Affirmative Action/Reverse Racism

Affirmative Action is not only unfair, it's completely unconstitutional. Setting quotas that benefit people ONLY based on race is hardly appropriate. I think at one point AA was a good thing, but it's crossed a line that it never needed to, and now whites are being discriminated against. AA is not about equality, it's about treating certain people better, and giving them benefits because of their race.

AA has two major drawbacks. First, it is a source of some reverse discrimination, in that those most suited to a position can be passed over because of their skin colour (in this case, white). Second, it leads to the conception that any coloured person who gets a job or a position did so only because of AA, not because of any talent that coloured person might have.
There is a problem in America (and Canada as well), in that a disproportionate number of minorities are poor, in prisons, unable to attend college, etc. but I don't think AA is the best way to solve it.

But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

I became a lot less angry with this policy when I realized that students can also get points toward admission for coming from certain parts of the country. If a university can promote geographic diversity, why not racial diversity?

The Bush Administration is right in saying it is unconstitutional because it is. I just hope they apply the same non-bias aproach to section 8 which is basicly affirmative action for girls.

-Nicholas

I think in this day and age that racial disrimination has gone away, for the most part. I think today the "discrimination of choice" is cultural discrimination. I think people in this country have more or less gotten over the color of skin. It is now more about the culture.

As much as I love America I admit that there are some people who wouldn't want me to work for them because of my race. But so what, I know that I am the better person and their worse off without me. I don't see the need for federal involvement. AA has always been insulting to me, as though I needed someones help. Some girls wouldn't want to go out with me because of my race. So what? To the left I say get over it.

-Nicholas

Originally posted by Cammie
Affirmative Action is not only unfair, it's completely unconstitutional. Setting quotas that benefit people ONLY based on race is hardly appropriate. I think at one point AA was a good thing, but it's crossed a line that it never needed to, and now whites are being discriminated against. AA is not about equality, it's about treating certain people better, and giving them benefits because of their race.

Click to expand...

AA has nothing to do with quotas, Cammie.  Quotas are illegal, and no one defends them.

Try learning about AA first, before discussing it.  Either that, or go back and re-read what Brimshack and I told you earlier.  It's still true, even though you want to ignore it.

Now, just wondering, all those who get prefrential admissions treatment into college based on legacy, is this affirmative action as well?

Originally posted by Doctrine1st
Now, just wondering, all those who get prefrential admissions treatment into college based on legacy, is this affirmative action as well?

Click to expand...

You mean by being related to an alumni?  That's preference by family relation.  Has nothing to do with test scores, or academic performance.

Funny how the conservative crowd never complains about that. 

And that's how Dubya got into Yale, by the way - his father was an alumni.  Dubya himself didn't have the grades or the test scores to get in otherwise. 

PS - There's a clue for you, blindfaith, as to how "intelligent" this president is.

Originally posted by Sauron
AA has nothing to do with quotas, Cammie.  Quotas are illegal, and no one defends them.

Try learning about AA first, before discussing it.  Either that, or go back and re-read what Brimshack and I told you earlier.  It's still true, even though you want to ignore it.

Click to expand...

Stop insulting my intelligence. I know all about AA. And illegal or not, quotas are in place in many institutions.

I know all about AA; I've experienced it firsthand. Nothing better than experiencing something for yourself!

 

Originally posted by Sauron
You mean by being related to an alumni?  That's preference by family relation.  Has nothing to do with test scores, or academic performance.

Funny how the conservative crowd never complains about that. 

And that's how Dubya got into Yale, by the way - his father was an alumni.  Dubya himself didn't have the grades or the test scores to get in otherwise. 

PS - There's a clue for you, blindfaith, as to how "intelligent" this president is.

Click to expand...

Okay, you can't debate without insulting anybody. As far as I'm concerned, this conversation is done.

Originally posted by Cammie
Stop insulting my intelligence. I know all about AA. And illegal or not, quotas are in place in many institutions.

Click to expand...

You made a lot of mistakes in your posting to Brimshack.  And here as well. 

So when it comes to AA, I'm not insulting your intelligence.  I'm just telling you that you simply don't know what you're talking about.  It's not the same thing.

