Dear America's Toughest Sheriff

Flag Burning as Iconoclasm

“One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all,” were the words we would repeat from our muscle memory. We had no idea what we were pledging allegiance to, less what the words pledge and allegiance even meant. Yet we pledged ourselves day in and out before this flag. The flag detail ceremony is highly prized by many Americans. They stand tall and proud as it is being raised and lowered. To these Americans, the flag represents their country, their god, and above all, their freedom. But what freedom is exactly held sacred beneath this flying flag?
There are several laws governing the display of a flag. If broken, they are punishable and can even amount to jail time. In the case of William B. Mummford, the removal of the flag was death(1). The cost of dropping the flag is that it must be burned. Many protestors have used flag burning in demonstration. I feel this is stating that America is falling and we will burn if we do not take action. However, the Citizens of Flag Alliance does not agree my feelings. The alliance states that the flag represents our unity and that our system of democracy, constitutional rights and freedoms are all unified by our flag. “It is our ‘trademark’.” Corporate America. I’m reminded by a scene from Chuck Palahniuk’s book Fight Club where the members of Project: Mayhem are set on a quest to kill two birds with one stone by destroying a piece of corporate art and a franchise coffee shop.
Even though burning the flag is seen to be unjustly by many, the case has been brought up all often in the past few decades. In 1989, Texas man named Gregory Johnson was tried and convicted for burning the U.S. flag in protest of the reelection of President Reagan(3). Even though there is no federal Supreme Court decision of flag burning as being unlawful, there are certain fire and peace codes the courts may arrest you for. The court’s decision was later appealed as there was no evidence that Johnson had actually endangered any one’s wellbeing(4).
I believe that as a symbol of freedom, we should be free to display the American flag in any way we choose. If that means flying it over a lighted path, draping from our door, modeling it into clothing, or laying it ablaze on the sidewalk while urinating on it to put it out, then so be it. Anti-flag burning members argue that our forefathers died for that flag, but I believe they could not die for something as vain as a flag. It was what the flag represented; our freedom to speak and be heard. To express ourselves in the manner that best displays our feelings and emotions; that and not having to pay taxes.

None

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece

Homosexuality is a term that refers to the sexual relationship held between members of the same gender. Most recently this lifestyle has been looked down upon and has forced many to remain “in the closet” about their sexual desires. However, this was not the case for boys and older men in ancient Greece.

The term homosexual was not used to describe the relationship that was held between two males during the classical Greek period. The relationship that was commonly depicted on much of the classical Greek pottery was known as "paiderastia" which translates to “boylove”(1) . This was the relationship that existed when an adult male selected a junior “eromenos” male from a separate family. Upon approval of the boys family, the adult male (referred to as a “erastes”) was to take the boy to a andreian clubhouse where the boy was to receive gifts. Afterward, the two would spend 2 months in the countryside where the adult was to teach the young junior to hunt and fight (Halperin, 56).

Halperin writes that it was ritual for the erastes to give the eromenos their first sexual experience. Much like women of the time, the young eromenos was not to enjoy the experience. He was to accept the dominance of the older male. Halperin stated that even though copulation was ideally achieved without penetration as to spare effemination of the eromenos, this was not usually the case (Halperin).

Conflicting writings have may have stated that Halperin’s findings of domination in the young male may have been skewed slightly from how most men felt about their younger partners. Thomas K. Hubbard at University of California has translated a recorded dialect that was held between Syracuse ruler, Hieron and the poet Sinonides of Ceos. In the conversation Hieron states that as a tyrant, he does not enjoy taking from the boy what he could just simply ask for.

“For when a boy loves you in return, how sweetly he looks back at you, how sweetly he asks questions, how sweetly he answers; and the sweetest of all and the most erotic is when he fights with you and argues. But to enjoy the charms of an unwilling boy," he said, "seems to me to be more like robbery than love-making. In fact, a robber at least gets some pleasure from his profits and from making his enemies unhappy; but for a man to take pleasure in the unhappiness of the person he loves and to be hated in return for his love and to force himself on someone he makes miserable: how could this not be a nasty, debasing experience?” (2).

This dialog also has me curious on exactly how women were treated. If the statues of Aphrodite were placed in rooms to be seen as statues of erotic behavior, shouldn’t have female partners been looked at in the same respect as the young male partners? After all, was it not the women that were mothers of these great, masculine men?

