Affirmative Action

[k]

But isn't it unfair that they're being unequally represented, just because blacks, by nature, have better atheletic skills?

1. PROVE whites are being unequally represented.

2. It is a myth that "blacks" by nature have better athletic skills.

 

[k]

Quite frankly, I refuse to contribute any further to this red herring NBA deal...y'all have a great night.

 

[12volt_man]

1. PROVE whites are being unequally represented.

Compare the relatively high percentage of whites in the population with the low percentage of whites in the NBA

2. It is a myth that "blacks" by nature have better athletic skills.

Actually, it's not.

Blacks, on average run a faster 40, the standard measure of speed in most sports, and have a higher vertical leap.

 

[Marek]

Quite frankly, I refuse to contribute any further to this red herring NBA deal...y'all have a great night.

This is not a red herring. Whites are under-represented in the NBA. It is legitimate to ask why liberals don't care about it.

 

[zoink]

In addition, how are we infringing on the rights of people today w/ AA?

The Government is depriving an individual of the privilege of [font=&quot]acquiring certain job.

Sincerely,
zoink[/font]

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

1. PROVE whites are being unequally represented.

The same way Affirmative Action “proves” that blacks are under-represented in employment and college – raw numbers.

2. It is a myth that "blacks" by nature have better athletic skills.

On that point, I quite agree.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

But isn't it unfair that they're being unequally represented, just because blacks, by nature, have better atheletic skills?

You do realize why this may be true in a sense, but in the grand scheme of things, farther from the truth?

 

[BrownCoat]

The Government is depriving an individual of the privilege of [font=&quot]acquiring certain job.

Sincerely,
zoink[/font]

Also, the government is depriving individuals of the choice of who they hire for their jobs.

 

[nvxplorer]

This is not a red herring. Whites are under-represented in the NBA.

If you can show that whites are being denied access to the NBA because of their race, then you will have a legitimate claim.

 

[Marek]

If you can show that whites are being denied access to the NBA because of their race, then you will have a legitimate claim.

But not all businesses deny employment because of race, yet many must adhere to AA.

 

[Lifesaver]

Affirmative action is a terrible thing. It forces universities and companies to accept people not based on any trait they value (merit, result, history, experience, personality, etc) but on an imposed arbitrary trait such as sex, skin colour, etc.

They spring from perceived statistical inequalities to propose the enforcemente of all kinds of impositions and measures of "social justice", which are nothing more than helping some at the expense of all others. So, for instance, if it is shown that blacks occupy fewer jobs of such characteristic than is their percentage in the population, companies should be forced to hire blacks as opposed to other candidates so that the statistics equalize.

This is ridiculous and unjust. Soon enough someone will prove that the percentage of top executives with no little toe on their left foot is smaller than the percentage of these men in the general population, and thus companies should favour applicants who lack their little toe.

Firms that don't make the best choices of employees are hurt in their profits; likewise, firms which make good decisions reap higher profits. The market already provides the system of reward and punishment to those managers who put their own arbitrary preferences of gender and skin colour over the company.

Every single individual is unique; no two persons are identical, though each shares many characteristics with many others. Gender, skin colour, kind of hair, eyes, head size, height, number of toes, etc, to name just some of the physical characteristics that vary among men.
To force someone to favour the posessors of this or that characteristic is absurd, immoral and harmful for society as a whole.

The best weapon against unjust prejudice of all kinds is information. With the spread of knowledge, old false opinions are discarded in favour of more reliable ones. To force companies and universities to hire and enroll contrary to their present best judgement is a great blunder.
Afterall, what if there are indeed differences between the sexes, as many studies have been showing? This is the kind of question that proponents of affirmative action want to deny at all costs, preferring imposition and coercion rather than information.

 

[nvxplorer]

But not all businesses deny employment because of race, yet many must adhere to AA.

Agreed, but AA is meant to correct institutional racism and sexism, not give particular groups unwarranted privileges. Racism and sexism in American society are not myths. We’ve come a long way, and it’s debatable whether AA is still necessary. As I’ve previously stated, I’m torn on the issue. I see merits to both sides of the argument. The NBA, however, was a ridiculous red herring. Laughable, actually.

