I think that this was by far one of the best posts that I have read on this site all semester. It is amazing to be able to read something written by a "lifer." It introduced me to something I never would have thought about. I do not think much about the men in prison and the things that they do on a daily basis. I do not have pity for these men because taking someone’s life is an unforgiveable crime and they must accept the consequences. However, although these men are convicted of killing someone they really still are human beings. Before reading this if someone were to ask me what I thought about "lifers" in prison I would have said exactly what this man referred to himself and the other men as "beasts." I do think that these men deserve to be in prison and they absolutely do not deserve to get out no matter how sorry they are because they took someone else's life. They should not get the chance of parole because that is like giving them a second chance at life. The person they killed does not have the option of coming back to life and living again. They are gone for good. But reading this article made me realize human beings are a special breed. Humans make mistakes; humans are full of compassion and understanding, and humans in perspective are good. You know when someone asks you whether you think that most people are good or whether most people are bad. That is what I mean by saying humans are mostly good. Looking at the most dangerous men probably in the world, the men in prison, and they still have compassion. That has to say something. I think that stuff like this is extremely interesting. Hearing the point of view of a man in prison is a rarity and having access to such things is also an infrequency. SOC119 was my favorite class I have taken here at Penn State so far and I think it is going to be pretty hard to top. I did not dread going to class like some of my other classes and I found almost all the lectures interesting. The class really makes you think and I like that. I would and actually already have recommended this class to anyone who wants to think deeper. In my opinion, I think that SOC119 should offer more thinks like this letter from the inmate in the semesters to come. Stuff like this has more of an impact than certain things like just listening to lecture or listening to peoples questions and having them get answered. I really do think that this should be incorporated more into the curriculum.

I would have to say that Sam's lecture on Thursday was the best lecture of the semester to date. It was just such an eye opening experience for me. There were several time threw out the class where I literally said "oh my God" or my jaw literally dropped. It is easy to be so oblivious to the feeling of the Arab Muslims in the middle east. It is easy to act like they are the bad people and that everything that the United States does and everything that the soldiers do is all good. But when you are given more information about the lives they lead and you put yourself in their shoes you begin to understand that they are very much just like us living the United States. They are not all bad people, not at all. They want to go to school and get an education, they want families that are happy and healthy, they want to be successful, and they want to live a long joyous life. They want everything we want. They are just like us other than the fact that they are now bombarded with a war they must deal with and they fear. One of the moments where my jaw dropped during lecture was when Sam said that the United States was willing to kill 29 civilians to get to one bad guy. That truly astonished me. I don't understand where they came up with that number. Did they invent some inane equation to decide what would be just? I do not believe that any civilians lives are worthy of taking to kill a single bad guy. Another eye opener for me was when Sam was asking us if we would fight back against the United States if they were killing our friends and our families. I raised my hand and said yes. My dad always says to me "If anyone were ever to hurt you I'd kill them." And all thought that sounds crazy I understand where he is coming from. I would absolutely kill someone if they killed someone in my family. Some love is so strong that morality and the law is no longer taken into consideration. On the point of Christians taking over the world... I do not know if I really agree with that. I think that the Arab Muslims may see it that way but I do not think that is the case. I really still do believe that the Unites States has all good intentions but the way they go about them sometimes are wrong. The Jihad video was extremely scary for me to watch. I was extremely frightened when the map was shown then one by one they listed when and the places where they attacked and they were marked off on the map. I believe that the United States fights and goes over seas to prevent terrorist groups like the Jihad from taking over the world and killing everyone.

The census has been a very large topic of conversation for the past few years. The ongoing debate about whether the term Negro should or should not be removed has been quarreled for years. It is very interesting to see in the video how people react to learning that the term is listed as an option on the U.S. census today. The one woman looked extremely offended when told Negro was a choice. It is a choice because there is a great enough group of citizens that identify as Negro. Although I am not a woman of color I can see how that can be hurtful. Negro is absolutely an outdated term. I believe that it stems from the offensive word Nigger. Slave owners back in the day referred to the African men, women, and children that they bought as niggers. I feel the parallel to nigger for white people would be cracker and I know for a fact I would not want to label myself as the selection on a census that has crack listed in the same choice. The one man in the video tried to explain and justify the reasoning why the term Negro was still an option. He said that many older blacks refer to themselves as Negro and do not take it as a negative. They are proud to be Negros. So I would say that I am just as unsure what to do about this debacle as everyone else is in the United States. For one, you do not want to offend the older generation or anyone that refers to themselves as Negros. Removing the term would make them feel as though they are nothing. I refer to myself as a white woman. If I were going to fill out the census and discovered my personal identity were not on there I would absolutely be offended. On the contrary, looking at an official U.S. government form and discovering that a term that hurts me emotionally is on there is also a really big issue. I do believe however that in probably the next fifty years or so the term will in fact be removed. Fifty years from now the majority of the group of citizens that identify as Negros will most likely be deceased. Surely but slowly I see this term disappearing so that it no longer will be an issue. There are probably only a handful of young people who identify as Negro. And in the future if people would like to be listed as Negro they can just fill it in in the choice labeled “other.” But who really knows? I may be wrong in saying that it will disappear. Anything can happen. The term may flurry back to life for some reason and be what the majority wants to be identified as. Only time can tell.