In some cases, affairs between women were documented in the poems of Sappo, a poet from the island of Lesbos. In her poems she glamorizes the Spartan women for their athleticism and freedom to compete nude with the young male Spartans (3).

The homosexual love affairs between Greek soldiers was also common. One instance is Achilles and Patroclus. An image depicts Achilles bandaging his friend Patroclus and is seen as being homoerotic by many scholars. The relationships were held valuable by the soldiers in that it was thought to be that one would fight harder for one's lover than they would for one's neighbor. Homer noted this in the mistake of organizing troops by village than by friendship (5).

Today, homosexuality is regarded as culturally unacceptable in Greece. The citizens of Greece for most have denied the relationships held between the same sexes of their early ancestors. The 2002 movie “Alexander” shows the homosexual relationship held between Alexander the Great and his childhood friend, Hephaistion. The film was a flop in Greece as it was in theaters for only 4 days (6).

Although homosexuality is seen as morally wrong in today’s Christian dominated culture, ancient Classical Greece was in a different time with far different cultural concerns. As the world became more involved with a single creator, it became more involved with self-control. The Greeks had not concerned themselves with forbidden as Christians did. The Greeks figured the desirable was okay just as long as it was not in excess. They felt that they had these urges for their male partners for a reason and the morality should not be an issue (Foucault, 68).

Bibliography

5. Aeschylus: Translated by Anthony Hecht and Helen H. Bacon. (1991). Seven Against Thebes. New York: Oxford University Press.

Halperin, D. M. (1990). One Hundered Years of Homosexuality: and other essays on Greek Love. 29 West 35 Street, New York, NY 10001: Chapman and Hall, Inc.

4. Hubbard, T. K. (2003, April). 2.4: Xenophon, Hieron 1.29-38. Retrieved October 17, 2007, from Homosexuality in Ancient Greece and Rome: http://www.laits.utexas.edu/ancienthomosexuality/readindex.php?view=18

1.Oxford Classical Dictionary: The ultimate Refference Work on the Classical World. Third Edition Revised. (2003). Entery on ancient Greek homosexuality. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

3. Sappic Love. (n.d.). Retrieved October 19, 2007, from http://perseus.uchicago.edu/hopper/text.jsp?doc=Plat.+Sym.+191&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0166

Drugs During These Hard Times

Jonathan Koch

04/20/2009

Research Paper

War on Drugs: Cultural Success, or Economic Failure

In 1937 a federal tax law was passed that would be the main arguing point to the eventual banning of the consumption and possession of Cannabis in the United States. This proposal was greatly lobbied by DuPont chemical manufacturing company who, at the time, was competing for the rights to manufacture car seats in the new booming automotive industry. While this did not make the consumption or possession of Cannabis illegal, it did impose a $100 tax on commercial use of the plant every time the plant, or drug, changed hands (1). Their major competitor was the manufactures of hemp that could be used as a strong fiber that would tear much less than DuPont’s own cheaply made oil-based fibers. Conspiracies like this have surfaced to my attention a lot since I was in high school. If any of them are legitimate in their argument, I could not tell you. My big concern is not really focused so much on the controversially unconstitutional prohibition of drugs, but the amount of money spent on keeping these drugs illegal and how the war on drugs is hurting our economy instead of fixing it.

The war on drugs was coined in 1969 by then president Richard Nixon (2) when he promised to keep drugs out of our communities and out of our homes by imposing and enforcing strict policies on offenders. Robert E. Peterson, former director of Michigan’s office of drug control, is a firm supporter in the firm punishment of drug offenders. Peterson now has his own private law firm in Owego, New York and has been keeping with his stance against drugs in America. In a 1996 essay, Peterson wrote that as the more drug offenders are put in jail, the drug use and other crimes in New York from years 1991 to 1995 have fallen (3). This is true; the rates have fallen, and they have continued to fall. In fact New York City is reporting the lowest crime rates in forty years according to the New York Times (4). But does this really have anything to do with drug use?

I did some searching in the library and came across some national statistics on the amount of drugs that have been seized by the government. Methamphetamine seizure had increased almost six hundred percent from the 274 kilograms seized in year 1990 to the 1817 kilograms seized in year 2005 while cocaine seizures had risen over forty-eight percent with 57,031 kilograms seized in 1990 to 84,959 in year 2005 (5). While this evidence seems to support the observations made by Peterson, we are only really seeing how much more is being smuggled in or manufactured and found by officials. We are not seeing the millions of dollars that are slipping by to meet the demand.

