E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe nation's colleges are currently allowed to consider a student's race in the admissions process, a procedure that is now being challenged in the Supreme Court. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
Updated at 1:30 pm ET The United States Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday in the most important civil rights case to come before the justices in the past six years: a challenge to the use of race as a factor in admissions at the University of Texas.
The case involves Abigail Fisher, a white woman who applied to the school in 2008.
She was not entitled to automatic admission under Texas’ "top 10 percent rule," which by law requires the university to admit all in-state high school seniors who rank academically in the top 10 percent of their classes.
Instead, Fisher competed for admission with others who weren’t in the top 10 percent of their graduating class. And though her academic credentials were superior to some minority applicants who were admitted to the University of Texas, Fisher was not.
“There were people in my class with lower grades, who weren't in all the activities I was in, who were accepted into UT. And the only difference between us was the color of our skin," she said.
She argues that the university is not using racial classification of applicants to pursue a compelling state need, since Texas’s top 10 percent rule has already succeeded in giving the university a racially diverse student body.
Stelios Varias / Reuters file photo
The U.S. Supreme Court in Washington.
She contends the university is using a form of racial balancing that Supreme Court rulings have banned.
The university has rebutted her on that point, saying her racial balancing claim “is refuted by her own concession that UT has not set any ‘target’ for minority admissions.”
NBC News Justice Correspondent Pete Williams reported after the one-hour oral argument that the justices were confronting the questions of “How do you know when there’s enough diversity?” and “How do you know when you no longer need affirmative action”
He said the University of Texas had argued to the court that it wanted not only diversity in overall numbers of students but “it wants African-American students who are interested in fencing and speaking Greek and studying architecture” and Latino students who are fencers or ballet dancers.
Texas’s argument was, Williams said “We want diversity, in other words, within the mere racial numbers.”
The first Monday in October is the traditional start of the Supreme Court's new term. Last term was a blockbuster, dominated by health care and immigration. But this one looks like it, too, and will be one of the most important in years. NBC's Pete Williams reports.
In Wednesday’s argument, Fisher was represented by Washington attorney Bert Rein, who is also representing Shelby County, Ala. in its challenge to the constitutionality of a key section of the Voting Rights Act. The high court has not yet agreed to hear the Shelby County case.
The University of Texas was represented by Gregory Garre, who briefly served as solicitor general in the Bush administration and who has argued 34 cases before the Supreme Court.
Solicitor General Donald Verrilli argued for Obama administration in support of the Texas program.
The last time the high court considered racial preferences in university admissions was in 2003, when it decided a case involving the University of Michigan Law School.
In that decision the court, ruling five to four, held that race or ethnicity could be used as one factor in a school’s effort to ensure racial diversity in its student body.
The court approved the University of Michigan’s “narrowly tailored” use of race in admissions decisions, saying that it helped to advance the state’s interest in getting the educational benefits that come from a diverse student body. The program did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the court ruled.
Williams said it seemed pretty clear from what the justices said in Wednesday’s oral argument that they were not likely to overrule the 2003 University of Michigan decision that allowed "narrowly tailored" racial preferences to be used in university admissions.
The author of the opinion in the Michigan case, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, has since retired and been replaced by Justice Samuel Alito, who is opposed to racial preferences.
Dissenting in the Michigan case, Justice Anthony Kennedy said race can be considered as "one modest factor among many others to achieve diversity," but a school must ensure that each applicant receives individual consideration and that "race does not become a predominant factor" in admissions decisions.
As is often the case, the likely swing vote in the Texas case will be that of Kennedy.
Washington lawyer Tom Goldstein, who teaches Supreme Court litigation at Stanford and Harvard Law Schools, said some observers have wondered how Kennedy can be sympathetic to gay rights – a “liberal” stance, but seem skeptical of the use of racial preferences, a “conservative” stance.
“Justice Kennedy has a vision of the law and of the Constitution which is very much about individuals – he wants people to be thought of as people not as (members of) groups. He’s concerned, I think, that the root of affirmative action is that you are treating people as black, you’re treating them as Hispanic, and not as individuals” and also that by having state law which treat gays differently than heterosexuals, states are treating them as member of a group and not as individuals.
Justice Elena Kagan, a member of the court's liberal wing, will not participate in the Texas case. She served as President Barack Obama’s solicitor general in 2009 and 2010 when the Justice Department became involved in the case in the lower courts. She joined the court in August of 2010.
