Affirmative Action?

[micfranklin]

Personally, I am against affirmative action (and I'm black too), but I would like to know where everyone else on this forum stands in affirmative action.

[BoogyMan]

Affirmative action is a policy program that has been described as positive descrimination. I find it reprehensible. To try and redress the social sickness this country has dealt with in the past with another form of the same seems to me to be counter-productive and hypocritical.

[Buck Laser]

It's always been interesting to me that opponents to affirmative action don't really know much about it--except that they don't like. Affirmative Action began some thirty-odd years ago when federal employers, college recruiters, recruitment people generally began to find that they weren't finding as many qualified applicants for available jobs as they knew statistically were out there. The Congress, aided and abetted by those sterling characters from the South, rushed to make AA available to EVERYONE, figuring that's make everyone see how silly the idea really. And guess what happened: not only did black men make signifiicant gains as they entered higher employee ranks, but it did a Great Thing in opening most jobs to people regardless of sex. Just look at med school and law school enrollments today if you want proof.

Personally, I've always found that the bitterest opponents of AA have always been people who've feared that they wouldn't be about keep a job if they had to compete on equal footing with women and minorities. There is just an appalling number of sub-standard white men out there who know that the only reason that they're able to have a job is because they've never had the opportunity to compete on a level playing field. In the Bush administration, General Powell and Dr. Condoleezza Rice have been his most notable hires.

No employment system guarantees a level playing field. You just have to do the best you can in the hope that you will attract the highly qualified candidates that you know are out there.

[wonder cow]

The question I ask myself is this:

If not for affirmative action, will qualified minorities be fairly represented in numerous categories?

The only truthful answer to that question is no. I support the gist of affirmative action (not always the specific implementation) until I can answer yes to the above question.

[micfranklin]

I'm against AA because for one it's based on a race over skill principle and goes directly against "equal treatment under the law" i.e. the 14th Amendment

[Elrathin]

There is just an appalling number of sub-standard white men out there who know that the only reason that they're able to have a job is because they've never had the opportunity to compete on a level playing field.


And now, because of AA there are a number of sub-standard minorities out there who know the only reason that they're able to have a job is because they DON'T have to compete on a level playing field thanks to AA.

It works both ways. When a black guy and a white guy apply for the same job and the black guy gets it just because he is black, is that right? No, of course not and that is what we are seeing today as well.

[Cobra]

I'm against AA because for one it's based on a race over skill principle and goes directly against "equal treatment under the law" i.e. the 14th Amendment
That's about why I'm against it.

[micfranklin]

There is just an appalling number of sub-standard white men out there who know that the only reason that they're able to have a job is because they've never had the opportunity to compete on a level playing field.


And now, because of AA there are a number of sub-standard minorities out there who know the only reason that they're able to have a job is because they DON'T have to compete on a level playing field thanks to AA.

It works both ways.Â*Â* When a black guy and a white guy apply for the same job and the black guy gets it just because he is black, is that right?Â*Â*No, of course not and that is what we are seeing today as well.


When you look at it like that, they're pretty much taking the easy way out.

[BoogyMan]

It's always been interesting to me that opponents to affirmative action don't really know much about it--except that they don't like.

How is it that you know that those who have a problem with affirmative action have little knowledge of it? Thats pretty broad and arrogant dismissal Buck.

[AlonzoMourning23]

They don't seem to know much about it. Boogy, the majority of anti AA people here tend to think "You were the best lawyer at your firm and this other guy is black. He failed his bar exam 3 times and then passed, but he's black. Sorry, we're going to have to go with the black guy".

By and large all it is is taking two candidates, both equal or one having a small advantage over the other, and taking the minority candidate.

[wonder cow]

By and large all it is is taking two candidates, both equal or one having a small advantage over the other, and taking the minority candidate.

Correct. Also, this applies only to government positions or positions closely tied to government money, like some contractors etc.

Affirmative action does not apply in the private sector.

In most cases today, potential employees are graded by a personnel office based on the scoring of their application. Minorities are given a few extra points. But then, a list of the top 10 or 20 or so candidates are forwarded to the supervisor who is hiring and the top few all have the same chance going into the interview.

[Oedipus Rex]

AA is discrimination. There's no two ways about it. Those who use AA are themselves practicing racism, sexism, etc.



Another pet peeve is when blacks refer to themselves as African Americans. Here's the worst part of it, folks actually think all African American is black???? When did the term change its meaning to reflect a person's skin color?

[wonder cow]

AA is discrimination. There's no two ways about it.

Of course it is. And?

Those who use AA are themselves practicing racism, sexism, etc.

No. Unless you can show that white males hold a less than fair share of government employment or that the statistics show unfair discrepancies in other areas covered by AA.

[Oedipus Rex]

AA is discrimination. There's no two ways about it.

Of course it is. And?

Those who use AA are themselves practicing racism, sexism, etc.

No. Unless you can show that white males hold a less than fair share of government employment or that the statistics show unfair discrepancies in other areas covered by AA.


It violates the 'equal protection' clause.

I don't have to show anything. Its up to the person who thinks they're being discriminated against to prove the discrimination. Why is everything upside-down and back-asswards with the Left?

