After the Abigail Fisher case where Affirmative action was upheld. A lot of people have said that affirmative action is longer needed anymore and That affirmative action is racist based on the fact it's "positive discrimination" and racist because it discriminates against white males and Asians. Do you agree with them and think Affirmative action should be disbanded? Or is it still needed. Discuss and provide reasons why or why not
Receipts:
Quote:
Decades from now, the people will wonder how did the Supreme Court allow for a discrimination based on the color of one's skin. Because that is exactly what this is. It is as noxious as the old "separate but equal" laws the Supreme Court upheld 100 years ago. This is truly shameful.
Quote:
So the institutionalized race based discrimination and prejudice will continue. Until NO favoritism is shown toward any groups for any reasons will this country begin to truly eliminate the hard feelings felt toward each other. Once again our courts/government solve no problems. The status quo goes on.
Quote:
know I will probably get flak for stating my opinion but, no one should be allowed to get anything based on their race, things should be based off of merit. It is beyond time for things like this to be abolished. Giving someone a job or entry into school, etc...based on their race is just as racist as not doing so. The person that is the best qualified should always be the person choosen regardless of race. It is laws like these that help keep hate and race relations problematic.
Quote:
Affirmative action = legal discrimination against whites. if whites were to organize and help their own we would be called racist. white is the only race you can discriminate against
Quote:
AA was put in place for a reason and served its purpose. It's no longer relevant and it will be done away with sooner or later. Others, with stronger cases, will be filing suit.
No. It's there for a reason.
The only people that complain about it are white and asians that grew up with daddy's money and have always had things go their way.
NO, lol. Take a look at the UC system. Literally like 40% asian because they don't look at race. Higher education should be a resolve for all races, not the highest performing test takers. Opportunity isn't distributed evenly enough for it to be abolished.
NO, lol. Take a look at the UC system. Literally like 40% asian because they don't look at race. Higher education should be a resolve for all races, not the highest performing test takers. Opportunity isn't distributed evenly enough for it to be abolished.
Yup. My school is <15% combined Hispanic and Black. Happy to be part of the small group though.
No, I think it's necessary. Though it would be better if it was done by economic status as opposed to race, but obviously that wouldn't really work in practice
It was shown that the people who get into schools are usually on par with the standard the school set. Sometimes the students who aren't white or Asian that have great scores don't get in anyway.
But why do we attack affirmative action and not legacy students? Often these are wealthy students who got in because their parents went. Or students that get accepted because their parents have the school a large donations.
People are quick to attack things that matter with race, but not things that have to do with social class.
It was shown that the people who get into schools are usually on par with the standard the school set. Sometimes the students who aren't white or Asian that have great scores don't get in anyway.
But why do we attack affirmative action and not legacy students? Often these are wealthy students who got in because their parents went. Or students that get accepted because their parents have the school a large donations.
People are quick to attack things that matter with race, but not things that have to do with social class.
It was shown that the people who get into schools are usually on par with the standard the school set. Sometimes the students who aren't white or Asian that have great scores don't get in anyway.
But why do we attack affirmative action and not legacy students? Often these are wealthy students who got in because their parents went. Or students that get accepted because their parents have the school a large donations.
People are quick to attack things that matter with race, but not things that have to do with social class.
legacy is really only taken into account heavily at elite schools (ivies + top20). And they're usually qualified. If they aren't they're normally waitlisted for political reasons instead of outright rejection.
If you are white and a good student there are tons of options for you and you shouldn't be concerned. Even with AA in place, top schools are still predominately white institutions.
If you are white and a good student there are tons of options for you and you shouldn't be concerned. Even with AA in place, top schools are still predominately white institutions.
If you are white and a good student there are tons of options for you and you shouldn't be concerned. Even with AA in place, top schools are still predominately white institutions.
hopefully my school is safe
