I never Knew so many people were against Affirmative Action...

AA is a necessary system right now, nowhere near perfect, but niether is society. But AA has plenty of flaws and not being 100% on board does not make you'racist or ignorant'
 
Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by moonmaster3

Originally Posted by ICUP

If you do not value Diversity then you will not understand the importance of AA. Its not all about having the best people statistically because then you may end up with the same people with the same experiences. Being in law school, I have seen that a group with diversity in experiences is better than a group with the same experiences.

AA just makes sure that there is diversity in experience in a work or college setting.


Can't you make a case that this is just reverse racism then? In the name of "diversity", Asians and whites, who are qualified and sometimes more qualified than the other candidates, are being denied simply because of their skin color or socioeconomic background.
eyes.gif
, if they're so over-qualified, they'll get into a good school, somewhere...

it's not like over-qualified whites and asians don't have vast opportunity.....

roll.gif
@I CANT HOST KEGGERS WITH GREG AND CHET AT THE LAMBDA HOUSE?

BUMMMMMMMERRRRRRRRR


The point isn't that they can't get into a good school, the fact that any school would do that is in my opinion, wrong. Who cares if they can get intoanother school? What if the school they got rejected to was the school they wanted to go to all their life? Because they are qualified to go to other schoolsisn't an argument to deny them admissions to any one specific school that they are qualified for but were not admitted to because of their skin color.
 
Originally Posted by moonmaster3

Originally Posted by ICUP

If you do not value Diversity then you will not understand the importance of AA. Its not all about having the best people statistically because then you may end up with the same people with the same experiences. Being in law school, I have seen that a group with diversity in experiences is better than a group with the same experiences.

AA just makes sure that there is diversity in experience in a work or college setting.


Can't you make a case that this is just reverse racism then? In the name of "diversity", Asians and whites, who are qualified and sometimes more qualified than the other candidates, are being denied simply because of their skin color or socioeconomic background.

Def. have a good point.

But then, you also have to ask yourself-- "is one's qualifications merely dependent on a set of quantitative factors-- grades, gpa, entranceexamination scores, extracurricular activities-- or does it take into account certain subjective (essentially unmeasurable) factors like one's background,history, and 'unique experience'"...This is the real question to ask...which is what ICUP was alluding to...

...
 
Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by moonmaster3

Originally Posted by ICUP

If you do not value Diversity then you will not understand the importance of AA. Its not all about having the best people statistically because then you may end up with the same people with the same experiences. Being in law school, I have seen that a group with diversity in experiences is better than a group with the same experiences.

AA just makes sure that there is diversity in experience in a work or college setting.


Can't you make a case that this is just reverse racism then? In the name of "diversity", Asians and whites, who are qualified and sometimes more qualified than the other candidates, are being denied simply because of their skin color or socioeconomic background.
eyes.gif
, if they're so over-qualified, they'll get into a good school, somewhere...

it's not like over-qualified whites and asians don't have vast opportunity.....

roll.gif
@I CANT HOST KEGGERS WITH GREG AND CHET AT THE LAMBDA HOUSE?

BUMMMMMMMERRRRRRRRR


The point isn't that they can't get into a good school, the fact that any school would do that is in my opinion, wrong. Who cares if they can get into another school? What if the school they got rejected to was the school they wanted to go to all their life? Because they are qualified to go to other schools isn't an argument to deny them admissions to any one specific school that they are qualified for but were not admitted to because of their skin color.
Its not about hiding behind diversity as another term for reverse racism. It simply is not. There is value in diversity but you may have notjust experienced it. For example, have you ever been in an all white race and politics class? What value would a class discussion be? Would you feel cheatedbecause your class has no one that has experienced what is to be a minority (race wise)? How about a Poverty and Economics class? How about a one sided AAdiscussion? There is no value in talking about things without diversity of experience and opinion.

I majored in economics and political science so I've been that token minority in those type of race discussions. Did I grow up in the ghetto, no. Is myfamily poor? no. However because of my race, I experienced things that they would never have the opportunity to experience. I analyze things through myexperiences and can enlighten them. Moreover, there is a huge difference from growing up with black parents who were immigrants from the Carribean, thangrowing up in a white family. Our cultures not only differ but our values differ also. There are differences between men and women in experiences. Somethings that are common knowledge for women are things that I as young man would never think about.