With Kagan out of the Texas case, a four-to-four tie is possible, which would mean that the Fifth Circuit appeals court ruling in favor of the Texas program would stand, but that no binding precedent would be set for other circuits.
In its most recent high-profile case involving the use of race in education, the high court in 2007 invalidated public school programs in Seattle and Louisville, Ky., that used students’ race as a “tiebreaker” for admission to certain high schools and kindergartens.
Chief Justice John Roberts said in his majority opinion on that case: “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
Leave a Comment:
This is simple, if the situation was reversed and she was a black student not admitted despite having better test scores than white students who were, the public would be rioting over the blatant racism.
What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.
Sharpton and Jackson would already been all over it too. At first glance this does indeed look like discrimination based on her race.
When is America going to come into the 21st century? Isn't it time that we stop using someone's race, gender, sexual orientation etc as a discriminating factor? Shouldn't it be based on merit??
If this country would actually stop racist practices such as this example, maybe we would rise above it once and for all. But then what would the self proclaimed civil rights leaders like Jackson and Sharpton do for a living? They survive by keeping racism alive, not by ending it.
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."
Too well put. Stop identifying people by their race, stop asking them to check boxes. Then there is no incentive to stacking them in different piles and trying to arbitrarily force the piles into even stacks.
If she is in the top 10% of her class and the rule says she is automatic what is the issue? The problem is this country promotes mediocracy based on race to give a "minority" the American dream when they have not worked for it.
The race issue goes both ways and young people today should not have to suffer for the past. It's a lame Jesse Jackson NAACP "we deserve better treatment" mentality that needs to get canned.
This is for lack of a better term reverse racism. Another interesting view is when people are asked about affirmative action as applied to university athletic depts. No way in hell they are going to do that.
This young lady was cheated by the school. Affirmative action is a failure. If a person can't make the cut based on their intelligence and hard work why should they be given a free pass because of the color of their skin? It is RACIST!
I am glad the SCOTUS will decide this, left up to those commenting here, we would return to segregation. Racism is alive and well in the U.S.
It's 2012 and we still have the same issues as in the 1930's, only now, everyone is included in racial bias. The race mongers have driven this country apart instead of together. Too bad.
@ go-n-out-of-biz
Awesome Gilligan avatar. Do you think any of the kids under the age of 14 even know of that show? Love it. Do you remember that episode where they almost got off the island?
IXLR8
understanding what you read is not your strong point, is it? It clearly states she was not part of the top 10%.
Two students go to the sqme classes and earn credits/grades based on their performance. They have studied from the same books, listened to the same lectures, taken the same exams and earned different scores. One student earned higher marks than the other but the poorer performer is accepted into university while the better student is denied admission. It is pretty obvious that the admission was not based on academic merit. It is very sad for the U.S. that people worldwide perceive the merit of skin colour.
Maybe someday the U.S. will advance to the 21st century and recognize the fact that the colour of one's skin doesn't need to be valued as compensation for a failed social engineering attitude. As long as the U.S. continues to allow discrimination while trying to tell other nations about their injustices in the equal rights arena U.S. will be viewed as hypocritical.
The only way to stop race discrimination in colleges is to not put race on the application. As for the10% rules it is stupid. My daughter begged us to put her in a diifferent school district because the one we live in is very competitive. Had we put her in HISD she would have been top 10. Another thing that bothers me is that athletes only had to make 700 on the SAT ( this was before they changed it) while non athletes had to make 1200.
first of all, i am, and always have been, against racism of any kind (i'm white, not necessarily proud). that said, she claims race was the only difference between her and the students accepted; seems she is also clairvoyant (?), and i would think she would be welcome in the all-knowing, all-powerful, bigger-and-better-at-everything University of Texas! on the other hand, perhaps her petty, self-absorbed, woe-is-me-the-victim attitude came across in her application and that was why she was denied. or, perhaps she was interviewed by a black person, and her blatant racism just oozed out. just sayin', cry me a river!
Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream that his four little children will "one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character". Well his children are still alive but so far that nation he dreamed of still does NOT exist.
Affirmative action was one of the greatest failures in society. Instead of bringing society up, it brought it down. It gave preference to those that did not earn to be there. Affirmative action made excuses, it blamed, and it promoted mediocrity.
We messed with Texas. Lets Go Mountaineers!
What on Earth does that mean?
