Regardless of the character of the immigrant, someone who immigrates to the country illegally is still doing just that, doing it illegally. Of course, the immigration system itself needs to be situated in such a way that immigrants are not incentivized to immigrate illegally, but people who come to work in the United States should respect the laws of the country, and that includes the immigration laws. Illegal immigrants still benefit from many of the services provided as people living in the United States, but while being undocumented provide an incorrect representation of who is actually living here, doing what work. Again, if the current immigration laws are so convoluted that they keep people from even trying to seek legalization, then they need to be fixed, but the burden is still on the individual to attempt to live and work in this country in a manner consistent with our laws. Illegal immigrants take advantage of the general generosity of the country, and in particular, the people who do take the time and effort to legally work here. Our country’s laws about immigration can’t be something that are just ignored because it’s convenient and easy to ignore them, and difficulty in enforcement shouldn’t be an excuse for not trying.

On the other hand, I can see how important illegal immigrants are to our economy. They help drive the prices down and keep businesses competitive. In addition, they are the most motivated and driven people given their ability to get to the united states in the first place and endure the hard labor conditions not only so that they can survive her, but also send money back home to support their families.

Stephen Colbert did an excellent bit on his show about illegal immigration by accepting the challenge of the picking fruits for the day. He then testified to congress while staying in character as Stephen Colbert. So of course he was outraged at illegal immigrants, but he also made a very serious case about their importance. Most importantly, he stated that they did jobs which no Americans want, as proof by the low numbers of people who enrolled in that program he signed up for. I want to say it was no more than half a dozzen people who willingly went to work on farms. When the congressmen asked him for his final thoughts, he said, both seriously and in character “ Please do not make me go back there. It was horrible.” So clearly this is a problem which must be addressed. As I have already said, we can’t have undocumented people in the country. Sam made that quite clear. But we definitely need to allow more visas for those who do seek better lives for themselves. Perhaps another option is to deregulate food prices so that the prices we pay actually reflect how difficult the labor is for them to get it.

First off I have to disagree with what most people are saying with regards to women not talking about sex if it were a female centered world. Girls, as far as I have seen love to talk about everything. I think the reason that they don't talk as much about sex as guys these days is due to the double standard. The fear of being called a slut, or hoebag by their friends is probably more cripling than anything that guys would say to them. Shit, it sounds like the majority of guys would 'bang' anything, including those girls who get around. No, it it were a female centered world sex would be much less of a taboo, and women would probably glorify their passionate lovers. Sex is phenomenal. I couldn't believe that only 40% of undergrads are actually partaking in it. I find that to be an atrocity, especially considering how much fun and pleasure we can derive from it. So this means that we guys need to help meet the women halfway. If women don't know their own bodies well, how are we to help? More than once I was with a girl who when I asked her what she like she responded with "I don't know/ well why don't you try to figure it out?" To me, that was a sign of ignorance of their own bodies, and that is a damn shame.
Personally, I love slow passionate sex. If it takes an hour or four, all the better. Unfortunately, being a guy, I realize that I don't quite have the stamina for that, and so what's worked best for me in the past it to get myself done with quickly, then focus the next half hour of rebuilding myself through the care and attention to my partner. Then when I am ready for round two I can last much longer and bring her even greater pleasure.
Overall, I would love to see an open and honest sex conversation so that we may understand each other's bodies and needs much better and then make love to our hearts' content.

I think for me the hardest thing to overcome dating outside of my race is that I am not very good with new things (despite the fact that I love them), and therefore lack confidence with regard to them. I would absolutely love to date a black girl, I think it would be tons of fun. I am just unsure how to approach it, as I feel like there is a certain amount of common ground which is lacking. When I don't know how to relate to someone, I feel almost trapped and I have no idea what to say or do. This makes me second guess myself, which in turns leads me to inaction. I have not really had much dating experience or instruction in the first place, so I feel additionally disadvantaged, not only bridging the gender gap, but also the race gap, it seems very daunting. Of course, there are a few girls I have my eyes on, and some are of different races. The one is philipino, but we share a common interest, so I would have not qualms dating her, other than potentially damaging our current relationship standing. Regardless, I think it may be a chance I will take. There was also a black girl whom I was admiring from afar. When I attempted to take her out, I got a very polite rejection. That was rather unpleasant, but she handled it very well, and I was psyched that I had the balls to ask. So overall, I think that dating outside my race would be a lot of fun. I don't think my parents would mind, they would most likely embrace it in fact. One thing that would be tricky is dating across a language gap. There are several Chinese girls to whom I have been attracted over the years, but it seemed tough to relate to each other as we came from such seemingly different backgrounds that I always felt it touch to bridge the friend gap. Likewise, it seemed like the language and cultural barriers were difficult to overcome as the Chinese tradition is one of much subtlety, whereas we tend to be much more blunt. This meant that what I immagined to be a date, turned into a group activity each time, and as a result of all these miscommunications, only a friendship developed. I also think that I was interested in sex, and she was of the thought that it must wait until marriage. So it certainly is tricky. Overall, I think that common interests are the most important thing to sustain a relationship, and so as long as I’m comfortable talking and making jokes, as well as hiking, and possibly dragging her up a tree, I will be just fine.

