On Friday, Jan. 18 a man allegedly carrying a shotgun was seen walking towards the Russell Senate Office Building. I was sitting at my desk in Senator Biden’s office in the Russell Senate Office Building performing the remedial tasks that are required of all interns. As a colleague returned from lunch, she informed me that numerous Capitol Hill Police Officers had pinned some guy down on the grass just outside of our building. Now, I’m not one to get upset easily, so I didn’t. I shrugged the story off and continued to sort, organize, staple, and three hole punch anything that was placed in front of me.

A half hour or so passed and a calm, reassuring recording came over the building’s Public Address system notifying those within listening distance that there was a situation just outside the building and that certain exits and streets had been closed until the extent of the situation was able to be ascertained.

Again, I shrugged off this news. This was probably just a precaution. But, just for fun, I turned on the TV in the office and clicked over to a news site to see if the media had begun to report on anything interesting. Sure enough, they had.

The stories of a man with a gun and several other weapons flitted across the screen under the headline ‘Breaking News’. Still, I shrugged it off.

The television displayed images of dogs sniffing around the man’s truck and the swarms of public safety personnel that were arriving to lock down the area from pedestrians. Still, I shrugged off what I saw. CNN showed the bomb squad’s robot approach the truck and inspect it for whatever the dogs had reacted to earlier. The other staff members in the office were visibly tense. The phones did not ring. The computer mice did not click. The stapler did not ‘kachuck’. All focus was on the television and what this robot was doing. All focus except for mine, that is. I was debating if this was good time to make a ‘Johnny Five is alive!’ joke.

The robot found nothing and the Gumby suited bomb squad officer who followed it seemed to come up empty handed as well. And I wasn’t relieved. I hadn’t felt at all tense. It was peculiar.

As I took the introspective, soul-searching subway ride back to the house I am staying at, a fellow intern couldn’t help but vent her disgust that I wasn’t nervous or scared or anything. I wasn’t trying to be brave or any kind of hero. I think I was really just being dumb. I should have been a little more uneasy that a man with a gun was tackled a few hundred yards or so from where I was sitting. I should have gotten nervous when they blocked off the streets surrounding the building. I should have worried when the robot started looking for bombs in the truck. But I didn’t because I had never attached myself to the situation.

It didn’t really click that this was happening right outside the door. I had forgotten that I was in Washington D.C., not Big Rapids and that I was just as un-bullet proof as the rest of the people around me. And that is when it hit me. Not when I was at work. Not when I was watching all of this happen live. It hit me on the subway ride out of the downtown area.

What happened that day actually had an impact on me. It changed the route I took back from work and how much I think about the security check points I have to go through in order to get to my desk. Those events are the ones that we hope we never experience, the type that ‘never happen to people like me.’ And if they ever do, it will take you a second thought and a backwards glance to recognize that this is a pretty crazy place full of pretty crazy people. And the craziest person of all is the one that doesn’t realize how lucky they are to be in it.

Do you have time in the morning for breakfast? I don’t - and I know why. The day is limited to 24 hours, and each one needs to be used to its fullest.

I’ve been paying more attention to how I use my time since the subject came up the other day in one of my classes. I usually wake up and have to rush through the shower, throw my books in my backpack, and run to class (only that I haven’t actually ran to class since middle school).

If the morning is the most important part of the day, then this is probably a good way to start on a bad note. When I get back from class, I throw a frozen pizza in the oven and flip on the TV (or “baby sitter” as my sister calls it). I might go and surf the internet looking for my next electronics purchase, or play guitar for a while.

At about 3 a.m. I decide that I should look at my homework for the next day, but decide that I should just get up early and do it when I’m not tired.

This plan rarely works – the cycle repeats the next day.

How is one to know if they are using time efficiently, though? Each individual has priorities, and these define importance. The class discussion led to which people actually cook a meal from scratch.

I do not see this as being of much importance for this reason: I have to eat multiple times every day of my life. Every minute I can shave off this remedial task, is a minute that I can use for something else.

(Sadly, I need to work on using these minutes better.)

So yes, I waste time. Do I think that going to bed earlier would make my mornings better? Maybe. Would a nice home cooked meal make my day better? I can’t see the tradeoff in taking an entire hour every day to create a meal when I can do the same thing in 15 minutes.

