It is true that for a group there will always be a good side and a bad side, but we shouldn’t let the isolated incidents influence the majority. This article shows that we as a society do not see the whole story when it comes to the situations that are happening in the Middle East. Although we are at war, we can’t always assume that it is the “bad guys” committing atrocious acts. The United States is just as capable of crime in war as the terrorist organization we’re fighting. We only see one side, the side that shows American troops valiantly fighting against an entity that is dead set on killing them whatever the cost is.
This story shows that we only see the side of the story that they want to show us. They glorify American troops, and they make Taliban fighters look like the worst people to ever walk the face of the earth. There’s always going to be bad people, there’s always going to be people that are willing to sacrifice their morals for some reason or another. It seems as though some American troops are just as bad as the enemy we are fighting. It seems as though the media, or our society, just want the positive things about troops in the Middle East. I know that we are doing a lot of good over there, and it is unfair to let the one or two negative instances change the way the troops are seen but I don’t feel that it is right to not show what is really happening over there. The Taliban may not be as bad as the media depicts them, it may just be a few bad seeds within the rebel force. It makes me wonder if the media is just highlighting the bad things that the Taliban is doing (i.e. torturing American troops, killing civilians, etc.) and not giving the whole story. It makes sense, we don’t want to hear about American troops doing wrong but we do justify the reason were over in the middle east still and making the Taliban out to be murderous vagabonds makes this easy. I feel as though we should re-think how we view things, just like this story shows, not all people are bad and not all are good.

I believe that suicide rates are higher in soldiers that deploy due to many different factors that are present in different sociological factors. When you look at the average soldier, you don’t see the family man, the loving mother, or a kid that is just like yours. Instead you see someone that has given their life to protect our freedoms. They have given the ultimate sacrifice to ensure that we are safe, our country remains the way it is, and that our life is undisturbed by dangers. But I believe as a society we lose sight of the fact that these soldiers are people, real people, and not just some trained unemotional super hero that will protect our freedoms at the drop of a hat. When a soldier deploys overseas there is a lot of stress associated with that deployment. For one year the solider is taken away from their loved ones, they miss out on birthdays, and they basically lose a year of "normal" life and spend time in a war zone in which any day could be their last.
When a soldier is in a war zone, they will see and do many things that the average person will never experience in their lifetime. Each day becomes a life or death struggle, and could potentially end with the solider having to kill an enemy, lose a close friend, or learn of something bad happening at home. These are unavoidable, and when halfway around the world fighting in a war there is no quick fix. You can't simply pick up a phone whenever you want, or go and personally take care of problems that arise. Most of these soldiers are often facing multiple deployments which make these problems so much worse in the long run.
The government is now trying to combat these problems by limiting the length of time a soldier is deployed, suicide prevention classes, and availability of mental health experts to help prevent suicidal and destructive behavior. It seems as if we, society, just want to turn a blind eye to this problem but we must remember that soldiers are people that are placed in high stress environments. The mental issues that they face should and cannot be overlooked; it is a very real problem that needs to be fixed.

One issue that really stuck out to me during the lecture on inequality is the fact that a person’s economic class standing will remain relatively constant based on the class of their parents. This fact is true especially for all of us going to college aspiring to beat the odds and rise in rank. Everyone has told me in life that college is the key, and if I get that degree I will live the life, but that isn’t likely. I may live relatively comfortable, but I will not be living a life of luxury. This inequality in resources based on family ties and family rank is very frustrating, and can cause much strain for lower income families. It appears that lower and middle income families have acquired a false hope, and when they do not reach the high ranks this can cause a sense of hopelessness. Another, inequality based on our present political system is the representation and interests of the classes in politics. I do not understand how a country supposedly founded on freedom can have a political system based on the representation of the rich. It is very discouraging to think about how those who run our country got to office, and how these people primarily focus on the interests of those who back their political campaign with the most money. Actually probably the most frustrating thing about all of this is how this will probably never change. This goes back to the concept talked about in class about how college students at Penn State truly aren’t going to do nearly enough to protest the budget cut, for students will sit back and put responsibility on another. It is the same thing in this scenario. We will continue to go on with our fast paced lives, and put the load on someone else. This will never change because all of those who are faced with this inequality will believe everything is going to be okay and that what politicians are telling them is true. Overall, I think this idea on inequality between class rank and representation will probably be an issue for a long time because of the fact that people will put the responsibility to make a change on another.

