Enjoy an Ads-Free ASFN - lighter and faster too! Become an ASFN-Contributor and help support the site.
Go Back   Arizona Sports Fans Network > Other Stuff > Politics and Religion > Polls

View Poll Results: To what extent should race be a factor in admission to state universities?
In some circumstances, quotas are the only way to guarantee equal opportunity for minorities. 3 6.52%
Grutter is a sensible approach--consider race, but that consideration shouldn't lead to quotas. 11 23.91%
Judge people on their merits, not their race--do away with affirmative action altogether. 32 69.57%
Voters: 46. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old September 20th, 2005, 04:14 AM   #1
Kolo
Registered User
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,820

Affirmative Action


Several years ago, in twin cases involving undergraduate and law school admissions policies at the University of Michigan, the Supreme Court ruled that race can be considered in admitting student to state universities. Grutz v. Bollinger struck down a policy whereby all minority applicants received 20 points on a scale which graded applicants, where those points essentially created a quota of minorities in every law school class. But Grutter v. Bollinger upheld the use of race as one of many factors which can be evaluated, on an individual basis, for determining worthiness for admission to UM's undergraduate school.
Enjoy an Ads-Free ASFN - lighter and faster too! Become an ASFN-Contributor and help support the site.

Last edited by Kolo; September 20th, 2005 at 04:34 AM.
Kolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 06:05 AM   #2
Stout
Hey fudge packers..go for 2 ;)
 
Stout's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: New Castle, PA--Enemy territory!
Posts: 18,857
Affirmative action is nothing short of a crime. It perpetuates the phrase 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'. No matter why or how it began, it simply doesn't work. In no way is it ever a good idea to say no matter what, X amount of this group MUST be granted special treatment. Why? Because everybody in group Y is being discriminated against. In this case, discriminated against racially.

Affirmative action, which is meant to prevent one form of racial discrimination, instead only achieves a different form of discrimination.
__________________
Lead us to the promised land, Arians.
Stout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 07:09 AM   #3
DjaugheOld
Ads by Google
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009
Sure AA is racial and is discriminatory....and arguably a temporary correction to our history of oppressing minorities (residential segregation and disproportionate funding of school systems).
DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 07:16 AM   #4
Kolo
Registered User
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,820
The standard by which AA was affirmed (if I remember Con Law correctly) is that the government can classify according to race (and thus pretend the 14th Amendment was never enacted) under limited circumstances: the classification must pass strict judicial scrutiny; the classification must serve a compeling governmental interest (in this case, the interest is a diverse student body); and the classification must be narrowly tailored to serve that interest (in Grutz, simply giving 20 points on an admissions scale was ruled not to be narrowly tailored, but permitting admissions officers to arbitrarily pick minorities over better-qualified white applicants is narrowly tailored).

If anybody's interested, that is.
Kolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 07:59 AM   #5
Stout
Hey fudge packers..go for 2 ;)
 
Stout's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: New Castle, PA--Enemy territory!
Posts: 18,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djaughe
Sure AA is racial and is discriminatory....and arguably a temporary correction to our history of oppressing minorities (residential segregation and disproportionate funding of school systems).
Because two wrongs always makes a right? Wait, no they don't. They often do? Wait, they don't.

Because AA actually works? Wait, no it doesn't. Because AA always, and even most of the time, brings in better qualified candidates? Wait, no it doesn't.

The intentions were good, the basis fundamentally flawed, and the enactment and enforcement absolutely disasterous.
__________________
Lead us to the promised land, Arians.
Stout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 08:23 AM   #6
DjaugheOld
Ads by Google
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stout
Because two wrongs always makes a right? Wait, no they don't. They often do? Wait, they don't.

Because AA actually works? Wait, no it doesn't. Because AA always, and even most of the time, brings in better qualified candidates? Wait, no it doesn't.

The intentions were good, the basis fundamentally flawed, and the enactment and enforcement absolutely disasterous.
If we only had to deal with something as simple as 2 wrongs then our society would be a much better place.

Obviously AA can be looked at either as an upperhand or a hand out..depending on the persons perspective.
DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 09:34 AM   #7
Stout
Hey fudge packers..go for 2 ;)
 
Stout's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: New Castle, PA--Enemy territory!
Posts: 18,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djaughe
If we only had to deal with something as simple as 2 wrongs then our society would be a much better place.

Obviously AA can be looked at either as an upperhand or a hand out..depending on the persons perspective.
Any law, or similar initiative, set in motion by the US that takes liberty away from one segment of the community to give an advantage to another segment of the community is WRONG. IN NO WAY should I, a white man, have to fear losing a job to a less qualified person because of a difference in race, ethnicity, or gender.