Seems you are clairvoyant as well given that you detected her "petty, self-absorbed, woe-is-me-the-victim attitude" from her simple statement of fact. And seriously, if she was interviewed by a black person and was denied admission because "her blatant racism just oozed out", doesn't that in and of itself constitute racism?
The uncomfortable truth is that if not for the quotas in university admissions (ie the promotion of a 'racially diverse student body'), the university populations wouldn't be diverse.
Simply put, certain cultures promote education more than others. The problem lies with the cultures. The whole 'blame someone else' attitude is killing this country.
Label me a racist, I don't care. It's the truth.
I went to a university that was very competitive to get into - the cutoff for getting in was a mid-90s average for high school grades. 50% of the student population was Asian, 75%+ of the student population was Asian and brown, and probably 90%+ were 1rst or 2nd generation immigrants. And you know what? I was extremely happy about that, b/c if Asians are working harder than others, they deserve to be there over others. I wasn't happy about what it says for our society though.
There was literally one black student in my graduating class. I find it sad b/c Asians aren't (biologically) any smarter or better than blacks, but their cultures are polar opposites, and I don't doubt that the cultural differences cause the disparities.
Yeah she claims that the other who students got in weren't as "qualified" as her, but nobody would know unless we put their resumes side by side. Could it be possible that her Essay's sucked? or that her SAT (or ACT) scores were much lower. I'm a black male, I scored a 1300/1600 on the SAT, had a 4.26ish gpa coming out of HS ranked 14th. I got into UNC (I just Graduated!!! wohooo) and the Salutatorian from my class didn't. Did he hold more positions than me? Yes (I played sports so that may have been a wash). His GPA was over 5.0, but then we get to the SAT and the essay... His essays were terrible and he barely scored 1000 on the SAT. I say all of this to say, its hard judge whether race played a factor since we don't have all of the details. I think we should look back to why these "diversity" rules were placed in the system in the first place... RACISM by WHITE PEOPLE. Its so crazy how racism begets more racism. Not saying its right, because it isn't, but everything comes from something.
Bayllie: if you could read properly, the article states she competed with "OTHERS" who were not in the top 10 %. Figures an Obama fan shoots their mouth off before knowing what they are talking about.
Bayllie: MY Bad. Maybe I have to learn to read. If she didn't make the top ten percent, then she has no case. I do not see racism if she failed herself to make the top ten percent. Typical Republican shooting his mouth off without knowing the story.
If the situation was reversed and it was another white student picked instead of her, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
rkb555,
Exactly, because then there wouldn't have been any discrimination based on race.
Rational Randy
show me where in the article does it state she was part of the 10%. The only thing that you will find is this:
which states she was not ENTITLED. Entitled means To furnish with a right or claim to something. You should know what " entitled" means since the Republicans love to use the word as a comma. Had she been part of the top 10%, she would have been automatically selected as part of the rule. Instead, she had to compete with the other 90%.
Figures a Romney fan does not let facts get in his way and does not know what he is talking about.
She is unaware of the fact that UT has a quota for how many terminally annoying students they admit and had reached their quota.
Was that the one where Ginger was wearing that tight dress?
Not necessary. It constitutes a pi$$ poor attitude on the part of the white student for even bringing up the fact that she was interviewed by a black person. If she was not a racist with a pi$$ poor attitude why would she even mention it? How do you know that what she says is true? Her word? Here's the problem here. We are reading her side of the story without hearing the school's side so it appears the school is in error where in reality the lower courts have heard the whole case and decided the school was not in error for choosing the black student.
Ask yourself...would this even be in the news if we didn't have a black president?
@ mary p comment #1.12
You have a very good point. Just because this white student was in the top 10% of her school does not mean she is smarter than the black student. I only means that she was smarter than 90% of the students in HER school. The black student could have scored better on admission test.
Rational Randy
I see you posted a retraction which I noticed after.
I do think this girl may have a legit reason to complain since she apparently had worked just as hard or even harder. That being said, I also think that many kids have a advantage just because of the zip code they live in. What school you attend has a huge difference on what college (if any) you will attend. Do I think it's fair? No but I also don't think there is a perfect solution to this problem. I also don't think it is fair that a child's future is predetermined just because of where his/her parents live or what their financial status is.
Take SAT scores for example. Does anyone think that students at a poor school in Worcester, MA have the same opportunity and education as students at St. Johns Academy in Worcester, MA?