[Stoner]

Affirmative Action is a horrible idea.

[lily]

When this was on the ballot here in Michigan, I couldn't believe the scare tactics that they used. Half the commercials didn't even say what the prop. was for. One add said if this passed, women would be denied mammagrams!

[firefox]

Check this out, guys: Spend more time finding the right people, regardless of ethnicity, sex, etc! What a concept, eh? We don't need AA if the time and effort is put in on a voluntary basis 8-).

[Oedipus Rex]

When this was on the ballot here in Michigan, I couldn't believe the scare tactics that they used. Half the commercials didn't even say what the prop. was for. One add said if this passed, women would be denied mammagrams!


AA has been eliminated here in Kallifornia as it pertains to college admissions.




AA is a free ride for those who'd rather not compete intellectually but would rather get a 'pass' based upon their ethnicity. Its almost as if they're saying 'yeah, my race/gender is not as smart as others'. It also taints those who've worked hard to achieve great things in life. Let's face it... Colin Powell is viewed by some as an AA case. How can any minority proved their self-worth when AA colors the opinions of their peers?

[lily]

AA has been eliminated here in Kallifornia as it pertains to college admissions.

Tht's also how it got on the ballot here.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?

[Oedipus Rex]

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?




That's how I see it. The message is that one race/sex is smarter than another.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Funny, I don't see how recognizing the reality that one group is overrepresented in desirable jobs and fields says anything about one being better.

It's about realizing there's a problem with the structure of society, not closing your eyes and pretending it will go away.

[Oedipus Rex]

Funny, I don't see how recognizing the reality that one group is overrepresented in desirable jobs and fields says anything about one being better.

It's about realizing there's a problem with the structure of society, not closing your eyes and pretending it will go away.




There's no such thing as a 'level playing field'. AA is legalized racism and sexism.

[Stoner]

It's about realizing there's a problem with the structure of society, not closing your eyes and pretending it will go away.


There'a a problem? Really? Are you sure?

Playing the racism card everytime you don't get a job is why AA is around.

Instead of whining about not getting a job one would be better off improving your skills as a worker.

Then again it's just easier to play the race card. No self-responsibility required.

[AlonzoMourning23]

There's no such thing as a 'level playing field'. AA is legalized racism and sexism.


You seemed perfectly ok with legalized racism in the other thread. ;)

But, it is a policy that is designed to counteract the social racism that is there.

There'a a problem? Really? Are you sure?

Playing the racism card everytime you don't get a job is why AA is around.

Instead of whining about not getting a job one would be better off improving your skills as a worker.

Then again it's just easier to play the race card. No self-responsibility required.

So you honestly believe that if white guy Edward Burns and black girl Shaniqua Mbeke walk into a job interview, both harvard grads with equal academic and professional qualifications, they have an equal chance of getting that job, no matter who is doing the interview? Or does, on average, Edward Burns stand the better chance?

[Elrathin]

Funny, I don't see how recognizing the reality that one group is overrepresented in desirable jobs and fields says anything about one being better.

It's about realizing there's a problem with the structure of society, not closing your eyes and pretending it will go away.


Alonzo, I like you on most of your opinions, but this one, I think your misguided.

Let me pose two situations that I think would happen with AA:

A black guy is slightly overqualified than a white guy, the black guy gets the job.

A black guy is slightly under-qualified than a white guy, the black guy get the job.

Do you see a problem with he second situation?

Now second question. If a white guy is slightly under-qualified than black guy, the white guy gets the job, would you see a problem with that?

No matter how you look at it, AA is discrimination.

[wonder cow]

It violates the 'equal protection' clause.

(What doesn’t?)

No. Actually it provides for equal protection.

I don't have to show anything. Its up to the person who thinks they're being discriminated against to prove the discrimination. Why is everything upside-down and back-asswards with the Left?

You stated that AA was racist/sexist policy. I simply asked you for evidence that supports your claim. If it is racist/sexist, then this should be apparent in the relevant statistical data.

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?

No.

Minorities in our country have historically been held back based on race, ethnicity, etc. Don’t underestimate the impact of this.Therefore, the majority of people in positions to make hiring decisions are white males.

Take two equal candidates: one is white, one is black. The person doing the hiring is white. Even if the person doing the hiring is not racist or overtly prejudice, there is a tendency for people to associate and favor people more like themselves, with similar culture, etc.

Is there any doubt that before AA, qualified minorities were passed over for less qualified whites? I mean, please. It’s not exactly ancient history.

[Stoner]

So you honestly believe that if white guy Edward Burns and black girl Shaniqua Mbeke walk into a job interview, both harvard grads with equal academic and professional qualifications, they have an equal chance of getting that job, no matter who is doing the interview? Or does, on average, Edward Burns stand the better chance?


They have equal chances assuming they have identical skills and goals.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

It's about realizing there's a problem with the structure of society


Exactly, AA IS a problem with the structure of society. Stamp out racism now!

[Sherri]

Let's try to remember the words of the late Gerald Ford, and try to honour his beliefs;

http://www.ford.utexas.edu/LIBRARY/SPEECHES/990808.asp

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

So you honestly believe that if white guy Edward Burns and black girl Shaniqua Mbeke walk into a job interview, both harvard grads with equal academic and professional qualifications, they have an equal chance of getting that job, no matter who is doing the interview? Or does, on average, Edward Burns stand the better chance?


