Population policies Essays

Population policies Essays Population policies Essay Population policies Essay According to, (Khuse Peter,203), it is false that contracted pregnancy just shifts the risks and health burdens which are associated with pregnancy, this is because in some cases such as infertility, it makes the impossible possible and and risk is lowered for women with high risk pregnancies, babies also benefit from better health and fewer handicaps in the babies and women therefore the available resources are used in other areas therefore benefiting the society at large. This therefore means that there is more to the emphasis on risk, this is because even in normal pregnancies, women are expected to go ahead with child bearing even when the risks are obvious. Furthermore, child bearing has always been taken as something women owed to men and the society regardless of their feelings and when they had little say about it, there were no cases of risk therefore why would the risk be seen now when women have choices? attention should therefore not be drawn to surrogacy as a less risk to the non-traditional reproduction approach. The wrong thing with this transfer is that it involves exploitation of women by men and also exploitation of the rich by the poor people. Another question raises of whether there is something wrong with separation of reproduction and sex. From the history, the separation which is inform of contraception is beneficial to women and society although it is termed as immoral by others. However, not all separations are morally wrong, contraception is permitted because it promotes autonomy, spares women health, manages population and strengthens family life but separation of sex and reproduction exploits women, increases population and weakens family life. This is true because in the case of population problem, people should think of all population policies but not to exploit infertile problems, further, if the major justification for contraception is family strengthening, then contracted pregnancies could do the same and whether or not children saves failing marriages, then surrogacy will prevent a man with a woman incapable of providing children from leaving. Surrogacy reduces women autonomy although some other cases show that it enhances it, the practice also burdens some class of women and the new choices are expected to nourish womens lives so long as they have control of their bodies. What is wrong here however is that contracted pregnancy is seen as prostitution which is sex without reproduction and surrogacy is reproduction without sex, the feature which the two share is that it is a lazy persons way of exploiting own natural resources. However, Laura views this as a naive view of what it entails to be a prostitute and the efforts involved in pregnancy (Khuse Peter,204). Overall asserts that it cannot and is not ones career choice and neither is it a real alternative, she says that it is implausible that parents would want it for their daughters or for people to start training on surrogate mothers, worse still, for schools to invite surrogate mothers to address its advantages, however for Laura, this is a blatant argument and such condemnations should have general condemnation of effortless ways of life which is involved in utilizing distinctive characteristics. This is because people always exploit their resources whenever they work; professors use their minds while ditchdiggers use their bodies, therefore Overall seems only to object some types of work such as contracted pregnancy which is no more than real job options for women. Her arguments that such a deal is not a real job is clearly not based on any social arrangements which enable earning a living but its based on moral judgment which seem wrong because they constitute bodily and personal alienation. Overalls arguments are seen as weak as she says that women working as surrogates are deprived expression of individuality, that they are interchangeable and have no choice of the sperm they are supposed to harbor, (Khuse Peter, 204).

