anytime you doesn't have it you shouldn't keep with a pet.
A important point is that to have pets you have to be prepared to take care of them, because they are living, and they suffer just like an human been.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Summary.-
Hi!
The new i choose for this task was called "Oklahoma abortion law to put patients' details online". It appears in The Guardian, on october 18.
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/18/oklahoma-abortion-details-online]
The new is about a new abotion law that gonna rule on the state of Oklahoma, USA. The new law says that all women that want to abort in that state, have to give private information to the doctor about herself.
Woman have to bring information about their age, marital status and education levels, as well as the number of previous pregnancies and abortions. Moreover, women have to talk about their relationship with the father, the reason to do an abort, and the place where it is realized. They never give their names to the doctor, but in the state of Oklahoma there's a small population, so is easy find out who is who.
Then that woman give this information, the doctor is obligated to give the information to the Oklahoma Health Department. This department post this information in a public website.
The sponsor of that lawis the Republican state senator Todd Lamb. He said that the have to give inform to women, because that baby could possible be a Nobel Prize when he/she grown up.
There's groups that support the abort, and they say that it's an unusual law, and it's gonna makes that women will be still more nervious about aborts in Oklahoma, specially because the information is important and publish since now.
The new i choose for this task was called "Oklahoma abortion law to put patients' details online". It appears in The Guardian, on october 18.
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/18/oklahoma-abortion-details-online]
The new is about a new abotion law that gonna rule on the state of Oklahoma, USA. The new law says that all women that want to abort in that state, have to give private information to the doctor about herself.
Woman have to bring information about their age, marital status and education levels, as well as the number of previous pregnancies and abortions. Moreover, women have to talk about their relationship with the father, the reason to do an abort, and the place where it is realized. They never give their names to the doctor, but in the state of Oklahoma there's a small population, so is easy find out who is who.
Then that woman give this information, the doctor is obligated to give the information to the Oklahoma Health Department. This department post this information in a public website.
The sponsor of that lawis the Republican state senator Todd Lamb. He said that the have to give inform to women, because that baby could possible be a Nobel Prize when he/she grown up.
There's groups that support the abort, and they say that it's an unusual law, and it's gonna makes that women will be still more nervious about aborts in Oklahoma, specially because the information is important and publish since now.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The statue of John Paul II in Bellavista.
Hi.
I'm against the proyect. I'm against the statue because i think that is too big for a little space like that, and will look grotesque. Besides, i think that the statue won't be a contribution to the square, because we already have the new building of Universidad San Sebastian, that makes look horrible to the neighborhood. I think that USS building is an imitation to our building, did you notice it? The roof is red like our, and the wall makes feel the same.
In other way, i think that the statue is a waste of money. It coste $400 millions! it is enough money to impulse usefull ideas, relevant proyects.
The university that pays the pope statue is the same one that imitate our building. USS is completaly catholic, you just need pay attention to the name. Our university is known like secular. The instalation of this statue in from of our university seems a incitiment to our bealieves. In a general way, no all the country is catholic, so put the biggest statue of the world that has been ever dedicated to the pope in a public place isn't pluralistic.
For all the reason i gave, if i was the mayor of Recoleta i surely said NO! The neighborhood isn't agree with the proyect any way. I think that the statue don't bring something for the neighborhood by itself. I think that on this square should exist a place to the family, neutral ideologically speaking.
I'm not against the pope figure, his work like pope or something like that., but i think that put a giant statue like that is a crime to the urban city.
I'm against the proyect. I'm against the statue because i think that is too big for a little space like that, and will look grotesque. Besides, i think that the statue won't be a contribution to the square, because we already have the new building of Universidad San Sebastian, that makes look horrible to the neighborhood. I think that USS building is an imitation to our building, did you notice it? The roof is red like our, and the wall makes feel the same.
In other way, i think that the statue is a waste of money. It coste $400 millions! it is enough money to impulse usefull ideas, relevant proyects.
The university that pays the pope statue is the same one that imitate our building. USS is completaly catholic, you just need pay attention to the name. Our university is known like secular. The instalation of this statue in from of our university seems a incitiment to our bealieves. In a general way, no all the country is catholic, so put the biggest statue of the world that has been ever dedicated to the pope in a public place isn't pluralistic.
For all the reason i gave, if i was the mayor of Recoleta i surely said NO! The neighborhood isn't agree with the proyect any way. I think that the statue don't bring something for the neighborhood by itself. I think that on this square should exist a place to the family, neutral ideologically speaking.
I'm not against the pope figure, his work like pope or something like that., but i think that put a giant statue like that is a crime to the urban city.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