When reading this article, I’m not sure one can accurately predict that religion is becoming extinct. Sociology has shown that people most often shape their beliefs based off of the beliefs in their family or community. This makes me predict that there will be trends in the types of religion for an area based off of past trends. This does not mean that trends are constant, but I think that religion will always be a part of civilization. First, I believe this because people need something to believe in. They need some higher power that determines their destiny or fate. However, the higher power may not be the same for all people. I do think the ideas that religions are based on will not stay constant, but will change over time. I think they will change based on what needs to change for society; for example, during the 1800’s proslavery colonists justified slavery based on biblical writings. Nowhere in the bible does it state that black men are inferior to white men and therefore should be enslaved. This is a prime example of how religion can be manipulated based on what people want society to be like. These views are then passed on from generation to generation and are molded or tweaked as times goes on and society changes. Often times however people do not just give up on religion. We are social creatures, and religion is a social aspect of a human’s life. One thing that may also occur is new religions may form. For example, the dominant religion in the early times of the republic had been Catholicism; however, people branched off in need for a change and started new religions, such as the Protestants, based off of their needs.
Overall, I feel religion is not reaching extinction, and never will. It does appear that religion may change over time, but overall people are more likely to just follow the norm. Also, I believe that religion will continue on because of socialization. Socialization by the family and community is a key indicator of trends, even something such as religion.

I feel that having two parents of the same gender does not have a negative impact on family structure. It seems as if people put too much emphasis on what society feels is “normal” and anything that goes against this feeling is seen as taboo. There is a good side and bad side to every situation. For example, there is just as much chance for two heterosexual people to be horrible parents as there is for two homosexual people to be. But as a society we cannot even give two same-sex people a chance because of the negative connotations associated with their union. I feel that regardless of your sexual preference a person is able to nurture and care for a child. Deep we all have the basic instinctual feelings when it comes to caring for a child, and it is this that makes us a family unit.
To be a family, you do not need a mother, father, and children. As long as there are two people that love each other and are willing to nurture, care for, and love a child that is a productive family unit. For society to say that a child, one who has grown up under a roof with two same sex parents is wrong is a shame. That child, as long as they are nurtured and loved they will grow into a productive and happy member of society. Same sex parents can provide the same essential needs that a heterosexual couple can provide. They are capable of providing the same mental, physical, and emotional well being as heterosexual couples. The family unit in a same sex situation may even be stronger do to the adversity faced because of the taboo associated with same sex union. Most children that are adopted by same sex couples are going to a very good home due to the strict selection process that they have to go through in order to even adopt a child into there home.
In conclusion, I feel that same sex couples are just as capable as heterosexual couples in providing for a family and having a productive family unit.

This article truly proves money does not bring happiness, and people all over the country have a big misconception on what the odds of winning the lottery truly is. It shocks me to read statistics that the majority of lottery players are in the lower income bracket. The lottery is just taking money from the people who need it most. Why is it that these citizens feel the only way to get ahead is by luck? What happened to getting ahead by hard work? The people strive to be millionaires, but don’t realize that if they do win, these odds being almost impossible, rarely when it’s all said and done end up being well off. There are many “its too good to be trues” that go along with winning so much money. First, it is unrealistic to become part of an economic class that one did not become a part of due to natural causes. Becoming part of a certain class by chance creates a large social shock for those winning the lottery. To make a transition that is so drastic, one must understand how to keep up with such social standards. It is interesting to think how it is such a drastic change from being part of high class to low class and how the opposite transition is thought of as being easier. Second, people do not understand the risks involved with having such an economic backing. If one is to possess such a large amount of money, they need to understand how to protect themselves and their belongings. One’s whole world has changed because of this “luck” so one must know how to take appropriate steps to adjust one’s old world to their new fortune. Third, most people from a lower economic class do not know how to budget such a large fortune. Most often people who win the jackpot end up spending all their fortune in the first few years, and end off worse off than when they began. Overall, I think it would be beneficial for society if they were truly informed about the lottery system and it’s effects. Then those who do win the jackpot can be informed on how to successfully make the transition.

Child safety is usually always a popular story or top story on news and media sources all around the world. Often times these media sources are truly dramatized. Especially when watching this video it is clear how the news and media truly exaggerate news stories, and after watching this video I understand why parents can have such fear about the safety of their children. I do think things however need to be changed in the media otherwise there will be an inverse effect of what is wanted in society, and more issues will arise due to the fact children will not be properly educated on what to due in certain circumstances. I think it is important that the media portray the real facts of the situation that 99.9 percent of people will help your child in a time of need. This misconception that kidnappings are more common then they are is creating a hysteria in society and taking away much natural freedoms that children have a right to experience to mature. Why doesn’t the media tell viewers the true facts that your child is more likely to get struck by lightening or get in a car accident driving to school then being kidnapped or abducted. Allow parents to have the opportunity to fear things that are in need to be feared instead of focusing on things that are very unlikely. Allow parents to save more of their energy on needed parenting issues like steering their children away from drugs or unhealthy habits. Let it be known to the older generation that times have not changed since they have grown up, and stop the cycle now so future children will get the freedom to enjoy their childhood. Overall, I think times have not changed, and society needs to be properly educated about the facts of child kidnapping and child abductions. I also think that parents should focus their fears about their children on other issues such as what we talked about in class known as the fear of the unknown. Parents should be aware of the true issues of safety for their children.