So we automatically write all those kids off even though they attended poor schools for no fault of their own?
And I'm not saying by any means that skipping people like Abigail is fair. All I am saying is that someone will have to lose for someone else to win.
Should this admissions policy be based on race? I say no. BUT, I think it's difficult to make a case against this admissions policy if it was based on socioeconomic status. There are all sorts of factors that go into intelligence and potential. Not all are acquired in school, and not all can be tested. A child from an impoverished home, who has to worry about violence and hunger, who doesn't have the opportunities for enriching extra curricular activities, and who's school is poorly funded and can't afford state of the art facilities, teachers, etc, can't be held side by side next to a child who's lived the opposite of that. To do so, would be a sure fire way to keep the rich rich, and the poor poor.
The 10% automatic entrance seems fair. After that, weight socioeconomic factors into it. And, those who don't get it, who may have higher scores then the impoverished kid who DOES get in, may just have to chalk it up to a sacrifice, for having had a more comfortable life, and go somewhere else. It'll build character.
Will our nation ever tire of the 'Race or Victim Card'? Again, look to the Jews. 3500 years of being the most hated race on earth. Over 400 years in slavery alone in Egypt. The most mass-murdered people in a 3-4 year period ever (WW II). Yet still the toughest people walking the earth today... and never, ever plays the 'Victim/Race Card'. Praying for the day the Black man learns from the resolve of the Jews. We can all learn from their example.
Think of it this way...
Imagine if me and Joe Schmo are sitting around playing Monopoly for two hours, and we own everything on the board, except those two, @!$%#ty dark purple properties right next to Go, and Jane Doe comes in, and wants to join. It's not her fault she's late, her parents just sucked and couldn't get her there on time. What chance would she stand, of ending the game with anything in her favor?
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” (Roberts)
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." (MLK)
For anyone that understands the concept of the above statement the decision should be obvious.
Don't worry guys, she'll win, she's white, Texas is red, and the court is republican.
A win, win for her.
No dream is ever going to overpower the content of the United States, which were born of prejudice.
Sounds like you could be a politician, what a useless speech, the Jews....LOL!! I guess you're all ready for an American invasion of Iran, to help your buddies, the Jews.
Now I take side line. It shows how the US is an infant nation that race has to be argued over. What would king Solomon would do in this case. Remember the story of the two mothers? Well, either he will admit both or neither. But then the US does not have that wisdom.
I like to ask the supreme court though that; should a student be allowed to enroll in to college because his parents threatened to break the leg of admission and chancellor?
Sarah many of our fore fathers were self taught. Your education, is pretty much in your own hands. Many well to do kids are dumb as rocks. Lets stop making excuses, and start looking in the mirror. Racism is Racism, we as a free country full of people from all walks of life need no laws based on color. That favor some over others, WE WERE ALL CREATED EQUAL.
Nicely put, Roy. Kind of cuts through the bull stated and restated above. The need for affirmative action is over. If we are going to put racial divides behind us, it's time to stop using race in any way, shape or form to gain advantage, either academically, socially, politically or economically. Another commenter noted that racist demagogues like Sharpton and Jackson make a living keeping the edges of racial disharmony as sharp as ever; they're no better than any sheet-wearing KKK'er or skinhead, just less blatant and not as overtly violent. Reverse racism is not only real, it's getting worse and feeding the attitude of entitlement that is pushing this country ever close to becoming a welfare state. As for moshuluu, you're a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Maverick,
Did you miss the part where I said, DON'T base this on race? Yes, we're all created equal, and are inherently equal.
We're NOT all born with equal access to quality education. Until the most impoverished school districts are run as well and have the same facilities and funds as the richest, this WILL remain true.
And our fore fathers? That was 200+ years ago. How they were educated is NOT applicable to today's educational system.
I hope this girl wins. What UT did is discrimination no matter how you slice it. Another girl from the same high school as her with a lower GPA and test scores and involved in fewer school activities was admitted and she was not, with the determining factor being race. This is wrong. We will not end racism in this country so long as race has anything to do with decisions like this. In fact, it is decisions like this that actually promote and serve to engender racism. When you see someone getting something you want not because they are more deserving, but because of the color of their skin, it is very hard not to become somewhat racist yourself do to the anger this treatment causes.
Reverse racism is alive and well in america. You see it in the work place as well as in colleges and schools that hire only bilingual people, people of color, and even in the scholarship programs, white Americans are discriminated against as well. You have to look a certain way, be black, hispanic, asian, or some kind of a minority.
