Why Athletes are Good Role Models
1475 Words6 Pages
Why Athletes are Good Role Models
Ever since the ancient years, we have admired athletes and the hard work that they do to achieve their goal of winning. We idolize them and wish we were more like them. What happens though when the realization sinks in that they are human too and that some of them do get greedy and selfish? A lot of athletes are model citizens that you should really look up to, but there are also some bad apples in the bunch that ruin it for everyone. Athletes can inspire young people to work hard so that their efforts can pay off, but no one is pure and flawless. Greed does take a hold of some players, but they shouldn't be the ones we devote all of our attention to. We should look at the
positive…show more content…
Shaquille O'Neal bought over 1,000 turkeys and gave to needy families all across the nation on Thanksgiving. I did not hear one mention of that in the news. They are making us believe that all athletes are bad people with their propaganda. If they spent half the time covering the good-hearted stories that they do the bad ones, we would have a different opinion on the hard working athlete.
Michael Jordan has started a foundation that donates money for research to help physically challenged children. He has been running up the tabs at
Atlantic City casinos, but who hasn't gambled? We are not perfect. Michael may gamble, but he does his share of helping and works hard for what he has acquired.
Gambling is no crime, so then he is not showing us a negative thing. If parents disapprove of him gambling, then they should outlaw it because he is not doing anything wrong. Michael, and other athletes as well, is aware that he is constantly being watched by millions and tries to act accordingly.
There has been a major controversy in the NBA lately thanks to Charles
Barkley and his claim in an interview that he is not a role model, but that is the job of the parent. He says that parents shouldn't be blaming the athletes if they can't control their own children. Another person that agrees with this notion is football and was paid 80,000$ a year
<span>Great Britain and France, two European powers with a vested interest in following what occurred during the American Civil War. Britain and France each watched, followed, and responded to the events of the Civil War in a manner that best served their own interests. Let's learn more about this fascinating international story.
France and the Civil War
Between these two countries, France played a much smaller role in the American Civil War. France maintained that it was officially neutral during the conflict, yet parts of the country sympathized with the Confederacy, mostly because of the need for Southern cotton. The Union blockade restricted the flow of Southern cotton, forcing some French textile manufacturers to lay off workers, hurting their business severely.
Furthermore, French Emperor Napoleon III had a desire to spread his rule into parts of Mexico, something which the Confederacy would have been able to assist with. Thus, Napoleon III had something to gain from a Confederate victory in the war. Others in France sympathized with the Union, primarily, because of their hatred of slavery in the American South.
The Confederacy did send diplomats to France to encourage assistance in the South's cause. Men such as John Slidell, a leading Confederate diplomat to France, attempted to convince France to recognize the Confederacy as an independent nation as well as to arrange for loans and assistance for the Confederate cause. While France never officially recognized the Confederacy, some French capitalists did assist the South by providing loans and financial assistance.
Britain and the Civil War
While France never truly had an impact in the Civil War, Great Britain played a larger role in the conflict. Like France, Britain remained officially neutral throughout the war, but that did not stop the country from finding ways to make its presence known.
Many in the government of Great Britain, such as Prime Minister Viscount Palmerston, the head of the British government during the Civil War, leaned toward recognizing the Confederacy despite Britain's stated neutrality. Both sides still tried to sway Palmerston and his government. The Union government sent leading ambassador and diplomat Charles Francis Adams Sr. to Britain to persuade the country to maintain its neutrality, while the South sent several different diplomats. The most prominent Confederate diplomat sent to Britain was James Mason, who worked hard to convince the British to recognize the Confederacy. In September 1862, Palmerston and his administration were on the verge of recognizing the Confederacy, but the Union victory at Antietam convinced them otherwise. Through the rest of the war, Britain would remain neutral.</span>
The Iliad is an epic poem written by the Greek poet Homer. It tells the story of the last year of the Trojan War fought between the city of Troy and the Greeks.
<span>the reason a</span>merica came into ww1 because Germany sunk a couple of ships that had america citizens on it one very famous the lusitania and cause the united states to enter the war this was one of the long term events. the other reason that started the war was the assassination of Austria Archduke Franz Ferdinand which caused the start of the war look at this web site and it will tell you every thing you need to know hope this helps
https://medium.com/@dhireshnathwani/what-was-the-most-significant-cause-of-world-war-one-ww1-74bb9e8...
