Firstly I’d like to say that I feel that it’s disrespectful to people gay or not, to be referring to actions that animals do when trying to justify a “natural” action. I mean animals do all kinds of crazy things and we don’t say that natural hence we are doing it. Some animals eat their spouses, is that natural? Other animals lick their children, is that natural? I fail to see how one can justify anything by saying that hey animals do it then it must be natural and we should be able to it too.
I think we need to carefully define homosexuality before addressing the question, since there are urges that a person may have as to be attracted to the same sex but then there is also the act of same-sex sex. I believe that only the latter should be, for the sake of the argument, defined as homosexuality since someone urges or desires don’t make you what you are but it is your actions. Wanting and or desiring to eat 5 pepperoni pizzas a day doesn’t make me fat, actually doing it does. I think the distinction is very important as people might get very confused between the two and it is important in order to address the question on hand.
A lot of people tried refereeing to their religion and religious belief to justify the way they thought but I felt that a lot of people were cheating us and themselves when they tried to justify homosexuality and still say that they were believers. The fact is that religion speaks clearly about the issue of homosexuality and if you don’t agree you must justify it using whatever method you can think of. If one is to be honest with himself/herself he must decide to follow all his religion or not at all. One can’t simply pick and choose parts he likes and leave parts that he dislikes, its not a game of pick and choose it’s a reality of choice and truth. However if a religion is not fully answering one’s doubts instead of remaining confused one should seek whether another faith answers them rather than staying in the “comfort” zone. It is not logical nor right nor just that we are born with an original sin of some else even if we were babies, and in order to cleanse us another person must die for sins we committed. I mean if that isn’t a screwed notion of justice I don’t know what is!
As a Muslim I am ordered to lower my gaze and it’s not only from the opposite sex but also from the same sex. It is because God who created us knows that we are creatures that appreciate beauty no matter where it falls but our actions are the ones that we are going to be judged upon and not what we have felt like doing. It is ridiculous to say that children that are even under the age of puberty know whether they are gay or not when in fact they don’t know what they really want to be when they grow up which is a far lesser of a decision than knowing one’s sexual orientation. But that is also the thing I feel that certain environments people push to make a particular choice. I feel sad to hear about people that insist on putting themselves under that label just because they want to confirm to a category that society has given them such as the example of the girl that deceived herself to be a lesbian just to become “special”. Are homosexual not attracted to women at all?
Is it okay for a father and his adult son to have a sexual relationship? If not why so when both are consenting adults? If morals are to be brought to the discussion one needs to choose a moral structure and foundation that is unchangeable throughout history otherwise saying that society dictates morals is not a valid argument since what was not okay yesterday is okay today and what is not okay today will be okay tomorrow.

To me this was a complete no brainer. My choice would be my mother wether I like it or not. The decision is made on the premise of who has the most right upon me.

I noticed that most people's answer was to the child and they felt that he/she were the person that deserved to be saved more than any other. However I was coming from another perspective that I think a a lot of people where not thinking about or realizing.

Life and the reality of death is written is unavoidable and can not be changed even though we are commanded to strive our best to protect and preserve and help maintain it. Whether is be our health or the lives of our relatives or people we know such as close family members, neighbors or our friends. We have no right to claim that someone has died "before his time" because people only pass away when their time comes. Additionally the reason why we as society prevent people from committing suicide is in part because they are attempting to take away something that is not their's in the first place. Life is sacred and should be preserved but in a situation that was mentioned in class the best we can do is to preserve the life the deserves to be saved.

Looking at the answers one can think of several reasons for making the choice of saving the life of the person that he intendeds to save. Firstly the motivation is personal gain. What do I, can I gain from saving that person? It was understandable why a lot of people would choose to save their spouse because they are the only person they had a choice in being with opposed to a mother who you are born to, or a child that you are blessed with. It makes sense that since you choose your spouse that he/she would be the person who you get along with the most, and who would provide you with the best companionship and love and attention throughout your future life. I think this is the most selfish choice one is to make since it is a decision that is focussed on one person's needs, oneself.

Saving the child is also understandable since it is a choice of preserving an innocent life that is a noble act and that of preserving the future generation. However when looking at the situation from a broader scope what is immensely clear is the fact the one's mother has the greatest right on one's self and deserves to be treated in the manner that she deserved simply put the mother's right is above anyone and anything else.

I believe that this conversation or rather debate should go farther than just saying that actions of what women decide to wear is based on how they respect themsleves. I thank that its a valid argument that people growing aroud a culture wear revealing clothing is accepted should not be simply judged as disrespectful to themselves, not that I am defending this action.