When Sam told us the video was a bit disturbing I was wondering what it would be about to try and prepare myself for what was to come. I absolutely agree that the video was disturbing. I could not believe that almost all the children chose the white dolls. If someone were to ask me prior to that video whether I would predict a black child would choose a black doll or a white doll I would most definitely have guessed a black doll. It truly saddened me when I saw the little kids choosing in distress which doll they believed was the "good doll" and which doll they thought was the "bad doll." It amazes me that at such a young age little kids can think that darker skin is worse than white skin. It is awful that they feel as though they are less than white people when they are in fact the same. I would like further research to be done on this to see if there is any evidence behind what makes these young kids think this way. Is it the environment they were brought up in, is it due to an experience, is it because of what the media displays? Being brought up in a predominantly white community I have never really been around many people of color nor have I talked about race much in my life. When the discussion about darker and lighter skinned black people came up I was shocked because I had no idea what so ever that darker skinned black people were viewed as not as pretty as a lighter skinned girl. When the one girl and class raised her hand to comment on this topic I almost cried. First off I felt awful I was so blind and ignorant on a topic that truly affects so many people. The girl discussed how she felt, what people have said to her, and why she feels less. She mentioned that someone once told her, "You’re cute for a dark skinned girl." I can’t even imagine how she felt when she received that comment. How can someone possibly even say that? Lat class was one of those classes that truly opened my eyes. I called my mom right after to tell her about the video, the discussion about darker and lighter skinned people, and the response the girl made. My mom did not know that darker skinned blacks were looked at as less pretty either. I told her about the video and how little kids believed they were less she was shocked on that as well. I have a four year old sister named Nicole and I am curious to whether see she’s darker skinned people as bad or less that lighter skinned people. When I go home I want to find out somehow and also educate her on skin color and let her know that blacks and whites are equal.

After reading this post I was appalled. I could not believe that in today's world people are still so unwelcoming of others. After everything that has happened in the past; wars, fights, and debates all over race you would think more people would be more accepting. Not saying that the general public has not gotten better because they have. I worked on a community service project senior year called "Gay Prom" which was a project to raise money to host a prom for high school students who are gay. My father, step-mother, step-sister, a group of business men and women, as well as three high school homosexuals all took part in planning the “Gay Prom.” The reason for "Gay Prom" was because many gay students, whether out of the closet are not, are scared, embarrassed, or just nervous to go to their prom. Gays that are not out are nervous to bring a date of the same sex. Gay couples should have the same rights and feel just as comfortable going to prom and having fun with the person of their choice. The idea for “Gay Prom” was brought up by an older group of homosexual friends. From firsthand experience they understand what it is like to be in the shoes of high school gays today. Their goal was to create a prom environment where the gay and lesbian high school teens from all the schools in the area could go and be themselves. This past year was the first prom and it went fantastic. It was not exactly what they were picturing but it turned out great. Older gay couples actually ended up attending the event but in a different portion of the hall. The older gay couples paid for the benefit so that the price was lower for the high school kids. A portion of the cost of the event went to an organization known as the Rainbow Room, a place where gay and lesbians can go to talk. At the event there was a DJ, a dance floor, a theme, tables, and a buffet style dinner. Although I believe that this event is a wonderful idea, considering I did work to make it happen, I really wish that the gay and lesbian teens felt more comfortable going to their proms. The school board in Mississippi had no right to cancel the prom over the fact that student Constance McMillen wanted to bring another female student. I feel bad for Constance McMillen. As she said, “A bunch of kids at school are really going to hate me for this.” She should not have to feel that way at all because she did nothing wrong. In no way shape or form should anybody be ridiculed for their sexual orientation. Constance McMillen has every right, just as ever other high school student, to enjoy her memorable night at prom.

