en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/762960 Comments by raphaelangel https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68755926 First off, I think that was the first lecture in awhile that Sam really grabbed my attention. I enjoyed how he literally told us to be another people. We had no choice but to see the War in Iraq from the opposing view. And I liked it! In fact, I talked to a lot of my friends and parents about the class. This class was definitely one of the most memorable. I don't know why exactly, maybe because I don't watch the news that often and I'm not very into politics, but I now can see what this war is about. It's a tough pill to swallow that majority of our fighting is due to a natural resource that is in abundance in Iraq. Watching those videos made me feel horrible about the war. I one hundred percent support our soldiers; however, I'm starting to hate and resent this war. Is it possible to still truly support our soldiers if we hate the war? That is an honest question I have (feel free to respond if anyone reads this post). When Sam asked, raise your hand if you would fight back, I raised my hand. I get it. I saw the point of Sam's lecture completely. He's not saying Christians are bad and that they're the cause of the war. He's right though, as a "Muslim", watching all those videos I think I would not like the "Christian Invaders" too. I probably, if in an Iraqi person's position, join an insurgence. They are defending their country too! Innocent people are dying. I cannot imagine being a college student in Iraq and being scared that my school would get bombed or something would happen if I left my house. War completely sucks and I hate the fact that its a fact that 29 innocent lives can be taken in order to kill one "bad guy". If you were an Iraqi and knew that statistic- personally witnessed the destruction too- why would you not want to join an insurgence? I guess some people well respond you don't necessarily win a fight with fighting back. But, this is your life and I know no matter what I would not let someone come in good old happy valley and destroy my life. I would not let my family members die for something such as oil at the hands of what appears to a "Christian invasion"(assuming that I am an Iraqi Muslim civilian). I get it Sam. I appreciated this lecture a lot and I thank you because I think I have developed or at least attempted myself to understand that war from another perspective. I think more people would at least understand why Iraqi's aren't thrilled with us. I am not saying in any way the I personally support the insurgents and terrorist, but not I can see why these radical groups are determined to fight back. Sun, 18 Apr 2010 23:14:58 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68755926 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-are-we-doing-here-really__trashed/#IDComment68042178 This is a pretty good question. I don't think there really is an easy answer. I believe depending on each individual, answers will vary drastically. Speaking for myself, the end goal of my race relations experience is opening my eyes. What do I want out of this class? I want to at least acknowledge race relations. I want to be able to take off "my lenses" and put on another persons lenses. I don't believe that Sam is trying to mold us into conforming sociologists, rather dig out a path for our own discovery. The end goal is obvious from day to day and it can be very simple too. Walking to class, I pay particular attention to race relations; I believe I pay more attention to the details that shape race relations. I want to know what it must be like for the inter-racial couple to get stares as they walk hand in hand. I try to acknowledge their courage for simply being themselves and honor race relations in general for simply not ignoring them, nor discriminating against them. I've increased my curiosity level. I am thinking about things I have never thought about before. What it would be like if I were to bring a person of the opposite race or same gender home to meet my parents? Would they accept the person, or rather my relationship, why and why not? Challenging yourself to step outside of the box. Even thinking about every day things we take for granite, such as munching on a piece of chocolate. Recognizing that my ten seconds of enjoyment was produced by someone's unpaid, torturous hard work. It's a difficult pill to swallow. But, race relations is reality. Reality that you need to look at life not only from your own perspective or your parents, but from a stranger's perspective. The end goal of my race relations experience is experiencing life as purely and as real as possible. Accepting the world and people in the world, for their unique identities that shape our planet. Without letting yourself go and realizing the end goal is just taking notice of life, you're just going to die. Sam is correct. We are all going to die. Keeping Sam's belief in mind, I want to die knowing that I lived not only from my perspective, but from others too. My advice for those who haven't found the end goal: be open to everything. Honestly listen to strangers and observe people. Allow yourself to look at the world outside of your own immediate "bubble". Yes, you may find things that you don't like, but you don't have to like everything in the world. You are still allowed to keep your identity and beliefs. However, I suggest you develop your identity with your own experiences and others' experiences too. Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:57:44 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-are-we-doing-here-really__trashed/#IDComment68042178 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66484569 I think this is a great question! I framed a similar question within our discussion group (I'll discuss it later in my response). My answer- with all honesty- is yes Sam has impacted how I view race relations. I believe that I have opened myself up to at least trying to learn about other people an how they view the world. I don't understand how people can sit in this class and not change their minds. Rather, as Sam has said it's not about convincing you to go a certain way, but more about presenting information and letting you form your own view. When Sam presents information, I honestly try to be open and the result of my openness has been a "change of heart" almost. I want to hear what he has to say because I realize now that I have been closed minded at times. I have lived within a metaphorical white bubble that hasn't allowed me to see others view. Majority of my life experiences have been with white people and shaped by white beliefs. Now that I am independent, away from my family and bubble at Penn State, I want to learn to appreciate the world for the diversity that it offers. Looking at the world from a sociological perspective has made me appreciate the beauty of humanity and also disdain the ugliness of bigotry/ discrimination. To reference back to what I said earlier about me posing the same question as the one asked for honesty in this blog, I asked now that we are at least more aware of the biases within different cultures and ethnicities, what do you do when some one makes a derogatory remark about another person? Do you act the same as you "always would" (previous to taking this class)? Would you not join in, but remain silent? Or has this class influenced you enough that you would speak out and tell some one that they are being offensive? I believe all these questions show how little or far you have come from being in this class. When speaking "honestly" as this other student has asked of us and answering my own questions, I am at the stage where Sam has influenced me enough to not join in on discrimination. I don't think that I can say that I would stand up to it (unless terribly harmful to another human being). It's scary to develop new ideas and to think different from your majority culture. We all know that when some people take a stand for something they are shunned by those who may be their closest friends. I would really like to move further through the stages Sam has introduced, but as of now (and being honest) I don't think I have reached the final stage. Wed, 7 Apr 2010 23:55:30 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66484569 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/those-damn-dolls__trashed/#IDComment65035135 I agree with Sam when he says this video is one of the most disturbing videos we have seen thus far. I literally could not look at their faces because they looked so pained by their decisions. It especially was upsetting when the final little girl had chosen the black doll as the "bad" doll then said the doll looked like her. It amazes me that children this young chose what doll is appealing by "black" and "white". I feel like the children in the video may have encountered race at an earlier age then I did. I think as a white person I have had the "white lenses" on and never really recognized how even young children who really don't understand the ramifications of race could broach the topic through play objects. This video makes me feel hurt and really like Sam has described it full of "white guilt". I mean how could a white person honestly look at this and not feel like their race has made children feel bad about who they are. It really is a tough thing to watch. I sort of have an example of this video in my own real life. Its not the same concept at all, but it deals with race and I feel it is relevant enough to mention. I grew up in a predominantly white world. Besides my three cousins (who are adopted) I had very minimal interaction with people of color. When I was in first grade my cousins and I, along with my mom and my aunt attended a carnival summer picnic. Now at this picnic I was finally confronted with being the minority in a setting. Anyways, there was a lot of toys and prizes given out and when it came to all the little girls we all lined up to receive our Barbie doll. The woman had them in a trash bag and randomly grabbed a box and handed it to each child. When it was my turn I was handed the Bay Watch Barbie. Except this time it was a Barbie I was unfamiliar with because it was black. My mom snapped the photo as my eyes bulged out of my head. At that time, a little white girl who had really never been around people of color, nor played with any dolls besides white ones, was shocked at the fact she was handed a black Barbie. I think this story relates because even though I wasn't sat down and given the choice of which doll to pick, I certainly was not accepting of what I was given. And I look back and think why. Was it because I was never given a different doll? Was I acting bigoted even as a child who really didn't understand race? It's kind of sad to see young children be so affected by race even when it deals with a doll they play with! Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:45:11 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/those-damn-dolls__trashed/#IDComment65035135 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/whats-the-big-deal-with-periods__trashed/#IDComment63938632 So originally I felt totally uncomfortable when same started his rant on "bleeding". I think I probably was uncomfortable because I was sitting next to this big guy who literally looked like he was going to throw up. So in a way I guess I was following suit by also acting disgusted. Once Sam started to talk more in depth about his wife's cycle I felt extra uncomfortable not only for myself as a woman, but for his wife too! However, now that I sit back and actually think about that moment I have no idea why I myself (a women) was acting disgusted. Obviously, at this point in my life its something I'm used to and it's not as scary as the first time you menstruate. I really enjoyed how comfortable this female student was to be a woman and to take pride in her ability to menstruate. She kind of inspired me to talk about it and analyze its relevance to our class. I think she brings up an awesome point about the wonders of being fertile. I have a family member who is married, has a great husband and they struggle conceiving a child. It really is sad when you think about how many girls our age only like the fact they have their period because it means that they didn't accidentally get pregnant. "Bleeding", as Sam puts it, really is referring to the miracle of life. Why are men so disgusted by it? Well, I believe it's because we don't openly talk about it and they simply don't get it because they are not females. They don't have the monthly experience of getting a period, therefore, they don't want to think about it. I think this kind of in a way relates to our discussion of race relations. If people aren't willing to come to the discussion table, no matter the topic (race, religion, sex, etc.), the subjects aren't going to be broached and there will remain a lack of understanding. AND THIS IS SOMETHING WOMEN NEED OR NO ONE WOULD BE HERE! I'm going to attempt to relate this topic to race relations with an example. I will admit that as a white person it was hard to see some opinions of people of color in the class. In agreement with Sam's belief, maybe I didn't get it/ understand because I never tried to get it. I looked at it through my "white lenses" and never really tried hard to see the opposing view. Periods are relevant because maybe males don't get it because they aren't trying too. Without even letting Sam finish people left (girls included), because it was something people don't want to talk about. We have to talk about this because it's taboo! The whole point of this class is to talk about things people don't want to talk about. And I feel like when a few brave people step out and offer they're opinion we start to see what's really going on with all the issues in the world. I thank this girl for asking posing the question because she made me feel comfortable saying my opinion about this topic. Thu, 25 Mar 2010 01:13:24 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/whats-the-big-deal-with-periods__trashed/#IDComment63938632 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/women-and-sports__trashed/#IDComment62685086 First, off I don't consider myself a feminist by any means. However, I will say that I am proud to be a woman. I have always been raised- gender aside- that you can be anything that you want to be. Yes, I know that sounds cliche but it's the truth. I think if this woman is more than qualified to be a high school football coach (which is appears) than she has every right to secure that position. Growing up I have always played sports. I have never been a "girly-girly" by any means. My father wanted a boy; so I was pretty much raised like a boy to play sports. I was involved in every sport possible. I tried gymnastics (which I guess is a "more feminine sport") and quit within two weeks. There is nothing more frustrating to me, especially concerning sports, when women are not taken seriously as athletes, coaches, or even ESPN reporters. Despite the fact I was female, when my dad and I would play one-on-one basketball in the driveway it was no mercy. There were times when I even recall some blood shed because my dad wanted me to be tough. I also played basketball with the neighborhood boys, who of course don't want to lose to a girl. So yet again I wasn't given any free shots. I'm sure this woman had the same experiences. She has played with males and they didn't let up because she was female. She has learned to play rough just like males are taught. She must be a touch lady especially for this woman to compete in a mostly male dominated sport. If someone has played a certain sport from a young age through high school and to the the college level, I would say they are probably knowledgeable about the sport. The woman from the blog has been playing football from an young age. She loves the game and is passionate about the sport. Why can't she be a coach? Honestly, besides the fact that she might have to make sure everyone is dressed before she enters the locker room; I don't see the big deal. Clear from your mind that she has breasts and a vagina--- ask yourself what is the real difference between a male's ability to coach vs. her ability? A couple male football players within my section said that they don't think a woman could fire them up before a game. Well, playing sports all my life and being a female I'm almost positive that I have given many pre-game speeches that have led my team to victory. And I'm pretty sure if I told a "man's man- Mr. football himself" that HE HIT LIKE A LITTLE BABY BITCH he might want to play harder too. I don't know I've had some pretty awesome coaches, male and female, that have fired me up before a game. I really don't see the big deal in her coaching the team. If she is qualified and has experience and passion then she should be able to coach the team without an uproar from the male population. Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:19:04 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/women-and-sports__trashed/#IDComment62685086 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/whats-with-the-theme-parties__trashed/#IDComment59757780 So this is probably going to be a repeat of what a lot of people have already said, but I disagree that majority of themed parties are geared to discriminating black people. I can rattle of the number of themed parties that I have been too that do not involve race; however, to take a different approach I'm going to focus more on the one theme that I'm assuming she is talking about: the "Ghetto/ or Gangster" themed parties. I honestly could see how a person of color would be offended by the party if it were titled "Black Ghetto or Black Gangster" party because obviously that parties focus is geared toward racism and racist beliefs. In contrast, I think that the "Ghetto/ Gangster" theme is more geared toward the popular culture of hip-hip. Although, yes it is a culture that has a larger percentage of people of color in it there still are white rappers that dress "ghetto/ gangster". So to say that this theme specifically targets black people is wrong. I've never been to this sort of themed party were anyone has taken it to a completely offensive level. I appreciate this young woman offering her opinion, but like Sam's wifes book said we have to look at both sides of the conversation so we can meet at a hidden bridge. She is completely entitled to her opinion and to think that although there is no blatant offense such as painting you face black, the theme still could be promote discrimination. But, I want her to see it I guess from another view (coming from a white person). To me I think it is only offensive when you hint on other characteristics such as attitude, language, and a person's being rather than just clothing. The whole central idea around most themed parties is that you dress different than you regularly would; Whether that is a Jersey shore style, business, sports theme, change gender style (girls go as guys vice versa), I don't think its offensive unless you specifically involve a race. For example, when I go to the girls dress as guys, we all were something similar to the hip-hop style because believe it or not there are other people that embrace it besides black people. Majority of my guy friends ( who yes are white) dress the same way you would say is discriminatory for a certain themed party. I think this conversation is also very relative to one of the previous blog posts. Why does everything relate back to race? Why does a seemingly innocent themed party (to a white person) offend someone of color? I think the answers are both in our misunderstanding of one another. And yes, we both are allowed to have our own opinions and have our own worldview so maybe we will never agree. However, if we just allow each other to hear one another out maybe we can come to a common ground. If anyone thinks of a more appropriate title for this kind of themed party or a way its less offensive let me know, I really am curious. Thu, 4 Mar 2010 16:45:48 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/whats-with-the-theme-parties__trashed/#IDComment59757780 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/native-americans-question-three__trashed/#IDComment58536795 I think a lot of people seem unaffected and lack emotion towards the subject because a lot of people have a similar mentality to the student who posed a question before this one. Most people actively choose not care because for most of us we have not directly (or even our ancestors) participated in this massacre of millions of people. I think people refuse to image the development our country resting on the graves of millions of innocent people; "The Land of the Free" as the main player in the largest most extensive genocide does not sit well with people, especially the ignorant ones. I believe lack of empathy for Native Americans also correlates to our childhood. The first student was talking about the common biases portrayed within our education systems. In our most influential moments (in schools) we are bombarded by negative images of Native Americans. We are the "hero" with our pilgrim outfit and gun. Of course, then they are always portrayed as the "stick figure with a feather" (as the girl put it in the first podcast question). What we need to realize is that now that we are educated on the issue (from our soc 119 class lectures) it's time for us to acknowledge the suffering of millions. Regardless, of whether or not your great great great uncle stole land from Native Americans, Sam is right we are still TODAY living on "Red Land". So just because your ancestors or you yourself personally weren't the people who participated in the genocide years ago, we are still allowing wrongs to be written against Native Americans by ignoring the injustices they face. It