I think that there are several factors that one really needs to think about when it comes to terrorism, rather than the black and white idea of it being simply "bad". I'm certain that the vast majority of people to do not have a positive spin on the topic, but like Sam's quote said in class, we need to better understand why terrorism occurs to better deal with it and potentially avoid it. Although Sam's lecture seemed like a plausible idea for why some terrorist activist may occur, I don't think that it includes the full scope of what terrorism involves nor provide enough motives behind the action. It difficult to begin to define the whole scope of terrorism because there is no commonly accepted definition of the word among political scientists, but there are common ideas of the word that are commonly accepted. Terrorism is meant to cause mental uncertainty in security, target innocent civilians, gain publicity, transmit some sort of message, and perhaps promote an ideology. Some facts to consider while looking at the subject include: terrorism is not a new phenomena, but its recent usage has increased, the scope of where attacks occur has widened, Americans are being targeted more frequently, the lethality of each attack on average is increasing, and the actors behind the attacks are less affiliated with sovereign states. When looking at the Middle East, it can be seen that many individuals are part of a suppressing government that does not allow for communication to occur between the citizens and the high-ranking officials. Leaders stay in power without regards to their people, and many cannot improve their lifestyle or standard of living. Additionally, people of the region tend to feel left behind in the world as it is today. The Middle East used to be the one of the leading centers of wealth and knowledge in the world, but it has fallen behind while Americans have not only succeeded, but have also become imperialistic upon their culture; anyone can go online and find a picture of Pizza Hut with the Great Pyramids in the background. There are mixed feelings because many want Americans in the region to create freedoms for them, but they don’t want to change their culture nor have another culture imposed upon them, which will increasingly happen due to globalization. So there are some individuals who use terrorism as a means of relaying a message and trying to be heard, while other capitalize on the ideals of religion, lack of education, and anti-American sentiments. If I were an individual that grew up and was politicized in the Middle East and shared many of their frustrations and experiences, I don’t think I would engage in terrorist activities, but I might not condone the use of it. It’s difficult to really understand the reasoning behind the action when one is not engulfed in the culture. But then again, one person’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. I think that many Americans are quick to judge terrorism on the whole while forgetting or not knowing about the terrorism that we promoted and in which we took part in Nicaragua.

If whites were to become the minority, it would take a while for the significance of the occurrence to set in. While whites may not be more than fifty percent of the inhabitants in the US they would still be the most populous group, and certainly the most powerful. Race has made some great strides in the past century, such as Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor and Barack Obama, but the current minorities haven’t had an overwhelming amount of influence as a collective group in American politics. I’m certain that over time as my fellow white brethren will become less numerous as a percentage, and the role of other ethnic groups will increase, but whites will want to grasp on to whatever power they are still able to when they feel threatened. I don’t think that all will share this sentiment, but mainly “conservative” extremists and other xenophobes that suffer a lack of superiority to others will attempt to oppress differences within the main institutions of governance. In a sense there could be a clash in the media between those who are accepting of change and those who will fight the “anti-American” culture that will plague our society. It might go so far that whites will attempt to keep a pure blood idea or hinder interracial couples from ruining society, like the homosexuals. Since it will be a gradual change, the vast amount of Americans should become more accepting to the idea of racial change, but I can envision many whites infuriated because the “Damn Mexicans are taking all the (better paying) jobs” when they can’t find work. By 2050, or whenever the whites will be a minority, there should be a change in social mobility for current minorities, depending on policy that might indirectly hinder them, and the main conflict will reside with job security in an ever increasingly competitive world.
Personally, I don’t fear a change in demographics within the country. Part of that may be due to the fact that I may not reside in the States when this occurs, but also I have learned Spanish and hope to become fully fluent many years before this occurs. I would hope that culture and language would not be significant factors of how humans interact with each other and how they are treated in society. I feel that the change in our society’s make-up will be beneficial to our values of fairness and equality of all individuals, and that we can be more centered on human rights. We need not worry about who is an American, but how he or she is treated. Lo que sera, será