Was in college based on AA? Naw I was well qualified, but I did get a minority scholarship.
pimp.gif
If AA increases diversity then it is a good program. Also if it were not forthe government or other business pressures then most business wouldn't give a rats about hiring diverse people. For example the legal field, it wasn'tuntil big clients like Wal-mart starting saying we need your firms to be more diverse if you want to keep Wal-Mart, Inc. as your client. Then thats when youstarted seeing more firms start recruiting from black law student associations and stuff. If there was no AA then most people would not have gotten theopportunity to understand the value in diversity.
 
LOL at Dirty arguing for AA.

You do realize that the group most negatively affected by AA are Asians when it comes to grad, law, and medical schools.
Do you see why?

Also, why are people arguing over AA in terms of jobs? AA is only really practiced for government jobs and not really in the private world as much.

AA has the greatest impact when it comes to educational institutions. I'm not against it really. It's whatever.
Ninety percent of sports players in Uni's don't deserve to be there. Plenty of those that attend Ivey League schools are only there because ofdonations made by their parents or being the children of alumni.

It is what it is. I don't view it as anything terribly horrible.
 
Originally Posted by moonmaster3

Originally Posted by eNPHAN

Originally Posted by moonmaster3

Originally Posted by ICUP

If you do not value Diversity then you will not understand the importance of AA. Its not all about having the best people statistically because then you may end up with the same people with the same experiences. Being in law school, I have seen that a group with diversity in experiences is better than a group with the same experiences.

AA just makes sure that there is diversity in experience in a work or college setting.


Can't you make a case that this is just reverse racism then? In the name of "diversity", Asians and whites, who are qualified and sometimes more qualified than the other candidates, are being denied simply because of their skin color or socioeconomic background.
eyes.gif
, if they're so over-qualified, they'll get into a good school, somewhere...

it's not like over-qualified whites and asians don't have vast opportunity.....

roll.gif
@I CANT HOST KEGGERS WITH GREG AND CHET AT THE LAMBDA HOUSE?

BUMMMMMMMERRRRRRRRR


The point isn't that they can't get into a good school, the fact that any school would do that is in my opinion, wrong. Who cares if they can get into another school? What if the school they got rejected to was the school they wanted to go to all their life? Because they are qualified to go to other schools isn't an argument to deny them admissions to any one specific school that they are qualified for but were not admitted to because of their skin color.
how about getting into NO schools because of your skin color?

aka before AA....

why you think HBCU's had to be founded?

AA was instituted to right wrongs.....

it's a shame chet can't get into state u, i mean, he's wanted to go there all his life...

but it was an equal shame that james couldnt get into any school what-so-ever before the institution of AA...

now, i think that's a stupid justification of AA, so instead of the "intent" argument, i pose this to you;

If chet didn't get into State U, why does he attribute it to a black student who did get in? why doesn't he ask himself why his other countless, white,over-qualified peers get in and he didn't?

i'll even grant you the thought that under qualified black students take places from over-qualified white kids...i'll grant you that...i disagree, butwhatever, for the sake of the argument, that's exactly what happens...

If he's so over-qualified, i don't think he would have lost his place to a less qualified black kid...

if he was so over-qualified, he wouldn't be near the margin to be "replaced" by a marginal black kid

maybe, if he wanted to get into state u SOOOOOOOOOOO bad, he would have worked harder to not been in the "replace him with an under qualified blackkid" margin, right?

like i said, chet may not get into his 1st choice of schools, as over-qualified as he is, but he definitely got into SOMEWHERE...

whereas, following YOUR logic (which i disagree with) the under-qualified black kids wouldn't have the opportunity at school ANYWHERE if not foraffirmative action forcing the school that accepted him to meet a quota and accept them into the school, right?

isn't the point of AA to give otherwise hopeless individuals an opportunity?

isn't the point of AA to give underrepresented and historically repressed groups an equal opportunity?

hey, i'd love for this nation to not need AA, but for that to be reality, we would have needed the historical racial interaction of this country to beVASTLY different...

it's not reverse racism....no, that would be discriminating against ALL white students, not admitting ANY of them, telling them to their faces,"it's cause you're white...this here is a school for red-blooded black people", causing whites to create their own HWCUs and force their wayback into mainstream schools through EXTREME OVER-QUALIFICATION.....for a couple hundred years....

that would be "the same thing"

but hey, then white people could get all the AA, and it would be us over-qualified black kids getting our spots taken by under-qualified whites, right?

eyes.gif
 
Originally Posted by dmxfury

AA is a necessary system right now, nowhere near perfect, but niether is society. But AA has plenty of flaws and not being 100% on board does not make you 'racist or ignorant'
So true.
 