Does ed burns look like dick cheney and shaniqua look like halle berry?

So you are saying good looking people should be forced to "ugly betty" themselves, smart people should wear headsets that give them occassional bursts of high pitched sounds to disrupt their thoughts, strong and fast people should beweighed down so they are equal to couch potatoes?

What a wonderful world you would build us!

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

Let's try to remember the words of the late Gerald Ford, and try to honour his beliefs;


Why?

[Sherri]

Let's try to remember the words of the late Gerald Ford, and try to honour his beliefs;


Why?

If for no other purpose, than to show respect for the dead and an honourable man who served this country during a very trying time.

[Oedipus Rex]

It violates the 'equal protection' clause.

(What doesn’t?)

No. Actually it provides for equal protection.

I don't have to show anything. Its up to the person who thinks they're being discriminated against to prove the discrimination. Why is everything upside-down and back-asswards with the Left?

You stated that AA was racist/sexist policy. I simply asked you for evidence that supports your claim. If it is racist/sexist, then this should be apparent in the relevant statistical data.

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?

No.

Minorities in our country have historically been held back based on race, ethnicity, etc. Don’t underestimate the impact of this.Therefore, the majority of people in positions to make hiring decisions are white males.

Take two equal candidates: one is white, one is black. The person doing the hiring is white. Even if the person doing the hiring is not racist or overtly prejudice, there is a tendency for people to associate and favor people more like themselves, with similar culture, etc.

Is there any doubt that before AA, qualified minorities were passed over for less qualified whites? I mean, please. It’s not exactly ancient history.


Here ya go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_discrimination

Reverse discrimination includes discriminatory policies or acts that benefit a historically socio-politically non-dominant group (typically women and minorities), at the expense of a historically socio-politically dominant group (typically men and majority races). Reverse discrimination is itself a form of discrimination.

Particularly in the U.S., the term is used to imply that affirmative action policies lead to under-qualified members of minority groups are being hired and promoted instead of more qualified members of majority groups. [1] [2] [3], [4], [5]. Similary, in India, the term is often used by the citizens protesting against reservation and quotas.

It is worth noting that in particular, racial quotas for collegiate admission were held to be unconstitutional in the United States, although non-quota race preferences are legal.

Many legal cases involving claims of "reverse discrimination" are settled before they go to court.





More in the link but I don't want to paste so much info here. I'll let you do your own homework.

[Sherri]

Does anyone, in their right mind, think George W. Bush was accepted into Yale when he could not make the grade to get into U.-Tex. ? The only reason he was accepted was because both his father and grandfather were alums at Yale. Is anyone against this form of AA ? You see once you "stack a program" for alum children, and jobs where the job can be a legacy job, you are cutting out a chance for someone to truly prove themselve on the job, and that is all that AA does. It opens the door for others, who may be as capable (or moreso) than you are.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

If for no other purpose, than to show respect for the dead and an honourable man who served this country during a very trying time.



Why? Why not quote James Brown, he was elected president as often as Ford was.

[Oedipus Rex]

Does anyone, in their right mind, think George W. Bush was accepted into Yale when he could not make the grade to get into U.-Tex. ? The only reason he was accepted was because both his father and grandfather were alums at Yale. Is anyone against this form of AA ? You see once you "stack a program" for alum children, and jobs where the job can be a legacy job, you are cutting out a chance for someone to truly prove themselve on the job, and that is all that AA does. It opens the door for others, who may be as capable (or moreso) than you are.


You're complaining about one person when there are thousands upon thousands who are denied a college education because of AA.



I propose we start a United Caucasin College Fund. You know, to mirror the United Negro College Fund. Oh wait, I forgot... that would be racist.

[Sherri]

Does anyone, in their right mind, think George W. Bush was accepted into Yale when he could not make the grade to get into U.-Tex. ?Â*Â*The only reason he was accepted was because both his father and grandfather were alums at Yale.Â*Â*Is anyone against this form of AA ?Â*Â*You see once you "stack a program" for alum children, and jobs where the job can be a legacy job, you are cutting out a chance for someone to truly prove themselve on the job, and that is all that AA does.Â*Â*It opens the door for others, who may be as capable (or moreso) than you are.


You're complaining about one person when there are thousands upon thousands who are denied a college education because of AA.



I propose we start a United Caucasin College Fund. You know, to mirror the United Negro College Fund. Oh wait, I forgot... that would be racist.

One person, of many alums can equate to alot of people who are deemed unable to get into another lesser school.

And your comments regarding starting a U.C.C.F. do equate to racism, when you do not even stop to think that the CRA and VRA were first signed in 64.

[Oedipus Rex]

Does anyone, in their right mind, think George W. Bush was accepted into Yale when he could not make the grade to get into U.-Tex. ? The only reason he was accepted was because both his father and grandfather were alums at Yale. Is anyone against this form of AA ? You see once you "stack a program" for alum children, and jobs where the job can be a legacy job, you are cutting out a chance for someone to truly prove themselve on the job, and that is all that AA does. It opens the door for others, who may be as capable (or moreso) than you are.


