Many argue that profiling condones racism and hinders our society of advancing to a nation that accepts all and treats all with widespread equality. When the nation's security is threatened, however, actions must be taken despite the connotations that come along with the actions. If there's a trend of groups that commonly commit terrorisms, precaution should be taken to those groups in addition to the general population.

When top ranking government officials need to coax information out of terrorists, when the outcome outweighs the negatives, torturing should be allowed if and only if the justifications are legitimate. If a small city police officer uses torturing methods on a teenage carouser who won't tell him where his stash of marijuana is, the situation isn't sever enough to be lawful or necessary – the teenager committed a small crime compared to big time outlaws who plot out mass murders and terrorisms. The line between big crimes and small crimes is defined well in that it deals with how many people will be effected, and that should be a guideline on whether torturing would be an appropriate punishment or a method of gaining information that would otherwise never be revealed.

If students chose where they wanted to go to high school, they would choose based on where their friends are going, if the school has a good sports team, a good band, a good choir, what cool electives the school offer, etc. Choosing a high school won't be treated with the same seriousness as choosing a college – most freshmen don't have their best interests set at heart yet. These are thirteen and fourteen year olds who don't know what they want to be when they grow up, whose concerns stretch to the limit of “what will I buy at lunch today?” and “why didn't she text me back?” Even if the student has some vague idea of what careers they want, too much population in schools will be costly. Taxes are paid to the school based on residents living within the school's area. If the school is overcrowded, the taxes for schools in that area will be go up in order to accommodate those who don't even live within that school district. Do you want to pay for someone else's kid's books, when they could be going to a school in their own district? If the student wants to go to a private school somewhere else, or a school that specializes in a specific area but calls for qualification, it's all right, but choosing to go to any public school is ridiculous because of the maturity level of the incoming freshmen, distribution of the population, and taxes.

President don't just decide if they want to serve another term, they have to run again. If majority of the people don't want to be "annoyed" by the current president, why would be give him another term and give him a chance? Presidents aren't celebrities like Tiger Woods - they aren't in the office for the limelight and fame. If they have the best interests, they're in office to help the nation and continue to help flourish the nation.

Initially, the president's terms weren't set in stone – George Washington actually retired after his two terms because he felt he had done enough for the nation he loved, and that set a precedent for later office holders. Like George Washington, modern presidents should know when they are helping the nation and should be able to gauge their ability to lead the nation. As long as the American citizens vote, the number of terms a president serves shouldn't be a problem. The US has a checks and balance systems to keep each branch from being too powerful, and if that fails, it's the people's duty to change the government if the president is becoming tyrannical. As long as the people have the power to pick who leads them, and the president is honest and holds the citizens' needs at heart, the number of terms served shouldn't be a concern.

Although the national security is jeopardized with having illegal aliens within the US borders, many illegal aliens are harmless and only trying to build a better life for themselves, a chance for prosperity that will hopefully improve the lives of their descendents. It can be argued that the foundation for the US was actually based off of immigrants traveling from European nations and wiping out the native populations – I have to ask how that differs from events today, with immigrants only wanting freedom but don't kill others to obtain it. Yes, laws should be followed accordingly, but deporting illegal aliens who have been within the US for majority of their lives, who haven't committed any crimes and have lived a quiet and productive life, are still considered outlaws, and by deporting them, the US, a nation that believes in “the pursuit of happiness”, destroys multiple lives by taking away a provider of a family. Reports on the news detail deportation cases where parents are uprooted because they are illegal, and they lose rights to their American-born childrens. Illegal aliens can be put in a jail cell for years for the sole reason that they didn't have the right papers to breathe in the air of the US. Illegal aliens, if they have not committed heinous crimes, should be given their papers, if only for their family's sake, for their American children, since it seems only Americans receive justice.

If the developed nations' governments, like the USA or Japan, aided developing countries in supplying material or acted as a regular customer to whatever goods they export, it would help reduce environmental loss due to economical purposes. Yes, many laborers in developing countries find work that harm the environment, like cutting down forests so the timber can be used to build houses or make other material, but if developed nations supplied other materials or even loaned a reasonable amount of money, governments could establish other jobs. It's true that there are other worries – poverty, hunger, illnesses, but the environment plays a major role in these unfortunate realities. If a family lives near a dumping ground or is surrounded by litter because the government hasn't yet established a definite method or dealing with its citizens' waste, illnesses are bound to spread. Developing nations could supply resources such as food to workers' families.

The negative aspects that the nation underwent actually shaped the nation. The nation began wth immigrants trying to escape prosecution in their native country, and that foreshadowed the troubles that would touch the US with so many blends of cultures and religions coming together. History repeats itself. The idea that whites were superior started with having so many different people in the world; slavery initiated the civil rights movement hundred of years later and opened the citizens' eyes to the unfair treatment that most people - people who were not white males - suffered. The Civil War, although not entirely fought because of slavery, ended the most intense period of discrimination at the cost of numerous American casualties. Some events, like the Civil War, were necessary for change to occur because the events brought to light the problems the nation faced, the unjust treatment of people, and resulted with movements that aimed to solve the nations' difficulties. Because slavery existed in the first place, equal right laws have been passed. Various issues in the US' history have challenged the leaders and strengthened the nation, like child labor in the early 1900's, womens' rights, terrorism and illegal immigration. If child labor had not occured and had been FIXED, seven year old kids in the present might be working twelve hours a day instead of going to school, and their mothers might not be able to do anything because they have no right to say anything. Even the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001 helped shape the nation, although at the cost of many lives. Because of 9/11, our nation has put new laws to protect its citizens, like restricting the items that can be carried in the airplane and being thoroughly searched.