en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/2437875 Comments by srr5152 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/how-has-your-opinion-changed-on-illegal-immigration-119-blog/#IDComment144983288 No my option on illegal immigrants had remained the same. I do not think that we should go house to house looking for them, but I think that they do not need to be here. Of course they want to come here but when they do they are mistreated and take jobs at lower pay. Of course business men like this but when it comes down to it there is a federal minimum wage law in this country and everyone who either pays under it is breaking the law. Simple as that. Also why would you hire someone who is a citizen for five bucks more when you do not have to, and that’s the problem with that. Also it is a huge drain on the healthcare system. Sam talked about the illegal immigrants not hurting the system that much and that is just wrong. Because they in most cases do not have insurance so they just go to the emergency room with problem and they are not going to be turned down there. So the people with money have to cover their medical bills with higher premiums. And also whenever you hear about the number of uninsured people in this country you have to realize that they count illegals in that. So a major reason why universal healthcare in on the table is because there are so many uninsured people and a lot of them are not even citizens. So should we pay for them as well? So after the lecture I did ease up a little bit because I never thought of them really paying taxes for, and I didn’t realize that in a lot of areas they are the only people that will do some of the work. But I do think that there should be stricter laws when it comes to hiring and doing background checks. Also I think that the government should not provide people who are not citizens with government mandated health care. I did have to agree with Sam when he corrected himself Thursday in class when he said that he was not just saying we should open the border and let whoever in. There needs to be border patrol and because the government needs to know who’s here. But I did not agree when he said that we are all illegal in this country. Just people we are not all native does not mean we are all illegal. Not of out ancestor when though the proper channels and did the paperwork and became citizen when they came here, so we are not illegal. Being not a native and being illegal are two very different things and that is where I think that Sam had it wrong. Fri, 22 Apr 2011 02:39:02 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/19/how-has-your-opinion-changed-on-illegal-immigration-119-blog/#IDComment144983288 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/12/do-you-think-you-would-actively-try-to-not-benefit-from-nepotism-if-the-situation-presented-itself-119-blog/#IDComment143231127 I would have to say no I would not actively try to avoid nepotism if the situation presented itself. Mainly because I know a lot of people in the career field I am looking onto and I plan to take advantage of that. I can honestly say that I would not try and avoid nepotism because inadvertently used it to get a job for this summer. I was applying for a job at my local DA’s office and so first I called a detective that works there that I know and sent him my résumé and he put in a good word for me. Then I talked to someone I know locally who is on the County Council and he said if a brought him my résumé and a county application he would turn in it for me and put in a good word. Well about a month later I got a letter saying that I got a job in the DA’s office. I am not sure what I will be doing there, but I really do not care as long as I got the job. So I would say that I would not avoid nepotism because I have already benefited from it. Now I am not certain that this is why I got the job, but up until then I had even had a chance to send them my application, they kept telling me to wait. And also there is a good chance that the man I gave my application to will be the next DA. But I think all in all I really would rather earn things for myself in the long run. My connection may have gotten me this summer job, but I do not know how much they will help after college. And if they do help, I have no arguments with that. And that but I can say that I would not try to actively avoid nepotism. Because I think that as much as it helps to be well educated and I think that if nepotism does occur that the person that gets the job should be as qualified if not more. Education will only take you so far and I think that with that education and having connection there is a lot more doors open to you. People have heard it said a thousand times, life is all about who you know. And I would say that is true but along with how much you know. This is why I thing that going to college is so important, you learn a ton while you are there and you make a lot of connections along the way. So I would have to say that the only time I would avoid nepotism is when I know I am under qualified for the job and am offered in anyway because of someone I know. Fri, 15 Apr 2011 22:03:11 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/12/do-you-think-you-would-actively-try-to-not-benefit-from-nepotism-if-the-situation-presented-itself-119-blog/#IDComment143231127 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/what-do-you-think-of-the-291-statistic-and-what-number-would-you-pick-119-blog/#IDComment141124717 I would have to say that I am fine with that number. The number is that high because most of these cases involve attempting to kill the target with a bomb, not just walking into a building and shooting 30 people and hoping one of them is the target. This is war and what most people do not realize is that this is the way the world works. What do you think would have happened if