Readers’ Forum: 10/30/18

323

Children and iPhones

How young is too young for an iPhone? The appropriate age is 13 years old. This is because iPhones affect children’s attitude, social skills, and addiction. Parents need to consider these factors when buying their children an iPhone.

Attitude and social skills are very important when a child is developing. As children start to grow and interact with people, iPhones can negatively impact the child’s cognitive development. Children can become addicted to their iPhones when games and social media are all kids spend their time doing. The addiction can start early if they get the phone earlier than 13 years old. These are important consequences parents have to know for their child’s benefit because this addiction can be hard to overcome. Technology has been a blessing in everyone’s lives, and we should never take that for granted. Others may think it’s a good idea to give a young child a phone because they have had a positive experience with learning basic skills through apps. Although this is one benefit of having an iPhone, there are other things parents can do to achieve the same benefit.

We need to recognize these things now. The appropriate age to give children an iPhone is 13 years old. Technology is an amazing thing, but let’s protect it from our kids long as possible.

— Nicolette Wallace

Rancho Santa Margarita, California

Recycling in Utah

As an international Canadian student coming to Utah, I never expected to experience a culture shock. However, coming from Calgary, a place that prioritizes sustainable-waste disposal, to Utah, a state beginning to suffer from a collapse of reusable waste options, I began to notice some major differences between my old home and my new home.

Through inattentive and passive attitudes towards recycling, Utah residents risk harming their quality of life and increasing the contributing factors to global warming.

Although sorting through household waste may seem tedious and unimportant, it makes a substantial difference to the ecosystem. When soiled recyclables contaminate clean recyclables, whole shipments are sent to landfills rather than recycling mills. As landfills contribute to air pollution, biodiversity loss, groundwater pollution, a decrease in soil fertility, and a variety of visual and health impacts affecting surrounding residents, this proves to be extremely detrimental to communities and ecosystems. However, by recycling, air pollution can be reduced and natural resources preserved.

By embracing reusable waste disposal, students can stand together and walk towards more sustainable ways of life.

— Afton Tingle

Alberta, Canada 


Reporter Opinion

Medical Marijuana and Proposition 2

Dear Utah House Speaker Hughes,

The Deseret News recently ran a story under the headline “Utah House, Senate GOP support medical marijuana bill; detractors say it won’t happen.” The article addresses a compromise bill, brokered behind closed doors, proposed as a solution for the controversial medical marijuana initiative Proposition 2, that will appear on the ballot this November.

You are also quoted as saying lawmakers will move forward with this “good public policy” whether Proposition 2 passes or fails.

Frankly, this is concerning. When did “We the people” become “My way or the highway”?

You may argue that this isn’t your attitude at all — after all, this new proposal is meant to be a compromise. The issue, however, does not lie in the good intentions behind compromise or the pursuit of middle ground; it lies in you and other lawmakers directly competing with voters while there is an active ballot initiative.

At the very least, your timing is poor. What gives lawmakers the right to preemptively override the voice of the people?

You and your colleagues are in office to represent your constituents, not make executive decisions that may or may not reflect their actual political positions.

Please re-consider how you are legislating this compromise bill. A legislative proposal should not be in play on top of a ballot initiative, particularly regarding an issue with the potential to directly impact communities and individual lives. Lawmakers should not be directly competing with their constituents.

— Kaitlyn Bancroft, Universe Senior Reporter

Print Friendly, PDF & Email