You do realize that the group most negatively affected by AA are Asians when it comes to grad, law, and medical schools.
I know this already.
...still doesn't change my mind about it
 
Originally Posted by eNPHAN

how about getting into NO schools because of your skin color?

aka before AA....

why you think HBCU's had to be founded?

AA was instituted to right wrongs.....

it's a shame chet can't get into state u, i mean, he's wanted to go there all his life...

but it was an equal shame that james couldnt get into any school what-so-ever before the institution of AA...

now, i think that's a stupid justification of AA, so instead of the "intent" argument, i pose this to you;

If chet didn't get into State U, why does he attribute it to a black student who did get in? why doesn't he ask himself why his other countless, white, over-qualified peers get in and he didn't?

i'll even grant you the thought that under qualified black students take places from over-qualified white kids...i'll grant you that...i disagree, but whatever, for the sake of the argument, that's exactly what happens...

If he's so over-qualified, i don't think he would have lost his place to a less qualified black kid...

if he was so over-qualified, he wouldn't be near the margin to be "replaced" by a marginal black kid

maybe, if he wanted to get into state u SOOOOOOOOOOO bad, he would have worked harder to not been in the "replace him with an under qualified black kid" margin, right?

like i said, chet may not get into his 1st choice of schools, as over-qualified as he is, but he definitely got into SOMEWHERE...

whereas, following YOUR logic (which i disagree with) the under-qualified black kids wouldn't have the opportunity at school ANYWHERE if not for affirmative action forcing the school that accepted him to meet a quota and accept them into the school, right?

isn't the point of AA to give otherwise hopeless individuals an opportunity?

isn't the point of AA to give underrepresented and historically repressed groups an equal opportunity?

hey, i'd love for this nation to not need AA, but for that to be reality, we would have needed the historical racial interaction of this country to be VASTLY different...

it's not reverse racism....no, that would be discriminating against ALL white students, not admitting ANY of them, telling them to their faces, "it's cause you're white...this here is a school for red-blooded black people", causing whites to create their own HWCUs and force their way back into mainstream schools through EXTREME OVER-QUALIFICATION.....for a couple hundred years....

that would be "the same thing"

but hey, then white people could get all the AA, and it would be us over-qualified black kids getting our spots taken by under-qualified whites, right?

eyes.gif
 
I truly feel that well-executed affirmative action will render itself obsolete - we need to end it as soon as we can, but it would be irresponsible to end itbefore it achieves its goal (a society in which today's economic realities are not reflective of past institutionalized oppression). It puzzles me when*some* white men use it as the scapegoat for their failures, because it really only helps those at the margins. No white man with perfect credentials and acompelling life story is going to be turned away in favor of a sub-par woman or ethnic minority but, just as Judge Sotomayor has said, a female or ethniccandidate with the same academic credentials as the society standard - a white male - has likely overcome greater obstacles and will bring a perspective thatis not only informed by mainstream culture, but also their own unique life experience.
 
im against it... why not start forcing NBA teams to draft women into the league and take the spots of better male players?
 
hmm.. for those against AA.

I posed this question in an older thread.
Jim Crow laws were ended in 1965.. compare that to the birth of our nation..1776...that's pretty much 190 years of racial discrimination.

I'm wholly in support of AA... but I'd say to those people who oppose it......why not keep AA for 190 years AFTER the repeal of Jim Crow laws?... so that's in 2155.

wouldn't that be somewhat fair?
 
Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

hmm.. for those against AA.

I posed this question in an older thread.
Jim Crow laws were ended in 1965.. compare that to the birth of our nation..1776...that's pretty much 190 years of racial discrimination.

I'm wholly in support of AA... but I'd say to those people who oppose it......why not keep AA for 190 years AFTER the repeal of Jim Crow laws?... so that's in 2155.
wouldn't that be somewhat fair?
good point
 
Affirmative action was a great idea and I agree it was necessary at the time.

Now the President is black. I don't see any need for affirmative action anymore.

In fact, at this point some might say it's just another form of discrimination.
 
Originally Posted by HOVKid

Affirmative action was a great idea and I agree it was necessary at the time.

Now the President is black. I don't see any need for affirmative action anymore.

