Same Sex Marriage Should Be Legalized

Same Sex Marriage Should Be Legalized Same Sex Marriage Should Be Legalized The debate on monogamy is often used as the counterargument to reserving the marriage rights to heterosexual couples. In other words, the advocates of gay marriage claim that most men in the heterosexual couples are not monogamous, but that faithfulness to one partner is demanded from gay couples in order to be recognized by law or the society. The debate on gay marriage rights is a fierce fight, employing all possible means and measures to prove ones point. This paper by referring to the most recent debate on gay marriage, argues that gay marriage should be given the same rights as heterosexual marriage and that the gay marriage should be legalized in the modern society. Many liberal and radical politicians today argue in favor of gay marriage or commitment ceremonies within the church so that lesbians and gay men can take part in church life. The gay rights advocates claim that the issue of allowing gay marriages is not entirely a religious one. As put by Julian Bond (2007 gay and lesbian rights are not 'special rights' in any way. It isn't 'special' to be free from discriminationit is an ordinary, universal entitlement of citizenship. In other words, the author argues that gay people should be given the same rights as heterosexual individuals who, for instance, are not excluded form the church if they commit adultery or get divorced. Yet there are many opponents of gay marriage who suggest that such strategy of allowing gay marriages to have the same rights as heterosexual unions is misguided. Various scholars state that it is essential instead to look beyond the currently popular political struggle for recognition of same-sex unions and gay families, into a landscape where the heart of sexual morality lies (Rauch 2004). Many family values campaigns have gained ground by promoting a view of the family as a haven in a heartless world. These conservatives understand that the Christian message is designed for a unit larger than one individual, that morality and faithfulness can only be achieved in a group setting (O'Brien, 2004). In their focus on the family, they appeal to those who feet isolated and detached from larger units. The family provides contemporary Americans with a tool for overcoming the crippling and lonely effects of individuality. Such campaigns tell people that they are not alone as long as they ha ve a family. Modern individuals need to work to disrupt the self-contained, isolated human subject. At the same time, advocates of gay marriages argue that if same-sex marriage is prohibited, as the eleven state referenda lost in the last election year [2004] would have it, a significant percentage of the population will continue to lose out on the 1,138 federal rights that marriage conveys (Hunt, 2005, p. 36). Each year more and more couples publicly pledge commitment. Each year more lesbians and gay men become families by producing or adopting children. The pro-family gay discourse accompanying these efforts tells one that the legalization of domestic partnership and the subsequent sanctioning of gay families is the way to end discrimination. The family has become the vehicle, Hunt (2005) claims, for gays to fit into society, to blend into the heterosexual landscape, to be accepted. As Jonathan Rauch (2004) writes, Domestic-partner and other marriage-lite arrangements, as I can't resist calling them, do not give homosexuals what they need. They also do not give society what it ne eds. Both authors agree that institution of marriage will provide gay men and women with solid psychological support, allowing them to feel as equal members of the community. At the same time, opponents of gay marriages state that, when analyzed closely, the families of gay people bring a different message into the society than their heterosexual counterparts. Where the conservative family consists of a married couple and their biological children, the gay families come in all sorts of configurations, from