You're complaining about one person when there are thousands upon thousands who are denied a college education because of AA.



I propose we start a United Caucasin College Fund. You know, to mirror the United Negro College Fund. Oh wait, I forgot... that would be racist.

One person, of many alums can equate to alot of people who are deemed unable to get into another lesser school.

And your comments regarding starting a U.C.C.F. do equate to racism, when you do not even stop to think that the CRA and VRA were first signed in 64.


AA is racism. It even goes against what MLK believed. You remember his 'I Have A Dream' speech?

This world isn't a fair place and there's no way to 'level the playing field' without using racism/sexism to do it. Even then, you're still 'punishing' those who've done nothing, with racist/sexist AA policies. Who'll level that playing field???

[micfranklin]

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?


Where'd you get that from? That's not what we're saying.

[Sherri]

Does anyone, in their right mind, think George W. Bush was accepted into Yale when he could not make the grade to get into U.-Tex. ?Â*Â*The only reason he was accepted was because both his father and grandfather were alums at Yale.Â*Â*Is anyone against this form of AA ?Â*Â*You see once you "stack a program" for alum children, and jobs where the job can be a legacy job, you are cutting out a chance for someone to truly prove themselve on the job, and that is all that AA does.Â*Â*It opens the door for others, who may be as capable (or moreso) than you are.


You're complaining about one person when there are thousands upon thousands who are denied a college education because of AA.



I propose we start a United Caucasin College Fund. You know, to mirror the United Negro College Fund. Oh wait, I forgot... that would be racist.

One person, of many alums can equate to alot of people who are deemed unable to get into another lesser school.

And your comments regarding starting a U.C.C.F. do equate to racism, when you do not even stop to think that the CRA and VRA were first signed in 64.


AA is racism. It even goes against what MLK believed. You remember his 'I Have A Dream' speech?

This world isn't a fair place and there's no way to 'level the playing field' without using racism/sexism to do it. Even then, you're still 'punishing' those who've done nothing, with racist/sexist AA policies. Who'll level that playing field???

I know the speech, very well.....

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA, when the only thing AA does is to open doors for all minorities. Once thru that door, everybody has to prove themselves. I know, I was one of the first 10 professional women to be hired on a F.D. I had to not only pass the written test, but I was also the only person in my academy class who was forced to take a physical endurance test before being accepted to the academy. I captained my own firehouse and if I had a daughter, I would suggest she follow the path I forged. Why limit the field ?

[Elrathin]

Why limit the field ?


AA is already limiting the field by saying you have to have so many minorities in the field, even if they are less qualified.

As I said before I think AA was needed at one time, but I don't think it is needed now everywhere, nor do I think in the future it should be allowed to exist.

AA is discrimination.

[micfranklin]

Why limit the field ?


AA is already limiting the field by saying you have to have so many minorities in the field, even if they are less qualified.

As I said before I think AA was needed at one time, but I don't think it is needed now everywhere, nor do I think in the future it should be allowed to exist.

AA is discrimination.


More like "reverse discrimination." The way it sounds, you'd think it helps solve the problem but it actually creates a bigger one.

[Oedipus Rex]

I know the speech, very well.....

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA, when the only thing AA does is to open doors for all minorities. Once thru that door, everybody has to prove themselves. I know, I was one of the first 10 professional women to be hired on a F.D. I had to not only pass the written test, but I was also the only person in my academy class who was forced to take a physical endurance test before being accepted to the academy. I captained my own firehouse and if I had a daughter, I would suggest she follow the path I forged. Why limit the field ?


So, you're saying that I feel threatened by AA?

[Elrathin]

More like "reverse discrimination." The way it sounds, you'd think it helps solve the problem but it actually creates a bigger one.


Well it did help in the beginning, but like many things, it needs to end eventually. It isn't something that is meant to last forever.

[Elrathin]

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA


I don't feel threatened by it. I am just stating a fact that it DOES discriminate and on that basis it is wrong IMO to think something like this should be permanent.

[Sherri]

I know the speech, very well.....

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA, when the only thing AA does is to open doors for all minorities.Â*Â*Once thru that door, everybody has to prove themselves.Â*Â*I know, I was one of the first 10 professional women to be hired on a F.D.Â*Â*I had to not only pass the written test, but I was also the only person in my academy class who was forced to take a physical endurance test before being accepted to the academy.Â*Â*I captained my own firehouse and if I had a daughter, I would suggest she follow the path I forged.Â*Â*Why limit the field ?


So, you're saying that I feel threatened by AA?

I'm left wondering why people want to limit the playing field for white men only, especially when we have a high number of Latinos/Latinas living in our country. I always went out of my way to have at least 2/3 Spanish speakers on my detail, to protect the general public.

[Elrathin]

I always went out of my way to have at least 2/3 Spanish speakers on my detail, to protect the general public.


So white people can't speak Spanish?

[wonder cow]

Here ya go.

No thanks. I just ate.

Reverse discrimination

No such of a thing. The term is an oxymoron, similar to “deacceleration�.

Reverse discrimination is itself a form of discrimination.

