The Search for Equality

As mentioned in the title, equality is what connects "Saudis in Bikinis" to "The Tyranny of the Majority". Both articles display situations where there are two extremes, one or the other, and both articles show a search for a balance between the extremes.

Guinier's article is about searching for the equality between two extremes such as trying to reach a consensus without excluding a group's opinion. For example she mentions a dilemma that occured at a highschool between two races. The highschool was taking a poll on song choices for the prom, but the poll was unfair due to the majority of the population being white. If the african american students preferred different music to be played, well it would not happen. Thus there became two seperate proms instead. This is an example of two extremes ( two different proms) not being able to find equality ( a fair polling system so there could be one prom). She then mentions the concept of taking turns, so both parties will not be excluded, whether it be at a prom or the democratic voting system.

Kristof also shows two extremes that are finding it hard to reach some sort of equality. When he visited Saudi Arabia he learned that women are required to wear a black cloak like outfit, abayas, while in the public. He mentions that women who even showed a little patch of hair in the public were frowned upon. This is a situation where there are two extremes displaying no equality when it comes to choice of clothing. Either these women obey the rules by being fully covered or be frowned upon by not being fully covered. To find equality in this circumstance would be very difficult since how a person dresses is apart of culture. There is also no equality when is comes to women's rights. Certain buildings do not allow women to enter but men can. Clearly there is no equality between men and women, because women sometimes can not even go into the same building that a man can. 

Just roughly, "The Tyranny of the Majority" is mainly about Guinier's views on how to approach reaching a consensus without disregarding anyone's views. She explains that it can be as simple as "taking turns", therefore there being no winner or looser(creating unfairness). She applies her view towards government tendencies and clearly states that the democratic promise has not been met and believes it should be based upon the idea of "taking turns and disaggregating the majority.." 

How does Gruinier's article relate to "the Case for Torture"? 

I saw a similar concept between both articles which was, what is considered to be fair? Guinier pointed out that majority voting is unfair and the idea of taking turns is fair. Proving that majority voting causes desegregation,  she mentions Brown Rice high school and how majority voting caused two separate proms because the african american students were outnumbered when voting for choice in music. 

In Levin's article he explains how torture can be considered fair (though it is considered unfair throughout the public). He gives many scenarios, such as possible terrorists attacks, and reasons on how torturing is a method that can save lives.  Levin puts things in perspective; torture one person to save millions or not torture and put millions of innocent lives at risk. By doing this I believe he is wanting to at least change views on what fairness should be. Sure it is not humane to torture, but it is fair to torture if it saves many lives. 

Also, both articles insist on the reader to think about the future based on scenarios. Levin states that in many years from now there could be a terrorist attack threatening thousands of lives and we as readers should really think about torturing being one of the best options to save those thousands of lives. Now, Guinier also leaves the reader to wonder about the future of our government and the fairness of it. She is wanting the reader to consider other possible ways "voting and representational systems" can affect(positive/negative) the idea of Madisonian Majority. Meaning how can we include everyone's opinion into a concise vote?

Completely Random

Once upon a time there was a young girl that always wore a pink wig and pink dress (she loves pink!) who always asked, "What does it take to bake a yummy cake?" ; thus she started to write a recipe and listed the following ingredients:pink flour, homemade pink frosting, and pink sprinkles.

Analysis of "A Moral Choice"

It seems like Gordon's article is for everyone to understand, there is no particular part of the public she is writing to. Her article was published in the Atlantic Monthly( described as "America's oldest and most prestigious magazines of literature, culture, and politics"), which is another clue that it was meant for everyone to read. She also uses the word "we" a lot, which also indicates that she is referring to the general public. Towards the end of her article she makes it clear that she is pro abortion and talks about the benefits of the pro side and argues against the con, rather than being unbiased on both sides of the argument. So, im guessing this article is leaning more towards people who are not against abortion or are for people who do not believe in abortion, but she is trying to change their view.

• Part 1: The Ontology of the Fetus
  
• She raises the question on what a woman's moral choices are towards having an abortion.
  
• Choice depends on the "acting woman" view of ontology. Meaning at what point does the mother view the fetus as exsisting or as a being.
  
• Every woman has a different view of Ontology, but common sense plays a key role in deciding

• Part 2: An Equivocal Good
• Overall abortion ends up being a moral issue due to the media. 
• Whether it be from movies, television, or photography, media affects our perception on abortion.
• Reaches to male audience by describing theologian Daniel Maguire's experience visiting an abortion clinic.
• In paragraph 3 she steps away from the topic of abortion and she basically gives her view on how parents should not plan their un born baby's life out according to their dreams and hopes.
• She believes the decision of abortion should be based on a person's situation and how they live or grew up that may affect the unborn child. 
• Abortion is not a decision of "life style over life"

Part 3: The Fear of Sexual Autonomy

• Compares different abortion regulations between countries
• explains how people against abortion view mothers who undergo abortion
• Author is surprised that men are writing their views ( bad views) on autonomy but may have no actual experience, which makes them, i guess, hypocrites

Part4 : Real Choices

• Makes it clear that she is on the pro choice side of abortion.
•  Tells reader about the "trauma" a mother may have if she is forced to give birth against her will
• Explains why it is important to have the right to abortion due to health concerns. Gordon also explains the effects that could happen if abortion was not allowed. Basically illegal abortions would be taking place, thus women would be risking their lives( health safety) to abort. 
• At the last paragraph she makes a clear about how we (the public) should make our decisions of abortion on and what our decisions should not be based on.