As much as I would like to advocate the idea that race and ethnicity should not matter when it comes to dating in marriage, it can have a significant role in whom we choose, with an emphasis on “can”. Because racial tensions are not something of the distant past, there are still a lot of conflicting feelings that reside with older generations. Although it may not be explicit racist comments, older generations might impose this idea that you should stick within your race. I know my grandparents asked me several times while abroad if I was dating any Spanish or Mexican girls, even though I was in Ecuador. If I would have said yes, I think they would have been a bit shocked and unreceptive, then they would have followed with, “Is she Catholic?” And so aside from pressure from older generations to stay within race, religion can also determine whom we date, not only in terms of pressure, but also due to common ideals and customs. I feel that religion shares the same basic principles to begin with, but there are different traditions that families and individuals attempt to uphold. At face value religions seem very different from one another, so some restricted thinking may make a person less prone to people of different religion, even within the same racial status. But if both persons of a couple are open to the other’s views then it should not matter much because they both should be receptive to the differences and not force their views upon the other. However, raising children in one of the particular religions might cause conflict, so this could deter the couple from marrying. Culture is another factor that can contribute to difficulties when dating someone of a different race. Although we might all be Americans, we are shaped by many things that form our own individual culture. Whites mainly have a different culture from blacks and browns, and people tend to date others who share common interests and what not. It is not so much that we look to discriminate against others when it comes to dating, but we look for others that value our same interests. Often times when people of particular race grow up with others of another race, like an Asian living a black community and expressing his own hip hop style, he is viewed as a black person, even though his skin is not black. Hence, I would say that relationships should be solely judged as interracial just because people have different phenotypes, but how individual culture is expressed should also be viewed.

Does it matter in American society if a child is raised by a homosexual couple, and if so, should it? I have thought about this topic on my own for a while without much progress. I was born and raised Catholic, and so I grew up with the idea that homosexuality, or acts of it, are immoral and sinful, thus gay marriage was a creation against the will of God. However, after I came to college I began to shy away from the rhetoric that was forced upon me growing up and began to really consider the topic. As freshman year progressed, and I learned more about the religion I grew up with, I slowly began to reject my religion and organized religion in general. It’s not that I’ve been antireligious or anarchical, but I’ve view religion as a product of man that has human error involved throughout it, so one should be guided by his or her own moral code…and the law.
It was during this time that I realized homosexuality is neither sinful nor immoral. It is uncommon to the mainstream, but still a natural occurrence and not a choice. Its existence had been acceptable in ancient times according to the society, but from my viewpoint, it’s really been religion that has oppressed the acceptance of it. Progressing past this thought, I was then concerned with the idea of marriage. I watched a lot of Fox News, which probably wasn’t the best idea in hindsight, to become more firm on a stance. Of course I realized that there was a strong bias from the network, but it did provide me with specifics to think about and research.
In the end I decided that there should be no reason why same sex couples cannot be recognized by the law to be in union together. The use of the term “marriage” is not necessary; it could be called a civil union or something to that extent. Marriage is often relate to religious thought, though matrimony is the official term, at least in Catholicism, and because there is conflict between religion and homosexuality, another term could be used. When children are involved in the matter, I was confused. I had heard that same sex couples did not last as long as hetero couples, and there was the added idea of bullying for the children. This video helped me get a better understanding of what it’s like and form my opinion.
I’ve concluded that if it’s difficult for a single parent to raise children in our society, but many are more than capable of doing so, is it not possible to take the same situation and add in another parent of the same gender? If kids grow up without mothers and fathers due to divorce or whatever it may be, then the lack of a specific gender due to homosexual pairs in parenting should not be an issue. Also, same sex couples might not have as lasting relationships because they don’t have that solid commitment of marriage or children to hold them together, since marriage is more so of sociological importance than religious. And maybe the bullying problem is just an excuse, or it’s just a sign of our society’s intolerance and the latent feelings that we all hold. Maybe the acceptance of same sex marriage and the fostering of children by these couples are what is needed to open the dialogue. If anything, children of same sex couples are, in my opinion, more prone to open-mindedness and accepting of others in society. As Zach pointed out, they can be productive, normal citizens that are independently unrecognizable. If anything, we need not focus on the 1950s cookie-cutter image of the “ideal American family” in the middle class that appear perfect in every way, rather we should focus our efforts on what it means to be truly happy, regardless of gender, race or sexuality, and what it means to be a family that promotes good morals and values.