And when did I argue that AA was not discrimination? Of course it is discrimination. But it is not racist nor sexist.

Discrimination is not always a negative.

Particularly in the U.S., the term is used to imply that affirmative action policies lead to under-qualified members of minority groups are being hired and promoted instead of more qualified members of majority groups.

This is a common media generated pop-culture myth. AA never requires that an under-qualified individual be given a job.

It is worth noting that in particular, racial quotas for collegiate admission were held to be unconstitutional in the United States, although non-quota race preferences are legal.

Source? More than likely, a particular implementation of AA for college admissions was ruled to be unconstitutional and not the entire concept.

[Oedipus Rex]

I know the speech, very well.....

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA, when the only thing AA does is to open doors for all minorities. Once thru that door, everybody has to prove themselves. I know, I was one of the first 10 professional women to be hired on a F.D. I had to not only pass the written test, but I was also the only person in my academy class who was forced to take a physical endurance test before being accepted to the academy. I captained my own firehouse and if I had a daughter, I would suggest she follow the path I forged. Why limit the field ?


So, you're saying that I feel threatened by AA?

I'm left wondering why people want to limit the playing field for white men only, especially when we have a high number of Latinos/Latinas living in our country. I always went out of my way to have at least 2/3 Spanish speakers on my detail, to protect the general public.


I asked because I thought you assumed me to be white. I'm not.

[Oedipus Rex]

Source? More than likely, a particular implementation of AA for college admissions was ruled to be unconstitutional and not the entire concept.



I gave my source. If you want another, then do the footwork yourself.

[wonder cow]

I gave my source. If you want another, then do the footwork yourself.

Oh. I guess you mean the wiki article.

The way you posted it made it unclear that all that followed was from the wiki.

And I will not bother looking at the wiki article as I consider myself a more sound source than wiki. Which does not say much for wiki.

[Oedipus Rex]

I gave my source. If you want another, then do the footwork yourself.

Oh. I guess you mean the wiki article.

The way you posted it made it unclear that all that followed was from the wiki.

And I will not bother looking at the wiki article as I consider myself a more sound source than wiki. Which does not say much for wiki.




Then I guess you should be having this conversation with Wiki. That, or support your own POV with sources other than Wiki.:D

[Elrathin]

Reverse discrimination

No such of a thing. The term is an oxymoron, similar to “deacceleration�.

From Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

Main Entry: reverse discrimination
Function: noun
: discrimination against whites or males (as in employment or education)

So yes, there is such a thing.

[wonder cow]

From Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

So yes, there is such a thing.

No.

Just because some idiots started using it, then some idiot dictionary editor decided to include it in a dictionary because it became a popular term, does not make it valid.

How would discrimination work in reverse exactly?

discrimination against whites or males (as in employment or education)

That sounds like racial/sexual discrimination to me. Nothing reverse about it.

[Sherri]

I always went out of my way to have at least 2/3 Spanish speakers on my detail, to protect the general public.


So white people can't speak Spanish?


Those who can, find themselves working within the government and I mean the Feds.

[wonder cow]

Then I guess you should be having this conversation with Wiki.

So, instead of you supporting your assertions with a reliable source, I should converse with the folks at wiki and explain to them why they are a crap source?

All I really asked for were the supreme course cases you stated overturned racial quotas in college. If you don’t want to give them to me, then don’t. And suffer the consequences of officially losing this thread.

Wonder cow +1
Oedipus Rex -1

Tsk, tsk.

[Sherri]

I know the speech, very well.....

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA, when the only thing AA does is to open doors for all minorities.Â*Â*Once thru that door, everybody has to prove themselves.Â*Â*I know, I was one of the first 10 professional women to be hired on a F.D.Â*Â*I had to not only pass the written test, but I was also the only person in my academy class who was forced to take a physical endurance test before being accepted to the academy.Â*Â*I captained my own firehouse and if I had a daughter, I would suggest she follow the path I forged.Â*Â*Why limit the field ?


So, you're saying that I feel threatened by AA?

I'm left wondering why people want to limit the playing field for white men only, especially when we have a high number of Latinos/Latinas living in our country.Â*Â*I always went out of my way to have at least 2/3 Spanish speakers on my detail, to protect the general public.


I asked because I thought you assumed me to be white. I'm not.

Then people like yourself, Wardell Connerly, and Clarence Thomas see no reason for AA; athough two I named benefited greatly from it.

Colin Powell knows where he came from, appreciates his roots, and believes it would serve others in an ill manner to "pull up a ladder on a swimmer in trouble", and not aid those who can prove themselves once their foot is in the door.

[Oedipus Rex]

Then I guess you should be having this conversation with Wiki.

So, instead of you supporting your assertions with a reliable source, I should converse with the folks at wiki and explain to them why they are a crap source?

All I really asked for were the supreme course cases you stated overturned racial quotas in college. If you don’t want to give them to me, then don’t. And suffer the consequences of officially losing this thread.

Wonder cow +1
Oedipus Rex -1

Tsk, tsk.


You're kidding, right? You really cannot be that childish can you?

[Oedipus Rex]

I know the speech, very well.....