On the flip side, someone of a different race, ethnicity, or gender should not be discriminated against based upon that difference. Is there a real way to enforce this? No, there is not, at least not beyond fines, sanctions, and legal action against liable parties that do discriminate.

That's all we can do, folks. Giving advantages for no tangible reason other than race, ethnicity, and gender, and giving advantages because of PAST misdeeds by OTHER people is morally and legally WRONG. It's disgusting that our judicial system can warp itself into a politically-correct yet morally wrong opinion that AA is all right. It is fundamentally WRONG.
__________________
Lead us to the promised land, Arians.
Stout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 09:37 AM   #8
krepitch
Moderator
 
krepitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 12,388
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stout
Any law, or similar initiative, set in motion by the US that takes liberty away from one segment of the community to give an advantage to another segment of the community is WRONG. IN NO WAY should I, a white man, have to fear losing a job to a less qualified person because of a difference in race, ethnicity, or gender.

On the flip side, someone of a different race, ethnicity, or gender should not be discriminated against based upon that difference. Is there a real way to enforce this? No, there is not, at least not beyond fines, sanctions, and legal action against liable parties that do discriminate.

That's all we can do, folks. Giving advantages for no tangible reason other than race, ethnicity, and gender, and giving advantages because of PAST misdeeds by OTHER people is morally and legally WRONG. It's disgusting that our judicial system can warp itself into a politically-correct yet morally wrong opinion that AA is all right. It is fundamentally WRONG.
I'm not an expert on this topic by any means, but isn't the requirement of AA programs to expand the pool of candidates for certain jobs, not to set quotas for certain numbers of minorities to be hired?
krepitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 09:41 AM   #9
JPlay
JPlay
 
JPlay's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,211
The intent of the law is not to give an opportunity to a less qualified candidate, it is to give the opportunity to the minority candidate assuming job qualifications are equal.


It amazes me that White Americans are so scared about losing out to the few minorities who are actually in a position for these job opportunities when it's obvious that these corporations and businesses are overwhelmingly employed by White Americans.

If this was a perfect world everybody would be hired and promoted equally without regard to race, however the statistics show otherwise and that is a factor of these companies being more than predominantly run by White Americans who tend to hire and promote other White Americans.

Statistics show the playing field is not equal and this is a way to level it for minorities.
JPlay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 09:43 AM   #10
Kolo
Registered User
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by krepitch
I'm not an expert on this topic by any means, but isn't the requirement of AA programs to expand the pool of candidates for certain jobs, not to set quotas for certain numbers of minorities to be hired?
It's not a requirement of AA programs, but it's an effect of them. For a school to consider minority candidates sufficient to diversify its student body, it will necessarily have to expand the pool--as opposed to simply saying only 3.8 gpa's and 1200 SAT's will be accepted, which effectively makes the student body more white and Asian and less Black.
Kolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 09:43 AM   #11
JPlay
JPlay
 
JPlay's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,211
Like 2pac said, Dear Mr. President, "I want my 40 acres and mule that was never given to us"
JPlay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 11:11 AM   #12
DjaugheOld
Ads by Google
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stout
...That's all we can do, folks. Giving advantages for no tangible reason other than race, ethnicity, and gender, and giving advantages because of PAST misdeeds by OTHER people is morally and legally WRONG. It's disgusting that our judicial system can warp itself into a politically-correct yet morally wrong opinion that AA is all right. It is fundamentally WRONG.
The problem with this perception is that it ignores the past...AA is intended to deal with past (and present) discrimination and prejudice through the system of inclusion.

AA was never announced as a 'cure-all' for our societys future...but as the most effective way to cure a society of past and current exclusionary practices by making special efforts of inclusion...which is exactly what affirmative action does.
DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 11:26 AM   #13
40yearfan
DEFENSE!!!!
 
40yearfan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ.
Posts: 31,992
Once upon a time, we needed AA. It has done it's job and is now an anacronism. We no longer need it.

We can reinact it in about 40 years when the Caucasian population is no longer the dominant population and will need protection.
__________________
Old age isn't so bad when you consider the alternative.
40yearfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 11:49 AM   #14
DjaugheOld
Ads by Google
 

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: 85249
Posts: 23,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by 40yearfan
Once upon a time, we needed AA. It has done it's job and is now an anacronism. We no longer need it....
Has it?

When did AA reach the magical milestone of social equality?
DjaugheOld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20th, 2005, 12:11 PM   #15
Derm
slippery when wet
 
Derm's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe - home of the AZ Cardinals
Posts: 2,113
I got AA'd out of a spot in med school a number of years back. I was pissed because I had great new business model as a "Mobile Gynecologist". My motto: "Our doctors at your cervix 24 hours a day"
Derm is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Tags
russ smith


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Sitemap:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:49 PM.



Subscribe in a reader
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design