I think that we view other societies as different because on the surface they appear very different. People dress differently, speak differently, worship other deities, listen to other types of music and eat a variety of foods. At first glance, we see the differences between cultures rather than the similarities, because the human mind tends to picks out abnormalities rather than commonalities. Similar to how we tend to see people by skin color first, we look at other countries that way. But to delve deeper into our thinking, we buy into this ethnocentrism where our culture is the “right” one or the one by which other cultures should be judged. Because the other culture eats guinea pig or rabbit or doesn’t eat cow, we see them as the weird society rather than our own. The various things that we are not accustomed to seem atypical to us from what is presented by mainstream acceptance of normality, so we are more prone to harshly judge it. We have this concept that to be different is a ghastly thing, so we attempt to assert our cultural superiority by holding the man down or sending him to the back of the bus.
Additionally, many of us don’t have experiences with the various countries that we see as different. In addition to that, there are many individuals who grow up in largely white rural communities that are not exposed to the world as it is. There are large groups of people who are isolated to diversity, but additionally they may not have a lot of knowledge about how to approach people of different backgrounds. In school we may learn some things about other cultures in general, but we lack interaction with different peoples. We generate these generalizations about the people and the culture, and we hold these stereotypes to be true with little or no evidence to support them. It’s only when we finally encounter people of different races, ethnicities and religions that we begin to understand their lifestyles.
I think the one key idea that people tend to forget is that we are all human, and genetically we are basically the same. It’s obvious that we all have our own differences, but the important things, that matter, to me at least -- such as emotions and needs--, we all have in common. Regardless of skin color, humans are not that different from one another, it’s really our personal life experiences that affect our mentalities which should not affect equality or treatment of one another.

Americans are by far the wealthiest group of people in the world that also lead to the largest consumers of goods, services and products. I feel that a lot of us get trapped in our daily lives and forget about what occurs in the world around us. We see our financial situations relative to those around us, rather than a worldly comparison. Many of us forget how truly fortunate we are, and our big grievances pale in comparison to those of other nations. Our hardships include not being able to pay credit card bills or our inability to buy friends or family Christmas or birthday presents, where as whole communities struggle on a daily basis to find enough food and clean water to support their families. I wish I could completely exclude myself from this way of thinking, but our culture emphasizes the importance of money and how wealth equates to success and happiness. So when we can't buy the new iphone model, afford a laptop, or buy a car, we feel that we are not wealthy, or not as wealthy as those around, so we may feel we are not fortunate. But there is so much that Americans take for granted, and I don’t necessarily mean something that Fox News would promote such as democracy or freedom, although they are important. For example, if we have a softball-sized tumor on the side of our face we can go to the hospital and receive help for it, or we can seek the help of various cancer organizations or churches to help pay for the procedure. Or even something less significant, such as a fever or flu or disease, we can get transportation to a hospital and obtain medical assistance, where as many throughout the world don’t have this choice. Medical care is limited throughout the world, and even in some places where it exists, the technology or personnel may not be as good and patients may not receive proper treatments. Many complain about the health care system in the States and complain about the high cost of prescriptions, which there should be an argument about, but at least we as Americans have that opportunity to buy the medicines necessary to survive.
It is because of this way of thinking that sometimes I’m not proud to be an American. I feel that we lose sight of what ideologies we should be emitting in our society, and we only promote our ethnocentrism. We need to move beyond the idea of making money throughout our lifetime and set better goals for the future of the country and for others around the world.

I think that both determinism and free choice play active roles in our daily lives. It is the combination of the circumstances we find ourselves in as well as free choices that lead up to our ultimate decisions.
For myself, I feel that determinism was the larger factor that lead me to become a student at Penn State. I am from Bellefonte, so the mere location of the school could have been enough for me to attend school here, that way I could meet my parents for dinner, or do laundry, or something of that nature. In addition to that, of the 230 people that graduated in my class, 100 of them went to Penn State and 50 of them came directly to Penn State. The idea that many of my fellow peers could have helped me feel more comfortable to come here could have aided my decision, in comparison to being thrown into a new situation. I don’t feel that these were significant factors, but they were still in the back of my mind. The key decider was that my mom works at Penn State, so I receive the lovely discount for family members, which cuts the cost of tuition by a ridiculous amount. I might have been able to search around the country and apply to colleges that would have given me scholarships on a smaller tuition so I paid less in the end, but I was more or less presented my most affordable opportunity.
Granted throughout this whole process I had the free will to apply to other schools and expand my horizons. In high school I was in many clubs, lettered in four sports my senior year, got my eagle scout award, and graduated in the top ten academically in my class. If I wanted to, I could have applied to any Big Ten school and many other colleges across the nation and got accepted, but there was a lot of effort to search the schools, to find something affordable, and to find something comparable to Penn State. Although there were outside forces that pushed me towards Penn State, I really did like the campus, the atmosphere, and the fact that there was a major I was interested in from the start. I wanted to go to Penn State, regardless of the fact that my parents wanted me to go here. I had the free choice to go elsewhere, but I didn’t care for some of the campuses I saw or looked into, nor were others economical.
Thus I feel that all things in life are a result of choice and circumstance, though we don’t have to feel limited or open by one or the other. Some of the world’s wealthiest people were born dirt-poor, while others were born into their wealth.

