YOU WANT ME TO RECYCLE WHAT?

1. Semrau clearly demonstrates the point of his article through the statement, "Quite simply, use what you have until it can no long function."

2. Through keeping his intentions secret till the very end, Semrau opens the mind of the reader to considering his suggestion. Semrau initially speaks his opinion of recycling in general terms. He then transitions into the story of his career and current life situation. The narrative of Semrau’s life prior to the revelation of his desire to donate his body to science prepares the reader to understand the reasons for this decision. These reasons also do not appear that of a crazed environmentalist, but of an honest individual. This narrative opens the mind of the reader toward accepting the 75-year-old’s surprising decision, and possibly even causes personal consideration. Semrau tactfully addresses the ethics of his decision through revealing honest, nearly sentimental reasons for his decision to donate his body. Semrau also presents statements about recycling and reusing that are familiar and agreeable. By doing so, he makes the steps toward accepting with his bold claim easier to take. Semrau lays down the logic of his argument without the reader realizing they are being persuaded. Regardless of the reader’s prior opinion of the issue, the shock of Semrau’s conclusion is enough to get one thinking matters through for a second time.

IT'S GOD/A BOY!!!!!!

Luther clearly articulates the theme of salvation and all of its glory entering the world through Christ on Christmas day in his hymn, “Savior of the Nations Come”.

Luther supports this theme with the literary tool of contrast. Christ’s singular glory is contrasted by His humble beginning throughout the hymn. Christ is immediately glorified during the first line “Savior of the Nations, come,” as he is portrayed as the mighty Redeemer of all people.

The second verse carries this similar theme, revealing that Christ was conceived only through God, not by men, therefore exalting Him further.

The third verse introduces the contrast, “Though by all the world disowned, Still to be in Heaven enthroned,” as Christ’s glory is ignored by those He came to save. Yet Luther reiterates Christ’s glory through the second line which reveals that Christ will receive ultimate glory in heaven.

Throughout the rest of the hymn, Luther reinforces the concept of Christ’s holiness through his diction. He uses strong words such as “triumph” and “victory” to portray Christ’s purpose of salvation. These words magnify Christ’s strength and power.

Luther also describes the manger as brightly shining, providing the reader a mental image of Christ’s radiant purity.

SERMON REVIEW

In Borghardt's sermon, Christ was mentioned a total of forty-nine times, being the subject thirty-one of those times. The verbs Borghardt used were as follows: makes, slain, took died, was slain, lives, died, rose, reigns, slain, put, wear, take, died, rose, died, put, wants, got, came, makes, blesses, is, grabs, holds, is, reigns, died, lives, reigns.

Borghardt's sermon's theme was that the forgiveness we have through Christ's death and resurrection has resulted in eternal salvation without fear or pain. Edwards preached the antitheses of the prior theme, stating that man should be obedient out of fear of God's immense and eternal wrath. Essentially, Borghardt encourages believers to stay firm in the faith in pursuit of Christ's mercy and forgiveness. However, Edwards discourages sin through describing the horrors that sinners face before God. Borghardt's theme is closely linked to the turths of the Gospel, where Edwards focuses primarily, if not exclusively, on the message of the Law.

WARNING: BANS MAY BE STUPIDER THAN THEY APPEAR

Matt Helm's article discusses the legitimacy of the law banning items such as dice, air fresheners, rosaries, etc. from hanging from the rear-view mirror. Due to its lack of enforcement, many question whether or not it is necessary.

Ron Jelinek comments: "I call it a 'gotcha' law. It's an excuse to pull someone over."

I feel that this quote is the most effective as it bluntly states the truth. The ban itself is poorly enforced and entirely vague. Unwritten connotations excuse some items while strictly prohibiting others. This leaves drivers to the mercy of whatever officers are patrolling the roads that particular day. For these reasons, I disagree with the ban.

While fuzzy dice do run the risk of obscuring blips here and there, issues such as drowsy driving, drunk driving, or distracted driving (driving while texting, calling, surfing the internet, brushing your teeth etc.) render drivers completely blind to their surroundings. Instead of focusing on little complications and details, I feel that we should place greater effort in minimizing these bad habits rather than diversifying the topic to include the most trivial of problems. I also think that while these laws attempt to better the driving of our state, nation, etc. there are other more effective/influential factors (such as our overall driving education program) that should be revised in order to assure safer driving.

LEBRON JAMES IS BLACK. WHO KNEW?

Mitch Albom chastised the sports world in his article It's not race, LeBron James, but it might be you for pulling the race card. He criticized Soledad O'Brien's decision to ask LeBron James if he felt his race contributed to his declining popularity. LeBron, of course, answered affirmatively. Albom then asks, if race is so important, why is race only brought up while decline? Albom reiterates how illogical such behavior is, and challenges readers to stop themselves from engaging in whatever racial profiling they might encounter.

I agree with Albom. Race should not affect one's opinion of another, especially when it comes to ability or popularity. I would also agree that LeBron's decline is properly linked to egotism, which, also may be the root of LeBron's decision to blame his downfall on something he can't control. I also think his point that LeBron was not the only one to blame. Why did O'Brien have to ask the question in the first place?

Albom states "Ego knows no color." toward the middle of his essay. I feel this is his strongest point, as it is a powerful, thought provoking statement. It strongly supports the main idea that race is not the root of LeBron's issue by bluntly stating that very point.