My thoughts on this video and issue are a bit mixed. I understand that the headpiece is because of religious reasons but I also know about Abercrombie and Fitch’s strange dress code. I fully support the freedom of these women to wear their religious headpieces and I do not think it is right how much people discriminate against them. It is like the one video that we blogged on earlier in the year where women were being fined even possibly arrested for wearing their head pieces in public. There was no reason to fine the women they were not causing an uproar or dilemma of any sorts. I commented in my blog that if they were starting trouble then there would be reason to demand them not to wear the head pieces but they have not started any trouble therefore there is no reason. Abercrombie and Fitch have very strict and odd dress code policies. So in a way I sort of do understand why they said the young woman would no longer be on the schedule till further notice. I know it may be wrong to think that but in a way Abercrombie and Fitch discriminates against most of the people who work there. They tell them exactly how they are supposed to dress and look to portray that “All-American” boy or girl image. I know at the mall near my town you have to be asked to work there you can’t apply for a job. That right there is an example of discrimination. They only hire people who they think look qualified. Abercrombie is just ridiculous to work for. My older sister, Heather, worked at Abercrombie and Fitch for a couple months when she was in high school. She said that they had to wear certain colors, they could only do their hair certain ways, they had to wear neutral makeup, and they couldn’t wear anything that stood out from anyone else. The formed everyone to look alike. They could only wear earth tones. So I see how telling this young woman that she will be off the schedule till further notice is wrong but I really am not surprised that Abercrombie and Fitch did that. Take for example trying out for a part in a play or musical. A Muslim woman would most likely be asked to take her head piece off for the part and if she said she could not because of Religious reasons I do not think that would change anything because in a play you are reenacting and depicting a story. They are setting the scene by telling the actors what they have to wear, like Abercrombie and Fitch tells their employees what they have to wear to set the “All American” look. So yes I feel very bad for this young woman but I also feel bad for the other employees because Abercrombie and Fitch just discriminates against almost everyone and if you don’t want to be told what to wear you shouldn’t work there.

I understand that Native Americans may find it offensive when they hear that most children in preschool depict them as people who dance around wearing feathers with weapons in their hands. But i do not think that the young children mean anything bad by it. I do not think that they see the Native Americans as the bad people at all. I believe that the Native Americans should take pride in those drawings done by the children because that is apart of their history and a part of their culture. The kids did not say that the "Indians" are bad people or anything of that nature. Thinking back to what I learned about the Pilgrims and the Native Americans when I was younger I remember them being referred to as Indians. I was just like the children today. I would say that I did not learn that the "Indians" are in fact actually referred to as Native Americans until probably almost fourth grade when I was in a school Thanksgiving play. The teachers are at fault for the children not knowing that a Native American is actually the correct term for an Indian. I think that this error in teaching children to be politically correct can easily be fixed by simply never referring to the Native Americans as Indians. If children are never exposed to the term and taught from the start that they are in fact Native Americans then there will not be an issue at all with this. I think that the children who have been taught already should be explained that the proper and nice name for Indians is actually Native Americans. I think with a joint effort from the education system and the community this problem can be easily fixed. Now on the topic of the genocide of the Native Americans I think that that should be taught later in the education process, maybe around the fourth or fifth grade maybe even later. I do not see any reason at all to be teaching three and four year old children about the death of the Native Americans. No topic relating to death should come into teaching children this young. For example students are not taught about the Holocast at the age of three or four because that is just too harsh for their little minds. If I remember correctly I did not learn about the Holocast in great detail til about middle school and I think that that was appropriate timing. Little kids just need to learn the basics such as the alphabet and how to count to ten and worry about growing socially by making friends. Other than the fact that teachers are referring to Native Americans as Indians when they are teaching another problem I see is that they do not really ever get into great detail about the genocide of the Native Americans. I attended a good school district and before taking SOC 119 I did not know that the largest genocide in all of history happened right here in America. I understand that America is ashamed of the past history but I belive that it is more important that our history is taught correctly.

I think that it is crazy that some people do not think that gay or lesbian couples are suitable to raise a child. In my personal opinion I think that both gay and lesbian couples are suitable to raise a child. I am not saying that every single gay couple is capable of raising a child just like every single straight couple is not cut out to raise a child. Background checks and investigations should be done on gay couples as they are on straight couples. I believe that gay couples should be just as accepted at adoption agencies. I believe that they deserve the same chance as a straight couple. The only true difference is that gay couples are clearly two people of the same sex. A gay person is not any less loving than any other person. Like Sam said in class what is the LGBT lifestyle? It is exactly the same as the straight lifestyle other than the fact they are in love with someone of the same sex. In many cases i think it is more suitable to have a gay couple adopt a child. For example it is better for a child to be with a gay couple than in an orphanage, moving from foster home to foster home, in an abusive environment, and so on. Sam also made a good point how gay couples can't have children. They can't make the mistake of accidentally getting pregnant. They CHOOSE to have the child therefore they WANT this child and are willing to love them. Many instances with straight couples is that they mistakenly get pregnant from not having safe sex and do not even want the baby. Therefore this poor baby may already not be wanted and can easily be neglected or not as loved as they deserve to be. I fully support homosexuals adopting children because I believe that they are certainly just as capable, if not even more capable of raising a child. The only thing that I can say that I am a bit concerned about is a child growing up without a mother or father. I feel that a mother and father both play individually important roles in raising a child. The mother is extremely important for girls during puberty and when they are in emotional need. Boys need a father to look up to and learn from. But although this crosses my mind I don't think it is absolutely a necessity. Take the television show favorite, Full House, those girls grew up without a mother and technically three fathers. They did of course have Rebecca who they could turn to for womanly advice. Now I understand that this is just a T.V. show but it proves to be a great example. Homosexual couples are just as capable of raising a child as are straight couples.

