Anyone still believe in the merit of Affirmative Action?

Its not very nice to call people names when we were having a nice little discussion, from what I've seen no one agrees with you. :dis:

 

nah he is right. the idea that people should be judged on merit and not skin color is crazy. i think otherwise because i am an idiot.

 

Is it possible that people evolve to fit the situations they are in - white people are white because they weren't in the sun & the reverse is true for black people... What if, stay with me here, what if black people can run faster and jump higher because they stayed predominantly hunters & white people are smarter because they sat around inventing stuff? Then, the idea that the "playing field" will ever be equal isn't feasible w/in the next million years...

 

doesnt everyone know that?

ooops i mean you are not allowed to say that.

 

Lottery, I agree with your end, but not with your means.
On the *conservative* Supreme Court's decision holding that diversity is a reason to discriminate on the basis of race, I think its important to know why by all indications that they ruled that way.
The feel-good,, easy reason is that they bought into your argument which borders on condescension.
The real reason, in my opinion, was the amici filed by numerous retired and active military people whose brief basically said that if you have a race-neutral military, you will have an all-white officer's corps and an all-black or hispanice enlisted force.
That is what carried the day in the Supreme Court, whether you agree with that argument or not.
I think the real reasons for the discrepancies in test scores and qualifications has very little, if anything, to do with what happend over 100 years ago.
I also believe little effort, just lip service, has been given to identifying the true issues and reasons behind these discrepancies.
I don't claim to know the real *reason*, I just know that no effort has been put into identifying what and if a reason exists.
Bottom line though, is I think the focus should be on socio-economic A-A programs, rather than race based. I'm not coming out against race-based programs, but I think what advocates claim to be attempting to do could be accomplished on a socio-economic basis rather than race.
No question that this country has a history of racist policies, however, I feel discrimination and government policy has been econically based for just as long, actually longer.
I concur with the belief that Bill Cosby or Jesse Jackson's kids don't need A-A, while some poor, yet achievement oriented white kid from a poor area may very well need such help.
I also believe that as practiced today, A-A policies do not necessarily help poor black kids as much as they lock in spots for people with last names like Gore, Bush & Kennedy and wealthy blacks, to the detriment of deserving lower to middle class kids of all races.
Let me assure you of this, however, regardless of what a Court decides, what a legislature decides or what public opinion is on the is.
The universities today are absolutely and totally committed to preserving the A-A system.
In your average university administration meeting, you could stand up and announce that you like raping and then eating small children and get less of a response of disgust than if you announced you were against A-A.
Maybe extreme, but the absolute truth.

 

White people sat around inventing stuff b/c they forced slaves to do their work for their lazy incompetent behinds. As the opportunity for blacks increase, so will their stature in society. The supreme court has ruled and it's a good ruling so AA will live on. So, you can continue on your rants (except for M.O.M since you were rational) but they wont do anything b/c all you guys are close minded.

 

i sure hope this holds true....being a white boy I have been holding out for my opportunity in the NBA. Equal Opportunity for me as there are not near enough whities playing pro hoops. I want in.

 

Lottery, as I am sure you know since you are passionate about this issue, what the Court did was strike down the undergrad program which was strictly race-based and said that the law school program which used race as *a* factor was Constitutional.
The next fight is already being waged, race-based scholarships.
That's where I think my position that these programs should be socio-economic based rather than race-based will prevail.
How can one justify denying a person in need a government funded scholarship strictly on the basis of race or worse, give such a scholarship to someone who doesn't need it, and *qualifies* strictly because of their race?
I'm all for giving someone a hands-up, but only if they need it.

 

Many scholarships deal with ACT scores. Since so many black schools have poor instructors, the smart kids arent taught anything and do bad on standardized test. So, many black scholarships search for these kids to give them a chance at a good institution.

 

Maybe so. But some, I don't know about how many, of these tuition waivers or scholarships deal strictly on the basis of race.
And I think their are some bad *white* schools as well.
You seem fair-minded, you can't believe that a white kid who doesn't attend one of these suburban *rich* school districts but does well on his test scores is any less deserving of a scholarship that might exist than a black kid?
Which goes back to my socio-economic basis.
I think such a program would reach many, if not all, of the black kids you are legitimately concerend with, as well as some non-black kids who don't have all of the same opportunities that *rich* kids have whether white or black or otherwise?