Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

I think giving the women a new weight room was the right thing to do. They are both playing in one of the biggest college tournaments in the US and they deserve to be treated fairly. I also think it's great that some big-name NBA players came forward to address the situation to help bring more attention to it.

Giving the women the better weight room was definitely the smart choice. They definitely deserve it, but I see why it wasn't there in the first place. The NCAA loses money every single year having a women's tournament so they just put more money into where they were getting the most money. It was still not fair at all and the girls don't deserve that.

I believe that it's insane that this situation even happened. If the women had just gotten a weight room like the men's from the beginning, then this whole situation could have been avoided. It's honestly laughable that officials gave the women just a single rack of dumbbells thinking that it would be fine. In all, I'm glad that they fixed their mistake but this situation could have been easily avoided.

I think that it was a messed up situation it was like that before and that should have happened a while ago. The women's team deserves a good gym to work out in with the right accessible tools to get their workouts in. They should be having the support to grow individually and as a team.

I'm glad that this issue was addressed, and apologized for. It was so unfair for the women who played sports

I think that giving the women a new and improved weight room was the smart choice. It is unfair for men to have a superior weight room over women.

Adding more weights and improving the weight room was the right thing to do. But why would they give women so much less than the men. Both genders have equal talents so why discriminate between them.

I'm glad that the women got an improved weight room. It is kinda sad how no one would of known about this if the women wouldn't have said anything about it.

The second dose really does have stronger side effects. My mom got her vaccine because she works with law enforcement and she was sick for a few days after she got hers and she said when she woke up the morning after her shot that it felt like someone hit her in the arm with a baseball bat.

yes, the second dose does have side effects, but the same thing happens with the flu vaccine. the only difference is that this vaccine doesn't actually inject you with the virus. it just sends antibodies to teach your body to fight it.

This article talks more in-depth about what coronavirus vaccines do to your body. For example, it talks about how the first vaccine teaches your body how to react to the virus. With the second vaccine, you will more than likely be getting more side effects. According to the article, no matter how many side effects people will get, the vaccine will still be working in your body. What are your guy's thoughts about the vaccine?

I think that even though the second dose of the COVID-19 had stronger effects, we should all consider taking it. At this point, it's our only hope to end the pandemic.

I think that even though it has stronger side effects people should still consider getting the vaccine. The stronger side effects may be rough, but I'm sure getting Covid is worse.

The article discusses how the second Covid shot will most likely hit harder than the first. It talks about how that's actually a good thing because these common symptoms are typically signs that the vaccine is working. While I have had friends that have suffered from the second shot, I would still get the shot because it's better than getting Covid.

I think that because the side effects are stronger we should allow the vaccine more time for development, but we should still consider getting it.

Even though the second dose of the COVID-19 had stronger effects, I think all of us should consider taking it at this point, it's our only hope to end the pandemic.

I think that even with the second shot having more side effects we should still get it because it is our only option at this point but I do also think that there needed to be more time for the vaccine to develop and for us to know if it could really effect us in the future.

I completely trust the Maderna vaccine as my dad was part of the trial for it and he had no problems with it (he didn't have the placebo, he had the actual vaccine), and that's good enough for me, if he was fine, ill most likely be fine.

I think although the second dose has stronger side effects it shouldn't stop you from not getting the vaccine at all. I think the vaccine is our only chance of getting rid of COVID and it will only work if the majority of Americans get it. At the end of the day, I think the side effects of the vaccine can't be as bad as the long-lasting effects COVID can have on you.

The COVID shot reminds me of the flu shot because when you get the flu shot it is normal to get sick afterwards or have pain but it will prevent you later from getting the flu. Even though the covid shot has side effects it is still good to get it because it will prevent you from getting COVID

Even though the second dose has strong side effects I think that it's vital that everyone gets vaccinated if we ever want to return to normal life. I got my first dose last week and besides a sore arm and being a little thirsty I was fine. It affects people in different ways so I could get no side effects when I get my second dose or I could get a ton of negative ones. It's only for 48 hours according to the article and I´m willing to endure the risk of being sick if it means making the world hopefully safe and normal again.

I think its really your choice. I personally believe I do not need to be getting a newly made vaccine that no one knows the possible future effects from it. If I get Covid I get it and I feel it's more important for older people to get the vaccine if they like, you do you. But as well as the J & J vaccine, I feel it is unneeded things being put into your body where there has already been multiple of horrible results from people getting the vaccine. You won't be seeing me vaccinated.

Personally, I would not get the vaccine because nobody knows what it is going to do to you later. If there are no long-term effects and it truly does protect you from the virus then I completely understand why you would get it. The thing is, no one 100% knows so I would be very hesitant to get it.

