I am and always have been a firm believer in innocent until proven guilty and giving people accused of a crime, no matter how serious it is, the right to properly go through the legal system and get their day in court. That being said, no matter what the legal process says about innocent until proven guilty, people will always be quick to judge someone being tried of a crime. As a human, you have to think that if someone has been charged with a crime, they must be guilty of something. It is absolutely human nature to assume that. The current case is no exception to this empirical fact. The extent of the crime committed, and the number of cases where this is apparently happens makes it extremely hard for anyone to think that Sandusky will be found innocent. Because of this, he is getting murdered in the press, regardless of what the final outcome may be. Where I have a huge problem with people not adhering to “innocent until proven guilty” is in a case where you don’t know all of the facts yet or only a portion of the story is made public knowledge. In cases like this, public opinion can very well shape the fate of the select individual. It’s not fair to that person in the least bit when conclusions are jumped to and decisions are made about them, before they have the time to properly defend themselves. I feel that the media is solely responsible by this in this specific case. I get that this is a huge story, I get that it happened at one of the biggest and most storied universities in the country, however the amount of media coverage this has gotten is over the top. Lets say in a month or so when Jerry Sandusky goes to trial, he is somehow found not guilty. The damage to his, Paterno’s, Spanier’s, Curley’s, Shultz’s and McQueary’s careers will all have been done all ready. The damage to the reputation of this University will already have been done. Is that fair to any of them? Absolutely not, and if you were accused of a crime you would want your day in court too. That being said, I have a feeling that none of these men are innocent, but at the same time they should at least be given the courtesy that every other American is given when it comes to the legal process. This example is of course one of the worse crimes that could ever be committed, and that is why it is so hard for people to actually believe in innocent until proven guilty, yet at the same time it is only right for everyone to be given the right to the legal process and how it truly operates.

This weeks question about why Americans won’t do the hard labor that Mexicans are willing to do is one that I have been asking myself for a very large time. Americans as a whole have a very entitled attitude, and a feeling that we are better than everyone. This amazes and bewilders me because I am not sure where this attitude came from. Especially in an economic climate like we are in now, where jobs are very hard to come by, I am not sure why people aren’t willing to do anything and everything to make money to support their families. I know that working in a field picking fruit or doing manual labor isn’t the sexiest or most prestigious job in the world, but it is a job, which is way more than a lot of people can say they have now. I have always thought that any job is better than no job, and this is no exception. Now I am not necessarily saying that I would want to do these jobs, but I am currently in a position where I hope to get a job in a field much different from that of one which involves a lot of physical labor. However, there are vast majorities of people currently in this country that aren’t in my position, and there is really no excuse for why they don’t work. We saw an interview with a women living in the south in extreme poverty with her children. She openly states that she could easily have gone on welfare and collect unemployment, except she wants to work, she wants to prove something to herself and her kids about the value of having a work ethic, and I respect that from her. She knows that her life is pretty bad, but she is at least trying to make a name for her and teach her kids valuable life lessons. If more people in America had the same work ethic as her, I think that we would be in a far better economic situation then where we are now.
When all of the craziness in the economy in 2008 was happening I remember asking my dad if he thought or was worried that he might get laid off. I can’t remember his definite answer, but I do remember him saying if he did he would have no problem working doing something outside because at the very least he would be outside and get into good shape. I will always remember that answer because he taught me to not think I am ever above a certain job or a specific line of work just because I will eventually have a college degree and hopefully one day work in a white collar atmosphere.