the US did not join world war two and just asked Hitler to stop. Well Germany would have just taken control of all of Europe. The world has always been fighting wars and that’s the way is always going to be. This war might have been about oil, but you know what, people have been fighting for natural resources forever. And when Sam talked about putting ourselves in their shoes and talked about us stealing their oil, well the truth of the matter is that there is more oil then they will ever need there so what is wrong with selling it to us and making so money to try and rebuild their country. Most of Sam’s lecture was not only extremely bias; but very one sided. He make a couple a valid point along the way but I think that railing on the evils of oil companies and then connecting that to Christians taking over the world was a load of crap. He had a point when he said that American is becoming very imperialistic, but I do not think that other countries thing that because America invades a country that the Christians are invading. So when it comes down to a number I can live with, I am not really sure. I love history so when I look back and see the bombing raids in the Battle of Britain and the bombing of Germany by the allies in world war two I don’t remember anyone complaining about civilians dying then. About between one and three million German civilians died in that war, much because of bombing, but people didn’t care then; and that was just when were aiming for the Germans bases and factories, not even people. So today when we aim for leaders and such and we kill 29 to cut the head off a snake I say that I am ok with that. And 29 is not a number of how many we kill every time we target someone, it’s just a number of how many we are willing to accept as collateral damage. To close I would like to say that I would love if that number was a lot lower, because its a lot easier to win over a population when you’re not killing them. But I’m sure that the US military is doing everything that it can to get that number down and to try to save leaves, the opposite of what the enemy is trying to do. Sat, 9 Apr 2011 00:26:56 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/what-do-you-think-of-the-291-statistic-and-what-number-would-you-pick-119-blog/#IDComment141124717 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/what-do-you-think-of-the-291-statistic-and-what-number-would-you-pick-119-blog/#IDComment141124455 I would have to say that I am fine with that number. The number is that high because most of these cases involve attempting to kill the target with a bomb, not just walking into a building and shooting 30 people and hoping one of them is the target. This is war and what most people do not realize is that this is the way the world works. What do you think would have happened if the US did not join world war two and just asked Hitler to stop. Well Germany would have just taken control of all of Europe. The world has always been fighting wars and that’s the way is always going to be. This war might have been about oil, but you know what, people have been fighting for natural resources forever. And when Sam talked about putting ourselves in their shoes and talked about us stealing their oil, well the truth of the matter is that there is more oil then they will ever need there so what is wrong with selling it to us and making so money to try and rebuild their country. Most of Sam’s lecture was not only extremely bias; but very one sided. He make a couple a valid point along the way but I think that railing on the evils of oil companies and then connecting that to Christians taking over the world was a load of crap. He had a point when he said that American is becoming very imperialistic, but I do not think that other countries thing that because America invades a country that the Christians are invading. So when it comes down to a number I can live with, I am not really sure. I love history so when I look back and see the bombing raids in the Battle of Britain and the bombing of Germany by the allies in world war two I don’t remember anyone complaining about civilians dying then. About between one and three million German civilians died in that war, much because of bombing, but people didn’t care then; and that was just when were aiming for the Germans bases and factories, not even people. So today when we aim for leaders and such and we kill 29 to cut the head off a snake I say that I am ok with that. And 29 is not a number of how many we kill every time we target someone, it’s just a number of how many we are willing to accept as collateral damage. To close I would like to say that I would love if that number was a lot lower, because its a lot easier to win over a population when you’re not killing them. But I’m sure that the US military is doing everything that it can to get that number down and to try to save leaves, the opposite of what the enemy is trying to do. Sat, 9 Apr 2011 00:25:34 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/what-do-you-think-of-the-291-statistic-and-what-number-would-you-pick-119-blog/#IDComment141124455 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/what-do-you-think-of-the-291-statistic-and-what-number-would-you-pick-119-blog/#IDComment141124131 I would have to say that I am fine with that number. The number is that high because most of these cases involve attempting to kill the target with a bomb, not just walking into a building and shooting 30 people and hoping one of them is the target. This is war and what most people do not realize is that this is the way the world works. What do you think would have happened if the US did not join world war two and just asked Hitler to stop. Well Germany would have just taken control of all of Europe. The world has always been fighting wars and that’s the way is always going to be. This war might have been about oil, but