Oil has always been one of those large industries and corporations that, obviously, have a lot of money and power backing them and their interests. It’s no surprise, and hopefully not news, that these corporations are getting tax breaks (as they have under previous president’s terms) and will not quietly just step aside now and be taxed like the rest of the country. They have money therefore power, and they’re not willing to give that up so easily. Obama obviously has the truest intentions at heart, but without the backing of congress, he won’t be able to get anything done. But Congress, of course, gets their power from the people of the state that they represent, and the companies that endorse them. Those Congressmen and Senators that are heavily backed by oil industries and lobbyists for the oil companies and the advancement of their companies, will not be in favor of any sort of action initiated by the executive to tax their allies and source of funding, as referenced in the article. In short, they have too much power and money at their disposal to back them up. Oil is by far one of the strongest industries and lobbyist groups in this country, and the world, and that won’t be changing anytime soon.

All in all, it’s quite unfortunate that that’s what this country has become. Something that private industries and corporations have the actual power; these nameless faces that we will never know are the ones pulling the strings and making everything happen the way they want just like chess pieces on a board. But this isn’t a game. We don’t realize it, but the government has become something less than of the people, by the people and for the people, and has become something more for companies, industries, and power. It’s become a monopoly game of sorts where the ones with the most money buy everything out and the rest slowly die away until the last one standing controls everything.

Whatever trends have been like in the past, religion is something that has always be controversial and dominant throughout history. While many religions have either died out or are not at the same level of popularity as before, the main world religions (Christianity and all of its denominations, Islam and Hinduism) are ones that will probably never lose its following and die out. Religion is created and gains power through humans, through people. They’ll only die out if humans stop believing, and that’s not going to stop any time soon. In the countries listed in the article, many of them don’t have large mixes of religions within the country or are countries that were never really that religiously conscious to begin with, except for say, Ireland which was largely Catholic (and still is). In modern times with more science and diversity, equality and historical education, people have come to care less about religion because of what they perceive is wrong with institutionalized religion and all the corruption that it tends to have. In the United States which his predominantly Christian, I don’t see religion going anyway at all. Religion, and religious beliefs are so ingrained in everything: our politics, legislature, and education, everything that it won’t be something that can just die out. Even with larger numbers of other religions growing, such as Islam, the American religion, unofficially, is Christianity and with all those crazy super religious people out there, who influence all of their decisions and the decisions and actions of others with their religious beliefs, I don’t see Christianity becoming any less dominant than it has been in the past. Possibly in other countries religion could diminish, as it already has in many countries, to the point where it doesn’t even matter anymore, but religion will never completely and truly die out until humans die out. It’s in human nature to create things to believe in, to have something that explains the unexplained and the unknown. The only difference between now and back when religions were first created is that fewer people actually care and wonder anymore. But the large majority still does.

This practice of polygamy is something that we, in our culture, are not used to, even though polygamy still exists in the United States. Polygamy, however, is seen more often than not, as one man with several wives; not the other way around as in this video. The practicality of it is very easy to see, though, because of the knowledge that especially in Asian countries, female children were less desirable than men; obviously that planning, like in China and India, has backfired in the long run. Although the whole practice might be seen with shock since it is a taboo in our culture, the necessity and practicality of the practice makes people readily understand the nature of it. Because of the lack of space and resources in places like India, brothers sharing the same wife promises the lack of dividing of land and property, ensuring the wealth stays within the family, and provides better stability. In contrast to polygamy where it’s one husband and several wives, this other type of polygamy is more stable because the wife can become pregnant only so many times; the practice in itself becomes a form of birth control.

Another reason in the video that shows the pros for this type of polygamy is that for the future of these developing countries with such large populations and lack of gender proportions, this practice will help advance knowledge and population stability within the country. With less children, especially less boys, it will be easier to educate them and there will be less emphasis on trying to get a male child to be their heir. This practice will also balance out the unbalance between the genders, hopefully, and, as stated in the video, in maybe one or two generations, these types of marriages won’t be necessary.

What struck me the most, however, is the fact that these people were happy in their situation. To them, it has become the norm. There isn’t the same level of drama and problems as in normal marriages nor as in the other type of polygamy and these families seemed genuinely happy with their lives. To us, it might seem odd because “love” is something irrelevant here. But to them, it’s practical, it makes life easier, and it automatically makes a family unit that they can all depend on and grow to if not love, respect and understand each other.