a committed lesbian or gay man raising a child alone, to more complicated arrangements (Musgrave, 2006). AdvocatÐ µs of thÐ µ gay marriagÐ µ havÐ µ diligÐ µntly pushÐ µd thÐ µ idÐ µa that contract, not biology, crÐ µatÐ µs parÐ µntal obligations, in part bÐ µcausÐ µ it is thÐ µ only possiblÐ µ way for samÐ µ-sÐ µx couplÐ µs to havÐ µ childrÐ µn togÐ µthÐ µr. ThÐ µ old stubborn rÐ µality that thÐ µ pÐ µoplÐ µ who makÐ µ thÐ µ baby arÐ µ his parÐ µnts must bÐ µ put asidÐ µ to accommodatÐ µ an infinitÐ µ divÐ µrsity of adult choicÐ µ. It is Ð µasy to makÐ µ a baby, but it is hard to lovÐ µ and protÐ µct and providÐ µ for childrÐ µn to adulthood. OnÐ µ important goal of statÐ µ rÐ µgulation of intimacy has bÐ µÃ µn to Ð µnsurÐ µ that childrÐ µn havÐ µ what thÐ µy nÐ µÃ µd. AdvocatÐ µs of family divÐ µrsity tÐ µll gays that it is thÐ µrÐ µforÐ µ cruÐ µl to dÐ µprivÐ µ any actual child of whatÐ µvÐ µr bÐ µnÐ µfit can bÐ µ milkÐ µd from thÐ µ statÐ µ by having thÐ µ law prÐ µfÐ µr any family form. If thÐ µ adults havÐ µ dÐ µcidÐ µd to bÐ µ parÐ µnts, thÐ µ statÐ µ should applaud and Ð µnforcÐ µ this dÐ µcision, no mattÐ µr how or who or Ð µvÐ µn how many (Ilana, 2004). Many bÐ µliÐ µvÐ µ that lÐ µgal rÐ µcognition for samÐ µ-sÐ µx couplÐ µs is positivÐ µ for thÐ µ sociÐ µty. Еxpanding lÐ µgal marriagÐ µ would bÐ µ thÐ µ most straightforward way to Ð µxtÐ µnd rÐ µcognition, but many considÐ µr morÐ µ limitÐ µd lÐ µgal rÐ µcognition in spÐ µcific contÐ µxts to bÐ µ dÐ µsirablÐ µ as wÐ µll. Many also rÐ µcognizÐ µ that thÐ µ Ð µmotional and symbolic significancÐ µ of marriagÐ µ for non-gay pÐ µoplÐ µ may provÐ µ a significant political barriÐ µr to thÐ µ kind of full marriagÐ µ rights that havÐ µ bÐ µÃ µn grantÐ µd to samÐ µ-sÐ µx partnÐ µrs in a numbÐ µr of countriÐ µs and somÐ µ statÐ µs in AmÐ µrica. At thÐ µ samÐ µ timÐ µ, thÐ µrÐ µ arÐ µ many individuals who havÐ µ arguÐ µd strongly that sÐ µxual minoritiÐ µs should not bÐ µ sÐ µÃ µking thÐ µ right to marry bÐ µcausÐ µ of thÐ µ history of marriagÐ µ as a patriarchal, confining institution inimical to human frÐ µÃ µdom an d happinÐ µss. ЕvÐ µn thosÐ µ who makÐ µ such argumÐ µnts, howÐ µvÐ µr, tÐ µnd to support morÐ µ limitÐ µd, spÐ µcific forms of lÐ µgal rÐ µcognition for samÐ µ-sÐ µx rÐ µlationships on pragmatic grounds. ThÐ µ supportÐ µrs of gay marriagÐ µ assumptions arÐ µ not all basÐ µd on Ð µmpirical Ð µvidÐ µncÐ µ dÐ µrivÐ µd from sciÐ µntific rÐ µsÐ µarch, although somÐ µ of thÐ µm may gain crÐ µdÐ µncÐ µ from thÐ µ rÐ µsults that havÐ µ bÐ µÃ µn announcÐ µd by sciÐ µntific and historical rÐ µsÐ µarchÐ µrs in rÐ µcÐ µnt yÐ µars (CarpÐ µntÐ µr, 2003). WhÐ µrÐ µ thÐ µ traditional family strivÐ µs to closÐ µ itsÐ µlf off from outsidÐ µ influÐ µncÐ µs, oftÐ µn shunning Ð µvÐ µn thÐ µ involvÐ µmÐ µnt of grandparÐ µnts or distant rÐ µlativÐ µs, gay familiÐ µs arÐ µ usually opÐ µn to thÐ µ involvÐ µmÐ µnt of many diffÐ µrÐ µnt kinds of rÐ µlationships. It is not uncommon for thÐ µ childrÐ µn of gay pÐ µoplÐ µ to havÐ µ two mommiÐ µs (a biological mothÐ µr and hÐ µr partnÐ µr), and two daddiÐ µs (a biological fathÐ µr and his partnÐ µr) and numÐ µrous aunts, unclÐ µs, and othÐ µrs who arÐ µ rÐ µlatÐ µd to thÐ µ child not by blood but by choicÐ µ. Gay families are often presented in non-traditional ways. On the one hand, the issue of gay marriage is quite a recent phenomenon. On the other hand, young gay people need some sort of psychological support and vision of the future to live and become happy. Gay marriage seems to provide them with such comfort (Bond, 2007). In conclusion, many modern progressive thinkers are deeply persuaded that the institution of marriage will save the society. The current gay pro-family agenda is clear and unambiguous: gay people refer to their civic rights that endow them with the equal treatment in the society, including the ability to marry and build a family. It is not claimed that homosexual unions are trouble-free, but gays should be treated fairly and presented with the comfort and support that traditional family settings offer.