is also amazing to me that people who now know that there is still discrimination today could care less. Okay so we aren't actively stealing their land today, but we are stealing other "American" privileges that majority of us enjoy such as a good education, treatment for illness (mental or physical), financial aid, etc. If you feel no sense of remorse, despite your role, maybe you should put yourself within their shoes. How different would your life be? Would you enjoy growing up in poverty and all the time knowing that there are other people within the world who don't care because this continuation of poverty was committed by people who they have no relation? The images we were shown within class are disturbing. I'm not sure what role my family played within the genocide, but I am not ignorant enough to believe that absolutely none of my ancestors were involved. And if they weren't involved at all, I am still hurt by this reality. It is a reality that should not be ignored. I am reminded of this horrible tragedy because I recognize that the majority of the land that I live on, play, or relax on is not mine. But, a stolen land of people that had their lives taken for it. It truly is an upsetting reality for me. Wed, 24 Feb 2010 20:08:29 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/native-americans-question-three__trashed/#IDComment58536795 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/lgbt-class-question-six__trashed/#IDComment57562649 As soon as a pregnant a woman finds out the sex of her baby, we define the baby’s gender even before the baby is born. We paint rooms pink for girls and blue for boys. From the moment of birth, our American society defines the acceptable male and female characteristics of a newborn. We immediately wrap a baby boy in blue and a baby girl in pink. I learned about an interesting study in my psychology class that pertains to this topic. New parents were given a baby that was wrapped in a pink blanket. All the parents described the baby as “cute, precious, and gentle” without even knowing the sex of the baby. Then they gave another set of parents a baby wrapped in a blue blanket. Essentially, the same thing happened with the parents describing the baby as “strong and handsome” without even knowing the sex of the newborn. As we allow our children to grow and be “themselves”, we give a male toddler a truck and a female toddler dolls. We continue to dress them “gender” appropriate until about age five when most children want to explore their world in their own ways. If a female pre-schooler starts to learn how to play sports, we don’t think twice about this decision. However, if a male pre-schooler is interested in dance classes we may raise an eyebrow. What if this young little boy decides to also listen to Britney Spears or maybe play dress-up too? Now, more than an eyebrow is raised. People start to talk about how “different” the boy is from others young boys. As the young girl starts to become better at sports she is also talked about; however, she is described as athletic and at the very worst a “tom-boy”. What we have to realize is that the way we raise our children, even before they decide their sexual preference (lesbian, gay or bisexual) is wrong. We allow society to approve of our female child’s gender preferences rather than male gender preferences. I think this is a huge issue within our society. We really don’t allow children to choose for themselves who they want to be. When they do chose what feels best for them, if it isn’t “socially” accepted we reject their beliefs and essentially their identity. It is not fair that we allow women to adopt female and male characteristics, yet scorn males when they are not portraying a masculine image. I like to imagine an alternate world for this scenario. If we didn’t dictate gender differences from birth, there wouldn’t even be labels such as a “feminine gay” or a “butch lesbian”. Gender would be more fluid and accepted as an individuality statement rather than an abnormality arising from society structured thought of femininity and masculinity. Fri, 19 Feb 2010 02:29:07 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/lgbt-class-question-six__trashed/#IDComment57562649 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/why-is-the-conversation-always-about-black-and-white-people__trashed/#IDComment56420570 I think Laurie is correct in saying that most conversations lead back to "black and white". Its kind of interesting because we sort of had a conversation in group about this topic. Sort of, meaning most people tried to avoid it leading back to skin color, but it was something that needed to be discussed. We were talking about an event that recently happened in Pittsburg, where a young Black male walking to his grandmothers at night was beaten up by three white police officers dressed in plain-uniform. They attacked him because they saw something large in his pocket which they thought was a gun or something illegal. Turns out it was a Mountain Dew (WOW they were so wrong)! Anyways, they claimed they approached him and one officer showed him his badge. Well, the young man decided to run and the three police officers caught up to him and brutally beat him, going as far as ripping his dreadlock out and a twig puncturing his cheek. Immediately, everyone was asking well what kind of area is it? Our TA told us that it was a rougher neighborhood of Pittsburg. So, immediately people were thinking well maybe he was attacked