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm

I can never understand how white men can be so threatened by AA, when the only thing AA does is to open doors for all minorities. Once thru that door, everybody has to prove themselves. I know, I was one of the first 10 professional women to be hired on a F.D. I had to not only pass the written test, but I was also the only person in my academy class who was forced to take a physical endurance test before being accepted to the academy. I captained my own firehouse and if I had a daughter, I would suggest she follow the path I forged. Why limit the field ?


So, you're saying that I feel threatened by AA?

I'm left wondering why people want to limit the playing field for white men only, especially when we have a high number of Latinos/Latinas living in our country. I always went out of my way to have at least 2/3 Spanish speakers on my detail, to protect the general public.


I asked because I thought you assumed me to be white. I'm not.

Then people like yourself, Wardell Connerly, and Clarence Thomas see no reason for AA; athough two I named benefited greatly from it.

Colin Powell knows where he came from, appreciates his roots, and believes it would serve others in an ill manner to "pull up a ladder on a swimmer in trouble", and not aid those who can prove themselves once their foot is in the door.


I'm also not black. I am an American, first and foremost. I don't accept being boxed into a racial grouping as I see it as a form of racism.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?


Where'd you get that from? That's not what we're saying.


If Blacks are as good as whites, why do they need AA? They only would need AA if they are not as good, right?

[micfranklin]

As I see the argument presented for AA, AA is needed because white people are better than other races, is that correct?


Where'd you get that from? That's not what we're saying.


If Blacks are as good as whites, why do they need AA? They only would need AA if they are not as good, right?


Because AA is discrimination, one way or the other.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

That isn't an answer to the question.

Why do blacks need AA? What is it about being black that means you you are unable to compete on the same level as whites? Is it something genetic?

[micfranklin]

That isn't an answer to the question.

Why do blacks need AA? What is it about being black that means you you are unable to compete on the same level as whites? Is it something genetic?


Well supposedly, other minorites including blacks, are seen as not equal to some people, and it's not that blacks are unable to compete, its that they are overlooked. AA was supposed to be used for making up for past problems (like slavery and bigotry) but now its only adding on to that problem.

[Oedipus Rex]

I've a question for everyone here. What ethnicity do you consider yourself.


I'll start. I consider myself an American. I don't view myself as part of any race. My father was Colombian, my mother is white, my wife is Filipino, and my son is a mixture of all the above. I don't fill out any government questionaires relating to racial background. I just leave 'em blank. I've never filled out a 'race' on any application for employment, school, loan aps, etc.

I do tend to associate more with whites than other groups but I don't identify myself as white.

[micfranklin]

I am an American person too, but I am also a black American or African-American or black person, whichever you prefer. Usually on any survey I fill out, the "race" option is optional, but I just fill it out anyway, and it doesn't bother me.

BTW I am aware of all the statistics relating to black people....

[Cobra]

Let’s see I'm white so I fill out Caucasian non-hispanic female on the test sheets for school tests. You can get in trouble for leaving them blank and they don't have an optional bubble.

[firefox]

I am an American person too, but I am also a black American or African-American or black person, whichever you prefer. Usually on any survey I fill out, the "race" option is optional, but I just fill it out anyway, and it doesn't bother me.

BTW I am aware of all the statistics relating to black people....


I'm 1/4 native american myself. I'm glad to see there are other minority/partial minority libertarians out there! Back to the topic, though, AA was originally designed to keep women down. See the SCOTUS case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_Hotel_Co._v._Parrish. This case actually relates to minimum wages, but it has been used as a precedent for other unconstitutional wage and labor controls.

[Elrathin]

Why do blacks need AA?


Are you saying that at the time of AA's creation that there was no discrimintation against minorities and blacks and that no employer looked at race first above all?

[wonder cow]

You're kidding, right? You really cannot be that childish can you?

Oh, yes I can be.

But in this case, I was joking.

Why do blacks need AA? What is it about being black that means you you are unable to compete on the same level as whites? Is it something genetic?

If you would like to ignore 300+ years of bigotry toward blacks, feel free.

AA is an attempt to correct bigotry and has been successful.

What most of you in this thread see as an ideological inconsistency hinges on the fact that all discrimination is bad. Which is not necessarily true.

[micfranklin]

You're kidding, right? You really cannot be that childish can you?

Oh, yes I can be.

But in this case, I was joking.

Why do blacks need AA? What is it about being black that means you you are unable to compete on the same level as whites? Is it something genetic?

If you would like to ignore 300+ years of bigotry toward blacks, feel free.

AA is an attempt to correct bigotry and has been successful.

What most of you in this thread see as an ideological inconsistency hinges on the fact that all discrimination is bad. Which is not necessarily true.


The definition of "discriminate" is to make judgment of a person or thing based on group, class, or appearance, for one. AA has been successful in the past but I think its just reverse discrimination and it has to go.

[Oedipus Rex]

You're kidding, right? You really cannot be that childish can you?

Oh, yes I can be.

But in this case, I was joking.

Why do blacks need AA? What is it about being black that means you you are unable to compete on the same level as whites? Is it something genetic?

If you would like to ignore 300+ years of bigotry toward blacks, feel free.

AA is an attempt to correct bigotry and has been successful.

