Currently, the issue of whether or not national teams and individual sportsmen should be financially supported by the government has sprung up a heated debate.. There are people on both sides of this argument with sound reasons. Before presenting my view , I would like to explore into both sides of this controversial issue.

 

Some opponents in favor of the idea that sportsmen should be supported by the state claim that most of the time, sportsmen participating in international matches are in representative of the state, thus they should get something from the government in return. Moreover, some practical incentives can stimulate athletes’ potential and encourage them to practice harder. Consequently, they may achieve better success which will improve the state’s international status. Lastly, governments’ funding national teams can avoid some embarrassing situation when individual sportsmen might refuse to take part in some matches representing their countries due to personal excuses, which is always reported in some countries where sportsmen are supported by non-government companies.

 

Other people who insist on non-government funding sportsmen firmly believe that when supported by states, sportsmen will have less freedom, which may pose a negative influence on their performance in matches, due to they may feel strong pressures and sometimes too confined, even depressed. Another causative factor is that the state have some many other things which are in great need of money, therefore , financial support in sports field may be very limited, which is not good for its development . However if sportsmen are funded by non-government companies or sports clubs, such embarrassment won’t occur. It does really kill two birds with one stone. On one hand, it can relieve the government’s financial strain; on the other hand, with affluent funds, athletes can have the access to a more advanced training system. Last but not least, sportsmen will receive more material incentives than when they are supported by the state, which can ensure their living after their retirement.

 

As has been discussed above, it is clear that there is virtually some truth in both sides. As far as I am concerned, I side with the opinion that national teams and individual sportsmen should be supported by companies and sports club.

Prompted by the popularization of feminism, the issue of whether universities should accept equal numbers of male and female students has sprung up a heated debate. Attitudes towards it vary greatly. Before presenting my view, I would like to explore into both sides of this controversial issue.

 

Advocate of the opinion that universities should accept both sexes equally firmly believe that both genders are entitled with the right to receive higher educations. By this, they mean universities should not deprive females or males of their right to further their studies in specific fields. Moreover, in the past, females were living under prejudice in the masculine dominant society, which had do great harms to them, both psychologically and physically. Consequently, we should never repeat the history again. In the modern society, gender discrimination should be totally eliminated, males and females, therefore, can make concerted efforts to contribute to the society. Last but not least, there are different features between the two genders, which ,in turns, can complement each other physically and mentally, thus working together can bring their strengths and talents into full play.

 

However other people, who insist on students should be permitted into universities in accordance with their gender features, argue that equal acceptance of males and females, without consideration of their differences, is ,in fact, a sex discrimination. It is such a paradox that being equal to both sexes is discrimination. But there are several contributing factors, amongst which the most important one is that while men are good at logical thinking and reasoning, women have their talents in expression and association. As a result, there are certain kinds of majors which can fit in with their gender features. Besides different special talents, their willingness also should be taken into account for it is commonly acknowledged that men have a tendency in science and engineer while women in arts and literature. Finally, it must be pointed out that the ultimate purpose is to meet the demand of the society for intelligence, thus how could educators neglect the willingness and talents of their students ,which will ,in the end, turn out to be a waste of resources.

 

From what has been discussed above, we may safely draw the conclusion that universities should accept males and females according to their special talents and willingness instead of without considering their gender differences.

Recent years has witnessed a heated debate over whether or not educators should take up the responsibilities to teach their students to judge right from wrong. There are people on both sides of this argument with sound reasons. Before presenting my opinion , I would like to explore into each side of this controversial issue.

 

On one hand, some proponents claim that there’s no necessity to require teachers to tell their students what are dos and don’ts, which students can learn from other places, and which will add up to teachers’ burden, which has been increasing through the past decades. Moreover, while teachers are passing knowledge to their listeners, they are , actually, telling their students what is truth, which enable young people to make judgments. Last but not least, in such limited teaching time, why should teachers be bother to teach their students how to tell right from wrong in stead of give them as much knowledge as possible.

 

On the other hand, opponents hold that teaching is never without its complexities. In their opinion, to teach , for one thing , is to pass down knowledge; for another ,however, teaching is a process that help people to form correct value and views. By this, they mean teachers are responsible to teach their followers how to distinguish goods from evils. Additionally, how can you figure out such a person without a correct understanding of the world but with a wide range of knowledge? That is impossible .People have to learn how to judge before they come to learn some practical knowledge. Lastly, overloading should not be the ifs and buts on which educators shift their duties to other people.

 

To summarize, there’s no deny that it’s pretty hard for educators to teach both things at a time, however it goes without say that it’s their responsibility to lead their students into a right way. I am strongly in favor of the idea that teachers should teach their students to judge right from wrong..

Recently , the debate over whether or not government should spand millions of money on space exploration has become a public focus.Both sides have their advocates with soud reasons. Before presenting my view, i would like to explore into both sides of this cotroversial issu.

 

Some claim that space exploration is a good way to enlardge our knowledge about univer. By sending space crafts and shuttles  into space, scientis are able to invetigate the outer space with a diverse angle, which can make space fullly explosed to them. Consequently, they can use all the infomation collected to buld up a data bass which is an useful tool in analyzing the formation and sturucture of universe. Moreover ,by means of space exploration, we may discover new forms of energy in other planets.This is especially important to us in such a energy-lacking time. It must be pointed out that nowadays many kinds of vegetables are firstly  grown in space, that is the gene reformation engineering, which results in a much more variety of food.

 

While there are so many pros, many people still argue that space explorations are not worthwhile with following reasons.The first causative factor is that such explorations cost hundreds of milions of money,which is actually lavishing the tax payers' money, while there are still some many finacially struggling people in our country.NOt that scientific researchs are unnecessary, but that funds should be spent on the most necessary points. Another contributing factor is that, during the process of exploration,  on one hand,space crafts may give some  materials into the outside world whicn finally become space-trashs;on the other hand, there are possibilities that space shuttles will bring back some unknown materials which will cause  disarsters to human beings.

 

In the final analysis, space exploration, admittedly, is scientifically beneficial to us, but I don't regard it to be a practical action nevertheless.In my opinion, government should do more efforts to increase  people's living standards in stead of pouring money into such unrealistic experiments.

the time finally come

 

 after finishing all the exams~~actually not all, only two of my four exams

 

i have to face the unwilling departure with my Yoyo.

 

during last term, something really happened between us, but exentually we over come all the

 

difficulties, and still, we are togehter, like couple.

 

as the time come by,the day has to come

 

i had thought of the plan that the moment i had finished my tasks , i would spend all my spare

 

time with her.

 

but it turns out to be a dream. for the reason of the Godamn UCLA extension program.

 

bye now, i have  to go now