Affirmative action..Why it's wrong?
-
lauren wrote: isnt that how the criminal justice system works more or less? Sure, but if some person has never wronged anyone should her / she be punished for the actions of others. Should Italians be feed to the lions for the christians to recive retribution? Punish the offenders not those who are simply the same color or gender. Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.
-
lauren wrote: if the people who have been discriminating have to tase their own medicine they may be less willing to dole it out in the future I guess I am not following you here. As an example I ask you how is an idealistic 18 year old white guy responsable for doling out anything wrong to anybody? Don't you think this is just a silly cycle where people are just biding their time to get back at "those people?" Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.
-
Michael Dunn wrote: "Affirmative action" is a euphemism for "discrimination against caucasians", nothing more. I agree. Wanna piss everybody off? Hold the first annual "white heterosexual male only" gathering. I suppose we brought it upon our selves, though. How many years did we partake in slavery, then later, segregation? How long did we hold the Japenese Americans in concentration camps during WWII? The US, thank God, get's a wee bit better each year toward treating everybody equally, but of course, we've still got a long way to go. Affirmative Action, though, has never been the way to do it, however, in my humble opinion. Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan Portland, Oregon, USA
Jamie Nordmeyer wrote: How many years did we partake in slavery, then later, segregation? How long did we hold the Japenese Americans in concentration camps during WWII? Uhmm me thinks you have been watching to much Star Trek Next Generation and paid to much attention to the Klingon Society. No offense intended, but this is reality, and the planet earth, not the Klingon Home Planet.... As far as I remember (although it may be changing these days).. THE SINS OF THE PARENTS ARE ***NOT*** INHERITED BY THEIR CHILDREN.. (although as I said, it seems like certain groups would love to change that). /CMH
-
Michael Dunn wrote: "Affirmative action" is a euphemism for "discrimination against caucasians", nothing more. But the real victims, I heard, are not caucasians. Some published research shows that other minority groups, especially asians, suffered the most because of AA. Also heard people saying that asians are already over-represented when it comes to college admissions and scholarships, etc. , while blacks are under-represented. Just wondering if the same people will also try to increase the asian representation in various sports. Can you imagine NBA will pick Yao Ming just to increase diversity?
I have often wondered why it is racist to say that one race is more intelligent than another (even if you have statistical evidence to support the assertion) and not racist to claim that one race are better athletes than another. I have never liked double standards. Staying with the sports example, people claim that minorities (specifically blacks) are under-represented in sports team management. Maybe so, but I can make an equally valid argument that Caucasians are under-represented as players. How do we fix that?:~ Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
-
It's positive discrimination (i.e. giving someone an advantage because they're difference), but this is still discrimination. Imagine the scenario of a job interview with two candidates, a really highly trained candidate, and someone who is totally average. In a normal world, the best person would be given the job, however, if there is "political correctness" at work, then the less able person may be given the job for the simple reason that they belong to some form of minority, and the company is either scared of being accused of discrimination against them, or they have some kind of "we're against discrimination" policy meaning they're forced to hire the substandard person just to make up numbers in their quota to prove what a modern company they are -- Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit!
Hey, I just realized that this thread ties into the one below about MS having to include Java now :) Talk about AA... Judge to MS: 'No you screwed Sun for far to long, now you have to included this substandard piece of crap in your OS, take all the support calls when it does not work right, blah, blah, blah...' Who looses? The consumer!
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
-
lauren wrote: if the people who have been discriminating have to tase their own medicine they may be less willing to dole it out in the future I guess I am not following you here. As an example I ask you how is an idealistic 18 year old white guy responsable for doling out anything wrong to anybody? Don't you think this is just a silly cycle where people are just biding their time to get back at "those people?" Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.
-
So you are saying that the sins of the parents are inherited by their children? As I said in a previous post, seems like someone has been watching a wee bit to my Star Trek Next Generation, in particular episodes relating to the Klingon Society.. (and for what it is worth, yes I am a white skinned hetorsexual male, I was raised by a single mother, who worked her arse off to support myself and my sister. we lived in a shabby neighbourhood, but guess what.. Both my sister and I actually studied in high school, we got good grades, we made it through college on our ACADEMIC merits, not on any other merit.)
-
So are you saying that doing wrong to one group of people for the bennifit of another group is OK? You don't think this will have dire ramifications in the long run? To me it is just racism pure and simple. The ends can never justify the means. Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.
-
David Chamberlain wrote: Another question is: if you want to achieve diversity, how do you measure it? If you measure diversity by race, then there is no way to achieve diversity without using race as a factor. This where I think we went wrong. Diversity is IMHO a political construct. What realy needs to be achived is equality. A state of affairs where peoples race and gender are never taken into account in hiring practices, credit ratings, collage admission etc... Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.
Chris Austin wrote: This where I think we went wrong. Diversity is IMHO a political construct. What realy needs to be achived is equality. A state of affairs where peoples race and gender are never taken into account in hiring practices, credit ratings, collage admission etc... A M E N !