In CA, white people have already become the minority.
Ok. a few points.... she stated that kids from HER school and class that graduated with a lower average than her and less extracurricular activities ( things that are supposed to help boost your ability to be accepted into college) got in and the only factor that she knows of is race. So maybe some of them had financial troubles, but the obvious bias in comments here is that a white student couldnt be financially needy ( blatantly false). That is why it will go to SCOTUS.
Next point is that as far as I can see from these comments, people are commenting without reading the entire article. Moshuluu... Supreme Court of the US. ie.. not Texas.. so your obvious political skewed comment with your own personal bigotry is incorrect.
Next... one person states a hypothetical situation where she might have been interviewed by a black person.. and others ( who obviously have comprehension skill issues) run with it. As far as I have seen, nothing has been asserted about any interview. So stop painting her racist because someone came up with a theory.
Personally I think the time for using Affirmative Action or Quotas is over. There are enough civil remedies in our court system for people who feel they were discriminated against that we do not need to continue to create a fear in employers for and against hiring anyone. We need to continue to work on creating environments in our school system to help all students achieve and become the best they can. Because.. I really do not want to go to a doctor that only got their degree because they met some arbitrary accident of birth like skin color or gender. Everyone deserves a chance. everyone..
Sarah,
I get what you are saying about socio economic standards, but the whole point of the case is based on race. A poor white student is no more likely to get a great job than a poor black kid. The reason white people are thought to have a head start is because there are some that are rich, and they know others that are rich, so they just all continue to be rich. So again, I understand not having the same economic standings will keep some down, but the whole point of this thread is about admitting people based on race. Trying to change it to anything else negates your argument. Not to mention is was black kids from her own school that were admitted ahead of her, so there goes your whole point.
Sarah..."A child from an impoverished home, who has to worry about violence and hunger...."
In the large city near where I live, there was a news story of a mother moving her junior high kid into a private school because he was bullied for "acting white", i.e. making good grades and trying to excel academically.
"Yes, we're all created equal,..."
Have to disagree with you on this one. Some people are much more intelligent than others based solely on winning the genetic lotto.
(Good to see you on the board. You haven't been around here much lately. Is the new job keeping you too busy?)
Wow, apparently everyone here is psychic. You all know EXACTLY what happened. That is impressive.
From what I can tell, there are too many unanswered questions:
1) If she was NOT in the top 10%, and the other students were NOT in the top 10%, then neither was entitled to admission. Thus, she falls into the same category as the millions of other college applicants that apply and get rejected from numerous schools.
2) How does she know the test scores of the other students? Did she go around and ask each and every one? Did they actually give her their test results? I know that I would never give some random chick my personal information, but that is just me.
3) What did she write on her application, or say in her interview? Just like a job interview, you can be qualified but still screw up the application and interview. Just because you are qualified does not mean you are entitled.
Too many unanswered questions to judge either way. If the other students were chosen strictly over race, that is wrong. If there were other, non-racial factors in determining admission, then the university may have been within their rights.
The girl argues that she can only see race as the issue, since she had a higher grade point average and more activities. But Jon From N. Carolina (post 1.19) is correct, universities look at many different things. Maybe her interview and/or essay had poor grammar and use of vocabulary. Perhaps her teachers were more lenient in their grading then those she competed with and it showed during the interview/essay processes. Perhaps she is looking at her more activities as a quantitative factor instead of a qualitative factor (for example; perhaps one of those classmates that was included played a sport and one activity. Accounting for practices, games, traveling, and meetings it might have taken 16 hours per week. Now say she was in 5 activities that met 1 day per week for 1 hour, that accounts for only 5 hours per week. Quantitatively the 5 extra-curricular activities beats the 2, but quantitatively the 2 edges out).
This court will be remembered as one of the Most Insane!!!. obamaDoNOTcare is Unconstitutional, however we will let it stand as a tax?!!.. They outlaw Yard Sales??!!! With the wrecked economy of the last 4 years, yard sales and Pawn shops are the only way lower middle-class can make it month to month!!. OMG==ObamaMustGOooo!!!