because it was night, he was alone and of course in a tough neighborhood anything "suspicious" is investigated. They also offered, maybe because he ran too that it made him even more suspicious. Um, well I'm not a male, but if three men came up to me at night and I wasn't doing anything wrong I'd probably run too (but that besides the point). But basically what everyone kept bringing up was issues of good cop/bad cop or the "bad area" to blame. However, what I think our TA was trying to get at was do you think his skin color has something to do with why he was approached in the first place. Seriously, come on it was one young black male and three white police officers, how could race be left out of this conversation! Well at our group it pretty much was. Referring back to another person's comment earlier saying something about white people are afraid to offend black people. I think they brought up a good point. Most of our section is white and I honestly don't think anyone wanted to discuss "black vs white" in this situation even though it was obviously the elephant in the room. What I'm trying to get at is that I think at times it is definitely relevant to bring up race in certain situations. In this Pittsburg story, our group may have gotten a better discussion if people were willing to talk about the role of race in the crime. I do think that not every conversation needs to involve race, but as someone mentioned if we don't have these conversations how will we ever enlighten ourselves and be open to other people. Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:42:00 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/why-is-the-conversation-always-about-black-and-white-people__trashed/#IDComment56420570 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/avatar-and-the-white-mans-burden__trashed/#IDComment55427142 So I practically laughed out loud when Sam said in his YouTube clip that someone commented " Well, I saw the film and didn't think that it was totally about a 'White Messiah' theme, but maybe it's because I'm white." Obviously! I completely agree with the person because I thought the same thing. The only reason I saw the movie is because my significant other and his whole family were going one night over break. The entire time my focus was on the special effects which are actually kind of thrilling especially in three demension; however my point is that yes I'm also white and I didn't even notice the theme either. Could it be because the special effects were capturing all my attention that I didn't think about the movie line? I don't think that's it personally. We sort of touched on this in my first discussion group. I probably don't notice things like that because I wasn't raised in a diverse area. So, yes with all the other movies that guy mentioned I didn't think about their inherent 'White Messiah' themes until just now. I'm not saying it hard for me to tell, but I think it has to be brought to my attention or I just take the movie as it is. Immediately, once it was pointed out I recognized what the author of the article was trying to say. I think he's semi-correct. After he analyzed it in that manner, I could see how the main character is portrayed as this awesome white hero who tries to help save the natives. And of course because it's animation they make the natives some ridiculous color (blue) to separate the hero's race from the Avatars. Another thing to consider, this may be off topic, but I think it is something to point out. For the first time, the 'White Messiah'/ hero is paralyzed from the waist down. Race aside I think it is interesting how they made a hero a person with a disability. However, the more I thought about it they make the character an ex-marine (nothing wrong with the military though). So, it makes it seem like they thought that he could assume the hero role because he had a tough image despite his disability. Another food for thought is that he also isn't a hero when he is in his true human form. So what was the relevance of having the main character/ hero be in a wheel chair? He only becomes the hero when he is an Avatar and is 'able bodied' again. I think this is actually equally offensive not just on a racial level, but for people with disabilities. Just thought it was something to think about without thinking of race for a second. Fri, 5 Feb 2010 02:03:50 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/avatar-and-the-white-mans-burden__trashed/#IDComment55427142 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/i-guess-it-pays-to-learn-a-bit-about-other-people__trashed/#IDComment54285666 This was most definitely an interesting article. I one hundred percent agree with the grandmother when she describes people as "skittish". Whenever I ride a plane I'm nervous in general that we're going down from natural causes or some issue with the plane. So couple that anxiety with post September 11th anxieties and I probably would be the ignorant person who also saw a religious ritual as a threat. People praying out loud (no matter what religion) would also scare me. I'm Catholic and even if I saw someone make the sign of the cross I would think it was semi suspicious. I was trying to think of something that would maybe be equivalent or considered a suspicious religious practice who might not know anything about being Catholic. I came up with someone praying with the Holy Rosary. The Rosary is not strapped or wrapped around you in any way and its on the smaller side, but with