-
Jamie Nordmeyer wrote: How many years did we partake in slavery, then later, segregation? How long did we hold the Japenese Americans in concentration camps during WWII? Uhmm me thinks you have been watching to much Star Trek Next Generation and paid to much attention to the Klingon Society. No offense intended, but this is reality, and the planet earth, not the Klingon Home Planet.... As far as I remember (although it may be changing these days).. THE SINS OF THE PARENTS ARE ***NOT*** INHERITED BY THEIR CHILDREN.. (although as I said, it seems like certain groups would love to change that). /CMH
Chris Hansson wrote: THE SINS OF THE PARENTS ARE ***NOT*** INHERITED BY THEIR CHILDREN.. I agree with you, but obviously, not everybody does, or we probably wouldn't need affirmative action in the first place. Many "minorities" today, despite the fact that they themselves weren't there, still feel angered at the country in general for what took place to their ancestors. That's my point. Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan Portland, Oregon, USA
-
Chris Hansson wrote: THE SINS OF THE PARENTS ARE ***NOT*** INHERITED BY THEIR CHILDREN.. I agree with you, but obviously, not everybody does, or we probably wouldn't need affirmative action in the first place. Many "minorities" today, despite the fact that they themselves weren't there, still feel angered at the country in general for what took place to their ancestors. That's my point. Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan Portland, Oregon, USA
Jamie Nordmeyer wrote: I agree with you, but obviously, not everybody does, or we probably wouldn't need affirmative action in the first place. Many "minorities" today, despite the fact that they themselves weren't there, still feel angered at the country in general for what took place to their ancestors. That's my point. Ah ok, then we are on the same page.... I misunderstood your position, and I apologize.
-
Ray Cassick wrote: Do you think that a person that knows they make it into a job simply because they filled a quota honestly feels any better? yup if it means s/he can feed their family and do a job they are capable of doing
"traffic lights are for people who can't make their own decisions"
biz stuff about melauren wrote: ...and do a job they are capable of doing And that is the problem with AA. No where does it say that you don't have to meet the quota if there are no applicants that are not capable of doing the job. Try to be a company that is under quota and convince an investigator that there are simply no qualified applicants...
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
-
lauren wrote: if the people who have been discriminating have to tase their own medicine they may be less willing to dole it out in the future Hmm... what an interesting thought... I wonder where else this "Do unto others what you'd really like them not to do to you" tactic would work out... *shog ponders sending US suicide bombers into the middle east... must be some use for all these depressed teenagers...*
---
Shog9 The siren sings a lonely song - of all the wants and hungers The lust of love a brute desire - the ledge of life goes under
Shog9 wrote: shog ponders sending US suicide bombers into the middle east... must be some use for all these depressed teenagers...* errrrr ... 250,000 american troops sent to the middle east? arent we doing that already? not all iraqi people had anything to do with sept 11 (if any) but its ok to go bomb them right? *laughs* double standards are very funny
"traffic lights are for people who can't make their own decisions"
biz stuff about me -
Jamie Nordmeyer wrote: I agree with you, but obviously, not everybody does, or we probably wouldn't need affirmative action in the first place. Many "minorities" today, despite the fact that they themselves weren't there, still feel angered at the country in general for what took place to their ancestors. That's my point. Ah ok, then we are on the same page.... I misunderstood your position, and I apologize.
No problem, no offense taken. :) This has always been one of those touch subjects anyways, and one I love to discuss (as I do with most 'touchy' subjects). ;) Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan Portland, Oregon, USA
-
lauren wrote: ...and do a job they are capable of doing And that is the problem with AA. No where does it say that you don't have to meet the quota if there are no applicants that are not capable of doing the job. Try to be a company that is under quota and convince an investigator that there are simply no qualified applicants...
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Here's another problem: the group of people who promote Affirmative Action as NOT being a quota. Dave "You can say that again." -- Dept. of Redundancy Dept.
-
What's wrong in University of Michigan admission plan?? Bush on attack over affirmative action[^] In India, we have "reservation policy" for Women and Lower caste people, so that they can get better education and jobs(of course, that policy being misused by others that's a different story) Personally I disagree that policy, but before India's independence they were branded as "untouchables", so Gandhi made that "reservation policy" which is going on for more than 50 years. Kant Sonork-100.28114 Don't :beer: and Drive.