This court will be remembered as one of the Most Insane!!!. obamaDoNOTcare is Unconstitutional, however we will let it stand as a tax?!!.. They outlaw Yard Sales??!!! With the wrecked economy of the last 4 years, yard sales and Pawn shops are the only way lower middle-class can make it month to month!!. OMG==ObamaMustGOooo!!!
madMarinedad,
If you had read the story with at least a little neutrality you would have read;
They weren't in all of the activities she was in. Part of the college entrance process and screening is the college's view on extracurricular activities which shows the entrance board the candidate's accomplishment, initiative, commitment, and leadership. Given they had worse grades, didn't participate in the amount and number of activities she did it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out it was based on race. No clairvoyance needed. I also don't need to be clairvoyant to figure out you're just another Liberal/Progressive on a race guilt trip. You've probably had a lot of things handed to you and you feel guilty about it.
hs321
In CT,mother gets 5 yrs i prison for sending child to school outside her district. She wanted to send her kid to a better school but couldn't because of her zip code. Fair? Not to the kid who was denied the same opportunity and his mother!
I'll bet every single one of you would want better for your kids and would do the same.
IXLR8
The article clearly states that she was not in the top 10% of her class and therefore was competing against others without automatic inclusion. And your statement that those not in the top 10% did not work hard for their standing is ludicrous. George Bush was not even close to the top 10% (being an average "C" student) yet he became president of the United States. So to you and the 47 who voted you up, reread the article more carefully and never deny hard work to someone simply because they aren't in the top 10%.
border joe
Repetition does not make truth. I think that maybe you are on the wrong side of the border. This has nothing to do with President Obama or any other president. These admission rules have been around for decades and have been consistently challenged and amended as needed for decades.
Conservatives.... You should see the BO dems
at the Benghazi Gate hearings.....Here comes the latest "spin"
Are you ready? Cuz the BO DEM excuses are piling up as high as
Obamas DUMBO ears....ready?
According to LEFTEST noodle- Dennis Kunsinach (D) Ohio
ITs congresses fault ..... A. Stevens is dead....OMFG!
If it wasn't soooo pathetic it would be hysterical.
“There were people in my class with lower grades, who weren't in all the activities I was in, who were accepted into UT. And the only difference between us was the color of our skin," she said.
OK, does anyone else see a problem with this sentence? Which is it? The difference, is it the 'grades/lower', or the 'activities' or the color of the skin? It reminds me of the same illogical stench I smell when I hear "I have the exact same car, but mine has 4 doors and not two and it is red and not blue" So is the car exact or is it similar? Well at least whichever university she does get into, I pray that they do have instruction in critical/logical thinking. Much too little cognitive ability in America these days!
Mr. Burns,
I know what the case is about. I'm thinking of possible solutions, to level the playing field for ALL, not just for a single race. You know, coming up with solutions, instead of just screaming, "RACE".
HS,
Yes, there are some districts that are opened regardless of zip code, but at least in my home state, transportation isn't provided. Which could be a huge barrier to utilizing that solution, and it isn't a universal option.
No new job, new grad student. But, yes it's going well. Good to see you on here too. Those that can remain civil and disagree are always welcome in my book. Hope everything's rosy in your world! :)
affirmative action programs are equivalent to state sponsored (institutional) racism....
another noble idea by blubbering liberals, but ends up being more hurtful than helpful (as usual)
Here is a novel idea. Remove race from consideration period. Take the top 10% as before. Then take the rest based on the academic achievement and whatever space is available in XYZ program. End of story and end of lawsuits from anyone and everyone.
This should go for all applications unless it is necessary to identify the person or verify their identity in some extra manner - say on a Driver's License or other state issued ID.
Ok can people just stop using the term "reverse racism"? It's not a real term. Racism is from any race to any race. It isn't reversed when it is towards white people. It is still just racism. Maybe this girl used that term in her admissions essay and they determined she was too dumb to get in :p
Wow!!! SOME white folks in America have a very short, or limited memory. How can we forget how racist America truly was, and is. 500 years of slavery, that ended in 1865. Reconstruction racism, which brought us the KKK, Segregation, Jim Crow, Discrimination, which carried on well into the 1970's. We had to amend our constitution for people of color, and women to vote for God's sake!! Affirmative Action was created because without it Americans of African decent were totally, and systemically, locked out of the American mainstream of life. Legal American apartheid!! How soon we forget!!! Now we whine and cry about our perceived, minuscule perceptions of REVERSE DISCRIMINATION!! Never thinking about the generations, upon generations of American citizens that faced church bombings, lynching, beatings, oppression, intimidation, poll taxes, economic oppression, all because their skin was not white. It was not that long ago people!