This is a very good question which I ponder far too often. I am very involved with Engineers for a Sustainable world, and the more we talk about these things, the more depressing it seems. The other day, we put together a jeopardy game for middle schoolers and one of the questions was the following. " How many earths would it take to sustain the lifestyle which we americans enjoy, if the rest of the world lived like us." The answer was 5 earths. That's crazy. The way we live is incredibly unsustainable and we are kidding ourselves if we think we can keep it up. Just like that slide Sam showed, we are way too far in the impact zone, despite the good living standards. Unfortunately, it feels like we are a world dominated by business, and we all want stuff, rather than experiences. I know that some of the best times in my life have been without stuff, and yet, we keep on consuming and consuming and consuming, in hopes of achieving a little bit more happiness and it never works. I was reading an article the other day which was saying that as wealth goes up, so does happiness, but then it plateaus at $100,000. I am not really sure how those studies were done, but this is something which is crazy, especially when it seems like so many americans are perpetually seeking so much more stuff. What we really need is a global mind-shift into a realm of non-consumerism. We need to get the the point of satisfaction without opulence. Unless this happens, I feel like there is very little hope for our world.

My biggest issue with the rhetoric of the environmental movement, is that it only shows the most extreme side. Rarely, if even ever do we talk about the progress we have made. This really frustrates me as it seems like there is no end in sight. In reality, we humans must have the power to do a lot of good. If this were not true our existence would be unbearable. And yet, we get bombarded with terrible stories of greed, and opression by the ruling class. The oil and gas tycoons who it seems will do anything for a profit. The way we rape the earth of her natural resources and leave it destroyed is frieghtening. Yet at the same time, there must be some good companies in the oil and gas industry, but who are they and are they always dilligent.

In my work, whatever it may be, I always try to do the best possible job, regardless of the meaniality of the task. Unfotunately it does not seem like most people have that ingrained in them. Instead, people just go to work, and bitch about how dumb it is, complain that they don't get paid enough for the shit job they are doing, and nothing progresses. Why can't we accentuate the positive stories and engrain a work ethic and morality into the majority such that we progress only positively, both economicaly, and sustainably.

This is a very tricky question to answer. My gut instinct is to say yes, this is a rather selfish thing to do. Looking at it a little more critically, however, I want to say that in Tammy’s case, perhaps she exercised great restraint. There is a good chance that having grown up with 21 siblings she felt really close to several of them, and as a result she may not have wanted to deny that to her children. I know that I loved growing up with my brother, and I love the fact that we’re still close. Though we did not grow up in poverty, we didn’t necessarily grow up with loads of money. The beauty of having a playmate is that you don’t really need play things as much. My brother and I could be content for hours, even days and more with just a simple $5 soccer ball. Going back to poor white people, the same can be said. Though there is often conflict with large numbers family is also a great source of comfort. While 22 children is rather excessive, my mother grew up in a family of 11(+3 cousins). Only her father worked, and then the children were expected to work and contribute to the family and provide income for themselves when they were old enough. They all had 3 sets of clothes, play clothes, school clothes, and church clothes. Now, I see my family in a broad range of socio-economic classes, most in the middle class with some in the lower middle, some in the upper middle, and a few in the lower class. Regardless, we have fantastic family get togethers and we really don’t need much to be happy as a family.

So as far as Tammy goes, yes, it probably is selfish, but on the other hand, she didn’t have 22 kids either, so she’s doing fairly well for herself. What’s more concerning, and selfish in my opinion is wealthy people not taking care of those who have less, and breeding a generation of affluence. My father has always told me that he had kids because he felt that it is a way to give back to society by bringing up the best children you possibly can. Wealthy people are far more selfish by choosing either not to have kids, not to adopt kids, or not to help out those with kids but without the means to support them.