The Ancient Sources for the History of Ancient India

The Ancient Sources for the History of Ancient India It used to be  said that the history of  India and the Indian Subcontinent  didnt begin until the Muslims invaded in the 12th century A.D. While thorough history-writing may stem from such a late date, there are earlier historical writers with 1st-hand knowledge. Unfortunately, they dont extend back in time as far as we might like or as far as in other ancient cultures. It is common knowledge that there is no corresponding equivalent on the Indian side. Ancient India has no historiography in the European sense of the word-in this respect the only historiographic civilizations of the world are the Graeco-Roman and Chinese ones...- Walter Schmitthenner, The Journal of Roman Studies When writing about a group of people who died thousands of years ago, as in ancient history, there are always gaps and guesses. History tends to be written by the victors and about the powerful. When history is not even written, as was the case in early ancient India, there are still ways to extract information- mostly archaeological, but also obscure literary texts, inscriptions in forgotten languages, and stray foreign notices, but it doesnt lend itself to straightline political history, the history of heroes and empires [Narayanan]. Although thousands of seals and inscribed artifacts have been recovered, the Indus script remains undeciphered. Unlike Egypt or Mesopotamia, this remains a civilization inaccessible to historians.... In the Indus case, while the descendents of urban dwellers and technological practices did not entirely disappear, the cities their ancestors had inhabited did. Indus script and the information it recorded also were no longer remembered.- Thomas R. Trautmann and Carla M. Sinopoli When Darius and Alexander (327 B.C.) invaded India, they provided dates around which the history of India is constructed. India did not have its own western-style historian before these incursions so reasonably reliable chronology of India dates from Alexanders invasion in the late 4th century B.C. Shifting Geographic Limits of India India originally referred to the area of the Indus River valley, which was a province of the Persian Empire. Thats how Herodotus refers to it. Later, the term India included the area bounded on the north by the Himalayas and Karakoram mountain ranges, the penetrable Hindu Kush in the northwest, and on the northeast, the hills of Assam and Cachar. The Hindu Kush soon became the border between the Mauryan empire and that of the Seleucid successor of Alexander the Great. Seleucid-controlled Bactria sat immediately to the north of the Hindu Kush. Then Bactria separated from the Seleucids  and independently invaded India. The Indus River provided a natural, but controversial border between India and Persia. It is said that Alexander conquered India, but Edward James Rapson of The Cambridge History of India Volume I: Ancient India says its only true if you mean the original sense of India the country of the Indus Valley since Alexander didnt go beyond the Beas (Hyphasis). Nearchus, an Eyewitness Source on Indian History Alexanders admiral Nearchus wrote about the Macedonian fleets travel from the Indus River to the Persian Gulf. Arrian (c. A.D. 87 - after 145) later used Nearchus works in his own writings about India. This has preserved some of Nearchus now lost material. Arrian says Alexander founded a city where the Hydaspes battle was fought, which was named Nikaia, as the Greek word for victory. Arrian says he also founded the more famous city of Boukephala, to honor his horse, also by the Hydaspes. The location of these cities is not clear and there is no corroborative numismatic evidence. [Source: The Hellenistic Settlements in the East From Armenia and Mesopotamia to Bactria and India, by Getzel M. Cohen, University of California Press: 2013.) Arrians report says that Alexander was told by inhabitants of Gedrosia (Baluchistan) about others who had used that same travel route. The legendary Semiramis, they said, had fled through that route from India with only 20 members of her army and Cambyses son Cyrus returned with only 7 [Rapson]. Megasthenes, an Eyewitness Source on Indian History Megasthenes, who stayed in India from 317 to 312 B.C. and served as ambassador of Seleucus I at the court of Chandragupta Maurya (referred to in the Greek as Sandrokottos), is another Greek source about India. He is quoted in Arrian and Strabo, where the Indians denied having engaged in foreign warfare with any but Hercules, Dionysus and the Macedonians (Alexander). Of the westerners who might have invaded India, Megasthenes says Semiramis died before invading and the Persians acquired mercenary troops from India [Rapson]. Whether or not Cyrus invaded northern India depends on where the border is or was set; however, Darius seems to have gone as far as the Indus. Native Indian Sources on Indian History Soon after the Macedonians, the Indians themselves produced artifacts that help us with the history. Particularly important are the stone pillars of the Mauryan king Ahsoka (c. 272- 235 B.C.) which provide the first glimpse of an authentic historical Indian figure. Another Indian source on the Mauryan dynasty is the Arthashastra of Kautilya. Although the author is sometimes identified as Chandragupta Mauryas minister Chanakya, Sinopoli and Trautmann say the Arthashastra was probably written in the second century A.D. Sources The Hour-Glass of India C. H. Buck, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 45, No. 3 (Mar., 1915), pp. 233-237Historical Perspectives on Ancient India, M. G. S. Narayanan, Social Scientist, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Oct., 1975), pp. 3-11Alexander and India A. K. Narain ,  Greece Rome, Second Series, Vol. 12, No. 2, Alexander the Great (Oct., 1965), pp. 155-165The Cambridge History of India Volume I: Ancient India  By Edward James Rapson, The Macmillan CompanyIn the Beginning Was the Word: Excavating the Relations between History and Archaeology in South Asia Thomas R. Trautmann and Carla M. Sinopoli​,  Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 45, No. 4, Excavating the Relations between Archaeology and History in the Study of Pre-Modern Asia [Part 1] (2002), pp. 492-523Two Notes on Seleucid History: 1. Seleucus 500 Elephants, 2. Tarmita W. W. Tarn​,  The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 60 (1940), pp. 84-94

