Sam is a true renegade I suppose being in a book where he is in the top one hundred one most dangerous professors in the world. This lecture really proved the point, but also missed the main point to many students in the class. Sam isn't attacking christians. He could easily flip the way the wording went and the religion. Islam is just as big, but since Americans are so used to hearing about how horrible Islamic people from Arab nations are, many Christians get defensive. I'm christian I have no complaints about the lecture. Is he talking about me? no. Is he talking about christians? yes. It's like if you say a black guy doesn't tip well. Does it mean that all black people are poor tipper or asians bad drivers? no, absolutely not. Clearly what I just said is more of a stereotype comapred that all christians are on a crusade. Sam is trying to point out how people never see christians doing the same exact things as other religions, and we hide it because America is a christian nation. It's tough to really get down to it because people get intense about religions and don't take a step back to think about anything. Everyone wants to just blast Sam, and that's fine. That's his job. He is to make everyone think, even if you think he's wrong. You don't see him get all scared and cry about if someone disagrees with his opinion. He takes opinions just as much as he gives opinions. What Sam did not convey in the larger scale in my opinion is the war. Is it it about resources? of course. The issue is if we are making a fake democracy excuse to take over that land. That land is fucked up and was not run properly at all. Sadaam was killing innocent people who disagreed with him. America doesn't kill MASSIVE amounts of people who disagree with the country, just the few that make points, which is rare from I'm reading here so you're all safe. I see a lot of christians condemning Sam because he speaks his opinion, but yet want their own so they can refute his words. It doesn't make much sense to me why everyone is getting so mad because if it was any other type of religion people would not have the same feelings at all. Are people over there completely innocent? no. Are people over here with their heads in the sand completely innocent? fuck no. They have it much rougher over there than Americans do here and have to live with bombs over there land and heads everyday. Am I going to be held responsible for that? No way. We have attacked many and we will be attacked in the future. People see America as this untouchable infallible land and it simply isn't the case.

Welfare. The biggest question concerning us all is that is it a problem or a solution. The biggest thing is that it is the solution to a problem. To be completely frank people on welfare abuse the complete shit out of it. A lot of people on welfare say it's free money instead of going and trying to find a different solution to the problem. Don't get me wring because I think welfare is a fantastic structure in a capitalistic society. The problem is when people say you know what I'm ad at the government and what's going on and instead of trying to find a solution they go straight into I'm going to take advantage of something that was created FOR me. Welfare was created for the people who don't have enough support, but it seems as if it's not enough support and it's fair to go and abuse a situation because they are in a worse situation. Welfare is great, trust me, I have family members who are on welfare and they are very embarrassed about being on it but shouldn't. I feel like I have to ass that I'm white to this situation to justify more clarification even though it doesn't matter. I saw an MTV episode where a fella by the name of Ol' dirty bastard was asking a ton of money with platinum records but used welfare. Why did he use welfare? To stick it to the "man". The reason he did it was because he's mad. Is that right justification because your mad? He didn't realize that by doing that he was actually increasing the problem and essentially hurting his own people step by step and day by day. Welfare comes down to responsibility for those who are in a disadvantaged situation, but intern they take advantage of that disadvantaged situation. I will feel bad for people on welfare always because people look down on them and it's not fair, but at the same tie I don't feel bad about the same complaining about it when they do nothing to levitate the situation, but instead keep trying to cause the problem because they are made at a certain group or maybe society in general. At the end of the say what is society going to do to alleviate the situation. Are we all going to blame a certain group? or maybe take actions and steps to solving the problem. A figure like Al Sharpton is the worst in my opinion because he is saying don't be racist against blacks, but he's racist against whites, and white figures just like him exist. To be quit honest it's just bullshit at the end of the day We all need to rise as a steady coordinated group and fight the trials and tribulations of hypocrisy and non justice so we can help those on welfare, but they need to be on the team as well.

Of course changing the books would have a dramatic impact. Then you can alter history in any way you want to as well. I could be a teacher and just not teach something I don't agree with. When you're a kid you learn that pilgrams and indians just loved each other and baked a turkey with mashed potatoes and shit. Could you imagine being in 2nd grade after making a hand turkey and your teacher telling you the white man raped native americans and threw small pox onto the blankets they slept with? Holy shit I'd never want to go to school again. Sure in high school kids should be taught in a more round fashion as to look at every side, but it also comes down to the kid wanting to learn on his or her own. Everyone is somewhat biased in their own opinions, so if you don't like that opinion go look for an opinion that can be constructed to a way you think is the concept many people end up doing. Onto the white guilt concept. Should a white person feel bad about what happened to native americans when their ancestors arrived here? absolutely. Should that white person feel bad that their ancestors were abusive people? absolutely. Should a white person have to carry that guilt every time he sees a native american on the news or sees a reservation? absolutely not. Helping everyone would be a fantastic thing to do, but for a white person to hold all the guilt won't help the situation, just like a black person holding all that anger won't help the situation. It comes down to how long should a person feel guilty about certain situations? When will black people feel that americans have apologized enough? maybe never. When will black people forgive their ancestors for selling themselves to the white man? maybe never. Time is a very sensitive subject in the game of life. Time is the essence of life and what makes life worth living and dieing for. Should books be changed to slight the white man? will that help at the end of the day? maybe some will say yes and others no. What age is appropriate for white guilt? should schools teach white guilt when kids are young so they carry an extra burden around? I think that's fucked up in a simple sense. Humans have been horrible to each other for years. White people enslaved more white people in the history of the world than any other "color", but this enslavement was not hidden like it is today. We only know that because of history books. Should races feel guilt? or maybe just the people who's ancestors were involved feel the guilt. It's a fine line.