I find it difficult to believe that people will be able to separate race from the equation, because race be an important part of people's culture and their way of living. The United States is a country of immigrant people, and with each group that comes here, they bring their identity with them. It used to be that first generation immigrants had difficulty adjusting, and as their offspring would continue to adapt to the culture more and more, and they would lose a lot of their heritage and traditions. By the third generation, they become mainly Americanized, “fitting in” with the typical norms of society. However, there seems to be more of a division in the States because immigrants are proud of their culture and they want to maintain it rather than blending in with the mainstream. I find it typical with people from South and Central America, who are proud Ecuadorians, Mexicans or whatever is may be. However, we cannot categorize as being Guatemalan-American, and so on and so forth, because it is just too logical, so we fit them into this general category of being latino or hispanic. Since we deem these terms as acceptable, then these groups can identify with this particular race as a means to celebrate their culture and heritage. I feel that society pressures ethnic groups to identify with their race instead of their heritage or culture. That is, race is just one of the many contributing factors that creates a person’s culture or their social make up. When people identify themselves by race, they use a synecdoche rather than the many contributions that truly identify them as individuals. If society were to remove the idea of race from how we view the world, we would first have to accept that race is only one small component of what makes a person who they are. Simultaneously, we would also have to admit that race is just a social concept and that to be black or white or brown should not be a factor of disparity, inequality, or social dominance. The only use that race should have should be an explanation of how humans are .01% different biologically. I doubt this will occur, within this or the next century, because race is used to attempt to help the minorities in the States via governmental programs. I feel that there is too much in historical context about race, via wars and other conflicts, that people will be able to forget about an idea that has shaped the modern world. I think the best way that race can be overcome is through intense global interaction where the majority of the population cannot self-identify with one particular race or another, so the purpose of categorizing people into race would be pointless.

I feel that people tend to gravitate to people that are most similar to themselves, so they do not have to try hard to act normal or be themselves. There’s a general trend that everyone likes to be in their comfort zone because it does not take extra work or effort. When one attempts to go outside of their comfort zone, it takes a conscious effort to be open-minded and willing to try new things. Also, it may lead to some confusion, awkwardness, and other unusual feelings because one is not sure how to fit in with a different group, that is, they might have to mute parts of their personality to feel comfortable in different surroundings. Normally people of the same ethnicity or race have several common cultural entities, such as music, clothes, and food, that allows for easier communication and friendship. It’s really hard as people to just throw yourself out there to meet people and be somewhat vulnerable against the conforming crowd. I think fear plays an enormous role in deciding to “break out” of one’s shell and talk to other people. There’s the fear of being laughed out, or rejected by your peers, or looked down upon for being different. It is fear that confines some of us to remain in our cliques. However, the reason behind our social introverted selves is not limited to such a small scope. Our tendency to remain with similar ethnic groups can vary from racism to a lack of interest in others’ lives.
As a former international student, I can say that I understand how some groups at Penn State might stand off in their own cliques. I traveled abroad to Ecuador for a whole year, and it was quite an intimidating experience at first. I was one of the Americans that hung round with the other international students because it was so much easier for us to communicate in English, which was the main factor for sticking together. It was effortless to express whatever you wanted to say, where as it took a lot more effort and understanding to communicate the same ideas in Spanish. It took a while for me to improve in my Spanish abilities and become more comfortable with the local culture, which eventually led me to branch off and meet more Ecuadorian students. My social life seemed so much easier when I hung out with my Ecuadorian friends, but I felt life I became a part of the Ecuadorian culture and lifestyle when I interacted with the local community. Even though I felt like I could connect with my own American culture wherever I went, it was more important to me to branch out and gain new perspectives through my new international friends. It is easier to fit in with the people most similar to you, but I felt that I accomplished the most personal growth via others’ culture and my expansion to incorporate their lifestyles into my realm of thinking and beliefs.

What's more, I found it interesting that we primarily judge people by color of skin for their racial identity. Since this class, I have been looking beyond skin color and more so at facial characteristics, such as nose length, lip size and the kinks in hair, to guess a person's heritage. I think I've come to a better understanding that everyone is perfect in their own right, because their genealogy has led to their diverse characteristics. I've also come to recently accept that I don't believe to use the concept of race because it doesn't really help to identify people with such diversity today.