Accomplishing Life Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Accomplishing Life - Essay Example Most of the time all we had was each other and that is why I surprised my family when I told them that I was going to join the army. My brothers and I did not have any money to go to college when we graduated, plus I didn’t want to go to college right away. I graduated in 2005 and a year later I joined the United States Army. At the time I didn’t feel like I had accomplished anything so far even though i did ok in school. I played sports and was part of school activities but still had certain goals I wanted to reach and I knew I had to start somewhere. I wanted to get away from home and see what was out in the real world for me. Army was the way to go, and then maybe I could start accomplishing my life goals. The journey for my army accomplishment started in June 2006 when i was sent off to Fort Jackson, SC for basic training. It was 9 weeks of physical and mental training and a lot of people telling you what to do all the time. There were four platoons that consisted of 50-60 people. The four platoons made one company. I was in fourth platoon, which was one of the greatest platoons you wanted to be in. I started meeting a lot of great people and did a lot of team building. We ran miles and miles; ruck marched through woods and sand, which was hard when you carried 30lbs on your back- holding a weapon. We learned about many different weapons and how to shoot them.

Leadership Blog Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Leadership Blog - Assignment Example Therefore, the managers need to identify the leadership approaches which can help in integration of activities of the employees and achievement of goals and objectives of the organization. The traditional theorists regarded leadership as an integrated approach which focused on team work. Later, it was regarded as a powerful relationship which had the ability to influence its followers (Evans, 2003). The modern leadership theories proposed that the master servant relationship should be replaced by superior subordinate relationship. The leadership theory occurred in groups which involved the employees working together in unification towards a share goal. As per Author Adair (1984 cited in Mullins and Linehan, 2005) leadership can be expressed as a relationship with other individuals. Leadership can occur in various groups or social context and they should have followers. Leadership theories are concerned with how to convince the employees to attain the goals and objectives in a systema tic method. Leadership can provide direction, guidance and activity for a collective group (Mullins and Linehan, 2005). ... The approaches of the managers need to align with the business goals and objectives. One of the main objectives of the organization is to increase the presence of the organization internationally and create a niche for itself in the market. The Cross - Vergence theory focuses on the economic ideology that believes in integration of cultural values with western influence (Theimann, April and Blass, 2002).The theory identifies the significance of the cultural values and its impact on an organization. Therefore, the theory recognizes the importance of national, sub culture, and the economic ideology influences. For example HSBC is pervasive in more than 88 countries worldwide and follows the Cross Vergence theory for guidance purposes. It is not possible to develop a universal theory of leadership which can be applicable to all organizations and in all situations hence a manager needs to identify the various approaches required at different levels and act accordingly. The difference in the cultural values of the countries may lead to the adoption of different approaches by the managers. It is not possible for every manager to adopt a leadership approach which aligns with the cultural values of the countries. The followership theory proposed by Brown & Thornborn (1998 cited in Evans, 2003) categorized the employees in four types; sheep people, yes people, alienated survivors and exemplary followers. Sheep people are extremely uncritical and passive but yes people are completely dependent on the leaders for opinions. Survivors keep adapting to changes and exemplary followers are able to think creatively and independently. Managers can devote certain portion of their time for in development of their emotional intelligence which can help in understanding the