It's almost funny that a lot of people are jumping on the person who said it wasn't his place to go and say something. These are the same people in high school who didn't say anything when a "nerd" was getting picked on, but now they vilify someone who says it isn't his place to do something. The nature of a human is the fight or flight mentality. People who say the person who didn't stand up to something that is wrong is right, but not totally. They are right in the fact that either way you should probably take a stance, but are they worse than the people saying they agree with marking out terrorist looking people? ABSOLUTELY NOT. It starts to get annoying when people continue to imply that not doing anything is worse than doing something when it's simply not true. Not doing something against injustice IS BAD, but it's worse than someone vehemently offending another’s culture? get out of my face with that garbage. It's easy to point and say that person didn't do anything so that person is clearly bad. These same people who say that probably haven't been in that position, so it's easy to sway it to their way when they've done nothing themselves. It's this new nature of political correctness bullshit to be honest. To single out people who don't say something is wrong, if not just as wrong as the people saying mean things. I can't believe people in this class are singling out that one comment without taking a look at themselves. Without question a time or two has passed where I haven't done something in a certain situation, and I feel bad that I didn't say something, but to gang up on a person who says I didn't know what to say is insane. My take is these same people won't honestly talk about race, but rather censor themselves to appease others so they don't come off as a racist. It’s just a simple, but complex double standard of the way race and society coincides. What is more disturbing? The person who says nothing, or the person who blasts that person verbally? They are better because they pointed out the fact they didn’t say anything? It’s just hypocrisy at its peak, and only gets bigger and bigger. I’m seeing a lot of these “as Americans we MUST say something,” so it’s all of a sudden the American way to point out when people don’t step up during an injustice? Shit I never got this memo. A lot of Americans are the most un just, and I AM American. People need to reflect on WHY that person is scared to say something instead of the end result of that person not saying something. Trying to intimidate the person more will not help the situation, and actually make the person not want to say anything else. This starts to become a spiral of silence. A spiral of silence is when many people won’t say anything against the majority because they are afraid.

This is the easiest hard question around. Media is a big part in why lesbians are seen as "cool" while gay dudes are seen as "unnatural". The media has NO problem portraying lesbians all over the place, including award shows and things of that nature. I think some gay male from american idol tried to kiss another guy on stage and they bleeped it, but I could be wrong. Even in society a father would be more accepting of a gay daughter compared to a gay son. It's much harder for gay males in the world, because as many say, it's a mans world. The macho act is part of a bigger insecurity for a lot of men since they can't express raw emotions, so they express fabricated ones that media plays into again. When's the last time you turned on the TV and saw two flamboyant characters interacting as if it was normal? I can't think of one. But instead you see two rugged dudes throwing a football around with wranglers on and it's cool because that's how "men" act. Take a show like Ellen, who's horrible by the way but that's neither here nor there, and try to imagine a gay fella doing her show. It would be shutdown almost immediately in my opinion. Many gay men don't attract and audience like a lesbian does. You don't see many girls saying "hey I really want to see those two muscle hunks go at it,"but, you will see dudes say the opposite. A lot of girls I know think it's more disgusting to see guys kiss than girls kiss. Also the title of lesbian compared to gay comes into play. I mean really think about it. When someone says "gay" you either think of the movement of the gay population or gay males. Maybe call gay men Mesbians? or Morebians? I'm not sure how the gay male population would react to that title, or if lesbians even would like a title and rather be called just a gay woman. It's a down slope battle. Gay men are now trying to be accepted on the same level as their female counterpart. It comes down to education. They don't talk about much HUMAN sexuality in schools before college, you just find out about it. What are we as a society to do about what is accepted and not accepted? We can't make everyone conform to our ideas or their ideas. People are still racist, and will continue to be, and it's a lack of education. Gay man will be less accepted compared to lesbians because it's simply just not as attractive to the "average" persons eye. It's not fair, but it seems like progress is being made. Just look at the amount of gays being accepted in the work place now since 2002. People have to understand it takes time. Society can't just go from crawling to riding a harley in a couple years, it takes many.

