Affirmative Action

[ElectionsGuy]

Oppose (I/O). The policy itself is racist, suggesting that minorities shouldn't have to work as hard/whites should work harder for the same benefit/reward. People trying to make Blacks, Latinos, etc. more successful by making whites work harder or them work less is ridiculous. People can't control success, and just because one skin color isn't doing as well as the other, doesn't necessarily mean its because of racism or they weren't treated "fairly". The root of black failures (for example) is primary cultural, and for trying to equalize everything doesn't make sense until THEY THEMSELVES do something about it.

Anyways, I'd like to hear your opinion or criticisms of mine, share.

[Goldwater]

Oppose (R)

[TNF]

Oppose (D)

Promoting minorities will not end the problem of racial discrimination and resentment caused by free market capitalism.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Oppose. Discrimination in favor of a downtrodden group is still discrimination and still wrong.

[H. Ross Peron]

Oppose (D)

Promoting minorities will not end the problem of racial discrimination and resentment caused by free market capitalism.

[dead0man]

Nevermind the good reasons given so far, it also perpetuates the myth that minority group X sucks.  Take a guy from group X who is smart, not a genius, but smart and hard working.  He'd do great a University U, but because of AA Private Genius School Tech needs more people of group X enrolled, they recruit our example and he ends up going to PGST where he is instantly in way over his head.  He busts his butt to tread water with all the Indians, Jews and Crackers but he still needs a tutor and "understanding" profs to get by.  For some people that might be fine, but for others it can be a real kick in the teeth to the ego.  So instead of a guy who would have done fine at UU, we get a bitter guy wasting resources at PGST.  And it maintains the stereotype that members of group X are dumb.  And it makes the dudes there of group X who did make it on merit to be looked down upon by their fellow students for only being there because of the color their skin.


I'll grant that it's better than the system that flat out excludes certain groups of people, but not by much.

[politicallefty]

This is one issue where I disagree with my party. I am a strong opponent of affirmative action. It is discrimination on the basis of race, which is something I am adamantly opposed to. In terms of education, California's Prop 209 showed that Asians were hurt the most by affirmative action. If I were a minority individual applying for any position, I certainly wouldn't want anyone to think I got the position solely due to race.

[DC Al Fine]

Kind of negates all the stuff about equality, I've been hearing from the Dems.

[Torie]

It depends how one defines "affirmative action."  I am really into how one defines words, before embracing or eschewing them.

[Link]

White male forum being white male forum again.  Affirmative action's main effect had nothing to do with race.  Why a bipartisan group of young white males wants to make it about race would be a better discussion.

It depends how one defines "affirmative action."  I am really into how one defines words, before embracing or eschewing them.

Pretty much the only intelligent answer in the thread.  I think everyone else is defining it as darkies are hogging all the goodies.

[Deus Naturae]

White male forum being white male forum again.  Affirmative action's main effect had nothing to do with race.  Why a bipartisan group of young white males wants to make it about race would be a better discussion.

It depends how one defines "affirmative action."  I am really into how one defines words, before embracing or eschewing them.

Pretty much the only intelligent answer in the thread.  I think everyone else is defining it as darkies are hogging all the goodies.

I think it was assumed that we were discussing race-based affirmative action, as that's what was discussed in the OP and that's also by far the most controversial form of affirmative action.

Anyway, I oppose it for numerous reasons already mentioned.

[Link]

White male forum being white male forum again.  Affirmative action's main effect had nothing to do with race.  Why a bipartisan group of young white males wants to make it about race would be a better discussion.

It depends how one defines "affirmative action."  I am really into how one defines words, before embracing or eschewing them.

Pretty much the only intelligent answer in the thread.  I think everyone else is defining it as darkies are hogging all the goodies.

I think it was assumed that we were discussing race-based affirmative action, as that's what was discussed in the OP and that's also by far the most controversial form of affirmative action.

That was what was being discussed, but it hasn't historically been the main factor in Affirmative Action.  One has to wonder why a group of white males will instinctively go on rants about the more unusual form of Affirmative Action while remaining silent about the form their mothers, aunts, sisters etc benefited from.  I guess when someone in your family gets it it is okay.  When a black guy gets it then of course it is wrong.

[TDAS04]

Oppose (D).

Race itself should not be a factor.  I am not entirely against helping disadvantaged individuals, but I do not support advantaging individuals because they happen to belong to a disadvantaged group.  

[Link]

Oppose (D).

Race itself should not be a factor.  I am not entirely against helping disadvantaged individuals, but I do not support advantaging individuals because they happen to belong to a disadvantaged group.

You contradicted yourself.  Helping them is advantaging them.

[TDAS04]

Oppose (D).

Race itself should not be a factor.  I am not entirely against helping disadvantaged individuals, but I do not support advantaging individuals because they happen to belong to a disadvantaged group.

You contradicted yourself.  Helping them is advantaging them.

No, I am not.  I am aware that helping means advantaging.  Maybe my wording was confusing, but what I meant was that it's OK to help disadvantaged individuals because are disadvantaged individuals.  However, an individual applicant should not get an advantage just because that individual happens to belongs to a disadvantaged group.  Not all blacks and Hispanics are economically disadvantaged, and not all whites and Asians are rich and privileged.  That's why race per se should not be a factor when hiring people or accepting applicants at universities.  

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This thread is tres embarrassing.

[Oakvale]

FORUM COMPOSED OF RICH WHITE MEN OPPOSE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

[Lief 🗽]

This thread is so delicious. Bunch of white male teenagers falling over themselves to prove that they hate affirmative action the most.

I especially enjoy the "people who support affirmative action are the REAL racists" nonsense.

[Kitteh]

Oakvale wins thread.

[Sol]

I support it, but only for economically disadvantaged individuals- it shouldn't be tied to race- it should be tied to class.

[Indy Texas]

The root of black failures (for example) is primary cultural, and for trying to equalize everything doesn't make sense until THEY THEMSELVES do something about it.

Please don't say anything else before you really dig yourself a hole.

[Indy Texas]

Oppose (D).

Race itself should not be a factor.  I am not entirely against helping disadvantaged individuals, but I do not support advantaging individuals because they happen to belong to a disadvantaged group.  

Well what the hell does being disadvantaged mean to you if not belonging to a disadvantaged group?

Are you disabled? That's a disadvantage. Are disabled people not a disadvantaged group?

Are you poor? That's a disadvantage. Are poor people not a disadvantaged group?

Explain how a person could be disadvantaged without belonging to a disadvantaged group.

[Lief 🗽]

The root of black failures (for example) is primary cultural, and for trying to equalize everything doesn't make sense until THEY THEMSELVES do something about it.

No, the root of "black failures" is the time when they were brought to this country against their will and enslaved for a few hundred years before being treated as a non-citizen underclass for another hundred years.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

No one should recieve priority access to jobs or education just because they're disadvantaged. Merit is merit, and its not fair that a more qualified individual should have his or her spot "taken" by someone less qualified.

I do recognize, though, that it's harder to succeed in a merit-based system if you're starting out on a much lower rung of the ladder. Giving these individuals the help they need to access equal opportunities is what we should be putting the focus on.

[ElectionsGuy]

I support it, but only for economically disadvantaged individuals- it shouldn't be tied to race- it should be tied to class.

Yes, I expect this would be most democrats answers when disregarded with race and more regarded with economic groups (the poor, for example). Racial Affirmative Action is probably too controversial for many democrats to say yes, but most democrats would probably say yes to the idea of Affirmative Action anyway. I still wouldn't support it or support the idea of it.