Global Competitiveness Essays -- Economics Business Essays

Global Competitiveness As the world becomes a smaller place, economies are shifting away from national economies to global economies. Robert Reich, Ira Magaziner, and Michael Porter each offer a different view of how a company remains competitive in this global economy. Reich stresses the difference between American-owned corporations and American competitiveness. Magaziner highlights the growing need of innovation and the avoidance of national complacency. Porter focuses on his diamond of national competitiveness. While Whirlpool is an American owned company—the company’s headquarters and upper management all operate out of America—the majority of the company’s factories and production lies overseas in South America and Asia. Similarly, while Toyota is a Japanese owned company, it has increasingly manufactured its cars within US borders. Whirlpool is an American company but does not benefit American competitiveness. Reich maintains that â€Å"foreign-owned businesses that benefit national competitiveness most are those that commit their engine of competitiveness to the host country.† Whirlpool may be American run, but Toyota’s factories in America create American jobs and train an American workforce, both commodities in national competitiveness. Reich further emphasizes the importance of a skilled work force: â€Å"A nation’s most important competitive asset is the skills and learning of its work force†¦[and]†¦National policies should reward any global corporation that invests in the American work force.† Stressing the skilled work force, as Magaziner has noticed, is not just an American necessity. Magaziner gives two examples of countries who take national pride in training the work force: Korea and Singapore. Bo... ...ompanies cannot compete, Tonelson gives two credible reasons for trade barriers. First, infant industries will have a chance to develop and one day be able to compete on a global arena. Second, hurting industries will have a chance to revamp their productions, regain efficiency and once again compete with the foreign product. On the other hand, Krugman believes that most nations use trade deficit and international competitiveness as a political ploy to impose trade barriers. Each country’s economy depends on the population within the country, not on what other countries are doing. Nations should thus not impose any trade barriers so that the foreign competition could both stimulate and replace inefficient companies. Meanwhile, nations should upgrade their workforce to efficiently produce goods that ship to other countries, creating a mutually beneficial cycle.

The British Politics

Structural-Functionalism in politics states that the political system is composed of different institutions which includes interest groups, political parties, government bodies and a bureaucratic machinery. In nature, this political model is conservative as it is not responsive to political changes. It’s first objective is to ensure its own survival (London). In British politics, its root for survival had been visible over time.Its parliamentary development over the centuries, and the emergence of the two-house parliament is a way of coping to the changing political calls intended for survival. Interest articulation and aggregation in this light has been effective because the citizens of the country and the parliament as well is anchored on the basis of their â€Å"shared sense of justice†. One which is believed that they are accountable for the laws that are being enacted. The parliament system has gone through many changes over time.A strength in the system can be att ributed to the fact that since it has gone through many eras, changes has occurred and in a way, those changes have improved the system as a whole. The system is now well-established and it since leadership in the higher level goes from generation to generation, it is stable and the government form and leaders will not change as often as other political systems do. However, its weaknesses lie on the same thing that its governance is being inherited.It may be the case that the next heir for the position will not suit perfectly to become a leader. Or that the leaders shall use their powers and family prestige in pursuit of their own interest. Thus it is inevitable that future leaders may make a mistake due to incapacity or selfishness that the hereditary process of leadership entails. Works Cited A Parliament for England. October 9, 2007 London, Scott. On Structural Functionalism. October 9, 2007