I have several feelings on the topic of conversation on black and white people. First off I agree with what a few people said above about the fact that the topic of blacks and whites is bound to come up when talking about race relations. I think there are several reasons that this happens. One would be that there absolutely is a history between blacks and whites due to slavery and the civil rights movement. America has had a great deal of times where it has been blacks verse whites. I think that when you look at a larger time line you will realize that it was just recently since African Americans have been given equal rights. It is also just recently that blacks and whites have begun living, working, and cooperating side by side with one another. Getting back to the fact that blacks and whites are always brought up in the conversation of race relations in my opinion is a good thing. Like my mother always says you need to talk about things that bother you and that you are dealing with. You can not keep your emotions and feelings bottled up inside because it is not healthy. It is healthy that people discuss blacks and whites so often as they do because clearly the blacks are truly disturbed and bothers by what happen to their ancestors. I believe that the more people talk about it the better it is going to get for everyone. The black people will become less angry and have less hatred towards the whites. Black people will realize that even though slavery still exists in some places and that some people are still racists most white people are not and they want to be friends. Black people will understand that the majority of white people are just as mad and annoyed at what happened with slavery as they are. I think as years pass people will slowly talk about blacks and whites less often. I think that this will happen because people are becoming more and more excepting. I know that slavery will always remain a very large and sad piece of history of the United States of America but I think that as the generations go on it will not be as hurtful on a personal note. People, both black and white, will be one. I hope that this does happen. I know it is unlikely that blacks and whites will be seen as one because of their skin color but i hope that it does happen. I hope that color just literally is seen as color and that no prejudices come with it. As said in class people are genetically 99.9% alike and only .01% different due to our appearance. What is on the outside says absolutely nothing about the person inside and I truly believe that.

I believe that the U.S. Census Bureau is taking the right action by listening to peoples thoughts, objections, and opinions on the word Negro in the U.S. Census questionnaire. I feel that it is very important not to offend anyone in anyway. I do not fully understand how the term Negro can offend some black people yet not other black people. I also feel that it is very important not to exclude anyone in the racial category of the U.S. Census questionnaire. The people that who do not like the fact that Negro is still an option in the U.S. Census questionnaire claim that the U.S. Census is not "keeping up with the times" and that Negro is an outdated term when in actuality there were 56,000 people alone who actually wrote out Negro in the "other" category of the racial section. They most likely wrote Negro because they are used to not checking a box or filling in a bubble that corresponds with Negro. This is because the U.S. Census questionnaire is most likely one of the only documents to still use the terminology Negro. Having said that this means that there is actually more than 56,000 Americans who prefer to be called Negros. And removing the option Negro from the U.S. Census questionnaire, in my opinion, would be insulting and rude. I know if I were filling out that form and White or Caucasian were not an option I would be very upset. I would feel unimportant and disrespected. This article shows how times are changing and that revisions may need to be made to accommodate them. I believe that one day the option Negro will be removed for the U.S. Census questionnaire. The reality that Negro is slowly fading away and soon to be history is similar to several other words in history that we now consider harsh words. For example a decent person would never use the word "Nigger" to refer to an African American because that would be offensive and harsh. A decent person would also not call a white person a "cracker" because that also is an awful word and extremely offensive. I believe that the word negro has historic and significant meaning, but the altercation of the word such as Nigger, Niga and so on have down graded the word and has created it to be a terrible insult and slang term to those of African descent. The U.S. Census is dealing with a difficult dilemma on whether to allow the term negro to remain on the U.S. Census questionnaire or to abolish it indefinitely like our sixteenth president of the United States of America, Mr. Abraham Lincoln, did with abolishing slavery all throughout America. I am very curious to see what will happen and whether the Negro option will remain on U.S. Census Questionnaires to come.