 

[nvxplorer]

They spring from perceived statistical inequalities to propose the enforcemente of all kinds of impositions and measures of "social justice", which are nothing more than helping some at the expense of all others.

Incorrect. Affirmative action arose to combat the very real racism and sexism that was prevalent in American society.

 

[Marek]

Agreed, but AA is meant to correct institutional racism and sexism, not give particular groups unwarranted privileges. Racism and sexism in American society are not myths. We’ve come a long way, and it’s debatable whether AA is still necessary. As I’ve previously stated, I’m torn on the issue. I see merits to both sides of the argument. The NBA, however, was a ridiculous red herring. Laughable, actually.

Ridiculous - yes, red herring - no.

 

[Lifesaver]

Incorrect. Affirmative action arose to combat the very real racism and sexism that was prevalent in American society.

And what is their main weapon for campaigning for this or that special benefit to protected groups? Statistics which show the group as underrepresented on a given segment.

Sure, racism, sexism and all kinds of unjust discrimination are wrong. But the only thing we can punish is if someone has their rights violated. For instance, a black man who suffers day and night abuse from his white neihbours, or a woman who is beat by her husband. These are examples of criminal actions which stem from prejudice, and it is these that it is right to punish.

Not being hired, for whatever reason, is not grounds to demand any kind of punishment or restitution, since each company may hire according to any criteria they choose.
If I make my own shop and decide to hire only bald men, it is my right, and I'm not doing any hairy applicant any injustice by not hiring them, as who has the right to decide who gets the job, and the very existence of said job, is me.

 

[nvxplorer]

Ridiculous - yes, red herring - no.

Sure it was. Discrimination has nothing to do with NBA. Perhaps the person who brought it up didn’t mean to distract from the real issue, but that was the result. Seeing the amount of posts dedicated to it, he was fairly successful as well

 

[nvxplorer]

And what is their main weapon for campaigning for this or that special benefit to protected groups? Statistics which show the group as underrepresented on a given segment.

This is the method employed, not the source of the program. Perhaps I misunderstood you.

Sure, racism, sexism and all kinds of unjust discrimination are wrong. But the only thing we can punish is if someone has their rights violated. For instance, a black man who suffers day and night abuse from his white neihbours, or a woman who is beat by her husband. These are examples of criminal actions which stem from prejudice, and it is these that it is right to punish.

Not being hired, for whatever reason, is not grounds to demand any kind of punishment or restitution, since each company may hire according to any criteria they choose.
If I make my own shop and decide to hire only bald men, it is my right, and I'm not doing any hairy applicant any injustice by not hiring them, as who has the right to decide who gets the job, and the very existence of said job, is me.

Philosophically you are correct. The reality is quite different. Bald people have not been historically discriminated against. Blacks and women have. The government has a responsibility to society as a whole, not just business owners. For good reason, discrimination in housing and employment is illegal. These laws benefit society. If it requires that some business and property owners have to relinquish a privilege or two, so be it.

 

[praying]

Would it be equally as funny if I said that black men don't get hired for white collar jobs because they're stupid?

It might if you put a smilie. I am not easily offended.

 

[praying]

In fiscal year 2004, EEOC received 27,696 charges of race discrimination. EEOC resolved 29,631 race charges in FY 2004, and recovered $61.1 million in monetary benefits for charging parties and other aggrieved individuals (not including monetary benefits obtained through litigation). The EEOC has observed an increasing number of color discrimination charges. Color bias filings have increased by 125% since the mid-1990s, from 413 in FY 1994 to 932 in FY 2004.

That is a lot of imaginary discrimination.

ETA the 29,696 figure is decpetive because of that 68.1% were found to have no resaonble cause for action.

EEOC's determination of no reasonable cause to believe that discrimination occurred based upon evidence obtained in investigation. The charging party may exercise the right to bring private court action.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Philosophically you are correct. The reality is quite different. Bald people have not been historically discriminated against. Blacks and women have.

Plenty of studies also show that short people and overweight people are also discriminated against, and as a group earn less, than their taller, thinner counterparts. Where is the AA for these people ?

The government has a responsibility to society as a whole, not just business owners. For good reason, discrimination in housing and employment is illegal.

No problem there

These laws benefit society.

That’s very debatable. I would contend that having the government mandate hiring policies that specify race in ANY form is anything but beneficial.