Should You Take Both the SAT and ACT

Taking a college admissions exam like the SAT or ACT is nerve-wracking enough without having to figure out if you should be taking  both  the SAT and ACT. There are schools of thought on both sides. Some people advise taking both exams, while others eschew that idea completely, stating you should take just one.   Well, to which advice should you listen?   To help make matters a bit clearer, here are the basic arguments for both sides and some questions to ask yourself at the end to help you make your decision.   Why You SHOULD Take Both the SAT and ACT Clearly, many people believe that you should take both of these college admissions exams, and the folks recommending both arent just test prep companies. (I think we can agree that any recommendation to take both tests from a test prep company comes from a group with a vested interest in you doing so.) Here are some unbiased reasons it makes sense to take both the SAT and ACT. If you take both, you will have more test date options. Since the ACT and SAT are operated independently of each other, they are offered on different test dates. If you have double the opportunities to take a college admissions exam, then you wont have to cancel important plans you may have like a college tour, a tournament game, or that much-anticipated great-Aunts birthday party if those plans happen to fall on your test date. Plus, ACT and the College Board schedule test  dates within just a few weeks of each other (The SAT is on June 3 and the ACT is on June 10, for example), so you wont miss an admissions deadline if you need a retake. Instead of retaking the same test, you can take the other test much sooner.  If you take both, you will give the college admissions office  more info about you. And lets hope that its good, right? If you should decide to take both the SAT and ACT and score well on both, you have demonstrated that youre capable of high-level reasoning across a variety of different question types, which is an admirable quality.  If you take both, you have a backup plan. Lets say you decided to take the ACT and something terrible happened on  test day: you bombed it, spectacularly. You woke up feeling woozy, so you couldnt think about anything else during the test except your upset stomach. Or you got an eyelash in your left eye and it bothered you. Or you were just out of sorts because of a fight you got into with your mom. If youve signed up to take the SAT a few weeks later, then no sweat. Your terrible performance on the ACT can be a bad memory and you can move on (with all the first-time tester jitters out) to a new test, with hopefully, better results.   Why You SHOULD NOT Take Both the SAT and ACT There is always a flip side to every coin, isnt there? Those reasons above are pretty great for taking both the SAT and ACT. However, if you read below, you will see that there are also some stellar reasons for just choosing one or the other and giving it a go.   If you DONT take both, you can master one exam.  Each college admissions exam is different from the other. There are different test strategies to master for the SAT and entirely different test strategies to master the ACT. The essays are significantly different. Dont even get me started on the science sections. Oh wait. The SAT doesnt even have a section devoted entirely to science. See what we  mean? Mastery of one test takes time; if you spend part of your time mastering one test and part of your precious study time mastering another, then you are reducing the total mastery time for one of the tests by half. Thats just math. Pick your battle and dive into the fray with both guns blazing. Not just one.  If you DONT take both, you will spend less cash. Face it. Signing up for a class for the ACT or buying books for the SAT takes money. It just does. Yes, there are tons of free places for test prep, but many of you will not opt for the free stuff. You will buy the books and hire the tutors and take the classes. Think of the cash. Then double it. If you try to master both exams with costly test prep aids, then you will be spending a significant amount of money to do so. At  last check, some of the test prep classes can run up into the thousands. Private tutors cost even more. If you focus on one test, youll reduce the expense.  If you DONT take both, you will spend less time preparing. As a high school student, you are probably pushed to the max with your time. Maybe you are holding down a job while trying to make good grades. Maybe you play sports, participate in clubs, volunteer, and spend time at church or with friends on the weekends. Preparing for two separate exams would really double the amount of prep time you would need for an exam that is just designed to show college admissions officers how you might fare in their colleges one day.   How to Decide Since there are positives and negatives to both options, how do you decide which option is best for you?Ask yourself the following questions to help you decide whether or not you should take both the SAT and ACT or just one.   How much time and cash do you have to pour into two tests? If youre on the short end in one or both of those areas, perhaps just focusing on one is better for you.How well do you typically perform on standardized tests? If you typically tend to do well on multiple choice tests, no matter the content, then taking both could work to your advantage.  How willing are your parents to fork out the registration fees for both tests? If your parents are on the heck to the no party bus, then perhaps youd better take this easy, 10-question ACT vs. SAT quiz to see which college entrance exam suits you best and go with it. You dont want to upset your parents!  How competitive is the college or university to which youre applying? Heading to Harvard? Yale? Columbia? Cal Tech? MIT? Then perhaps youd better take both tests. Nearly a third of all college applicants going to big-name schools take both exams. You want college admissions officers to be able to compare apples to apples when considerin g your application, dont you? Yes, you do.   The Bottom Line No matter which option you go with - both or just one - you  must  take preparing for the SAT and/or the ACT a priority in your life during your junior and senior years. These exams are not tests to waltz into unprepared. You can get cash for your college admissions scores via scholarships and admittance into schools that may have been out of your reach otherwise.