you know what, people have been fighting for natural resources forever. And when Sam talked about putting ourselves in their shoes and talked about us stealing their oil, well the truth of the matter is that there is more oil then they will ever need there so what is wrong with selling it to us and making so money to try and rebuild their country. Most of Sam’s lecture was not only extremely bias; but very one sided. He make a couple a valid point along the way but I think that railing on the evils of oil companies and then connecting that to Christians taking over the world was a load of crap. He had a point when he said that American is becoming very imperialistic, but I do not think that other countries thing that because America invades a country that the Christians are invading. So when it comes down to a number I can live with, I am not really sure. I love history so when I look back and see the bombing raids in the Battle of Britain and the bombing of Germany by the allies in world war two I don’t remember anyone complaining about civilians dying then. About between one and three million German civilians died in that war, much because of bombing, but people didn’t care then; and that was just when were aiming for the Germans bases and factories, not even people. So today when we aim for leaders and such and we kill 29 to cut the head off a snake I say that I am ok with that. And 29 is not a number of how many we kill every time we target someone, it’s just a number of how many we are willing to accept as collateral damage. To close I would like to say that I would love if that number was a lot lower, because its a lot easier to win over a population when you’re not killing them. But I’m sure that the US military is doing everything that it can to get that number down and to try to save leaves, the opposite of what the enemy is trying to do. Sat, 9 Apr 2011 00:23:47 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/04/05/what-do-you-think-of-the-291-statistic-and-what-number-would-you-pick-119-blog/#IDComment141124131 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/29/do-you-ever-feel-uncomfortable-around-two-or-more-people-speaking-another-language-119-blog/#IDComment139230468 I would have to say no I do not feel uncomfortable around two or more people speaking a different language. When I am in another country I always speak English, mostly because that’s the only language I speak, but all the same. The only thing that bugs me sometimes it when they will look at me and then say something in their own language, I often feel like they are talking about me and I have no idea what they are saying. That would be the only like in which I am uncomfortable. And I really do not have any reason to be because odd are they are not talking about me and even if they are, I will probably never see them again so who cares. I defiantly think that if I could speak another language around campus with a friend I would defiantly do it. It’s just so much more fun than speaking English all of the time. The main reason I do not have a problem with people speaking another language is because many of them are from other countries and English is a second language to them. So why would they speak their second language to a friend who also speaks the same first language. The very fact that they can speak both their first language and English is great because that already more language than I know. But also knowing that I only speak one language also and listening to other speak more than one make me feel one a little ignorant, and two a little stupid. I feel like these people just see me as another ignorant American that does not care enough about the rest of the world to learn other language. And also I feel stupid because though I have taken language courses they never seem to stick and I always hate them, which is why I have never learned a second language. So in a way I feel like those people that speak many languages are judging me for being a stupid and ignorant American which is really not true. I would say that the only time I am uncomfortable is when people o know are speaking another language right in front of me. I want to be included in the conversation so I want to tell them to stop, but at the same time I do not want them to think I am being rude and not respecting their culture. But other than that I really never feel uncomfortable, I am glad that they feel comfortable enough around this campus and in this country to speak their native language. So in conclusion if someone wants to speak another language around campus, I encourage them to, just don’t talk about people in that language. Fri, 1 Apr 2011 23:53:27 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/29/do-you-ever-feel-uncomfortable-around-two-or-more-people-speaking-another-language-119-blog/#IDComment139230468 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/has-barak-obama%e2%80%99s-presidency-helped-the-race-movement-119-blog/#IDComment137551797 I think in a way people thought that, and still think that, Obama’s presidency has helped the race movement. But personally I do not know if it has. Of course it’s a he step forward to have a president that is half black, but at the same time I know a lot of people that think that that’s why he was elected. Of course this is false and not anywhere close to the truth, but a lot of people I know think that he was elected people everyone who was black voted for him. Well now that they say this my view on them has changed, but that is beside the point. Also they say that he is doing thing in office to only help black people. This was the moment I realized my friends were racist. So in this way I think that though for the country as a whole Obama is great for the race movement. But when it comes down to white people, many are fearing losing power, like the king of the hill idea Sam told us about