This weeks question about why Americans won’t do the hard labor that Mexicans are willing to do is one that I have been asking myself for a very large time. Americans as a whole have a very entitled attitude, and a feeling that we are better than everyone. This amazes and bewilders me because I am not sure where this attitude came from. Especially in an economic climate like we are in now, where jobs are very hard to come by, I am not sure why people aren’t willing to do anything and everything to make money to support their families. I know that working in a field picking fruit or doing manual labor isn’t the sexiest or most prestigious job in the world, but it is a job, which is way more than a lot of people can say they have now. I have always thought that any job is better than no job, and this is no exception. Now I am not necessarily saying that I would want to do these jobs, but I am currently in a position where I hope to get a job in a field much different from that of one which involves a lot of physical labor. However, there are vast majorities of people currently in this country that aren’t in my position, and there is really no excuse for why they don’t work. We saw an interview with a women living in the south in extreme poverty with her children. She openly states that she could easily have gone on welfare and collect unemployment, except she wants to work, she wants to prove something to herself and her kids about the value of having a work ethic, and I respect that from her. She knows that her life is pretty bad, but she is at least trying to make a name for her and teach her kids valuable life lessons. If more people in America had the same work ethic as her, I think that we would be in a far better economic situation then where we are now.
When all of the craziness in the economy in 2008 was happening I remember asking my dad if he thought or was worried that he might get laid off. I can’t remember his definite answer, but I do remember him saying if he did he would have no problem working doing something outside because at the very least he would be outside and get into good shape. I will always remember that answer because he taught me to not think I am ever above a certain job or a specific line of work just because I will eventually have a college degree and hopefully one day work in a white collar atmosphere.

This weeks question about why Americans won’t do the hard labor that Mexicans are willing to do is one that I have been asking myself for a very large time. Americans as a whole have a very entitled attitude, and a feeling that we are better than everyone. This amazes and bewilders me because I am not sure where this attitude came from. Especially in an economic climate like we are in now, where jobs are very hard to come by, I am not sure why people aren’t willing to do anything and everything to make money to support their families. I know that working in a field picking fruit or doing manual labor isn’t the sexiest or most prestigious job in the world, but it is a job, which is way more than a lot of people can say they have now. I have always thought that any job is better than no job, and this is no exception. Now I am not necessarily saying that I would want to do these jobs, but I am currently in a position where I hope to get a job in a field much different from that of one which involves a lot of physical labor. However, there are vast majorities of people currently in this country that aren’t in my position, and there is really no excuse for why they don’t work. We saw an interview with a women living in the south in extreme poverty with her children. She openly states that she could easily have gone on welfare and collect unemployment, except she wants to work, she wants to prove something to herself and her kids about the value of having a work ethic, and I respect that from her. She knows that her life is pretty bad, but she is at least trying to make a name for her and teach her kids valuable life lessons. If more people in America had the same work ethic as her, I think that we would be in a far better economic situation then where we are now.
When all of the craziness in the economy in 2008 was happening I remember asking my dad if he thought or was worried that he might get laid off. I can’t remember his definite answer, but I do remember him saying if he did he would have no problem working doing something outside because at the very least he would be outside and get into good shape. I will always remember that answer because he taught me to not think I am ever above a certain job or a specific line of work just because I will eventually have a college degree and hopefully one day work in a white collar atmosphere.

I think that the creation, and passing of this piece of legislation is absolutely ridiculous. I don’t know law very well but it is hard to imagine that this could be deemed Constitutionally acceptable, which makes me wonder how the law got passed in the first place. Also it brings into the question the ethics and intelligence of the people that we have elected to run our country. If laws like this are created, who is to say some other, more ridiculous, law won’t be passed in a later date, which apparently is conceivable now that this has been passed.
In a college setting, it is understood that students are trying to broaden their knowledge, both in the classroom and in life. At large universities, and especially Penn State, one of their selling points, one of the staples of the university and university life is that there are hundreds of ways to get involved in any number of different clubs, from book club to club sports. Many students often times come to college unsure of what they want to study, but that is really the least important thing of what they are unsure of. In many cases, students come to college unsure of who they are, they have yet to establish an identity for themselves. They join clubs of all different kinds to better understand things that they are either passionate about, or know nothing about, yet have an interest to learn more. Sometimes, people join clubs out of curiosity, maybe it’s a club that has an opposing view from theirs, but they want to join to learn more so that they are more knowledgeable about whatever topic they want. With this law, it would be impossible for these opportunities to happen, which is why I cannot see how it is plausible that these state senators thought it would be a good idea to pass this law. By doing this, they are directly blocking one of the main purposes that young kids go to college, which is why I think that this law is absolutely ridiculous. I don’t understand how someone who is paying college tuition, part of which goes into an activities fee that helps fund many clubs, can be turned away from a club that they want to join based on conflicting view points. In some cases, having these people in clubs such as those that deal with political parties, religion or other group sensitive causes could actually benefit from having these people apart of their discussions and meetings. I also don’t see how state funded universities can accept money from their government if they are openly discriminating against skin color, race, gender, sexual orientation and other defining factors.