Such high pregnancy rates are quite alarming in this current age because of so many preventative measures that are so readily available to the public. I personally don’t think that there is any excuse for teenage pregnancy, because although there isn’t a lot of sex education available in many schools (both public and private), many things are just common sense; either the girl should be on birth control or condoms should be used. However, more sex education should be available in schools instead of just relying on abstinence because then there would really be no excuse for such a high level of pregnancies throughout the country.
The whole object of freedom and how it relates to this particular scenario really emphasizes the “invisible strings” that are attached to every human being. Obviously these girls have the free will to decide whether to get pregnant or not, because not all of these could possibly be accidental pregnancies. Like the Lifetime movie the Pregnancy Pact, these girls could easily have been peer pressured or coerced into becoming pregnant along with other girls, their friends, because of societal pressures or because they think it’s socially acceptable to do so. The school itself doesn’t help any matters with the amount of aid it gives to pregnant students, almost making it seem encouraging and acceptable for girls to become pregnant in school.
In the Pregnancy Pact, a group of girls agree to all become pregnant because they all feel that it will make them appear cool and want to have their children all grow up together. Their perceptions of reality are all skewed and the group of girls even pressure one of their friends to become pregnant by pressuring her boyfriend to complete the deed. While the events in the Pregnancy Pact aren’t factually inspired by actual events, but more from the rising levels of teen pregnancy throughout the country, meaning that high amounts of teenage pregnancy is a national problem not just in certain areas, it does show the sociological aspects of what is happening the school and how the girls aren’t necessarily “free” to do whatever they choose.

Humans are not only very social creatures, but are quick to adapt and change according to any circumstances. In most cases, that's a good thing, but when it comes to social pressures, people want to be accepted and don't want to be the oddball not following a certain trend. The video was very funny to watch and illustrated the concept really well. You would think that with something so ridiculous that the individuals being tested wouldn’t be swayed; or at least I would like to think that I personally wouldn’t had I been the person being tested, but it’s obvious from the video that people conform to society a lot more than previously thought. It’s so common to see people following trends especially when it comes to something like fashion or other things that attest to personal taste and views, people can be easily swayed to share the views of the majority. The video echoes the video we saw in class today with the subject being tested with a group of actors and the survey with the length of the lines. At first he tried to resist, but after several turns of being the only individual, he changed his answers to match those from the rest of the group. Although many people think that they are individuals and rebels and not prone to care what other people will think about them or change their views based on other’s opinions, we as humans are predisposed to alter ourselves to be more in common with the majority. We don’t like to stand out and have to take responsibility for any consequences our actions would bring in being the one person that is different. Humans pride ourselves with the claim that we are all individuals and have the freedom to think, to believe, and to choose everything. We are adaptable, but highly self conscious creatures as well. We don’t necessarily have those freedoms that we think we do, because we’re so effected by everyone and everything else in our world. Society, people and our experiences shape us to try to be part of a whole.

Obviously everyone has different morals based on their own experiences, life stories, and environment. This prisoner obviously could have different perspectives and "moral compass" due to his own past and for being in prison surrounded by other criminals for so long. Obviously this person has set up his own moral compass and way of life, not merely what to do or not to do. Many people would agree that there is a set of societal standards and what is acceptable. But these don’t necessarily make up a moral compass. These standards are set by people and what they think is acceptable and there really is no excuse to not make the right moral decision no matter what their background or history is. Yes, there can be invisible strings that will make you more inclined to make the wrong decision, but in the end you still have the power to make the right choice and follow your own set of morals, or at least the ones that society deems suitable.

Although people that join the military are stereotypical those with no other choice or futures, there are still quite a number of soldiers that join from a sense of duty and love of their country. Regardless, the USA military is composed of hundreds of thousands of individual minds and people coming from different backgrounds and places in life. Not everyone in the military has come from lower standards of living or come from dysfunctional families and lifestyles. These soldiers go oversees in the name of our country to promote and spread the idea of freedom to others. Yes, they see and experience many horrible things while they are away: death, destruction, suicides, countless of innocent victims and blood. All of these things can obviously effect any normal person; being constantly exposed to these things can change the mentality of a person. The question is, everyone is predisposed to suicide due to societal expectations and "invisible strings" so why are these soldiers committing suicide different than any other person contemplating suicide? Their experiences can obviously change someone, (an example from the media would be Owen Hunt's character in Grey's Anatomy who has nightmares and survivor's guilt from his tour in Iraq) but in the long run does it really effect their thoughts on suicide or were these soldiers just coincidentally already those that would have committed suicide already? Maybe these people that enlisted in the military were already predisposed to suicide and it wouldn't have mattered whether they were soldiers or not. Experiences can obviously effect people's thoughts and personalities, the way they think and act, but how much of it is really due to those experiences altering the mind, and how much of it is from those little "invisible strings" that have already determined what the future lies in store?

soc001