Since I don’t believe in New Year’s resolutions, but rather revising my lifestyle when I find room for improvement, I will be working on changing my time use to stay out of the doldrums (but still won’t be making big dinners).

With this year being an election year, the issues are always in heated debate. Things like abortion and gay rights become flame wars, while issues such as our receding economy and inner city poverty are overlooked. It is as simple as this: our morals make up who we are as a society. To protect our society, we have to keep our morals relatively in line with everyone else’s morals, or else we would be impeding on each other’s constitutional rights.

This argument comes up mostly in the above two issues I stated. Many think that abortion and gay rights are purely moral issues, that any individual can decide what is right and wrong, and it won’t affect anyone else. That is untrue. In the same way, many of the things we already govern on are moral issues, but these don’t seem to be argued.

In my Christian faith I believe in certain moral laws that were laid out for me by God through Moses. These are the Ten Commandments. Several of them we also govern on, particularly murder, theft, and in certain aspects, honoring your father and mother, and not giving false testimony against your neighbor. In regards to the last two, we are bound by law to remain in our parents custody until we reach the age of 17, and in a lot of circumstances, public defamation can be grounds for a civil law suit.

What if a person who came from a tribe that practiced cannibalism and had the mentality of, “only the strong survive”. Would we let him into our country? Absolutely not! While it is completely acceptable for him to kill anyone that he feels is keeping him from attaining higher goals in his own society, we believe that is wrong.

So how does this affect how we govern the hot topics of abortion and homosexuality? In terms of the latter, I believe homosexuality is wrong. It is unnatural, a product of failed parenting or in rare cases, a genetic defect. It is impossible for two men or two women to reproduce, in a natural sense. We were not made that way, nor, for those who are non creationists, did we evolve that way.

I disagree with certain life styles, but I am not condemning. I am not going to try and force someone to not be homosexual, though I won’t support it either.

My concern is, when a homosexual couple tries to raise an adopted child. That child won’t understand what it means to be a man or a woman. It may suffer public ridicule when it enters school and everyone finds out that it has two dads or two moms. The child may not ever learn about the joys of a companion in the opposite sex. Are the parents supposed to teach the child heterosexuality or homosexuality? They can’t say that they will leave it up to him, because gender roles are learned.

According to a research study by Illene C. Noppe, gender roles are first influenced genetically by hormone production. In the womb, our gender is decided at random, not by the choice of anyone.

This random decision affects how we develop. Males produce more testosterone, causing them to develop stronger muscles, a more objective mentality, and many other qualities. Women produce more estrogen, making them more caring and emotional. Aside from what occurs naturally, as children, we look to our parents to help us understand why our body is making us feel a certain way. Albert Bandura emphasized in his social learning theory the importance of children’s imitation of the behavior of others. We are not merely, “its,” we are different. I am not the same as a female, and a female is not the same as me.

Abortion is much easier to explain. Yes, there is a lot of merit to the argument to be able to do with her body what she wants. But that argument doesn’t account for the fact that we live in a society, not isolation. What we do to ourselves, affects those around us.

A mother may want an abortion, while the father may decide that he wants to raise that child. Both were responsible in conceiving that child, why is it the mother’s decision to keep the child.

I believe that any life created, should not be destroyed under our own power. We should all be given equal opportunities to live a wholesome life. The only situation where abortion is acceptable is if the mother’s own life is threatened by the birth of that child. Otherwise it is a very irresponsible decision.

To say we can’t govern morals would be chaos. Our lives and the way we interact with each other is based on the morals we share. Yes, we can have moral differences. But those differences shouldn’t impede on someone’s ability to have a happy life.

The other day I decided to go get my nails done. This process is ritual for me. It happens every two weeks, usually on a Wednesday. This time was no different. Last Wednesday after work I grabbed a friend and off we went.

What usually takes about 40 minutes took three hours. My friend had received a manicure and pedicure in a little over an hour, while I…well, I was still waiting. While it took an hour to soak off the previous set of nails I had, it shouldn’t have taken another two for a full set. I was starting to get a little impatient.

What used to be an enjoyable experience is starting to become a pain. Literally. While I was at this particular nail shop, which will remain nameless, the joy of getting my nails done began to fade.

My nails started to hurt as the nail technician was filing, clipping, and cutting. I noticed that one of my fingers was slightly bleeding. The technician was filing a little too hard.

Now, before I go any further let me just say that the finished result is lovely. My nails look great!

