The Obama administration fully supports marriage equality, and pushed the Supreme Court to rule that voters from California cannot ban same-sex marriage there. The administration says that it goes against the constitutions equal protection clause if they don't let gay and lesbian couples marry. The most recent file, though, does not declare these bans unconstitutional nationwide. Eric H. Holder Jr. stated," The court's decisions concerning the two same sex marriages, are just not that important to the tens of thousands of Americans who are being denied equal benefits, and rights under our laws, but to our nation as a whole.
   The brief then said," Prejudice might be the result of 'insensitivity caused by simple want of careful, rational reflection or from some instinctive mechanism to guard against people who appear to be different in some respects from ourselves.' The case, United States v. Windsor, No. 12-307, presents the "narrower" question of constitutionality of the "Defense of Marriage Act", which tells that marriage can only be between a male and female. The Supreme Court's ruling on that act, will decide whether or not the government can discriminate against same-sex couples, even though they got married in states that allow it.
    I think that same-sex couples should be able to marry. It's not their fault that they are attracted to the same-sex. When you fall in love, you can't help it. In some cases on same-sex marriage, laws were made so that same-sex marriage would be a crime! A CRIME FOR MARRYING SOMEONE YOU LOVE!!! What's up with that!? Some people even think of homosexuals as different, like they are aliens and are disgraceful. Obama even said that he didn't particularly like same-sex marriage in 2008, but when it comes to American's rights, he will fully support them. Now, Obama has now had a different view of same-sex marriage. “Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law. For if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal, as well.” I agree with Mr. Obama! :)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/us/politics/administration-to-urge-justices-to-overturn-a-gay-marriage-ban.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&hp

    There can be a lot of risk supporting immigration. Crowds became very angry with John McCain when he tried to introduce a plan for legal residency to immigrants. People don't like the idea of having people who crossed the boarder illegally to be residents. Attendees proposed that they should build "that dang fence", and also suggested that the best way to keep the flowing crowd of immigrants out of our country, is to hold guns up to them.
    In 2007, McCain and Flake were each co-sponsors of their own immigration proposal. McCain that year pressed his broad plan with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, and Flake joined with Representative Luis V. Gutierrez, to introduce a plan to tighten border security while giving illegal immigrants a chance for legal residency. Then McCain and Flake ended up focusing more on boarder security than to legal residency. Flake later said that the immigration reform was a "dead end" until the boarder was secure. "Mr. McCain switched his focus from a comprehensive approach to border security, running an ad that ended with him walking along the state’s border and declaring, 'Complete the dang fence'.
    I think that those who are already in America, illegally, should be able to have residency. Maybe not permanently, but for time for them to, maybe, earn some cash for their family if their struggling. All they want is a place where they can belong without worries, and America is a country where you are supposed to live without fears of your leaders. If immigrants want to stay, though, I think that they should take the steps to be legal citizens, instead of living here permanently and still getting all of those freedoms. (Not to be mean).

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/21/us/politics/arizona-senators-return-to-immigration-overhaul.html?ref=us

    The men who opened fire in the recent massacres all have something in common: they all loved to play violent video games. Social scientists have been studying the effects on digital behavior since the 1950's, and particularly video games since the 1980's. Scientists are contemplating whether or not today's recent video games would effect the brain, and be behind the reason there have been so many recent shootings. New research has found that playing violent video games can stir violent urges and mildly aggressive behavior for a short period of time. Younger people, though, who become "big time gamers" can become more aggressive and start fights with fellow peers.
    It is not yet discovered whether the habit increases over a long period of time, and whether that person will commit a violent crime. A research team studied the effects of undergraduates playing “Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance” for 15 minutes.The study showed that these students were more aggressive after playing the video game, than students who were forced to swallow hot sauce. Similar studies have also found that after playing violent video games, people act more rudely than they normally would have. “None of these extreme acts, like a school shooting, occurs because of only one risk factor; there are many factors, including feeling socially isolated, being bullied, and so on, but if you look at the literature, I think it’s clear that violent media is one factor; it’s not the largest factor, but it’s also not the smallest.", said Craig A. Anderson.
    I agree with Anderson on this topic. We can't think that violent video games are the source of these massacres. It could also be from what the person is dealing with at home and around in their enviroment. These people who went in and started the violence, could have also been stressed or maybe even had a problem that they were not diagnosed for, and were not given medication or special treatment for this problem. I think that violent video games could also be a factor to these shootings, but not the main reason on why these men started to get these urges to commit a crime.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/science/studying-the-effects-of-playing-violent-video-games.html?ref=science

