There's a difference between spanking and abusing your child. I was a kid who would get spanked for misbehaving. I didn't like it as a child, but I do appreciate and respect the method as a young adult. It taught me to respect to my elders (and others), act appropriate in public, and to not have a foul mouth (the foul mouth usually would be punished with a soap in my mouth, but sometimes spanking substitutes it). Also, I did not turn into an aggressive/abusive person nor did I gain hate or emotional issues of my parents and grandparents for spanking me.
Spanking is a physical gesture to punish wrong behaviour. It is not an abusive act. An (physical) abusive act is to bring intense physical harm that may cause injuries to another.
Race shouldn't determine your worth of being accepted into a college. The individual shouldn't be judged by his or her ethnicity for approval but rather on what he or she accomplished and can put forth. We should be spreading tolerance and accept each and every race as equal. We are all humans and each of us has different personalities, histories, views, etc. On the other hand, if it is a college specifically for the particular race to learn of their own culture and history then I am fine with that. It would be much like a Christian or Catholic school, but focusing on the ethnicity’s history. Over all, if the college isn’t a specific school for a particular ethnic group to learn their own culture, the college shouldn’t be determining the person’s right to enter by his or her race.
No, you shouldn't trust the newspapers and TV news alone. I don't trust relying on the newspapers and the TV news alone. They tend to give you either biased and/or limited information on things happening around us. Which is why I would recommend, when you want to know about something (like say the Boston Marathon Bombing), to search across the Internet for various news casts, reports, debates, etc. For answers. Basically, be your own investigator using everything you find on TV, newspapers, online, and from people around you as pieces of the puzzle you're trying to solve.
Yes, science fiction does actually tend to predict possible futures accurately. Just as jgstorywriter said, the Brave New World is a good example of certain things happening now-a-days and possibly may advance more like what's the book. Every one no longer sanctifies sex (orgy porgy) and drugs keep us 'happy' and 'calm'. Basically in an alternate state of mind/not in real world (Soma). Then there's the Terminator series and Eagle Eye, both of which show advance machines/robots that have their own conscience. If you look into the advancement of technology (for entertainment, war, etc.) you would be very shocked on how far technology has gone. There are even commercials, cartoons, movies and books that reveal bionic robots. Life like robots are being created to this day with synthetic blood, organs and so forth. Furthermore, there's movies like Splice. The name says it all. The movie is focused on two researchers (in a relationship) and a peculiar specie that was created from the DNA of some animal and the woman (one of the two researchers). In real life, scientists have been conducting experiments on animals to this day by splicing DNA. Science fiction has shown predictions and still do to this day. Which is one thing that really allures me to watch and read this genre.
Freedom of belief. It should be taught in schools alongside evolution. At the very least, let creationists do prayers to their God(s), read/study their religion (Bible, Qur'an, etc.) and have the freedom to speak about their religion in school without being ridiculed. People should have a choice in what they believe. No one should call the other stupid for believing or not believing in a religion.
War is predominately wrong, but in rare occasions it is right. It should only be a last resort option to dispute an argument. I do not condone violence unless it is necessary. By necessary I am meaning only if your (or someone else's) life is being threatened. Basically, a last resort to defend yourself (or someone else).
War is a major part of history and teaches us much whether it be good or bad things. It shows us the horrible reality of what fighting and death is like. It even reveals the dark sides of humanity. War is often associated with the greedy and hateful nature of people (commonly the leaders). Often countries wage war for territory, recourses, and annihilation of a certain group of people. Ultimately, for power and control. However, war allows us to see the sliver hint of morality in humans too. There's always a small crowd who'll lay their life on the line to bring out the truth and do what's right. These people will risk their life to protect others and attempt to stop the corruption and violence feuding between the countries (or war feuding between regions of the same country).
War is predominately wrong. As I have stated in my previous paragraph, war is often waged for the greedy and hateful desires of our leaders (and is backed up by people who share the same desire as them or is unaware of the true intent of the war). However, it is sometimes necessary to carry out war to prevent imposing danger to the citizens as a whole.
No, no one's belief/view of life should be restrained or illegal. There should be tolerance for people's view of life and whether or not they believe in God(s). If we are to be teaching students scientific theories, they should be able to study and/or speak of religious theories within classrooms too. A theory is an educated guess supported with some evidence. It's prone collapse to nothing or be alternated to fit new found discoveries over time. So it is an on going search for the truth (fact). We shouldn't be forcing each other's theories down another's throat. Instead, allow each other have our faith in whatever theory we believe.
In a sense, yes. It is human nature to be selfish/greedy. That fact doesn't really excuse us for being that way or allow us to continue that behaviour without consequence though. Anyways, money (currency) is a major trade. We use it to get necessary recourse and unnecessary products. We can also use it as trade for someone to perform a task. Due to the fact it is a highly desired trade source people often lose their minds and do whatever it takes to attain as much as they can. And for those who are successful to become wealthy (or born in a wealthy family) are highly prone to get high off of their wealth. By that I mean they go on a power rush. They have the money to spend on things they desire (cars, houses, etc.), attract people/multiple relations (let's face it, as I stated already, numerous people will do whatever they can to achieve wealth) and do pretty much what they desire (numerous times celebrities and other wealthy folk pay their way out of jail or prison). So in a sense, yes money/wealth can cause you to lose ethical reasoning (and even your morals).
No, money is not the root of evil. People are subjected to act on selfish impulses. Basically in this case, the root of evil here is greed or selfishness. If money didn't exist can greed still exist? Yes, people may be greedy of many things: tangible items (games, TV, cars, etc.) and even intangible items (power, praise, etc.).
Greed isn't alone as root of evil. The seven deadly sins: Lust, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Envy and Pride. As a my friend of mine pointed out, greed actually is the root of most of these sins.
Only the fanatic ones. I'm a Christian and had many Atheists throw verses at me randomly as well as arrogantly insulted me for being a believer in God. However, we must realize who we are being criticized by (especially when online). They are what I call fanatic Atheists. Unlike the majority of Atheists, they deliberately seek out any Theist to insult and argue with. Don't get me wrong, there are also fanatic Theists who deliberately seek out people of a different religion and non believers. It is quite sad that the Atheists and the Theists both get blamed as arrogant and disrespectful as a whole because of the small percentage from both sides wage war on the other.