I think you should get the vaccine but you should not be forced to get it. If someone is worried that the vaccine is not safe then they should not have to get it if they do not want it.

Even though it has stronger effects I still think everyone should consider getting vaccinated. Of course, there should be no forcing anyone to get vaccinated, it's just important that everyone weighs their options. I was really really sick with Covid earlier this year and it was awful. If I can do my part to protect myself and everyone else I'm going to do it.

I think that it's a good thing since as the article said, it means it's working. If there is a chance for people to be able to not get the harsh effects of COVID-19 then maybe they should get the shot so they can be prepared for it. Idk.

It's still in the works so of course it's going to have different/stronger effects.

I believe that we all should take the second dose because it will help with Covid and in fact it's definitely stronger than the first one.

I think that people should be able to decide if they want the second dose or not, but I hope they do.

I think more Americans should get the vaccine despite the side effects the vaccine has on them. It's our best chance of not catching or spreading the virus meaning that we can return to our normal lives. A couple of days of the side effects the vaccine has on them outweighs the long-term effects of not getting the vaccine including the fact that if you get COVID, there's a possibility your symptoms from the virus will last even after you're free of spreading the virus.

I agree with everyone's comments, even though the second dose has worse effects i think people should try to get it because other wise we'll never "go back to normal"

I think we should stick to the vaccine that we KNOW works best

I think that it was fair to ban it as the message it sends today is one of hate. While some may not consider it hate speech, we must take into account the opinion of the people that symbol hurts. As such the only place I think that flag should be is in a museum.

I agree with Emma that banning flags isn't fair. Just because you don't agree with a flag someone has doesn't mean it should be banned.

I think that emma and baylie are racist

and i agree with @margaretgrover <3

I do not think that they should be banning Dr. Seuss in schools and I do not think that he came out to be racist with his books. when he started wringing that was how people did and things were back then and today's society is so sensitive to everything. so many kids grew reading his books that I just think it is wrong.

Dr. Suess being canceled is just going too far. He wrote children's books in the 1950s, back then things like pictures in a children's book were not viewed as something that could be racist and I believe that that is not what he intended at all. These books were made for the entertainment of children.

I don't feel Dr. Seuss books were published to spread hate on certain races. I could be wrong but if it was, they would be canceled far before now. I think these books should not be banned due to the fact, if they were racist, we could learn from the past. We all know the 1950s had minstrel shows which promoted things such as black face. We do not ban those videos or other past history evidence because we learn from those things. It's all history and we can not change what happened. All we can do is learn to be better.

I agree with laceyperry067 I don't believe that there was ill intent behind the books it was just what was "acceptable" at the time. I don't think it would be right the erase the work of a good writer, but as a person of color we should neither condone nor promote those kinds of images in children's books. Books like this, with dated ideas, should be handled differently in order to teach right from wrong. We have to learn from the ugly truth in order to grow and move past it.

I think it's utterly ridiculous that they're banning his books! Maybe he was racist, maybe he wasn't. But he wouldn't put that kind of thing in a children's book!

I grew up reading Dr. Seuss books and enjoyed reading them. It's insane to think that they are now being canceled. Granted, I feel like all we can do is move past this and learn from it. However, I do not think that erasing his literature is a good idea.

it feels strange that they are not going to be sold

A few things. First off, as a response to Zeak as far as my knowledge is concerned, the books are still going to be sold. (Unless a business decides not to sell them.) What's happened is that they aren't going to be printed anymore, new copies aren't going to be made. Second, as a general thing does everyone actually know the books that aren't being printed? None of them are particularly famous, except for maybe "And to Think that I saw it on Mulberry Street." As well, it's not some outside force making the Seuss estate stop publishing these books, they willingly decided to do so. No-one is being "Cancelled," here. As well, it's things like this (https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/03/05/books/03DRSEUSS5/merlin_184489674_86a1b9c7-d76d-45d0-b52c-0976d003a730-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg) (https://smartcdn.prod.postmedia.digital/nationalpost/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/If-I-Ran-the-Zoo.jpg?quality=90&amp;strip=all&amp;w=400) that are the reasons the books are being pulled from shelves, which have fairly racist and stereotyped depictions of Chinese people.

I do not think that if dr seuss was that liberal he wouldn't have intentionally tried to portray them badly, i feel like a lot of people are taking a lot of things to far they just try to nick pick everything out to find something wrong with someone and come after to just to great drama.

I do not think that his books should be banned because his books were more of its time. The books were for children to read and enjoy not for them to read and be racist.

I don't think that we should cancel Dr.Suess. His books were fine before and then suddenly everyone hates them? If you are offended by his books for some reason, then just don't read them, it's as simple as that. You shouldn't go as far as banning them.