Even with the large amounts of drugs being seized, a report from the White House Drug Policy advisor states that Americans still spent nearly a combined total of $45 billion on heroin and cocaine in the year 2000; in the year 1990 it was estimated at over $92 billion. This does suggest that users are spending less on the drugs, but it does not tell how or why not as much money is being spent. To reach a demand, smugglers must first get the product to the United States. This would be very difficult to do if the product was bulked up with impurities, so the drugs must be separated down to the purest form to allow smugglers to conceal and move the product. In the year 1990, a pure gram of cocaine would cost $180 dollars. In the year 2000, cocaine prices had fallen to $152 per pure gram and heroin had fallen from $2,184 per pure gram to $839 per pure gram (6). This had also been a main reason for boiling cocaine to the base salts and smoked as the recreational drug, “crack”, which is potentially more dangerous and even less expensive than in the pure form.

One of the main arguments on keeping dangerous drugs illegal for the recreational consumption is that people feel threatened by the thought of having a meth lab on the corner of their neighborhood. They do not want to worry about their children being targeted by drug pushers while they walk home from school. They do not want to have to worry about being assaulted and robbed by some junky trying to get his next score of – whatever. But the problem with this is that most drug users are not bad people. They are little league coaches, teachers, moms, dads, or they are people just trying to ease the excruciating nausea and vomiting that occurs after chemotherapy treatment. Sure, you have the idiot high school kids getting high behind a statue after school at 4:20, but they are not criminals; they are just idiots. So, what are we supposed to do with people that are not criminals in any other sense except for the fact that they enjoy drugs that somebody else has said they are not allowed to put in their own body? Should we send them to jail?

A 2008 yearly census reported that 2,310,984 prisoners are lodged in either federal or state prisons, which is an increase of 2.4% from years 2000 to 2007. Of the 2,310,984 prisoners, 253,300 were in for non-violent drug offences (7). In a brief statistic taken by the state of Florida, it is estimated that it costs anywhere from $43.11 to $94.87 to house an inmate depending upon the amount of care the inmate requires (8). If the average inmate requires $43.11 to be housed (assuming that costs is similar to other state and federal systems), that would cost the United States $10,919,763 a day to incarcerate the drug offenders alone. That is over $3.9 billion a year. Can we not just let them go and expect them to be on their marry way to recovery?

A 16 year old male, from Washington, D.C., has been arrested 12 times and still makes more money per day than I probably will ever make with no arrests. He was reported as making $300 to $400 dollars a day selling crack. His behavior was of his environment; “I don't want to make this a life thing. I'll quit when I get out of high school. But when you start you really can't stop. The money is too good.” (11): This teenager did not want to be a drug dealer. These people are a product of an environment that is created by oppression. They are people whom are controlled by people that take advantage of others and exploit things like illegally selling drugs to users. When I filed for financial aid this year, and years before, I was asked if I had ever had any drug related charges. Before I started researching the topic of America’s drug war, I always wondered what would have happened if I had to mark “Yes”. Turns out that there was an education bill passed in 1988 that would deem me ineligible for federal aid if I marked yes, or had been found to have a drug related charge on criminal record. With the exceptions of a few speeding tickets, I have no criminal record, so I just marked “No” in the circle, submitted the document and waited for my money. Until reading Merchandizing Prisoners: Who really Pays for Prison Privatization by Byron Eugene Price, I never made the connection that a 19-year-old kid caught with an ounce of marijuana would be disqualified for financial aid, while another who is convicted of a violent crime, such as murder, can still receive government assistance (9). Not to imply that aid should be disqualified for both, but that we cannot expect a person to just recover from a felony conviction without an education. While there are welfare benefits for drug abusers, I would rather much see this money being put back in our education systems.

Another issue with the laws on drugs is medical care. Doctors of medicine and other medical professions are allowed to prescribe medications to patients by means a drug administration card that is closely monitored by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). These drugs are scheduled from 1 to 5 based upon their danger and likeliness of causing addiction or dependency, schedule 1 being the most dangerous, 5 being the least. You cannot get any of the scheduled drugs in the United States without proper permission from the DEA (10). This causes panic in doctors in that they are afraid of prescribing what the DEA may consider to be too much medication. The overprescribing of medication can result in the revocation of the doctor’s privilege to prescribe medications to patients that may require larger amounts of medication as their tolerance of the drugs increase. Consequently, a study submitted by The New England Journal of Medicine in a book on drug addiction by Esther Grinnell M.D. shows that pharmacies are 75% less likely to carry sufficient amounts of opioid pain medication in nonwhite neighborhoods versus 23% in majority white neighborhoods (11).

