Final Entry!!!!!!!!!!

I am a female, I'm 20 years old.

I'm studying English and Film BA.

Being bad relates well to other modules, particularly intro to lit 2 and film genres.

This is because intro to lit analyses many themes in books, from power to ageing.

Film genres looks at the gangster genre, which displays lots of being bad!!

I think being bad is at an appropriate level, it is hard to remember to do the blog everyday, but the overall work is not too demanding.

All topics were appropriate apart from masturbation, i really don't see how this is a 'bad' thing unless you are religious.

I think murder and abortion should be the adequate replacement for masturbation.

The overall lecture format was OK, but more information would have been helpful, rather than discussion because we do that via the Blog anyway.

I do think drawing on perspectives in other modules is a good idea, but it is hard to relate many with English Literature.

More modules should be available for these topics as it is useful in education that lasts for life and for understanding the world we live in as it quickly deteriorates.

I am not planning to do 'It shouldn't be allowed' as it clashes with other modules i really want to do for my set subjects.

I would recommend being bad.

The blogs were the best part as they encourage work organisation and are reasonably easy to maintain.

The two short essays were better than doing a longer essay, and probably easier as well!

I have learned that some of my opinions are set in stone, and that i hadn't even thought of others, which i suppose, makes me quite ignorant!!

The bad cinema topic was the most useful, as i had never thought about why people would enjoy them.

The most useless was smoking, as i am already addicted, I'm clearly in favour and couldn't possibly say that I'm not!

Comment on Carlbin Sekeke's views on Religion.

http://carlbinsekeke.blogspot.com/

I agree with your post, and will admit, i do not agree with religious fanatics.

The troubles that Northern Ireland suffered were a disgrace and completely unnecessary.

There was an issue raised in the news a few years ago on the muslin 'niqab'.

An English man went into a shopping center wearing a balaclava and was asked to remove it for 'security' reasons. Mainly because his face cannot be identified by the CCTV.

So can someone explain why then, a Muslim wearing a Niqab is allowed to walk around without even being asked to remove it?

I personally think that many Muslim's will not conform to English ways and English are too afraid to question them because it would offend them.

As you stated in your post, the Koran does not actually request for their faces to be covered, so it is more a choice of dress.

Religion causes too much conflict, such as the troubles in Northern Ireland, and many are unnecessary.

I have no problem with what many Bible's teach, because in general they encourage people to live honestly and compassionately, and that is something that could greatly benefit a society where everyone is out for themselves.

I do have a problem with people that deliberately misinterpret the bible, to deliberately separate themselves from other religions and inevitably cause conflict.

Global Warming.

We live in an age where convenience dominates all sales markets.

Internet is fast, mobile phones are cheaper and most of the population own a car.

Unsurprisingly then, over the last 50 years global warming has increased to an alarming level.

The other day i decided to watch: An Inconvenient Truth.

http://www.climatecrisis.net/aboutthefilm/

Before i saw this i thought that Global Warming was somewhat of an urban myth, created by goody goodies to scare us into cutting carbon emissions.

How wrong could i be? This film clearly demonstrates sufficient evidence that is undeniable.

The shocking statistics really were an inconvenient truth!!

It was shown that if the shelf-ice in Greenland and Antarctica melts, it will effect the sea current in between America and the UK and effectively rise the sea level by 20ft. In turn, severely damaging many cities all over the world.

The overall moral message was clearly to encourage America to make small cut-backs which will contribute to solving this 'ticking time bomb'.

Everybody is guilty. We are a lazy population and are encouraged to chose the 'easier' option. such as driving to the shop 5 minutes down the road. But, all we are really doing is spiting ourselves. If global warming continues we will destroy the world. Is the convenience really worth it?

If you don't agree, please watch the film before replying!!