So, of course the nail tech noticed that my finger was bleeding. Instead of picking up a cotton ball and giving it to me to soak up the blood, he simply wiped it off with his finger. I’m thinking “how many times before has he done this?”

This was unacceptable. I understand that mistakes happen. Sometimes people accidentally get cut when having a service performed, sometimes people are unsatisfied with the results, and sometimes people are perfectly happy.

When I was in cosmetology school I was taught that if while performing a service and the customer starts to bleed that I should stop immediately and then decide what action to take next. I was just amazed that the technician didn’t stop at all. I’m thinking “does it not bother you that I’m bleeding… unbelievable.”

I believe this was an unsafe thing to do and I’m sure I won’t be going back to that salon. I just can’t help but think that the technician has done this before.

The smart thing to do would be to get up and leave. However, he was already done and simply fixing a nail at this point. My nails had been polished, buffed, and shaped. Let me assure you that if this would have happened at the beginning of the service I would have left.

I also saw a nail tech use the same footspa for different clients one day without cleaning it. I haven’t been to that salon since then.

I know the instruments used had been cleaned because I saw them in the sanitizer. However, individuals have a high risk of infection from unclean instruments. According to KMBC, a television station in Kansas, a lady had her finger amputated after she got an infection from unclean instruments.

One day on Tyra's show a lady had scars from her knees to her ankles because of a pedicure gone wrong. It looked horrible. She said she never wore shorts or skirts because she was ashamed of her legs.

According to Dr. Sarkisian of Fort Wayne Dermatology, nail salons are breeding grounds for nail fungus, Staph infections, Herpes, and Hepatitis C.

Three days after I had the service some of my fingers still hurt. The tiny cuts are barely visible but hurt badly; they feel like paper cuts.

I’ve heard various horror stories regarding nail salons so I caution you to be careful. For now, I’ve came to the conclusion that I will learn how to do my own nails.

My uncle is constantly suffering on dialysis and dying of kidney failure because it is illegal for him to pay for a kidney to save his own life. The debate about the ethics of allowing people to voluntarily sell their kidneys to people who desperately need them has seen increased attention since The Wall Street Journal published an article titled “Kidney Shortage Inspires A Radical Idea: Organ Sales,” late last year.

The debate hinges one question: Is it right to allow people to sell their kidneys? Not only is it right to allow people to sell their kidneys, it is immoral to force sick people into a slow and painful death by making it illegal for them to help themselves. In 2006, 4,400 people died waiting for kidney transplants because they were not allowed to buy them. This is inexcusable.

“Payments eventually result in the exploitation of the individual,” Physician Francis Delmonico was quoted in The Wall Street Journal article. Delmonico believes that legalized organ selling would exploit the poor, who are more likely to donate.

But poor people and minorities, who have higher risks of kidney failure, are already being exploited because they can’t get transplants.

According to Gregory Hladky from the New Haven Register, African-Americans constitute only 13 percent of the population, but constitute 12 percent kidney failure patients.

According to a 1998 FDA report, ongoing kidney dialysis, the painful and time-consuming process that prolongs the lives of patients, costs over $50,000 per year. For four years of dialysis, if the patient is lucky enough to stay alive, the cost is $200,000.

But, if it were legal, the patient could pay $50,000 for the transplant and $150,000 to the donor, and still be better off. The patient would be healthier, more productive, and would live longer.

Poor donors are more exploited when they’re expected to donate for free because they can’t afford the health risks of donation. Currently, poor parents are not allowed to sell kidneys to pay for operations to save their children’s lives.

If we want to talk about exploiting the poor, we should talk about Social Security, which, according to a 1996 RAND Corporation noted by the Cato Institute, results in a transfer of wealth from poor to rich because the poor retire later and die earlier.

Is it wrong to profit from kidney transplants? If so, someone should tell the surgeons, who spend years studying to perform the transplants, that they have to work for free. Someone should tell the nurses, who get paid to care for patients, that their behavior is immoral. Why is it that we are only willing to say these things to the people who give the most, the donors, who give not only time, but a literal piece of self, for asking for a little money for it?

Why is kidney selling reported as a “radical idea?” The only thing radical about it is the number of lives it could save. More than 12 people die every day because they can’t get kidneys. I dread the day that my uncle is one of them. It’s a sad sign of our political landscape when letting people live is considered "radical" idea.