    For the first time, scientist have found life under the antarctic ice. Scientists have found living bacteria in the cold dark, deep beneath the ice. They believe that with this discovery, we might gain knowledge on how to support life on other planets or moons. There are hundreds of networks of lakes between the continent of Antarctica, and the thick ice above it. Scientists drilled through half a mile of ice, into Lake Whillans, and recovered samples of water and sediment that showed positive signs of life.
    A lot more studies, including a DNA analysis, are needed to figure out what kind of bacteria has been found, and on how the bacteria manage to live. There was no light for them to live, so they had to have lived off of organic material from melting glaciers, or drifting minerals into the lake. Chris McKay said, “If it was using a local energy source, it would be interesting. If it’s just consuming organics carried in from elsewhere, it is of much less interest.” It would be less interesting because in other places in the solar system, bacteria living under ice sheets would have to depend on other minerals alone. Some samples from about four-feet into the sediment, showed that farther down they drilled, the less oxygen there was. These bacteria were living in unbearable conditions with very little oxygen.
    I think that this topic was very interesting. For who knows how long, scientists have been telling us that there was no life on Antarctica, and that the continent was never going to be able to obtain life. Now there's evidence that there is living bacteria under miles of ice, without any sunlight or heat. I thought that this was a great article. If scientists find more life in Antarctica, we could possible find knew ways to live on other planets/ moons. Scientists still have a long way to go finding out how this bacteria managed to live, and what they are exactly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/07/science/living-bacteria-found-deep-under-antarctic-ice-scientists-say.html?ref=science&_r=0

    Beijing's government put in place emergency measures for a thick smog. The smog has covered the city in a brown, gray soot. The measures, are shutting down more than 100 factories and getting one-third of the government vehicles off the roads. The rating of the air was called "hazardous" in which the air quality is more than 300, and in that case people should not be leaving their homes at all. A report stated, "There was 5.18 million cars in Beijing, compared to the 3.13 million cars in early 2008". The mayor of Beijing, Mr. Wang, thinks that the numbers of autos should be able to rise, but slowly. Beijing is hoping to decrease the air pollutants by 2% this year, and to that, they are ordering 180,000 older cars off the roads, and are encouraging "Cleaner energy". The government is also hoping to grow over 250 square miles of trees in the next 5 years.
    In the past 3 decades, China has been trying to grow it's economy, and with that, the environmental effects have become severe. China now accounts for 47% of global coal consumption, which is as much as ALL of the countries combined. "Coal consumption in China grew by more than 9 percent in 2011, or 325 million tons, which equaled 87 percent of the total global rise in coal use". A special device on top of the United States Embassy, had reached 517, which to the index, is so high that it was labeled, "beyond index". Pan Shiyi asked 14 million of his followers on his micro-blog, weather China should enforce stricter pollution laws.
    I think that China should enforce stricter pollution laws. If the air levels are that bad there they should definitely start more laws and maybe even close some of their factories. Yes, a lot of people will loose their jobs, but if it's between polluting the air for billions of other people, and my job, I would gladly be let go. Some people have died in Beijing from the high pollution levels. I wouldn't want more to die just because I want money. There are other jobs to do that you can still support your family with. I think a great idea would be to close down some of the factories, then hire those workers to help clean up their environment. Some of those workers could be trained ,possibly, to install solar panels in peoples homes for cleaner electricity? I know it wouldn't be enough to hire all of the people, but it would at least help a little.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/world/asia/beijing-takes-emergency-steps-to-fight-smog.html?ref=science&_r=0
   

    The National Institute of Health is retiring almost all of their 451 chimps permanently and bringing them to sanctuaries. They are keeping at least 50 of them for new research projects. Of the 451 chimps, 282 are ready for research, and 169 are considered retired but not all of them permanently. 219 chimps that are owned or supported by N.I.H. are in sanctuaries or are heading to one. N.I.H. also had required that the chimps would live in groups of 7, and would have a minimum of at least 1,000 feet for each chimp to move around freely, climb, and to have access to outdoors in any weather with the opportunity to forage food for themselves.
    "Not a single laboratory in the U.S meets these recommendations," Ms.Conlee said. Now our federal government realizes that chimps should not have to be confined indoors for the rest of their lives, and experience what their true nature is. Chimps are the species closest to humans and are extremely knowledgeable and sociable. Dr. Lloyd said that chimps should live in environments that promote the full range of natural chimp behavior. Lloyd adds,"Chimps should not live alone in a large period of time like they do when they are being tested". The Institute of Medicine emphasized that human health must be at issue and that there is no other way to do the research since chimps are the closest species to human.
    I think that letting most of the chimps go is a really good thing. They should not be locking up animals for the rest of their lives to be tested different drugs on. Yes, the researchers are trying to find cures to help the human race, but what about the Chimpanzee race? They go and take them out of their natural habitat and changing how they act, and even possibly killing them with drugs. What will we do when they become extinct? There is already people out there, finding Chimps, killing them, and selling their meat and fur on the black market for a profit. It's terrible on what people do to animals to make a quick buck in this world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/23/science/nih-moves-to-retire-most-chimps-used-in-research.html?ref=science&_r=1&

_    More and more people have been getting sick from the flu virus, even if they have had a flu vaccine. There has been the worst whooping cough outbreak in the last 60 years. Even Boston's mayor has called it a public health emergency, because of the hospital rooms being crowded. People with even the slightest of colds, has been asked to wear masks to decrease the risk of getting the flu. There has been 42,000 cases of the flu that was reported. The flu is the worst in the colder states like Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Colorado. It is possible that the newer and safer vaccines' protection does not last as long as it should so more people could easily get sick even if they were vaccinated. People should be more careful when it comes to getting sick. If your getting sick you should make sure that you are taking care of yourself, and not spreading the disease throughout your community.