Where ever we look, especially at Penn State, it is obvious that in most cases the white kids hang out with other white kids, the black kids hang out with other black kids and the Asians hang out with other Asians. I feel like this is common across not only most college campuses, but also the world in general; for the most part, your friends are those people who are most like you. This gets me to the question of does hanging out with people primarily of a different race make you a poser? My answer to this question is a very straightforward no. The way I look at, and define the term poser, is someone trying to be something they are not. I am sure in some cases where people are primarily hanging out with people of other race, most notably Jamie Kennedy in “Malibu’s Most Wanted,” there are people who then would be considered “posers.” In my opinion, in the vast majority of the times where people are hanging out with other primarily of another race, it is because their backgrounds are very similar, and they have more in common with this group of people than many people can see because their skin colors are different. Think of it this way, if a white kid is growing up in a very urban area where the vast majority of the people in this area are black or Hispanic, it only makes sense that they would hang out with them as opposed to a group of rich white kids from the suburbs. The only thing they have in common with each other is skin color, and if that is the only thing that they can relate to each other on, then there is no way that they will ever be in the same social group. In that case, there is no way that we could consider the white kid from the urban area a “poser” because his/her friends have way more in common with each other than we could tell by just looking at skin color.
I think that this is one of the main problems with society today. When people see someone of a certain race hanging out with people of a race different from their own, they see it as wrong or that somebody is trying to be someone they are not. I don’t understand why it hasn’t occurred to some people that sometimes people fit in better in other cultures, or that people have different backgrounds and relate better with people of different races. Or maybe even that some people just don’t care about race and genuinely enjoy being with whatever group they are with regardless of their skin color.
Just because people don’t look the same doesn’t mean they aren’t the same.

Where ever we look, especially at Penn State, it is obvious that in most cases the white kids hang out with other white kids, the black kids hang out with other black kids and the Asians hang out with other Asians. I feel like this is common across not only most college campuses, but also the world in general; for the most part, your friends are those people who are most like you. This gets me to the question of does hanging out with people primarily of a different race make you a poser? My answer to this question is a very straightforward no. The way I look at, and define the term poser, is someone trying to be something they are not. I am sure in some cases where people are primarily hanging out with people of other race, most notably Jamie Kennedy in “Malibu’s Most Wanted,” there are people who then would be considered “posers.” In my opinion, in the vast majority of the times where people are hanging out with other primarily of another race, it is because their backgrounds are very similar, and they have more in common with this group of people than many people can see because their skin colors are different. Think of it this way, if a white kid is growing up in a very urban area where the vast majority of the people in this area are black or Hispanic, it only makes sense that they would hang out with them as opposed to a group of rich white kids from the suburbs. The only thing they have in common with each other is skin color, and if that is the only thing that they can relate to each other on, then there is no way that they will ever be in the same social group. In that case, there is no way that we could consider the white kid from the urban area a “poser” because his/her friends have way more in common with each other than we could tell by just looking at skin color.
I think that this is one of the main problems with society today. When people see someone of a certain race hanging out with people of a race different from their own, they see it as wrong or that somebody is trying to be someone they are not. I don’t understand why it hasn’t occurred to some people that sometimes people fit in better in other cultures, or that people have different backgrounds and relate better with people of different races. Or maybe even that some people just don’t care about race and genuinely enjoy being with whatever group they are with regardless of their skin color.
Just because people don’t look the same doesn’t mean they aren’t the same.

I am from a pretty multicultural area, so for me being around people of other ethnicities is nothing new. That being said, I was aware from a very young age that I was white and that I was in the majority. I have seen all different types of minorities be discriminated against and know that often times I will never see the same types of discrimination because I am a white person. I guess I do feel a sort of “white guilt” because of this, but I can’t say for certain if it really affects me as much as I think it affects other people. For me, I see race as just a thing. I really don’t care if someone is white, black, brown, purple or yellow, but I am aware that people are different, and there is a majority, and several minorities. I do know that being white I am in the majority and because of this I am never the victim of such discrimination. I can’t really say that I have been in a situation where I have felt white guilt afterwards, but I know that I probably will be one day. When this happens, I know that I will feel bad about it, and think if I really deserved whatever it is that I got. In all honesty, I probably wouldn’t do or say anything if something like that happened. I would be completely ok accepting it. I’m not sure if that is ok, but the way I see it is that you are who you are and any good or bad things that happen to you because of it should be accepted with a certain sense of appreciation. Its unfortunate that I might be given certain advantages because I am white, but I understand that it was the hand that I was dealt and I am just playing it. I can see where people would take offense to that statement, but I feel that although I maybe reaping the benefits from this prejudice, I don’t agree with it. I know that it is wrong. However if I am given a job one day over someone who is more qualified than me, and is in a minority, I am not going to reject the job because of it. I understand that it is hard being a minority in America, and while I wish that things would change, I don’t know if it will until generations like mine, where race really isn’t that big of a deal, are in charge and have the ability to erase all racial stigmas and stereotypes. I feel that in the future it wont be necessary for white people to feel ‘white guilt’ because all of these prejudices will have completely been erased.

