|
US Supreme Court has Mixed Ruling on Affirmative Action (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Galapidate |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrummeRaver86
Yep. I just want to see the day when people stop this "politicall correct" fetish. |
Haha yeah, at least reword it to make it sound nicer ;) |
|
|
| Shakka |
| The whole world needs a crash course in "insensitivity training" to develop thicker skin. The government can't force people to be nice to eachother. I think that being an to people is one of my fundamental freedoms. |
|
|
| Nadi |
| The mixed rulings are pretty dumb. But on affirmative action as a whole I think they got it all wrong. I think points or opportunities ro what not should be awarded based on ones socio-ecenomic background not there skin color. I think this way because right now they can still use race as part of there admisions decision, so even if your rich, being a non white helps you, while if your a poor white you dont get any extra consideration. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I also am in agreement. But just wait until the hard line liberals, who like to portray people as victims of society, begin to argue that it's unfair to discriminate based on intelligence. Soon you'll have affirmative action for retarded people so they don't have to feel disadvantaged. This decision will open a Pandora's Box. |
Are you saying just because someone is retarded, that person shouldn't be allowed to get a ph.d.? Shame on you.;) |
|
|
| rizen |
i like the ruling on both.
no extra points for being non-white, so if a white and black person have equal amount of points, both should get in, or a coin toss :p but sadly usually the white will get in.
as for race being a factor for universities shaping their admissions programs, its a good idea, because not the best overall person will get the position anyway, so this evens it out ... somewhat :conf:
anyway just thought, why dont people bitch about the sport scholorships? sure the person may be good at a sport, but can also be as dumb as a rock. why choose sports over education? :( |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by rizen
anyway just thought, why dont people bitch about the sport scholorships? sure the person may be good at a sport, but can also be as dumb as a rock. why choose sports over education? :( |
Simple ... money. What alumni is going to contribute to a school that has no school spirit and has a crappy sports team? Plus the money the school gets from the NCAA, college bowls, etc. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nadi
The mixed rulings are pretty dumb. But on affirmative action as a whole I think they got it all wrong. I think points or opportunities ro what not should be awarded based on ones socio-ecenomic background not there skin color. I think this way because right now they can still use race as part of there admisions decision, so even if your rich, being a non white helps you, while if your a poor white you dont get any extra consideration. |
This is what scholarships are for. Not all people that go to college are rich. They also have dozens of financial aid opportunities if you bother to do the research to find them. Sure, they may have to work a little harder than a kid that had an easier time getting in, but that's never stopped anyone before. There's nothing wrong with the system. I love the sense of entitlement in this country.
You can please all of the people some of the time. You can please some of the people all the time; but you can never please all of the people all of the time. |
|
|
| Nadi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
This is what scholarships are for. Not all people that go to college are rich. They also have dozens of financial aid opportunities if you bother to do the research to find them. Sure, they may have to work a little harder than a kid that had an easier time getting in, but that's never stopped anyone before. There's nothing wrong with the system. I love the sense of entitlement in this country.
You can please all of the people some of the time. You can please some of the people all the time; but you can never please all of the people all of the time. |
I'm not talking about paying for college. I'm talking about the admision policys. The ratinal for using race is often the minority who has slightly lower scores can do just as good/better than the white kid because he most likely had less oportunities in school(i.e he went to an inner city school filled with gangs and had 45 kids in a classroom). What I'm saying is that if a white kid goes to school in similar conditions that logic doesn't apply to him, as if his scores are lower he is considered to be simply less qualified.
I may be being naive but I think at this point in time, the majority of our country is not racist, at least not concieslly. For the most part people are no longer denied opportunities because of their color or gender. If this is true than why do they still get special opportunities? Color should play no part in the admision process, one's background and ecenomic status should. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nadi
I'm not talking about paying for college. I'm talking about the admision policys. The ratinal for using race is often the minority who has slightly lower scores can do just as good/better than the white kid because he most likely had less oportunities in school(i.e he went to an inner city school filled with gangs and had 45 kids in a classroom). What I'm saying is that if a white kid goes to school in similar conditions that logic doesn't apply to him, as if his scores are lower he is considered to be simply less qualified.
I may be being naive but I think at this point in time, the majority of our country is not racist, at least not concieslly. For the most part people are no longer denied opportunities because of their color or gender. If this is true than why do they still get special opportunities? Color should play no part in the admision process, one's background and ecenomic status should. |
That's pretty much what I'm saying. I was just pointing out that background and economic status, as you put it, are already factored in for the most part. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
I'm not quite sure exactly where to stand on this. Me being more liberal, I tend to view affirmative action as an opportunity for the minority to receive the same chances as the majority in general race and population terms, which is why I believe it was created and still maintained. However, in it's core it is reverse racism, which is truly difficult to justify.
If affirmative action is to be eliminated for college level entries, then I would say that other profiling measures must be eliminated as well - and that includes gender status and especially prior family members being Alums. So that means that race would no longer be an issue to entrance, as well as daddy graduating from the same school that I am applying to (*cough* *cough* *Bush Jr.* *cough* *cough*). You think this New England Brat would have gotten into Yale on his high school status if it weren't for daddy Bush being a Yale Alum? Funny how he seemingly overlooked that part when he endorsed his anti-affirmative action view towards the Supreme Court. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
If affirmative action is to be eliminated for college level entries, then I would say that other profiling measures must be eliminated as well - and that includes gender status and especially prior family members being Alums. So that means that race would no longer be an issue to entrance, as well as daddy graduating from the same school that I am applying to (*cough* *cough* *Bush Jr.* *cough* *cough*). You think this New England Brat would have gotten into Yale on his high school status if it weren't for daddy Bush being a Yale Alum? Funny how he seemingly overlooked that part when he endorsed his anti-affirmative action view towards the Supreme Court. |
I think we agree about half-way on your second point. While I agree that students should be accepted on merit as the primary (and by primary, I mean that there shouldn't be any other real factors involved) reason, the legacy system is not completely without merit. While it does give an edge to some applicants, you must look at the positives. Some of the biggest financial contributors to universities are their alumni. The endowments are then used (hopefully) to improve aspects of the schools (add a new student center, upgrade the dorms, improve the chemistry dep't, etc.), as well as to provide scholarship funds and opportunities to kids who may not otherwise be able to attend the school/university, and who most likely are NOT legacies. If a school were to do away with the legacy bit, they'd probably suffer a substantial financial blow from contributing alumni who see less of a reason to donate money. In the end everyone will suffer.
So while I agree with you (idealistically) in principle, in reality I think society benefits by having something like legacy status in place. It's not like everyone who is a legacy of a particular school gains admittance, though it certainly offers an edge to some. I don't think it's a reason to justify affirmative action, and I don't think it's a big enough reason to try and tweak the system. We all know that nothing is perfect--just accept that fact and move on. I don't think we needed to bring the Supreme Court into the situation. |
|
|
| marcus82 |
nice thread...
i believe that affirmative action and all it's flaws are needed in this current day and age. let's face it, the world is not fair, and although it's not fair to get more points to get into a university it also isn't fair to recieve $5000 SAT prep courses inner city kids cannot afford.
im not well versed in university admission in the states, so if someone could please tell me...when you apply to a university (a minority) do they also do a financial check as well? it sure sux to be a struggling inner city white kid with no $$$ trying to get into a university. |
|
|
|
|