I know all about AA; I've experienced it firsthand. Nothing better than experiencing something for yourself!

Click to expand...

No, you haven't experienced it first hand.

Originally posted by Cammie
Okay, you can't debate without insulting anybody. As far as I'm concerned, this conversation is done.

Click to expand...

 

Huh? Wha..? where is there an insult?????

Originally posted by Sauron
You mean by being related to an alumni?  That's preference by family relation.  Has nothing to do with test scores, or academic performance.

Funny how the conservative crowd never complains about that. 

And that's how Dubya got into Yale, by the way - his father was an alumni.  Dubya himself didn't have the grades or the test scores to get in otherwise. 

PS - There's a clue for you, blindfaith, as to how "intelligent" this president is.

Click to expand...

Although there is no way I can prove it, but somehow I would think that there are far more people who were admitted because they had the right name or the right connections rather than the right race. But as you have said, not a peep.

Some 20 years ago, the Boston Police Dept issued the Sergeants exam. Promotions were then awarded to the top minority scorers, not the top scores, but the top minority scores.
This is but one example of a system gone awry.

The idea behind affirmative action was equal opportunity, not highly selective and catered to certain groups opportunity.

I agree with the goals of Affirmative action. The statistics regarding education and job opportunity for minorities shouldn't be news to anyone. However, I am not sold on affirmative action, because I feel that it benefits one group by alienating another thus inadvertantly creating more friction.

However, one thing that is painfully obvious is the underfunding of schools with primarily minority students. Though it is true that these schools tend to be in poorer communities, it seems to me that if the schools are funded by the government, they should all be on par with other state funded public schools.

The problem is that it's much easier to give minority students, regardless of whether or not they went to a below average High School or not, priority when trying to get into college. BUt then it gets really tough because their high schools were pitiful and they spend their first year playing catch-up.

Cenimo's example is the form of Affirmative action that I have the biggest problem with. When people are immediately excluded or eliminated because of race, we are stepping back in time 60 years. To eradicate racism in this country, we have to eliminate any catalysts that may cause friction. When you're talking about careers and job opportunity, you can't find a much bigger catalyst.

As far as reverse racism. I think that that is a dangerous term and should not be actually considered an issue. Racism is racism. I used to think the same way, but after talking to quite a few people about the issue (especially those of other races) I realized that racism towards whites is not much newer than racism toward other racial groups that are consider minorities in the US.

FIghting racism doesn't mean just fighting any injustice toward your race, but injustices toward any race, while maintaining a sense of balance. People who are overly sensative about their race are just turning up the heat on a pot that's been close to boiling over for hundreds of years.

I think that our selfish pride and insecurities are what cause this sort of tension to remain throughout all of the blood and tears shed to eliminate racial tension. Either stop collectively referring to a race altogether, or figure out a way to harmoniously embrace racial and cultural diversity.

I'm going off on a tangent now... Basically, what I'm saying is that the term reverse-racism seems to be just another catalyst for both minorites and whites... because it implies that racism toward ethnicities other than caucasians is natural.

Zach

PS - There's a clue for you, blindfaith, as to how "intelligent" this president is.

Click to expand...

You're not too quick to learn anything, are you Sauron.  Haven't you caught on to the fact that when you insult people you get warnings?  Hello?  Knock it off and grow up.  You're slinging the same garbage at Cammie too, and it's not just unecessary, it's childish.

Sauron

Thanks. Affirmitive action- treating all equally - and you suport that, and jump all over people. I rest my case, no one here could have brought up a better example of how it really works.

sic semper tyrannus

Originally posted by blindfaith
You're not too quick to learn anything, are you Sauron.  Haven't you caught on to the fact that when you insult people you get warnings?  Hello?  Knock it off and grow up.  You're slinging the same garbage at Cammie too, and it's not just unecessary, it's childish.

Click to expand...

This is not true.  You asked a question about Bush's qualifications in another thread.  I responded in this thread, since there was a connection to the topic in this thread.

I also said nothing about Cammie's intelligence.  I said that she did not know what she was talking about.

Someone can be very intelligent, but be totally wrong and/or never studied the topic at hand.  Saying someone doesn't know what they're talking about is NOT the same as saying that they are unintelligent.