Last night on the radio, a reporter compared Trent Lott's backing of segregation to Bush's attack on Affirmative Action. I was angry because they aren't the same thing. Segregation is a system to keep people down based on their race. Not backing Affirmative Action means that we aren't going to give extra benefits at other's expense based on your race. To say otherwise is similar to saying "stealing $20 from a poor person (segregation) is the same thing as not giving $20 to a poor person (affirmative action)". (And the poor-person analogy has certain flaws - specifically "not all black people are poor" and "some white people are poor", a fact which AA ignores.) I have to agree with Bush's position on Affirmative Action. I think there is a great deal of double-thinking on the issue. Even the Supreme Court can't seem to think of a legitimate way to back Affirmative Action - because all AA ends up hurting some people based on their race (i.e. white). Even worse: while women benefit from AA, they outnumber men in college. So why are we skewing the numbers even further? As far as the political parties are concerned, I read once that, "Republicans see people as individuals - not as part of groups, Democrats see people as part of groups - not as individuals." I thought it held a bit of truth. It's true that people are individuals who are not well defined simply by their group. On the other hand, people are part of groups and are discriminated against on that basis (racism and sexism are proof that people are seen as part of groups). In actuality, people are both individuals and part of groups. I can understand why there is a need to give minorities extra help. Many have (as part of their past, or their ancestor's past) been victims of discrimination. I don't think they should be given "bonus points" for being a minority, however. (I remember a few years ago, Berkeley was adding 250 points to the SAT scores of black students so that they could compete for admissions with other students.) Those "bonus points" are wrong, IMO. On the other hand, I think I could support initiatives to raise academic work for minority students. In the end, all students have to compete on equal footing and on the basis of test scores. If universities are waiting until graduate school (as in the case of the University of Michigan) to give minorities "extra help", then the whole process is rotten. The process has to be initiated much earlier in life and it has to take the form of actually improving test scores - not gi
-
who said 360 degress? so u havnt discriminated against anyone so the world is fine then? forcing the dominant species to give opportunities to the less privieledged IS a way of making people see that color makes no difference to ability sorry but this is exactly the reaction (bleating) i was talking about
"traffic lights are for people who can't make their own decisions"
biz stuff about melauren wrote: who said 360 degress? You go from discriminating against one race to discriminating against another. That seems like a 360 degree turn to me. lauren wrote: so u havnt discriminated against anyone so the world is fine then? No, I never said that. I purely stated that I never discriminated, so I should not be punished for it. lauren wrote: forcing the dominant species..... Just remember, you brought species into this discussion... Looking at this from a purely scientific standpoint, the dominant species should move ahead, that's what makes them dominant. Look around in nature and throughout history… To me AA is just like Unions and several other 'Social Programs' (and yes, I view Unions as a Social Program). They breed an 'entitlement behavior' that sickens me. Anyone that thinks that they are entitled to be given something (money to not work because they made poor life decisions, a break every hour so they don't get tired at work, a job just because their race has a history of oppression) deserves to get nothing more than a good education. What stops a minority from crying discrimination? Nothing? What stops a union worker from crying breech of contract? Nothing? It's all the same... I can see this thread starting to get ugly here so I will stop… Clearly we don’t see eye-to-eye on the subject (probably never will). "A person convinced against their will is of the same mind still"
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
-
David Chamberlain wrote: Another question is: if you want to achieve diversity, how do you measure it? If you measure diversity by race, then there is no way to achieve diversity without using race as a factor. This where I think we went wrong. Diversity is IMHO a political construct. What realy needs to be achived is equality. A state of affairs where peoples race and gender are never taken into account in hiring practices, credit ratings, collage admission etc... Fill me with your knowledge, your wisdom, your coffee.
Chris Austin wrote: What realy needs to be achived is equality. So how are you going to measure that? Is measuring "equality" any different than measuring "diversity"? If they both relate to race, then they must both use race as a factor. Unfortunately, in history, the result of ignoring race and gender as selection criteria typically leaves those minorities out of the selection, due to lack of opportunity. It's a cause and effect problem in that the causes that make people unable for the selection are the things that make them unable to perform. The correction has been not to help them to perform, but to bias the selection. Dave "You can say that again." -- Dept. of Redundancy Dept.
-
Here's another problem: the group of people who promote Affirmative Action as NOT being a quota. Dave "You can say that again." -- Dept. of Redundancy Dept.
I have actually heard of it referred to as 'Non Discriminatory Ratio Adjusting' of you can believe that...
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
-
im not saying "punish" as such but when i hear bleating from the transgressor when they get a taste of their own medicine i think "shut the f**k up and now taste how it sux to be doing what u have been doing ... will u stop it now?" seems thats how we have built our society so why change it just cos the top cats (ie, white hetrosexual christian men) start to get a bit less than top treatment?
"traffic lights are for people who can't make their own decisions"
biz stuff about melauren wrote: im not saying "punish" as such but when i hear bleating from the transgressor when they get a taste of their own medicine i think "shut the f**k up and now taste how it sux to be doing what u have been doing ... will u stop it now?" And there in lies the flaw. Who's a transgressor? I surely have never been, and yet affirmitive action can disqualify me. You are espousing racism and discrimination, wrapped up in fancy paper and a pretty bow. As others have said, address the problem. Instead of affirmative action, let's enforce harsh penalties for those caught discriminating on the basis of race, sex or religious beliefs. William E. Kempf