earlier in the semester. These friends of mine are white and just feel as though they are not going to be first anymore and are not going to have as much control as before. Which really is not true. I believe that Obama being elected is the start of the sharing of the king of the mountain theory. For the first time a not white man has been elected to the highest office in our country. And if he had not gotten the nomination from his party then the other contender was a woman. So either way history was being made. And this proved that things really have changed because just 30 years ago this idea of a woman and a half black man running for president would have been a crazy and probably even a laughable idea. Now is has come to be a reality and he ended up winning against his white opponent by a large margin. Now during the election when his motto was change and many people including me had high hopes for him. But now he has not done much in the way of change and spending is out of control. Well now it seems as though he may be hurting the idea of different races and creeds in the white house. But perhaps not. Even if he does not to a wonderful job as president, he still was elected to that office. So whether people like him or not, they still have to deal with him for another two years. So what I think is it comes down to is the fact that no matter how good of job h does, he still made a huge and historic step in the quest for racial equality. Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:18:42 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/24/has-barak-obama%e2%80%99s-presidency-helped-the-race-movement-119-blog/#IDComment137551797 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/15/have-you-ever-felt-guilt-from-being-of-a-certain-race-119-blog/#IDComment135909314 No I have never felt guilty for being white. I will admit that the white community has a bad history when dealing with other races. But this in no way is connected to me. I did not have a choice in being born this color and therefore do not feel guilty for the things that people of my race did in the past. An example of when some people might feel guilty is when they are white and they are hired over someone of a different race or ethnicity. In this scenario I say that I am not the one doing the hiring and therefore cannot be blamed for the outcome of it. In that case it is the mangers fault because he is the racist and how would I have know that is why I was hired other than if I went up and asked him. I also do not like it when people try to make me or other white people feel bad for being white. By saying things like “do you know what your ancestors did” or anything like that. So I do not feel guilty. I now that terrible things were done to people in the past in this country, but people today should not be judged by the actions of those people. The only time I do feel some guilt is if I say something racist by accident and then I feel guilty because I am white and what I said might have offended people. Now that would probably happen no matter what race I was. It’s not that I am insensitive, it’s just that I do not blame myself for things that I did not do, and not did I have any part in. I think that feeling guilty for being a certain race is just another way to look back instead of looking forward when it comes to race and equality. I am a firm believer that looking at what we have now; learning from the mistakes we made in the past; and looking forward are the best ways to live our lives. Any other way and we are focusing on things that just do not matter. Now I think that I have learned from the past, and I hope that most people have as well. Now based on that I think that now while we live in the present we should not feel guilty because by knowing our past we have learned from it. And now the most important part is to always be thinking about and planning for the future to make sure we do not make the same mistakes as those in our past and to work together for a brighter future. Fri, 18 Mar 2011 21:02:32 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/15/have-you-ever-felt-guilt-from-being-of-a-certain-race-119-blog/#IDComment135909314 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/02/is-it-possible-for-affirmative-action-to-take-things-too-far-119-blog/#IDComment134035291 I think that things like affirmative action can take things too far. I general idea for the program is good, give people chances to go to college that would not have to otherwise. But when it comes to far is when people of minorities have more of a chance to get into schools then the majority of people. I think that the program was started when people were turned away because of their heritage and not because they were not smart enough. Well today people that are not as smart are getting into schools because the school needs to have a certain number of non white people. So the general idea for the program was good, but I personally do not believe that schools look at the color of the person anymore. But they still have to meet a quota. I think these days the fairest way that colleges should admit students is based on grades, involvement, and general leadership abilities. I have also in the past heard of times when affirmative action hurts people in the majority, but also in the minorities. So classmates of mine have talked about how at their schools very smart people who were in the minority were not accepted to schools because the school how already met its quota. In this situation the minorities were hurt but the system that was developed to help them. This seems as if the schools are promoting racism by having these quotas and numbers. A school should admit though with the best records, no matter where they are from or what color their skin is. When it comes down to a numbers game, no one really wins. I think in a sense affirmative action