In fact, at this point some might say it's just another form of discrimination.
im gonna assume that your post isnt to be taken seriously

one of the first things i commented on about Obama becoming president is the negative side effect of people getting a false sense that racism is no longer amajor issue in our country , or that AA is no longer needed
 
Originally Posted by HOVKid

Affirmative action was a great idea and I agree it was necessary at the time.

Now the President is black. I don't see any need for affirmative action anymore.

In fact, at this point some might say it's just another form of discrimination.

Wait...aren't you a lawyer or something...and you seriously THINK THIS WAY...hot damn...


roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif


...

Edit:

If your post was sarcasm, then it's the best I've seen on this board and my apologies for the subliminals...
embarassed.gif
...but if you were being serious, then...
eek.gif
x
laugh.gif
x
smh.gif



...
 
Originally Posted by Prez T

Originally Posted by HOVKid

Affirmative action was a great idea and I agree it was necessary at the time.

Now the President is black. I don't see any need for affirmative action anymore.

In fact, at this point some might say it's just another form of discrimination.
im gonna assume that your post isnt to be taken seriously

one of the first things i commented on about Obama becoming president is the negative side effect of people getting a false sense that racism is no longer a major issue in our country , or that AA is no longer needed
yeah, when obama got elected, i said to myself

"wow, we're not 'there' yet, but we're alot closer than i thought we were...."

and it's the truth.

"the president is black, aa is not needed" is a joke of a statement...

i know, instead of letting AA rock till 2155, just repeal all white american's rights for "190" years, a la Jim Crow laws?


roll.gif
then, after 190 years, when we repeal the laws, but never reallyofficially apologize, we'll give you AA until the next white man is elected....

until those things happen, stop screaming "reverse racism!" and ignoring white privilege....


roll.gif
@being alive during this election and honestly thinking racism isdead......


"he...he....he's muslim...and a terrorist..."

roll.gif
 
Originally Posted by SuperAntigen

Originally Posted by HOVKid

Affirmative action was a great idea and I agree it was necessary at the time.

Now the President is black. I don't see any need for affirmative action anymore.

In fact, at this point some might say it's just another form of discrimination.

Wait...aren't you a lawyer or something...and you seriously THINK THIS WAY...hot damn...


roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif


...
no, he's a ridiculously caked doctor, who i doubt ever lived a "humble" lifestyle....


but yeah, he SERIOUSLY thinks that way....unfortunately.
 
Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

hmm.. for those against AA.

I posed this question in an older thread.
Jim Crow laws were ended in 1965.. compare that to the birth of our nation..1776...that's pretty much 190 years of racial discrimination.

I'm wholly in support of AA... but I'd say to those people who oppose it......why not keep AA for 190 years AFTER the repeal of Jim Crow laws?... so that's in 2155.
wouldn't that be somewhat fair?

Excellent point Dirty...

...
 
Clearly rascism isn't dead, but if a black man can become President, why do we need affirmative action?

I'm Jewish. We may be the most persecuted people in the world. How come there is no affitrmative action for Jews? There are people that are rascisttoward Jews, right? The reason Jewish affirmative action doesn't exist is because Jews were not put in a position where they couldn't acheive in thiscountry. Black people were. That is a horrible thing so affirmative action was a way to solve it.

Now that black people can acheive (note: Even MORE than Jews since a Jewish person has never been President), why do we need affirmative action?
 
Clearly rascism isn't dead, but if a black man can become President, why do we need affirmative action?
It's like you ignore your own answers to your own questions.
How come there is no affitrmative action for Jews? There are people that are rascist toward Jews, right?
Cuz unlike black ppl I can't tell a jew is a jew just by looking at them. Being jewish isn't a race, you're talking aboutantisemitism. Even with that as you go on to say Jews weren't put in an impossible situation where they couldn't achieve in this country.
Now that black people can acheive (note: Even MORE than Jews since a Jewish person has never been President), why do we need affirmative action?
So you really do believe that the accompishment of one black man changes everything for all black ppl? You must be naive, that's not how theworld works kid. The next 5 presidents could be black and we'd still need AA cuz the system still isn't fair or balanaced when it comes to equalopportunities.

I thin we should do what Dirty suggested it's more than fair. Thing is I'm sure ppl against it would bring up some can't fight fire with fireargument or some Hamurabi's Code bs about an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.
 
Back
Top Bottom