I think its weird to stop producing a kids picture book because kids really don't take books that deeply. Plus at such a young age the kids don't understand much of today's society so it makes no sense to stop producing books that were made in the 50's.

i think cancel culture is absurd. yes, there are offensive things everywhere, but cancelling them won't rid the world of it. i think it's good that people are recognizing certain things as... insulting, but banning childrens' books?

Children are very impressionable at a young age, and supplying them with books with such messages may put racial stereotypes into their heads.

I read these books as a kid and it didn't influence me to believe stereotypes, I just read them for fun like a little kid would and it had no effect on my future.

I think that children shouldn't be reading things that may affect their opinions on people, which I understand how these books potentially could. However, I was not negatively affected by any of these books and can also see how people may just see them as children's books. I see other people commenting about how things were different in the 1950s and that is why it should be allowed, but things are different now. We don't need racist children's books from the past, and if that's Dr. Suess then I feel like he was banned for a good reason.

I don´t understand how giving food or water would be criminal. You think that voters would be encouraged to vote but apparently not. I can see how needing an ID to vote would be necessary but not allowing time to get a voting ballot makes no sense. I feel like the only people this will hurt are the politicians.

This new bill is just making it harder for people to vote, it doesn't look like it will do any good.

this bill is and will going to make it harder for people to vote but i still dont understand how giving food and water would be criminal

I don't think giving people food or water while they wait in line to vote is a crime. It will just make people not want to vote and it won't help anything.

This bill will make it harder for people to vote but I still don't understand how giving food and water would be criminal!!

I think this is wrong, I don't think they have a right to sue. They were told the rules before they had their little event, which I don't think they should have gotten in the first place. They just didn't like that the rules were enforced, and now they are mad. They shouldn't get the luxuries that we do because they are serving time for their crimes.

I don't think they have the right to sue the state. first of all, they were well aware of the rules before this event took place. It's also a health and safety issue with food being taken back to the living quarters. They are just mad they can't enjoy more of the luxury food they were given. Even though they are paying for the choices they made. So, they shouldn't have the right to sue.

I think they can cry about it. They didn't deserve anything in the first place. :D

I don't think they have the right to sue the state, I might have read this wrong but I didn't see anything about the state doing something that would offend them.

I don't think they can win this because it's not infringing any rights.

They shouldn't be able to sue the state because of Timer and Manner restrictions and they do put other people at some sort of state they shouldn't be. It's morally wrong and that can play a role in their case.

Definitely an interesting headline. The claimants (being unjudgemental) feel that they had a religious act violated by the Government. It's a complicated manner because in a way the government did technically interfere with their religious freedoms because the Iowa Department of Human Services put the rule in place that inmates can´t take food into rooms for health reasons centrally not intending to block their freedom but instead concerned about safety and health. I think that even though in a way the claimants do have a point that their creepy and gross religious feast was blocked by the government I also think the rules that were put in place to protect everyone in the prison. Old food can cause sickness, rancid smells, and pests so it Could interfere with other inmates that had nothing to do with the group and therefore I think that the Iowa Department of Human Services is in the right and should win the case.

They shouldn't be able to sue the state because of Timer and Manner restrictions and they do put other people at some sort of state, they shouldn't be able to do that!! It's morally wrong and that can play a role in their case.

i think if they got their way with this then it causes problems with other prisoners trying the same thing.

Honestly, the mandate is lifted (for Iowa at least) so if you do not want to wear a mask, vaccinated or not you shouldn't have to. It is your choice. And you should especially not have to have the vaccine to travel and put something in your body not proven to be safe or cause long-term effects. There are bigger problems to worry about than if Americans will lie and say they're vaccinated to not wear their mask especially if it's not mandated in the area.

I am interested in how the cases will turn out now that more people are not wearing masks. If it gets too bad I'm sure something else will be put into place.

I wonder how the government is going to force non vaccinated people to wear a mask. It is real easy to just say you're vaccinated when you really aren't.

i don't think that people will be honest about their vaccinations only to not wear their mask. not everyone carries their vaccination card with them(although we should, i know i don't)

I think this is going to be interesting to see. So many people were already refusing to wear masks and I think this might just make it worse.

I don't think this was the right move, as America is nowhere close to herd immunity

I have still seen people on social media that have admitted to not wearing masks and not getting vaccinated citing "My body, my choice". This is idiotic and people think that the government is out to get them and control them by wanting them to wear masks and getting the vaccine. There are also people who don't trust the vaccine for no good reason.

I don't think many people are out there being honest. Many are going to think that if it isn't required why would they wear one? It's a lot of trust on something you don't have a definite answer for.

now people might not be required to wear a mask if they are fully vaccinated so fewer people will stop wearing masks. Even people who are not vaccinated are going to use that excuse that "they are vaccinated"

People are going to lie about being vaccinated, just like they lie about having a medical exemption. All we can do is hope that people will be honest.