is something that we need to move past. It is something that has helped many but now in my option its usefulness has run out. It is not longer needed and therefore is hurting people. It is hurt the majority, and the minorities. When it comes to the point were so just about everyone is being hurt by and program or idea, it is time for that idea or program to go. Even if the idea does not go, it needs to be rethought. Because the idea of taking someone that is smart and has potential from a school where there is little chance of going to college and letting them in is okay. But it should not just be for minorities and right know this is not how it works. Just because someone is a minority does not mean that they have worked harder or deserve any more than someone else. Some people would call that being racist, I call it being fair in a unfair world. Fri, 11 Mar 2011 03:41:16 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/03/02/is-it-possible-for-affirmative-action-to-take-things-too-far-119-blog/#IDComment134035291 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/24/is-it-selfish-for-people-in-poverty-to-have-more-kids-because-of-their-lower-income-119-blog/#IDComment130499837 I would say that it is without a doubt selfish and even stupid for people that are poor, and/or of lower means to have more children than someone who is in a better financial situation. When it come down to it is always seems as if this is the case. Someone that is poor has more kids than someone who is not. This is just stupid for the poorer person. The person who is rich can afford children, while the poor person clearly cannot and therefore cannot provide them with a decent life. And it is not a matter of education; it is a matter of common sense. Why would you have three children when you income can barley support you and one child. Then of course if there are two parents one either has to stay home for years or the parents have to pay for childcare for years. Either way it costs the parents an incredible amount. Then of course there is the case of the single parent. First after you have one kid and you are raising it alone, would you still have sex? Or wouldn’t you as least be safe about it in the future. Because if you are barely making enough money to support one child, how would you expect to be able to support more. Then later if the single parent does have more children, guess who now has the obligation to pay for the mistakes of that parent. You guessed it; Uncle Sam. The single parent goes on welfare and not only drains from the economy but the children first off grow up thinking that the government will pay for everything, and second off will grow up in terrible conditions. Because last I checked, welfare pay is awful. So looking back guess how many poorer parents would not have had as many kids. Not to say they do not love the kids they have, of course not. Most would do anything for their kids. But if the option was to never even have more kids and live a much better life, I would hope most people would do that. Of course if you ask most parents they would say that their child is worth more to them than any amount of money. This may be true, but in general for the future it would be much better is more poor people didn’t have as many kids. Having more kids only adds to the already huge gap between the rich and the poor. This is something that is just not good for the country. So in closing if poorer people in the future just had fewer children, they could live better lives and hopefully so could their children. Fri, 25 Feb 2011 05:17:27 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/24/is-it-selfish-for-people-in-poverty-to-have-more-kids-because-of-their-lower-income-119-blog/#IDComment130499837 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/17/how-do-you-feel-about-the-way-people-live-in-america-compared-to-other-places-around-the-world-119-blog/#IDComment128750977 I consider us in America to be extremely lucky. And even that may be a huge understatement. The simple things that we do every single day are things that a lot of people in this world will never have and cannot even image having. Things like running water, heating and air conditioning, cars, and even just three meals a day. But yet that still is not enough for us. Most people would argue this to be a bad thing, but I personally like to play the devil’s advocate and argue for the other side. The reason I think we as Americans live like we do is because we were born into it and that just our attitude, not to except anything less. I see this first off as an extremely lucky thing based on our chances of being born here are less than one is every twenty five. Second off I see this as a good thing, because besides being just luck, we and our ancestors were determined to have a better life then those who came before us. This shows a great deal about the American drive to always seek to better yourself. So in that sense I see it as a good thing that we live the way we live. Just because other people in the world do not have certain things does not mean we should give them up so we can all be unhappy and live in poverty. Now I am not saying that giving some of our excess wealth and comforts to those less fortunate is a bad thing, if anything it’s a great thing. It is just that I do not think we should change the way we live our everyday lives we in truth nothing is really going to change. I could stand out in the rain and preach about this stuff, or give all of the money I will ever earn to charity, and people in America will still life better than almost everyone else in the world. Now when it comes to giving and changing things I believe that what Sam said was very true, its not about getting rid of poverty, it is about helping one person at a time. This is very true, but I do not believe that it is necessary to sacrifice the lives we have