I thing a major aspect of this disscussion that is being forggotton is what do men really want. For those thinking that women are forced to cover themsleves when in reality they are asked confirm that they do so by personal choice. Going back to my question, what do men really want? Do men really want to around girls that are coverd up or around a culture where women wear revealing clothings.

I think that hardest form of slavery to overcome is that which is by oneself on one's self. I sometimes wonder why some girls would go so far to dress in very reavleing, uncomfortable and not weather friendly clothes. I lady that is comfrtable with her body and that believes that she has a beautiful body and is confident in that statement would not wear such clothes unless she is not belieiving in this statement.

I read in previous comment as to how many girls feel sorry for the Musilm girls for wearing headscarfes and wearing modest clothes. But I wonder at the same time as to how many Muslim girls feel sorry for other girls who given the male oriented leadership in society are presenting themselves as living example to the question of what men really want.

I personally feel sorry for what the male-based culture forces women to wear in the west. Who ever said that a women is never beautiful without her revealing clothes. The reality of it is, at least ot men, all women fall into two categories; attractive or not. An attractive women need not prove anything and on the otherhand a less attractive girls, at least to shallow men; is not worth looking at. But the that cant be farther than the truth.

Sick people exist in all societs, groups and places. Spesifically Men who sexually abuse women should be punished to the full extent of the law. However I dont think that the some responisiblty should be ommited from soicety sho is responsible in advicing and eductaing young girls that provocative clothes are just that. While wearing reaviling clothes gives no one the right to touch or abuse you in any inappropriate way but the fact is that you cant play so close to the fire and not expect to be burnt. I just hope the young women come to true relisation to where thier tru beauty lies and appreciate that.

I think that people seem to over think what raceisim is and what it represents. I mean the video was making fun of people that had bad pronunciation and were struggling to comprehend the questions that were posed to them.

Why do we have to make everything about race. I mean if a blind person was listening to the show he might find it funny, but on the other we have to associate race to this issue. Does it matter that they were Asian? If it were any other race and any other person that ad the same difficulties in pronunciation and comprehension it would still be considered funny. If a french guy or an italian guy was asked the same questions and was not able to answer or gave incomprehensible answers it would still be considered funny.

The reality is by us claiming that its racist we are being racist. Why? Lets take this example. Sam visits Mexico, assuming that he struggles with his Spanish. And is interviewed by a Mexican TV channel about his visit to Mexico. An he makes a fool of himself. The show airs. Sam shares the video with class. Class finds it funny and does not find offensive at all.

My point? We have built in our image that the White race is a superior race and to make fun of it and use humor against people of that race could simply be dismissed because they are "way better" than the rest. While if it was a person from the Asian, Black or Latino race that is being made fun of, we have this built up image in our heads that these races are of lower standard and people belonging to these races are of weak and inferior quality and thus need protection and need to be defended and any insult to them or joke against them is one that reflects the truth about them and their inferiority. Thus instead of treating this as a joke and humor and making fun of other people of an EQUAL status' mistakes we create this bubble of racsim around anyone who's not white.

The fact is that in order to move on with the issue of race we need not blind ourselves but rather accept or reject others on the basis of their thoughts and contributions and not the color of their skins. If the perpetrators of a terrorists attack were all asian or all white or black should that change the we judge their action? An evil deed is and evil deed and color of one's skin can't veil the evil of the deed.We need to question our methodology of race. As Sam mentioned in class that you tend to find white people overly react to a "racist" event more than the person of color themselves. Is it because of their love or the artificial anti-racist thought in their mind.

Truth is sacred. It should be cherished and respected and every effort should be made to achieve it.

Societies and civilizations have risen and flourished by strong moral values that trumped those of their competitors and rivals. This respect to morals is the what distinguishes great societies from small ones and is also what exemplifies a way of life for Humanity to follow in. Perhaps the pinnacle of morality is Truthfulness. There are many reasons that truth is considered a vital moral for society to uphold; but perhaps the fact that lies causes deceptions, which causes false information to justify injustice in the world.

The majority if not all beliefs stress on the importance of truth and truthfulness in one's life. Yet the times that we live in are filled with acts of deceptions that misinform people and is an indirect cause to many injustices in this world. From a salesperson who lies to sell his product to the politician who does so to preserve his seat.

So when it comes to the Media and more specifically making ones mind about others. I think that its extremely important to draw some general guidelines to confirm the authenticity of the information presented.