Look at the hatred our President, and his wife, and children faces each and everyday due to the color of his skin. This President has had more death threat against his life, and his family then ALL the past Presidents COMBINED!!! What does that tell you about race in America today. Now, we want to go BACK to poll taxes, and voter suppression to trump the will of the electorate. We would like to think we've moved past the issue of race, but all you have to do is ask ANY person of color (If you have the courage) then listen, and try to understand how they feel. Then, and only then, will you get the true state of racial conditions in America today. If YOU never faced it, YOU will never UNDERSTAND!! May GOD help us....
How about no race, gender, anything on all forms used for selection? That would surely even things out. I know, but then someone will say that many students wouldn't get in because of crappy high-schools. So fix the high-schools then, oh wait...but even then private schools would have a leg up on public ones, due to funding. So how about no public money for private schools...I mean if they are primarily for those that can afford them anyway:) There is a solution here though, and we all need to find it, but discriminating so as not to discriminate is ludicrous! The first step should be removing all demographic info from the selection process, period.
You want to end racism
Do like I do check OTHER and write in HUMAN on the line provided.
There is only one race the HUMAN RACE.
Last time I checked we all bleed red, we can agree to disagree on a lot of different issues but this one needs to go away once and for all.
BAYLLIE. Noo, she wasn't in the top 10% of her class, HOWEVER..."And though her academic credentials were superior to some minority applicants who were admitted to the University of Texas, Fisher was not." And WHY not, she had better credentials but was stepped over because of RACE! You're an idiot.
mackman,
Really? The black man was working the cotton fields back in 1365? I sure bet ol Christopher Columbus was surprised when he got here.
Yes, the big bad racist monster rears its ugly head and votes him in as President of the United States. Go find another line of work Al.
Bonebreaker1
she claims. do you know academic credentials of all that applied to the same school, same year as you?
and grades are not the only thing you get judged on. It's the whole package and let me tell you, students are like DNA - no two alike. Too many variables.
Here here white people who wanted and needed diversity way back when..
Sarah,
You're a troll arent you. I see you all the time posting BS. This story is about a woman who is upset black people in her own school were admitted ahead of her. Nothing about different and worse schools. Yet you bring it up to justify racism. Good going Sarah. What makes you so damned crazy.
I want to know how Abigail knows what the other student's scores were. My daughter goes to school at UT Austin and if you don't meet the criteria of a certain GPA, Sat, ACT, class rank, you don't get in, period. I had one daughter apply and get wait listed, another who got in. We were not surprized by either. But we never knew what other peoples scores or class ranks were. I have run in to people who are angry when their cheerleader didn't get in even though she had low scores. It is a huge school and the number of kids on the 40 acres is huge. Why this one girl thinks it is about race makes me wonder? Oh and by the way, my kid is caucasion.
UT admission is based on being in the top 10% of your high school class. Your ACT or SAT score need to be above average. You need to distinguish your self in some manner besides academics, either art, music, athletics, debate. You need to have volunteered in your community. You need a steller application letter. If you don't jump through all these hoops, you don't get in. Period. I have a daughter in school there currently who jumped through the hoops and another kid that did not get in because her academic scores were not high enough. I know one crazy cheerleader mom who made a stink because her kid didn't get in but the girl's grades were not good enough. I don't believe for a second that race plays a part in UT's acceptance policy and I we are caucasion.
Didn't mean to repeat the post, darn I pad! Sorry.
Our great nation is a Republic and as such protects the ultimate minority, the individual.
Our Republic offers the greatest Constitution ever created.
Our Constitution enforces the greatest Bill of Rights ever created.
The most important thing America offers is Equal Opportunity, NOT Equal Outcomes.
When the affirmative action cases were initially decided, and the laws providing for it were passed, the country was attempting to reverse, as quickly as possible, the direct effects of discrimination which had permeated every aspect of our nation, particularly in the South.
In the 50 years since the Civil Rights act, discrimination in school admissions against blacks and other minorities is almost non-existent. There may be isolated incidents, but they do not require a corrective blanket policy which treats people differently based on the color of their skin. The circumstances in which the wide majority of black people are educated are not so widely different as to require preferential treatment.