What most of you in this thread see as an ideological inconsistency hinges on the fact that all discrimination is bad. Which is not necessarily true.


The definition of "discriminate" is to make judgment of a person or thing based on group, class, or appearance, for one. AA has been successful in the past but I think its just reverse discrimination and it has to go.


He's right. AA has been very successful at discrimination.

[wonder cow]

The definition of "discriminate"

The real meaning of the word is something like:

To make a clear distinction; distinguish

The popular usage of the word has warped its meaning.

However, no one has directly challenged my statement that not all discrimination is unethical.

He's right. AA has been very successful at discrimination.

AA helps correct a great injustice.

Really, who gives a flying piss if on a case by case basis a single individual here or there gets passed over for a job? How does that possibly compare to the institutionalized racists hiring practices in years past where qualified and skilled women and minorities were all but locked out of jobs based simply on race and sex?

The only way any of your arguments against AA can be valid is if you completely ignore the history of racism and bigotry in this country and if you are naive and ignorant enough to believe that if AA were removed minorities would not get the shaft again from what is still a disproportionate percentage of white males in positions that make hiring decesions.

[Oedipus Rex]

The definition of "discriminate"

The real meaning of the word is something like:

To make a clear distinction; distinguish

The popular usage of the word has warped its meaning.

However, no one has directly challenged my statement that not all discrimination is unethical.

He's right. AA has been very successful at discrimination.

AA helps correct a great injustice.

Really, who gives a flying piss if on a case by case basis a single individual here or there gets passed over for a job? How does that possibly compare to the institutionalized racists hiring practices in years past where qualified and skilled women and minorities were all but locked out of jobs based simply on race and sex?

The only way any of your arguments against AA can be valid is if you completely ignore the history of racism and bigotry in this country and if you are naive and ignorant enough to believe that if AA were removed minorities would not get the shaft again from what is still a disproportionate percentage of white males in positions that make hiring decesions.




Who will correct the discrimination against those who have suffered potential job losses today because of AA? Will there be some future AA for white people only?

The point is that AA is discrimination. Those who back it are sexists, racists, etc. I now have a broad brush with which to paint all your future posts.

[Elrathin]

How does that possibly compare to the institutionalized racists hiring practices in years past where qualified and skilled women and minorities were all but locked out of jobs based simply on race and sex?


So you trading one form of discrimination for another. Is that right?

Are you seriously trying to say that if AA was abolished today, that it would be just as bad as when it was first implemented? I don't think so.

There are anti-discrimination laws in effect TODAY that are enforced quite regularly, that could easily take care of racists without having AA involved.

No, I am seriously leaning towards getting rid of government sponsored discrimination all together.

[wonder cow]

Who will correct the discrimination against those who have suffered potential job losses today because of AA?

Correction of exactly what injustice there, OP? Are white males underrepresented in proportion to the population in Government positions?

The point is that AA is discrimination.

How many times do I have to say this? SO WHAT?

Discrimination does not necessarily equate to racism or sexism.

I now have a broad brush with which to paint all your future posts.

Good for you. I also have a brush. And I’m painting a picture of someone with the inability to grasp or deal with logical arguments.

So you trading one form of discrimination for another. Is that right?

Yes. All discrimination is not unethical.

One of the problems in this discussion, is the perception of inconsistency. There is no inconsistency here.

Are you seriously trying to say that if AA was abolished today, that it would be just as bad as when it was first implemented?

Pretty close. And people who don’t understand this have not seen much of the world, and/or look at it through rose colored glasses. Also, it does not require a racist to favor someone of the same culture and/or ethnicity.

There are anti-discrimination laws in effect TODAY that are enforced quite regularly, that could easily take care of racists without having AA involved.

So, as long as you have the money to hire an attorney, you can spend it to protect your civil liberties, so that you can get a job you deserved anyway because some ignorant bigot passed you over?

[Elrathin]

Pretty close. And people who don’t understand this have not seen much of the world, and/or look at it through rose colored glasses. Also, it does not require a racist to favor someone of the same culture and/or ethnicity.

Can you please show me the attitudes of today are the same as before. I don't see too many people going on T.V. saying they won't hire blacks, do you?

I don't see NEARLY the discrimination against blacks as there was before AA. Sorry, but evidence is not on your side for this comment.


So, as long as you have the money to hire an attorney, you can spend it to protect your civil liberties, so that you can get a job you deserved anyway because some ignorant bigot passed you over?


If I am discriminated against at work, I have to do the same thing. The laws are in effect, and you don't need a pricey lawyer either. There are MANY pro bono lawyers that would take up this case and not charge a thing unless they win the case and damages.

Again, AA needs to go away. Discrimination against white males is just as bad as discriminated against blacks or women.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?

[AlonzoMourning23]

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?


It seems like the sole intent of many of your recent posts is to get someone to go off on you.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

It seems like the sole intent of many of your recent posts is to get someone to go off on you.


That's your interpretation that I believe is based primarily on your bias against my politics and secondarily based on the couple times I have had to report your posts for violations of forum rules.

If you have something to say on topic, feel free to add, but as a moderator I hope you can refrain from derailing threads with off topic posts like this.