For this weeks response I chose to answer the question how would you feel if your child were gay. This is a very interesting predicament that I think all parents at least think about before they have children. My generation is far more open minded than the generations that have come before us, and more understanding and open to gay and lesbian relationships, but I’m not sure if it has changed all of our views on having gay children. For many people, when they envision their future family life, they only have their own to look at and aspire to have as well, which in almost everyone’s case, is a mom and a dad, 2.5 kids and a dog. While this is the idea of a “picture perfect” family and may seem a little bit corny, that is still what most people aspire to have, and I am no different. If my child did turn out to be gay, I would have no choice but to accept them and love them for who they are. However, it’s not something that I would wish upon them. Aside from all of the struggles and abuse that they would almost certainly encounter, it would be hard for me to relate to them. As a straight male, I have lived a certain way for my whole life and have loved every minute of it. My hope is that one day I will have a son or sons that I will be able to provide for in the same way that my father provided for me, and that they will be able to share some of the same experiences that I have had. Having a gay son or daughter, might hinder me and my future wife from being able to relate and share the same experiences that we had with our children.
Also, I’m not exactly sure that gay and lesbian adults even want their kids to be gay. At first when you hear this, its almost a little bit shocking, but when you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Gay men and women have been through a lot of abuse and traumatic experiences throughout their lives, and I’m not sure if they would want to push that onto their own kids. If gay men and women would prefer for their own kids to be straight, then there really wouldn’t be much of an argument for straight people to want anything different.
I think that since our generation is so open minded, the majority of people wouldn’t mind if their kids are gay or lesbian, but it’s not something you hope for. Many people would still have a problem with it, but its getting to the point where it is becoming less and less of a problem and more of something that people view as acceptable.

This week I chose to answer the question asking which kind of aid is the best for the United States to provide other countries. I find this question very interesting for a few reasons. There are areas inside of the United States that are deprived of some of the most basic human needs; water, shelter, and food. I feel that it is far more important to take care of people on our own home front before we go out and spend trillions of dollars in other countries. That being said, I do understand that there will always be people in our home country that need aid and deserve to get it and wont, but the amount of people that need aid in America today is appalling. I do think that foreign aid is very important, but so is domestic aid, and I think that sometimes we overlook that fact.
In terms of international aid I equate that to being kind to and helping out your neighbor. Be it a small chore or a big one, you never know when you will need their help. For many of the countries that the United Stated is currently helping, we know that there is no way that they will ever be able to repay us within our lifetime, and that’s fine. But what I absolutely hate to hear and what continues to happen is when dictatorships swallow up all of the financial aid that we give their countries to benefit themselves. This, in my opinion, is an absolute waste of time and money. That we are giving American tax dollars to dictators to buy new cars and boats is one of the most ridiculous things that I have ever heard of. If America wants to give money as foreign aid, they should also send people with the money to ensure that it gets into the right hands. Sending money, and money alone, to foreign countries should not be a practice that we grow accustomed too.
I believe that the best form of international aid we can give other countries is giving them materials they need to survive. Meaning, sending them raw materials to build houses, schools, churches, shops, etc., food, water clothing and any other basic human needs. I feel that this would be far more effective than sending them the money to buy these things, because sometimes these things are not available for purchase in especially poorer less developed countries. Some people may argue that this is hurting these countries because the local economies won’t grow by us just giving them everything. My argument would be that these local economies can only stand to gain from here on out if the proper infrastructure is in place for a long time to come.