Grinnell, an expert on addictive behavioral studies, also suggests that drug addiction is more likely to be cause of a behavioral problem than it is a chemical problem. This is suggesting the report on pharmacy’s underwhelmed pain prescription supplies in nonwhite neighborhoods could be based off an ethnocentric belief that whites are less likely to abuse prescription drugs (11). This could lead to lower sales in and closures of pharmaceutical stores in black neighborhoods. Without the assistance of pain medications, people requiring these medications will not be able to recover from injury or be able to perform duties required by their work, which can lead to time loss of work or even job termination.

Peterson’s review in support of America’s drug policy shows the decreased crime rates in the city of New York throughout the 1990’s as more and more drug users spent more time in jail. His evidence does show to be true, but the claim seems all too accidental, or with false cause. The crime rates in the statistics do show lowering rates of crime, but they do not support that the drug policy is effective economically especially when crime rates have been battled positively just by doing something as simple as repairing broken windows on low income housing which is much less expensive than sending a person to prison.

If the war on drugs is meant to stop crime and to stop drug use, then the war on drugs is at best a temporary solution that will backlash as prisons fill and education priority declines. When we make laws that prohibit drug use, we put the power into the hands of people that will exploit impressionable teenagers with promises of money and power. These people are in charge of large amounts of uncontrolled money and capitol, and are not afraid to resort to ignominious and despicable acts of crime to protect them. So, why should we put the power in the hands of these people when we could be controlling the purity and costs of the drugs so we can make recreational use much safer in a well-regulated market? Why should we waste resources trying to find drug smugglers and dealers? What we, as a nation, need to be doing is building a stronger nation from the sales and taxes on drugs that would go to rebuilding urban neighborhoods to give people a safe living environment; to hospitals and programs that teach the potential risks associated with addictive behavior and the abuse of drugs or anything else that can create a wall in successfully achieving their goals.

Bibliography

1. Booth, Martin. “Cannabis: The History.” Holtzbrinck Publishers, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. 2005 (P. 188).

2. Payan, Tony. “The Three U.S.-Mexico Border Wars.” Westport, Conn.: Praeger Security International, 2006. (P. 23).

3. David bender, Publisher; Bruno leone, executive editor; Bonnie Szumski, Editorial Director; Brenda Stalcup, Managing Editor; Scott Barbour, Senior Editor; Stephen P. Thompson, Book Editor. “The War on Drugs: Opposing Viewpoints.” Greenhaven Press, incorporated, Box 289009 San Diego, California 92198-9009. 1996. (Pg. 29 – 32).

4. Rashbaum, William K.. “Falling Crime In New York Defies Trend.” 2002: New York edition, section B page 1. November 29, 2002. New York Times <http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/29/nyregion/falling-crime-in-new-york-defies-trend.html?scp=1&sq=falling%20crime%20in%20new%20york&st=cse>. 24 April, 2009.

5. Hubert C. Cuvey, “The Methamphetamine Crisis”: Stratagies to Save Addicts, Families, and Communities.

Praeger Publishers, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT. 2007.

Includes bibliography, references, index . (P. 35).

6. "What America’s Users Spend on Illegal Drugs." White House Drug Policy. Dec 2001. Abt Associates,Inc... 01 May, 2009. (Pg. 14 – 19).

7. "Prison Statistics." Bureau of Justice Statistics. 30 June 2008. Beuro of Justice. 30 Apr. 2009 .

8. Bryant, Paula. "Inmate Cost Per Day." Statistics in Brief. Sep. 2008. Florida Department of Corrections. 03 May 2009 .

9. Price, Byron Eugene. “Merchandizing Prisoners: Who Really Pays for Prison Privatization”

Prager Publishers, 88 Post Road West, Westport, CT 06881. (2006) P. 142.

10. Drug Enforcement Agency. DEA, drug Scheduling. DEA, 04 May, 2008. .

11. Grinnell, Esther M.D.; Adamec, Christine. “The Encyclopedia of Addictions and Addictive Behaviors Facts on File”, Inc. 132 west 31st Street, New York NY 10001, 2006. (xii).