Entertainment and the media create a norm that affects societies' views about dating, love, and relationships. The current depiction creates a sense of anxiety for people about what relationships should be. Media and entertainment show this norm of having a need for a companion or significant other, and living a fairytale life or a life of chaos. Often times movie scripts and song lyrics create a sense of loneliness or a feeling of the end of the world if a relationship is ended, making more and more people feel a sense of worthlessness and depression. Take for example a show that creates a lot of talk, MTV'S Jersey Shore, which has primarily turned into the Sam and Ronnie show focusing on their unstable relationship. People love this and tune in every Thursday night to see if they are together or apart. What kind of message is this sending to viewers? Media such as this creates such a distorted view on love and relationships. This in turn causes people to not truly understand the relationships they partake in creating disorganization between the partners in the relationship. Also, these depictions create inaccurate expectations between the two members in the relationship causing many relationships to fail or end. Then when the relationship does end the two members do not know how to react. Media shows anger and hostility between the two people when in all honesty people would be much happier if people if the ended on good terms due to the fact that there is someone else out there. That’s why this song sends a perfect message to viewers. What are the chances of finding that one person just for you in a world of millions of people? Slim to none, and often time people don't even take this into consideration. Life is about building relationships and sometimes these relationships will end, so why not make the best of it and appreciate the relationship for what it is at its present time. Overall, I think if more sources such as this song became popular in the media there would not be such a hype on relationships, and more people would feel free to form healthy relationships as they pleased, creating a much more happy and loving society.

I have tried to stay away from these articles from the Prisoners spending life in prison because I am unsure about how I feel in reaction to their essays, but I decided to finally build up if you want to say courage and reflect on this essay "Remember". Most are feeling very sorry and emotional for this man who is in jail for life, and I am having a lot of trouble coming to a conclusion such as that. I do not know if I can feel remorse for this man. Maybe it is a lack of compassion or maybe I am just heartless. In mostly all of our lectures in our Sociology 001 class we are learning about these invisible strings that incline us to make certain choices or take certain paths in life. So looking at this man's case through a sociological stand point I guess I should be understanding that there are some forces that incline him to commit such a crime; however, we also have learned that overall we may not have complete freedom based on our choices, we ourselves have the final say in what choices we make or which roads we take in life. So this fact puts responsibility on the individual. This is the point in which I am stuck on what emotions to have towards this man. I want to feel bad for him because he has lost everything in his life, but and this is a big but he took the life of someone else. How does a person make up for an act such as that? How can one truly come to terms with that fact? Also, when reading this man's essay which has similarities with other in-lifers you see they portray a sense of remorse and repentance in most of their essays. When considering their emotions, why is it that a lot of these people who do feel this remorse and do get a second chance in the real world, they commit similar crimes again? I would feel that after the first experience this would cause some of these strings that are acting upon someone to be overcome, but who am I to know.

This video is really not that shocking to me. Every day we are surrounded by social decisions and interactions, which are determined based on the environment around us. Basically every part of our daily lives is determined by this sense of acting on the norm. This video purely shows in its simplest form that there really is no freedom in the lives of human beings. Be it the clothes we choose to wear or not wear or even the seat we choose to sit in during our Soc 001 class, every decision we make may be influenced or molded subconsciously in one way or another by what is going on around us. This concept makes me realize that we live our lives like we are on auto mode very similar to being a robot. We are not consciously taking in our surroundings or being fully aware of our daily tendencies or choices. I am having trouble grasping how a society can change away from this idea of conformity. How do we take our lives into our own hands when there are so many forces acting against us, and is there really a way to be fully aware of every decision we make when we are making millions of decisions every day? I guess with every big change it must start at the root with the individual. What can we do as an individual? Truly stepping outside of the box and standing up for oneself even in the face of adversity can make a huge difference in one’s environment. Since conformity is an act primarily affected by a group, I guess another way to rise against conformity is just to simply be different and to step out of the norm. I am truly not sure if the issue of conformity will ever truly be resolved. Even in today’s generation when many try to act out against the norm, one can argue that they are still conforming in some way. Can one conform against a norm? I truly feel puzzled about this idea of conformity. Although I understand the meaning of it, I do not fully understand how one could do an act opposite of conformity.