One thing that came to mind with this question was the movie Idiocracy, in which the future is full of stupid people as they reproduced at a far greater rate than the educated, who when they were ready and willing to reproduce, no longer had it in them to do so. Over a thousand years, smart people went extinct and dumb people ruled the world. Though this is a goofy example, it illustrates my point that if those of us who have the means to bring up children in a proper manner elect not to do so, we are in fact being more selfish than anyone.

This was a really cool article, and my comments are going to be based on the second articles about what it means to be Muslim. Under the tab that questions “You mean to deprive us of love, but in this day and age we express our feelings and emotions - what is so wrong with that?” I found the most astounding answer.

"There is no religion which encourages its followers to love and care for one another more than Islam does. This applies at all times and in all circumstances, not just on one particular day. Indeed, Islam encourages us to express our emotions and love at all times, as [the Prophet] said: 'If a man loves his brother, let him tell him that he loves him.'"

Having lived with the American notion that muslim = terrorist since september 11th has had some serious repercussions. Their way of life seems so different than ours that anything they say counter to our thoughts makes us want to vilify them. In reality, most muslims whom I've met are incredibly devout, and kind people, just as the saying goes, and as humans it is hard for them to resist lust, just as it is hard for any of us to resist lust. I have had many freinds in Morocco who are very interested in what sexual relationships and relationships in general mean to us Americans, and I was currious where they stood on these issues. My best freinds over there, Sayf was telling me that he was engaged once (had a girlfriend) and that they kissed. He was quite ashamed of the fact, as it was a very impure thing in his mind, and I can fully apreciate that. The fact that there is a holiday in the US which promotes just that behavior makes it very understandable for them to be upset and warning agains it. As one of the videos about polyandry exclaimed, the western influence of love and romance through the media has portrayals which do not always agree with the culture which is recieving them.

I myself am not sure where I stand on the issue of sexuality and promiscuity. It makes me sad when girls parade around like sluts, but I suppose that's their choice. I have had premarital sex, and I don't really plan on changing that in any way, nor do I regret my decision, but I wonder sometimes how fulfilling a non-physical relationship could be.

Last night Sam and his wife were talking about the needy penis and how there are levels of sex beyond intercourse, which women often understand, but men tend not to see or even know about. I wonder if my celabate freinds who are in loving, commited relationships are more easily able to experience and apreciate these things.

This whole thing of liberal versus conservative has really been bugging me for the past week or so. My roommates and I usually joke that I’m a dirty tree hugging hippy, and that they are heartless bastards based purely on the fact that I’m a democrat/liberal, and they are republicans/conservative. My biggest problem came when Sam said that most republicans are in fact more socialist than the democrats whom they accuse of being socialists and nazis(thanks glenn beck...). So this who thing got me thinking about what the hell does it mean to be a liberal, and what does it mean to be conservative, if the political affiliations we use are not the most accurate representation of them?

So this brought me back many moons ago to my 11th grade advanced composition teacher who one day gave a spiel of why he was a liberal, and proud of it. His speech (and class) was so powerful that my best friend, who grew up in a very republican household, became quite the liberal. So I went back and asked my teacher what it was he had said so long ago, and this is what he associated with being a liberal. The following paragraph is an excerpt of what he sent me.

The definitions I provide for “liberal” are: “Not limited to or by established traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behaviors of others; broad-minded. Tending to give freely; generous. Not strict or literal.

This is more or less what I associate with being a liberal too, and thus I am proud to be associated with this label. But when Sam said that he leans towards conservatism, my world was virtually flipped upside down. As far as I can tell each one of the things my high school teacher said applies to Sam, and yet he leans towards conservatism. What the fuck?

So here is what I think I understand as conservatism, and please somebody who reads this help me out, because I still don’t really get either of these label’s definitions. From where Sam is coming from, a conservative is someone who believes that free choice is more important than determinism. This is optimistic, so I like it. What I don’t like as much is that with conservatism, it seems like the status quo is made to be enforced, and as Sam’s king of the mountain exercises illustrated, the people on top, are rarely willing to share, and there tends to be a big disparity between those on top and those beneath.

So it seems to me like the middle ground is of utmost importance in these issues, where if you are too liberal, which I tend to be, you’ll give too much and people will take it for granted and it will make them work less and be less willing to work for themselves. At the same time, however, it is important to let people empower themselves, which is the conservative stance. This ensures that only the best and most willing and productive members get on top. The problem is that the entropy of the system makes it very difficult for those on the bottom rungs of society to make any progress upward, just like Sam’s genius hatian guy who can’t raise $400 to get to mexico for college.