today in order to do it. The only people that I think can make a real difference is those that are the most wealthy, and last I looked it is something like the top ten percent of Americans control 85 percent of the wealth, and it may be more than that. So what it comes down to is that American are going to keep living the lives that they have always known and the people that live in poverty will continue to live like that, and as sad as it is, that’s just the way the world works, it is unfair. Fri, 18 Feb 2011 06:27:12 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/17/how-do-you-feel-about-the-way-people-live-in-america-compared-to-other-places-around-the-world-119-blog/#IDComment128750977 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/10/what-did-you-get-out-of-king-of-the-mountain-119-blog/#IDComment127414901 I guess when I heard the king of the mountain example I thought that it made sense. Once one group gets to the top, they do not want to leave, and often think of ways to keep the other groups down where they are. Also it makes sense that he said that whites got to the top first and now want to make sure they stay there. I am white so I see ways in the past that we have used our status of being on top to keep others down. Some good examples would be not allowing others to vote, and of course, slavery. I believe that it really all started back in Europe. It just happened that in Europe the weapons and technology developed the fastest, and therefore they were able to spread out and explore and conquer other cultures. They were the first to explore and discover the Americas and when they got there their weapons and technologies where much greater than the people that were already here. And of course these people from Europe were all white and thought of themselves above other cultures around the world. So in a sense that is when the white man first got on top of the mountain, when the mostly white European countries thought of better ways to kill others then everyone else. After that it was just a matter of time before they spread out and did thinks such as took slaves of other ethnicities and once a certain ethnicity is thought of as a slave, there is no going back. I think these days the white man still remains at the top of the mountain, but everyone else is slowly working their way up and the white man is losing ways to stop them. These days everyone over 18 can vote, slavery has long since been abolished, and for the first time a man of mixed races was elected to the white house as president. But all other races are far from the top, there is still a huge amount of racism and unequal treatment. This is because of all other the years of slavery and injustice cannot be all unwritten over night. Thousands of years of the white man being high above the rest cannot be simple forgot about and undone in less than a hundred years. In the last century the other races have been slowly attempting to move up the hill, and at first they did not ever have a chance of advancing, because white people kept putting up road blocks. In the past fifty years or so we have begun to start taking down those road blocks, but it takes time. It is my hope that over the next fifty years other races continue to move up this made up mountain so one day we can all call the top home. Fri, 11 Feb 2011 21:57:01 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/10/what-did-you-get-out-of-king-of-the-mountain-119-blog/#IDComment127414901 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/03/why-dont-we-live-like-the-monkeys-119-blog/#IDComment125994702 I think that t is a great thing that we think for ourselves. If we did not then we would be doing the same things as the animals, just collecting food and finding shelter. Because we have learned to thing for ourselves we have had done things that other animals cannot even think of. We have explored almost every corner of this world and have even left it and gone to the moon. We go to space; no other animal has ever done that. I guess we would be content if we did not think for ourselves because we would not know anything else, but then we would not have been motivated to do all that we have done. We would do the same thing day after day and think nothing of it. Because I can think for myself I can realize that not being able to do this would much worse. But at the same time it is hard to try and look at things from that angle. If I could think for myself we would be content with even the simple things, which I guess is good. We would not know really what we were missing with all the technology and freedom. But then of course we would not strive to be better than we are. This is something hardwired into just about every human being, to be better than you are, and if we could not think for ourselves I do not think we would have this drive and passion for self improvement. There is so much more than just living for the sake for living, and without being about to learn to think about that, we would never have experienced that. Life as we know it would be completely different, no computers, nice houses, education. We would just learn how to survive and nothing more. What kind of life is that? I personally would take all of the bad things that come along with being able to think for yourself just for having my thoughts and creative ideas. Imaging not being able to image, not having any creativity, that all goes along with being able to think for yourself. I think living just on instincts is a boring life, you do not make a difference on a day to day basis, and that something that personal and I would hope most other people want to do every day. It is just that simple in my mind, if I am not either thinking up something nor doing something that makes a difference, then I should be on this earth. If I could not think for myself, then I would not be able to do this. This is what I have based my life around and thinking for myself allows me to do it. Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:32:27 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/02/03/why-dont-we-live-like-the-monkeys-119-blog/#IDComment125994702 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/26/why-do-we-associate-with-people-of-the-same-race-and-ethnicity-as-ourselves-119-blog/#IDComment124273258 I think that the reason that people tend to hang out with and mostly only socialize with people of the same race or ethnicity because it is what they are most comfortable with. It also may be a question of the area you grew up in. I know from personal experience that neighborhoods at least in my area are very segregated. It is not intentional; it’s just what everyone is most comfortable with. That is personally why I don’t really hang out with people of different races and ethnicities, because I do not know that any because I did not grow up with them. I think that where you grow up and who you grow up with has a great effect on whom you hang out with and befriend later in life. I do not believe that any of this is intentional, perhaps a very small number of people do that want to branch out to other races and such, but for the most part most people just do have a reason to. And just for the record if you looking for a devious campus then Penn State is not the right place to look. I am not one hundred percent sure on the numbers, but I think that that the campus is about eighty five percent white, so that’s why you see whites with whites, it’s a matter of odds in the people they meet. Also I think that there is a fairly simple answer to the question about the foreign students, it is just to make it feel more like home. I know that if I was to study abroad somewhere where English was not the native language, I would look for a group of Americans, or English people or anyone that’s first language was English because it is just easier to communicate. Also I would look for Americans first people when you are in another country a great way not to feel home sick to make yourself feel as close to home as you can get, and the best way to do that is to hang out with people from the same country. As time goes by I think more and more people will see different groups blending and mixing. More and more people over time will have no problems ignore their own comfort zones and branching out to other groups of people. This could happen, or this could stay just as they are now, everybody is okay with each other, they just do not really hang out and become good friends with people from other groups. No one can really tell for sure what is going to happen, but at least now we are at a point where though we are not best friends, most people are not racist and don’t hate people of other races and ethnicities. Fri, 28 Jan 2011 06:04:37 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/26/why-do-we-associate-with-people-of-the-same-race-and-ethnicity-as-ourselves-119-blog/#IDComment124273258 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/04/23/south-park-off-the-hook/#IDComment122816245 I believe that because I am not a Muslim that I will never understand what the problem is with South Park poking fun at Muhammad. The show is meant for fun and to entertain people, not to insult. The creators of South Park seem to make fun of almost all religions. Jewish people are at the bad end of many jokes on the show, Jesus is a main character on the show, and not in a good way, and there are a couple episodes devoted to doing nothing but making fun of Mormons. I think that the real issue of course was not that the show was making fun of Muslims, but that they were going to show an image of Muhammad on the show and showing an image of him is strictly again the Muslim religion. If this is the case, then the Muslim views just should not watch it if it offends them. They creator of South Park might have pushed it a little bit far in this one, but that does not mean that they are free to be threatened and fear for their lives. This of course was not the Muslim people of course, it was extremists. Every religion has them, but Muslim extremists are just a little more serious. I am sure the Christian extremists do not like the show, but that does not mean that they threaten to kill the creators of the show. This show and shows like it sometimes cross the line, and that is why they are so popular, because the make fun of things that no one else will. I really like this show and they do and very good job at what they do, which is to entertain people. When the episode aired the image was censored so in the end the threats worked and the creators gave in. I think that it should never have come to that. When it comes down to it though they had the right to make that episode under their freedom of speech, there are just some things that they should avoid. When it comes down to it, it is not worth is to be threaten and possibly killed just to make fun of one religion. I actually saw the episode and it was not really worth it to put Muhammad in the episode. They could have easily used and different character in place of it and it would have avoided all of this controversy. But no threats were carried out and the show continues normal today. So though the show made it through this, they really should think about pushing the bar that far again and whether it is worth the risk just for a couple laughs. Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:05:02 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2010/04/23/south-park-off-the-hook/#IDComment122816245 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cr%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment122184821 soc 119 Wed, 19 Jan 2011 02:05:50 +0000 http://www.worldinconversation.org/2011/01/10/last-name-%e2%80%9cr%e2%80%9d-%e2%80%93-intense-debate/#IDComment122184821