Firstly one needs to check the media agency's news sources. Whether they report news from News agencies such as AP or they do their own investigations and research. Additionally I would look for the hosts of the various newscasts and talk shows, examine their credentials and their alliances if any that are made public. Then I would examine the guests that appear on the different shows especially the frequent ones. It is important for a credible news agency to have multiple guests that present various opinions on issues and different viewpoint but also present a true balanced perspective that is also grounded with facts and credibility of the narrator of the news.

Secondly there is the big question of where and how a news agency is funded. I would dismiss any news agency that has questionable funding. Ideally a true truthful news agency would be funded by the people and for them. However in reality the is that many if not all agencies today are funded by either corporations or governments. Every news agency today I believe has its biasses and the trick to find the truth is to determine what those biases are. Even if these weak links are its advertising partners.

As an example, I grew up watching Aljazeera and for many years it represented to me and to many Arab youth the pinnacle of professionalism and credibility. However in recent years I have been able to get a glimpse at its "biases". Knowing that the Aljazeera Corp. is owned by the Qatari royal family and keeping in mind the geo-political events that surrounds its HQ, opens ones eyes to what kind of information coming out might be untrue.

Finally I think that the main point that one needs to keep in order to maintain a objective view of the world is to have as many news sources as possible as to be able to judge various news items individually. After all a man wearing blue glasses only sees blue things. The approaches I talked about may sound extreme but even the minimalist of effort made to verify information can result in a huge change in a person's ideas and views. What is truly sad though that some people when judging certain ethnic groups, are more afraid from being called racist than being afraid of becoming a believer of falsehood.

"O ye who believe! If a wicked person comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done."
- Quran 49:6

It is quite shocking the amount of discrimination based on race that goes on. What is perhaps even greater is the fact that is rarely even talked about.

When it comes to hiring people for certain jobs I can understand when people want to hire individuals that they feel more comfortable with and feel connected with, regardless of race. However at the same time the face that a lot of people have certain misconceptions and ideas about certain races or groups of people may prevent them from giving themselves a chance to connect with them.

Discrimination in hiring might have an economical as well as an ethical side to it. When a manger decides to make the decision to hire some he is often faced with the dilemma. Does he hire the person that he clicks with the most, or does he hire the best man/women for the job? If he decides the latter he may have to "suffer" daily with a person who does a great job but is a horrible person to deal with.

When I was asked in class about my decision to hire the best person for the job, I had reservation to make a decision purely on job qualities. Race aside I think that there are factors such as social skills and perhaps even the way a person dresses that are important for the employer. Having said that this may put certain groups or races under the un-hirable zone for a certain business. But that does not necessary mean that the business itself is racist.

It is however unthinkably awful when standards are applied in the justice system to the level of treatment. Last I checked Lady Justice was blind. Yet what we observe is that the image of blacks being criminals is engraved in society so much so that judges are making racist decisions in favor of whites against blacks. These individual are supposed to be the ambassadors of justice but instead they represent the flaws of a system the promotes 21st Century slavery. The situation is even worse when a jury is introduced that is even more gullible to the idea of criminal blacks. When you have job descriptions of individuals who advice to as how to act around the jury and who to pick you know the system is wrong. It is no longer about applying justice, but rather a popularity contest where race is trump card to some while a death sentence to others.

Last I checked Lady Justice wasn't a U.S. Citizen, yet the justice system is portrayed as the perfect system applicable to all time and place. Same goes to the ruling system and way of life. If a person believes that he has a right to enforce his way of life on everyone then what would you call him? Racism may be taught to be about the color of ones skin but in reality it is much deeper than that.

As a Muslim guy I don't see my self marrying outside my faith even though its permissible in my faith to do so.

I think one has to take into account several factors when deciding on this huge decision. Even if it's one's own decision to choose one's partner, given the fact that a person ends up living with his/her partner for a long time I think it is also important to have the environment that a couple are going to live in , in perspective. Unless the couple does not decide to have children it would not be wise to ignore what their children may go through.

We covered in class how one's environment can influence the way he or she behaves and acts and also determine their future opportunities in many ways. One may argue that love has no boundaries but one has to also be realistic. With a divorce rate of 50% a person's decision to settle with a partner should take into consideration of what wood happen to their kids.

If a couple decide to get married when both families are against it there will defiantly be problems in their future together. Say they have a fight (which is bound to happen) who do you think will their respective families cite with? Moreover what would their first thought be, oh he's Asian or black that's why he/she is disrespecting our daughter/son.

It's crucial that the Couple's families are on the same page. Namely that they are not against interracial marriage. Then again some parents opinions can change.