[Oedipus Rex]

Who will correct the discrimination against those who have suffered potential job losses today because of AA?

Correction of exactly what injustice there, OP? Are white males underrepresented in proportion to the population in Government positions?

The point is that AA is discrimination.

How many times do I have to say this? SO WHAT?

Discrimination does not necessarily equate to racism or sexism.

I now have a broad brush with which to paint all your future posts.

Good for you. I also have a brush. And I’m painting a picture of someone with the inability to grasp or deal with logical arguments.

So you trading one form of discrimination for another.Â*Â*Is that right?

Yes. All discrimination is not unethical.

One of the problems in this discussion, is the perception of inconsistency. There is no inconsistency here.

Are you seriously trying to say that if AA was abolished today, that it would be just as bad as when it was first implemented?

Pretty close. And people who don’t understand this have not seen much of the world, and/or look at it through rose colored glasses. Also, it does not require a racist to favor someone of the same culture and/or ethnicity.

There are anti-discrimination laws in effect TODAY that are enforced quite regularly, that could easily take care of racists without having AA involved.

So, as long as you have the money to hire an attorney, you can spend it to protect your civil liberties, so that you can get a job you deserved anyway because some ignorant bigot passed you over?


You're right. So what? You don't matter to me. You can be a racist/sexist all you like.

Now I know you to be a [edited]. Thank you.

[wonder cow]

You're right.

Thank you.

You don't matter to me.

Your statement is not relevant.

You can be a racist/sexist all you like.

I'm neither.

Now I know you to be a [edited].

You know nothing about me. But stick around.

Thank you.

Oh, you are more than welcome. If there is anything else I can do for you, let me know.

[micfranklin]

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?


Are you advocating genocide or superior race ethics?

[Oedipus Rex]

You're right.

Thank you.


You're quite unwelcome.

You don't matter to me.

Your statement is not relevant.


And neither are your opinions.


You can be a racist/sexist all you like.

I'm neither.

Did I leave a few out? Let me know which ones and I'll add them.

Now I know you to be a [edited].

You know nothing about me. But stick around.


Really, I don't care to know any more. You can play by yourself now.

Thank you.

Oh, you are more than welcome. If there is anything else I can do for you, let me know.


Yes, there is something else... when you come to your senses, please seek professional therapy. :rolleyes:

[lily]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/29/AR2006122902051.html?referrer=email

Court Backs Affirmative Action Ban In Michigan

By Tim Martin
Associated Press
Saturday, December 30, 2006; Page A11

LANSING, Mich., Dec. 29 -- A federal appeals court ruled Friday that three
Michigan universities should not have been given a six-month extension to
comply with parts of a new state law banning some public affirmative action
programs.

Michigan voters in November approved Proposal 2, which bans the use of race
and gender preferences in university admissions and in government hiring and
contracting.


The measure took effect Dec. 23, but U.S. District Judge David M. Lawson
earlier this month provided an exception for admissions and financial aid
decisions for incoming classes at the University of Michigan, Michigan State
University and Wayne State University.

A three-judge panel of the Cincinnati-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the
6th Circuit said federal law does not warrant providing an exception.
Although Lawson allowed the schools until July 1 to comply with Proposal 2,
the appellate ruling means they will be expected to comply immediately.

The universities asked for the extension because they had already begun the
admissions cycles for those students before voters approved the proposal.
Lawyers for Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm (D) and Attorney General Mike Cox (R)
signed off on the extension.

Kelly Cunningham, a spokeswoman for the University of Michigan, said Friday
night that the school is reviewing the ruling.

A pro-affirmative-action group called By Any Means Necessary is considering
appeals, lawyer George Washington said.

But Eric Russell, a University of Michigan Law School applicant who is
represented by a backer of the measure, the Center for Individual Rights,
called the ruling "a victory for all the people in Michigan who voted 'yes'
on Proposal 2."

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?


Are you advocating genocide or superior race ethics?


I don't think either choice is a fair way to resolve the issue. You think those are fair methods?

[micfranklin]

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?


Are you advocating genocide or superior race ethics?


I don't think either choice is a fair way to resolve the issue. You think those are fair methods?


Nothing about those are fair methods, or even right methods either, just ask Adolf Hitler. And plus, you happened to be the one to suggest it earlier.

[Flea_Bit_Monkey]

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?


Are you advocating genocide or superior race ethics?


I don't think either choice is a fair way to resolve the issue. You think those are fair methods?


Nothing about those are fair methods, or even right methods either, just ask Adolf Hitler. And plus, you happened to be the one to suggest it earlier.


Huh? When did I suggest either of those methods, or any unfair method?

Are you deliberately trying to misrepresent what I said like alonzo did with my statements that one could choose their sexuality? While such deliberate misrepresentation of anothers point may not break forum rules, it certainly doesn't add to a reasonable debate. I think it would be better if you stuck to the truth of what I posted.

[micfranklin]

Did you not post this?

The problem is minorities. Without minorities this debate would not exist and racial discrimination would cease.

Perhaps the best course is to figure out a fair way to rid the US of minorities?

[micfranklin]

"Equal Protection under the law" won't be a real concept as long as affirmative action stays around.