Cempoala - Totonac Capital and Ally of Hernan Cortes

Cempoala - Totonac Capital and Ally of Hernan Cortes Cempoala, also known as Zempoala or Cempolan, was the capital of the Totonacs, a pre-Columbian group that emigrated to the Gulf Coast of Mexico from the central Mexican highlands sometime before the Late Postclassic period. The name is a Nahuatl one, meaning twenty water or abundant water, a reference to the many rivers in the region. It was the first urban settlement encountered by the Spanish colonization forces in the early 16th century. The citys ruins lie near the mouth of the Actopan River about 8 kilometers (five miles) in from the Gulf of Mexico. When it was visited by Hernan Cortà ©s in 1519, the Spaniards found a huge population, estimated at between 80,000-120,000; it was the most populous city in the region.   Cempoala reached its fluorescence between the 12th and 16th century AD, after the previous capital El Tajin was abandoned after being invaded by Toltecan-Chichimecans. The City of Cempoala At its height during the late 15th century, Cempoalas population was organized into nine precincts. The urban core of Cempoala, which includes a monumental sector, covered a surface area of 12 hectares (~30 acres); housing for the citys population spread far beyond that. The urban center was laid out in the way common  to Totonac regional urban centers, with many circular temples dedicated to the wind god Ehecatl. There are 12 large, irregularly shaped walled compounds in the city center that contain the main public architecture, temples, shrines, palaces, and open plazas. The major compounds were composed of large temples bordered by platforms, which elevated the buildings above the flood level. The compound walls were not very high, serving as a symbolic function identifying the spaces which were not open to the public rather than for  defense purposes. Architecture at Cempoala Cempoalas central Mexican urban design and art reflect the norms of the central Mexican highlands, ideas which were reinforced by the late 15th-century Aztec dominance. Most of the architecture is built of river cobbles cemented together, and the buildings were roofed in perishable materials. Special structures such as temples, shrines, and elite residences had a masonry architecture built of cut stone. Important buildings include the Sun temple or Great Pyramid; the Quetzalcoatl temple; the Chimney Temple, which includes a series of semicircular pillars; the Temple of Charity (or Templo de las Caritas), named after the numerous stucco skulls that adorned its walls; the Cross Temple, and the El Pimiento compound, which has exterior walls decorated with skull representations. Many of the buildings have platforms with multiple stories of low height and vertical profile. Most are rectangular with broad stairways. Sanctuaries were dedicated with polychrome designs on a white background. Agriculture The city was surrounded by an extensive canal system and a series of aqueducts which provided water to the farm fields around the urban center as well as the residential areas. This extensive canal system allowed water distribution to fields, diverting water from main river channels. The canals were part of (or built onto) a large wetland irrigation system that is thought to have been built during the Middle Postclassic [AD 1200-1400] period. The system included an area of sloping field terraces, on which the city grew cotton, maize, and agave. Cempoala used their surplus crops to participate in the Mesoamerican trade system, and historic records report that when famine struck the Valley of Mexico between 1450-1454, the Aztecs were forced to barter their children to Cempoala for maize stores. The urban Totonacs at Cempoala and other Totonac cities used home gardens (calmil), backyard gardens which provided domestic groups at the family or clan level with vegetables, fruits, spices, medicines, and fibers. They also had private orchards of cacao or fruit trees. This dispersed agrosystem gave the residents flexibility and autonomy, and, after the Aztec Empire took hold, allowed the homeowners to pay tributes. Ethnobotanist Ana Lid del Angel-Perez argues that the home gardens may also  have acted as a laboratory, where people tested and validated new crops and methods of growing. Cempoala Under the Aztecs and Cortà ©s In 1458, the Aztecs under the rule of Motecuhzoma I invaded the region of the Gulf Coast. Cempoala, among other cities, was subjugated and became a tributary of the Aztec empire. Tributary items demanded by the Aztecs in payment included cotton, maize, chili, feathers, gems, textiles, Zempoala-Pachuca (green) obsidian, and many other products. Hundreds of Cempoalas inhabitants became slaves. When the Spanish conquest arrived in 1519 on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico, Cempoala was one of the first cities visited by Cortà ©s. The Totonac ruler, hoping to break away from Aztec domination, soon became allies of Cortà ©s and his army. Cempoala was also the theater of the 1520 Battle of Cempoala between Cortà ©s and the captain Pnfilo de Narvaez, for the leadership in the Mexican conquest, which Cortà ©s handily won. After the Spanish arrival, smallpox, yellow fever, and malaria spread throughout Central America. Veracruz was among the earliest regions affected, and the population of Cempoala sharply declined. Eventually, the city was abandoned and the survivors moved to Xalapa, another important city of Veracruz. Cempoala Archaeological Zone Cempoala was first explored archaeologically at the end of the 19th century by Mexican scholar Francisco del Paso y Troncoso. American archaeologist Jesse Fewkes documented the site with photographs in 1905, and the first extensive studies were conducted by Mexican archaeologist Josà © Garcà ­a Payà ³n between the 1930s and 1970s. Modern excavations at the site were conducted by the Mexican National Institute of Anthropology and History (INAH) between 1979-1981, and Cempoalas central core was recently mapped by photogrammetry (Mouget and Lucet 2014). The site is located on the eastern edge of the modern town of Cempoala, and it is open to visitors year-round. Sources Adams REW. 2005 [1977], Prehistoric Mesoamerica. Third Edition. Norman: University of Oklahoma PressBruggemann JK. 1991. Zempoala: El estudio de una ciudad prehispanica. Coleccion Cientifica vol 232 INAH Mexico. Brumfiel EM, Brown KL, Carrasco P, Chadwick R, Charlton TH, Dillehay TD, Gordon CL, Mason RD, Lewarch DE, Moholy-Nagy H, et al. 1980. Specialization, Market Exchange, and the Aztec State: A View From Huexotla [and Comments and Reply]. Current Anthropology 21(4):459-478.del Angel-Pà ©rez AL. 2013. Homegardens and the dynamics of Totonac domestic groups in Veracruz, Mexico. Anthropological Notebooks 19(3):5-22.Mouget A, and Lucet G. 2014. Photogrammetric archaeological survey with UAV. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences II(5):251-258.Sluyter A, and Siemens AH. 1992. Vestiges of Prehispanic, Sloping-Field Terraces on the Piedmont of Central Veracruz, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity 3(2):148-160.Smith ME. 2013. The Aztecs. New Yo rk: Wiley-Blackwell. Wilkerson, SJK. 2001. Zempoala (Veracruz, Mexico) In: Evans ST, and Webster DL, editors. Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America: An Encyclopedia. New York: Garland Publishing Inc. p 850-852. Edited and updated by K. Kris Hirst