In a society where race conflict is promoted regularly I think that any couple would enter marriage with an expectation of some kind. I don't think that they would have a completely natural relationship especially if they encountered with people that keep pulling the race card. You may find that some couples would try to prove that they are associated with a race because they at married to a member of that race. Similarly you may find people trying to preserve their own culture and associate themselves with their own race/culture to prove that they still belong to that group.

This situation may get even worse for the "interracial" children. They would be too black to be white and too white to be black as has been said about President Obama. When I heard someone calling president Obama as not really black I was really surprised as if trying to distant him from that culture. It seems that the person was a promoter of a new aryan race that needed to preserved which was alarming to me.

With these given factors I think the important part of making that decision is knowing that you can be as natural as possible with some one is the key. One should enter marriage with the expectations that they need to prove anything or that they doing a person a favor for marrying them. Now this maybe extreme but if a person should marry someone thinking that they may magically solve their insecurities.

I think that the definition of race to as it is used today is stupid, naive and bigoted. Its overly simplistic to put thousands of people under a group just because they share some biological characteristics. I mean are we animals in a zoo? Are we being studied to find how fascinating our physical features are? And whats up with the half-naked specimens that are thrown around in commercials and magazine covers?

No I refuse to allow myself or my children after me to fall in this hole. We can distinguish rocks based on shape, size and color. We can admire trees for their shapes, size and color. We can compare dogs based on their shape, size and color. Its wrong to carry that same me theology on people.

We are all aware of death. After 120 years none of us today will be walking on the face of the earth. We will be bones under the earth. It matters not then how are shape was. What color we looked. We will all be the same.

It is by one's brain that you can distinguish between people. How they think, what values they believe in and what they have accomplished. In reality a Japanese Muslim is closer to me than my non-Muslim sibling. The values that people share are stronger than features that come and go away. I mean if I painted my self white and dyed my hair blonde will I be White.

The true entity of my race lies in my heart, not my face.

I learnt a deep lesson about life and the test that it puts people through.

I learnt that a persons ending is not far from being a true reflection of who a person is. A structure of integrity and charity could easily be cracked and later demolished by the creeks of injustice and oppression. It is difficult to live a life of integrity and charity but its more difficult to maintain that life's ideals and beliefs when no one is watching.

We need to question whether a good man who says nothing and does is a indeed a good man or rather a sustainer for evil that flourishes. It easy to put blame on other when we are not in the shoes of those who are tested. But when so many of us fail the test what does that say about our society? When the teachings of 'Greed is Good' overshadow the teaches of "Treat others the way you want to be treated" what does that say about us?

Faith plays a very vital role in the true meaning of race and how it affects people thoughts. Faith does not necessary mean following a religion but rather the set of ideal that you share with people around you, them being your family, neighbors or countrymen.

An extreme example of this is the nazi propaganda that grew in the early 20th century, where people of other races where believed to be of lesser value and thus were denied their rights and prosecuted for being born they way that they were. Today we are experiencing a very similar belief where the dominant americo-european-capatilist culture is forcing itself on others be it nations or even on a individual level.

The argument that I want to present is the introduction of a different meaning to race, or rather to an individual's entity. As a muslim we are taught that one's race can not be used as a measure or and indicator of one's thoughts or beliefs or even cultural belonging. It may sound very superficial but race as it referred to today is no more than observation of different skin colors and physical features. The true measure of one belonging is not in the color of his skin that he was born with but rather the ideals that he chooses to believe in. And these ideals are present in one's heart not his face.

Islam teaches us that a person who imitates a group of people becomes part of them. When one decides to behave like a group of people and adopts their beliefs he is counted as one of them. The way I see it any individual that acts adopts the american culture, believes in the American dream and participates in society is American. Not Asian-American, not African american but American. We are all sons and daughters of Adam and Eve, we are all creatures of God, why is it that we want to differentiate our selves with pseudo-imaginary boundaries in a manner similar to the nation states.

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)." - Quran

The western-capitalist way of life is more of an identifier of a person's beliefs that his skin color. As an Arab that comes from the desert and adores his islamic culture I am offended more with people who demand me to follow their culture because they see it superior than with people who dislike me because of my skin color. As Islam expanded geographically cultures were celebrated and flourished if you don't believe me ask the Jews that lived in Islamic Spain and the Christian Copts that live in Egypt. It is only today when "Muslim" government embraced secular laws and practices that cultures were assassinated and injustice flourished. If you ask for evidence just observe devolution of architecture from ancient beauty to modern grotesque.