how nervous everyone is while riding a plane a Catholic might consider another Catholic as suspicious unless they are a nun or a priest. I feel bad that the boy and the girl were arrested, but I would be a hypocrite if I didn't admit that re-directing the plane and taking them into custody was the right decision. It is unfortunate that he was basically accused of being a terrorist or potential threat to other passengers safety when he was simply honoring his own religious practices; however, he probably should have used common sense and realized that people are incredibly ignorant when it comes to something that even Jewish people have admitted is unfamiliar. Now that we are on the topic of the Jewish religious practices, I am curious as to what the teffilin represents. Is there anything in the box? Why are there black tape looking cords wrapped around the arms? I hope these aren't stupid questions. Some people who practice Judaism probably are laughing like you dumb Catholic, but I did the same thing when I went to a funeral at my Church and some non-religious people picked up Rosaries and put them around their necks as if they were necklaces. I wasn't offended or upset they didn't know what it was just opened my eyes and realized not everyone has the same religious practices! I wonder if the boy maybe did it on purpose because he thought he would get that reaction or maybe was he the "ignorant" one because he assumed that everyone would be cool with him going about his daily religious practice? I guess no one should assume these days especially on airplanes when everyone's anxieties levels and watchful eyes are just waiting for something suspicious to occur. Paranoia is the new reality. It is accepted and labeled the new normal with air travel. It's really unfortunate. Fri, 29 Jan 2010 00:37:23 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/i-guess-it-pays-to-learn-a-bit-about-other-people__trashed/#IDComment54285666 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/last-name-begins-with-s__trashed/#IDComment53875474 hello Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:00:42 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/last-name-begins-with-s__trashed/#IDComment53875474 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53037887 Part 3 (sorry it won't let me put it all together-annoying):Can I call myself then a true Catholic if I don’t believe in the suffering of “sinners”? And thinking about being labeled a “sinner” or an ancestor offending God and making a deal with the devil wouldn’t we all be sinners? I know by no means that I am a perfect Catholic and by committing the act of a sin that I would be rejecting God and what Mr. Robinson would call “making a deal with the devil”. It is a really confusing topic because of the hypocrisy element. In conclusion, I want to stand what I ultimately believe in (religion aside) and that is my own belief that the disaster in Haiti is a heart breaking tragedy that no one should be forced to endure the suffering that has been imposed upon them. Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:30:58 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53037887 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53037829 Part 2: Mr. Robinson is saying although the Haitian ancestors were sinners by making a pack with the devil now their living relatives must suffer. I’m sure at some point in Mr. Robinson’s family lineage there was a sinner just as evil as the so called Haitians who made some pack with the devil. So does that mean that at some point if something horrible happens in his life his ancestors are to blame? I wonder if he ever is curious about hypocrisy in his preaching. This whole controversy really makes me want to re-examine what I have been taught. Honestly, I personally am offended by his statement and angered, but I am pretty much told to accept it by associating myself with the Catholic religion. What if I completely reject his belief; does that make me a hypocrite in my religion? Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:30:22 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53037829 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53037616 I have to split my comment too! Part 1: Pat Robinson’s “pack with the devil comment” makes me wonder about why people say the things they do. He is not going to recant his statement, so he obviously he made this comment one hundred percent believing that the Haitians must suffer for some past mistake of their ancestors. My first response was utter shock. How could someone honestly believe there is a justified reason for the suffering of hundreds of thousands of lives? Everyone rips him to shreds and tears him to pieces for his comment, but then I started to think about Sam’s lesson in hypocrisy before I jumped on the same bandwagon. I am a Catholic so therefore I do believe in good and evil. I do believe that there is a greater power, God, which created the earth and will someday destroy it. So in somewhat agreement with Mr. Robinson, yes there is evil in the world that we may not see day to day but I do believe it does exist. I don’t agree with his statement at all that people should be punished because of their past mistakes; however, as a Catholic we are raised to believe that sinners will suffer. Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:28:04 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/clubbing-the-bejesus-out-of-rationality__trashed/#IDComment53037616