What are we supposed to do with morons on the planet earth? This is what makes life fun even though many are disturbed by the comments, and rightly so. We look at animals in a different light, as they have souls and are part of mother nature, but some humans' do not have souls. It's a shame to hear such ridiculous notions from a man of " high prestige". Politicians will do anything to save the ass of themselves in the end. Welfare is definitely a good, and progressive thing for SOCIETY. Society is so hell bound on blaming the lowers for the misfortune of the world, but yet it's the lower that does the work for the higher class to BENEFIT. To benefit people must step on the lower and make them feel horrible as people. I think many in this class are seeing a lot of these issues for the first time while some of us have seen this going on for years. My group had this discussion of who is the first person in your mind when thinking of welfare, and it's rather simple, that is black people come to mind. Is it right? No, but is it what the media and surrounding forces LEAD us to believe? Well yes. Everyone has a choice in life to think how they would like, but outside forces absolutely control how many think. They are too weak to think otherwise on their own. Sam pointed out in class that if he picked any black person and asked who was rich they immediately go to a white person. Is that racist? maybe, but it might be just the product of what society keeps implementing on human beings, and not animals. The media wants to treat us like animals because they see us as just eating off the scraps that the government gives us. Fuck them. I mean really who are these highfalutin dickwads to keep pointing out how bad everyone else is, when in fact they are the worst of all of society. Many want to blame societal issues on the lower and middle classes when the higher classes are rewarded for beating down on the "inferior" classes!!!! It's funny that he says the welfare people are animals while he's ninety six percent monkey himself the dickface. The end of this post is to say how people don't want to look at themselves when problems, but rather blame the "animals" for gathering what the higher people actually invented FOR the "animals" so they could be elected. It comes down to power and the realization of many that people are just pawns for the higher order to move around to checkmate society in the way they see fit.

Clearly this movie is a spin off of the Pocahontas saga and dancing with wolves, and actually avatar is being sued over it. The issue at hand seems that it's always a white person derived as the hero. In history every conqueror has been of white descent for the most part. Jesus is seen as white through 99 percent of the depictions, but most scholars would accurately put him as middle eastern or black. It's a tricky situation when making a movie. If you make a blue person a bad person, or any colored person in a movie a bad person, that is going to be racist in the minds of most. When does blue become black, and black become blue? The line of what is segregation and what is FICTION is getting ridiculous. So now filmmakers can't envision something they want in the movie?, or is is the subconscious saying this part of the movie is racist in the directors' head. It comes down to artistic expression. An example of this is comedy. White people CAN NOT say the same things as a black person would or they would be in serious trouble from the political correct society that is growing. Some line must be drawn between reality and artistic expression. It's easy to point out flaws in EVERY mixture of art through society and race.

It's not a surprise that France wants to ban something like this. When it comes down to personal expression the line of what is decent and what is not becomes thin. If you look at America with public schools for example, many children wear ordinary clothes. Once a year you see a child with a t-shirt that says "My principal blows" or something to that nature. Is it alright to ban self expression? If it comes down to context what can the principal actually do? Nothing. This is somewhat similar to what's going on with the French government trying to intervene with veils. Government should be a small part trying to justify the citizens needs. In this case it seems like the government is justifying the needs of itself. Religious practices are a bitter situation to handle in many parts of the world. It seems best to leave religion alone to whoever is practicing as long as they are not destroying society. It's almost humorous to think that if this was a catholic instead of muslim this law wouldn't have even been THOUGHT about. It's an unjust paradox of religious gripe, and feelings of "mine is better than yours." They continue to say if the muslim women in that part of the world were more educated they wouldn't be so "obedient" to their husband. Who is to say what and what is not education? It's always easy to point the finger at what is different from what you know instead of understanding it. You don't see the French government or officials go on television and say maybe we should try and understand their culture. It's direct misguided orientalism at it's peak. Nobody wants to learn about something different from themselves, but instead continue to not understand their OWN understanding of a situation. Most people, and it seems like especially these people in France, won't be their own person and stand up for what the truly think is right or wrong. It seems as if the majority rules and that is how it's going to be, because they are scared to be excluded. Anyone with something over the head is seen as embarrassed or afraid, but that is most certainly not always the case. This is clearly not to single out France in any way, but a feeling of resentment still occurs about muslims in France. In my opinion a lot of the hatred stems to the Algerian War of Independence. Algeria did not want to be under French rule anymore, but instead branch off into what they saw as a fit government. It seems as if France is still bitter about the situation and losing a lot of its colonial branch in that war. The history of a people always comes around again. This can be seen all throughout the middle east specifically as an example. People should be able to do what they want and act how they want, and the consequences will fit. In this case to ban a person from wearing a veil would be to ban a person to wear anything.

heeeey noooow

merkin