There is a small part of me that can see the humor in these statements when I put myself in the shoes of the writer and his followers. That part of me was very difficult to come by, as I have a lot of Muslim friends who are 'real' Muslims and preach peace and harmony and most beautifully, my friend Sayf, the most devout Muslim I've ever met, said that in the doctrine of his religion, there is a passage which explains that regardless of the religion you were brought into, the way to heaven is by being as true to it as you possibly can. This was the most enlightened view I had ever heard. It made perfect sense. He told me that Muslims were the most fortunate, of course, because they had the most prophets in their religion and theirs went the farthest forward, but then he explained that if Jesus was it for you, then you had best be as true to Jesus's teachings as you can. The same was said for Abraham.

In all honesty, when I first moved to the States, I was appalled by Christians. I thought I understood them, I thought they followed Jesus, the prince of peace, but then they used him to justify horrific things. My new country went to WAR, using the banner of the prince of PEACE! That was fucked up. Likewise, Americans/Christians believed in guns and killing each other. They thought it was right to kill doctors who were giving hope to women with no other resorts(abortion) and vilifying the women themselves as murders. None of them, however would even consider taking in those babies once they were born, or coach the woman through the life-altering experience that might be. When I first moved to the United States, I couldn't tell the difference between American and Christian, unless someone told me that they were not a Christian, and all of the horrible things I saw on TV, done in the name of god, shocked me and turned me off of the Christian hypocrisy. Then I saw the movie Jesus Camp, and my view on Christians was solidified in horror. Training little kids to be Warriors of God, that was all kinds of messed up.

Fortunately, since then I have met some really outstanding Christians, and I understand that the majority of Christians are actually decent people, and the extremists do not represent everyone, even though that's how the media portrays it. And thank the gods that it isn't that way, otherwise, this would be a nightmare of a country. Ignorance is really our greatest enemy, and education is not necessarily the answer, though a good first step. Travel and immersion are key.

As far as international students are concerned, it's simple. They hang out among each other because it is the most comfortable and most simple. Having moved to the US from France when I was 10, and knowing the English language fluently before moving here, I was completely dismayed by the speed and mashed up accent that Americans had. It sounded so nasally and fast that I remember coming home angry by my day when nothing out of the ordinary had happened bu instead the only thing that had gone wrong was that my classmates were speaking American, not English at break-neck speed. Of course I grew into the language after several months here and I can no longer detect that American accent that I so abhorred.

When I go abroad, I try to mix with the natives of the country, but it is considerably easier to stay with other americans and have a good time that way. WHile I am not fond of staying around Americans when I am traveling, there is certainly a sense of comfort in knowing that there are people who speak the same language as you with the same nuances and similar ideas, even if prior to the trip you may have had nothing in common. The thing is however is that it is much more work to break out of that comfort zone and abandon all your American friends and make only chinese friends, or in the case of chinese students here, forget their mother land, and adopt the american life style with american friends and speaking nothing but english. The two languages are so horribly different that it makes it very tough to make that transition. I was fortunate in CHina, as all of the chinese students with whom I spoke had a very good foundation in English. But imagine if I had to have spoken only chinese. It would have been a terribly lonely country with such limited contact that I would have yearned for some english. So when I hung out in CHina with one or two of my Americans friends, it looked as though we were a white pack in China, like Chinese students form packs here at Penn State. This experience has made me aware of the necessity of these things for sanity's sake.

As far as white people hanging out with white people or so, I cannot say that I see that much in my life. I have a fairly diverse group of friends, and while the majority of them are white, the majority of PSU is also white, so I think i am proportionally okay here. But I feel like race as very little to do with what I see, and instead it;s all about culture and breliefs. I don't hang out with peope who get blackout drunk every weekend, as it is not my style of choice. Instead I am best friends with the folk in my karate club, people with whom I share a passion.

Awesome video post. Not really knowing either of you I can't make much of a decision but I tend to agree with the rest of the posters in that you are probably not related. On the right you look considerably more asian. You have an asian nose and asian eyes. On the left, you certainly look more african in skin and hair complexion, but your eyes and nose don't quite match up with that description. Your eyes look a little more asian or indian. I guess that this all gets back to the excellent point that it's gotten nearly impossible to really classify race considering all the exceptional mixing we've done through traveling and integrating. Prior to this class, my black friends were black, my white friends were white, my asian friends were asian, and I busted indian friends saying that they were not asian. But then you get into latinos and middle easterners and the lines get really blurry really fast. It's pretty wild to think that in a class about race, there isn't really a good definition for race anymore.