It looks as though it's going to be a close race between the two. Biden is in the lead by a few so he might just win by a hair.

It was pretty close at first but Biden is definitely going to pull through and win.

There is no way Trump is going to win, Biden is definitely winning.

It's pretty crazy how the red states flipped I was definitely more interested in the presidential election than the last one.

I was not expecting some of the states that were red to flip to blue as they did, I was more into seeing who was winning in this election because of how close the race was.

I feel like we should have human lab rats for this stuff. Like if there's a mandate for vaccines, we should see what the effects are on people before we give it to the whole population.

I think there will be no easy way of getting rid of the virus because not everyone is going to trust the vaccine and not everyone is going to be on the same page. I can see this pandemic stretching far into next year which is so annoying and sad.

If the vaccine isn't going to 100% protect you then why get it? It's starting to seem like the vaccine has the potential to cause more harm than good.

I have to agree with Lennx partly, why take the vaccine when it is giving people more issues, even though not all vaccines are 100% sure to protect you I I think they should have worked and studied the vaccine longer to make sure it was safer than it is. Also, I don´t think it should be allowed to required medical workers to take the vaccine to keep their job because since people are getting sick from the vaccine more medical workers have to stay home from getting sick and if all medical workers have to take the vaccine and they get sick there is going to be a lot less doctors and nurses working.

I think that people are getting too comfortable and not wearing their masks as much anymore and becoming more relaxed about the thing they need to do to keep the numbers from rising.

I think that it's good that we got new restrictions, but I don't think people will follow them for very long.

I think it is good there are more restrictions being put in place, but I don't think it will help anyone, because people are still going to big gatherings.

I think the new regulations needed to be put into place to help decrease the covid cases. I think that the governor was justified for wanting to put a mask mandate in. People in Iowa were not being and so I feel that now was a good time to put restrictions in.

This is definitely for the best, cases are rising quickly and people weren't taking it as seriously as before. I hope people will do these things to save not only themself, but other people as well.

If I didn't have sports to play and could watch an artist I enjoy for free I would participate in a study like this. The reason being I'm healthy and all of my friends who have gotten the virus said it felt like a cold. (I know this isn't the case for all people of course)

Yes, because i'm healthy and have a small chance of dying from the corona virus.

I think I would try and avoid an experiment like this. Don't get me wrong, it sounds interesting and enjoyable but even if I could listen to a band I enjoy, there is always going to be a looming fear of me getting the virus. I wouldn't be able to focus on the music.

I don't think I would consider being apart of experiments like this, mainly because I don't want to get it and maybe spread it to others who didn't even attend it, like my family or friends. It would just make me nervous, to be honest.

I wouldn't try. because I don't wanna get Corona. or I don't wanna spread to people.

I would volunteer because it's a free concert and it would help bring back more live events that would be safer and help us get back to normality plus I'm a healthy kid so I'm low risk.

I would volunteer because its a free concert and I am very healthy and if I were to get it I would most likely recover from it and be fine.

I would definitely volunteer to be apart of this study. I think we need to try and gain some normalcy back into our lives. Another reason I'd try this is because I'm very healthy and haven't been exposed to anything. With this study underway, we as people could see if this could be an effective way to get back to our lives

I wouldn't volunteer because yes its a free concert, and yes I'm healthy so I'm at low risk but, I have lots a family members who are at high risk. Even if I'm fine and get it, those who are around me and are at high risk might not be in the long run. I rather stay safe for others.

Ok so, this is like a 50/50 no I don't want corona but if I can help humanity to figure out more about this virus then i would do it hands down no questions asked.

I would volunteer to do this study because I think it would be a cool opportunity to see where you can get COVID and where it is mostly at. I would absolutely volunteer just for the experience and to see what is around me and to see if we could actually use something other than masks.

I think I would definitely participate in this study because I think society needs to try to get back to normalcy and try to figure out how to go back to times before covid.

I would volunteer because I'm all for trying to get things back to normal. I think that corona has changed our lives enough, and I don't think we should have to live in fear of going in public without a mask.

I would not volunteer because its dangerous enough trusting some masks material to protect you from spreading or receiving the virus. As nice as a free concert would sound, it would be too risky to make it as a test. If they used something other than humans (or easier to maintain animals) for testing, it could make tests less worrisome when post-results are gathered.

I would do it because I know that I can't die from the virus, so I think it would be cool to find out how quickly it actually spreads and how many people are really effected by it

I would volunteer because i think it would be fun to go to a concert also it would help get more information on covid and how to deal with it.

I would not participate in this experiment because I would not put myself in a situation where I'm most susceptible to the potentially deadly virus.

I would participate in this experiment because I could have fun while giving people more information about COVID 19.