While there are, without any doubt, some students who, due to the community they grow up in are not as prepared for college or do not test as well as others. It may be that, on a percentage basis, there are more poor black students than poor white students. However, that is an argument for giving all students who have a difficult economic background a qualitative advantage, not simply those who are of one race or color.
JimSpence, #1.69- NICE POST!!! EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. EXACTLY.
This case isn't about Racism, at the basis, it's about Discrimination; and the Discrimination here seems to lie in the automatic unlimited 10% factor which starts the ball rolling. What if 90% of the enrollment is made up of 10 Percenters? It's the 10% factor that is establishing a "finite" factor to be applied to the determinination of what is "in-finite", FIRST, before "in-finite" is even allowed to exist, to even be considered.
In this case, also, the only really "legitimate finite" that exists is in the University having a "finite" number of slots; therefore, One can only look for the element of Discrimination, not necessarily just Race, FIRST, within the "finite" number of slots available as opposed to looking for the problem within the larger "in-finite" Societal slots-as-factors, either FIRST or after-the-fact. Would she have gotten in if there was 1 less 10 Percenter there? Nobody knows because it's "wrongly" set up to also automatically not be a consideration.
It's the 10% unlimited, too narrowly defined automatic factor that is not only discriminatory, but actually sets the stage, supports , advances and furthers [it], Discrimination, all at the same time, No?
Mr. Burns,
Why so angry? Are you going to, "release the hounds"??? Seriously dude, you don't even know me. It cracks me up how upset I can get strangers, sometimes. They engage me, and then next thing I know, "Meh, meh meh, meh, liberal, freeloading, gay loving, illegal, crazy Muslim!"
Dude, I'm not worth your being that pissed at. And if you've seen me on here before, and didn't like what you read, WHY ADDRESS A POST TO ME???
I didn't know you were limiting the conversation to, "Yes I agree" or "No I don't". It must be nice to see things so simply, AND get to make the rules on where the discussion can go.
But please, explain to me this...
I said it SHOULDN'T be based on race, right? In my very first post. So, how would this be "racist" if it WASN'T based on race, i.e. socioeconomic status, as I suggested. Unless you're toiling under the ridiculously ignorant belief that ALL poor people are black?
Do you really believe that the hatred the president faces is because of his skin? It has nothing to do with his exceptionally lousy leadership skills?
Give us a hint. Where did you pull this data other than from your rectal data base?
That is like saying as long as you consider yourself repressed you will be. How do you reconcile the successful people of your race?
It hasn't been of much help so far, why would god change things now?
Go-N-Out-of-Biz #1.5
Give it a rest! #1.7
I say good call, both of you. OK, Athletic Depts...at all Colleges and even at the Professional level, Where is the Affirmative Action for us "Middle Sized White boys" to paraphrase what's his name from 'Slap Shot' about being able to play hockey. Yeah, some one would cry foul if we made the College and Professional Athletic Teams "look more like common everyday America" as was the directive of Affirmative Action in the Business World.
And why should anything be based on the color of skin, Fairness is in ability. Is it fair I can not play Pro football? Is it fair that most (if not all) Pro athletes would not know the molecular weight of cobalt, or how to find the area under an arc?
The best way to qualify for a school is the same as the best way to qualify for an athletic team. Be Good At what you do. And for a University, grades and academic achievements should be the only yard stick. If you have 5,000 openings, then the top 5,000 scores get chosen. Simple. the only discrimination then is at an academic level.
And if you can not achieve the "Diversity" you desire through those methods, then perhaps you should come to understand there is a reason for it and focus on making the students you have, the best they can be. Instead of wishing you could make everyone the same. We need to quit this Politically correct crap. It is killing this nation and dividing us further, not bringing us together.
WE ARE NOT EQUAL. PERIOD. END OF SENTENCE. CAPICE! We all have our talents, some more than others, the only place we are equal is in the eyes of the law and the court room.
And it is high time we learned that we can not make each other equal, via diversity.
@ thinker #1.73
D**n Dude, rip him a new one, ;-)
But well said. And I have to concur about correlation between the death threats to the president and his leadership abilities. I myself would very much like to see this man (as well as most of Congress) tried and convicted of Treason against this great Nation, and the Sovereign State of Kansas and sentenced to death. But alas, it is only a dream.
I don't know how accurate this info is, but I heard that Ms. Fisher only scored an 1180 on the SAT and the person picked over her scored an 1260. This could have been a factor.
@the thinker, actually his figure on the death threats is accurate, but what he didn't tell you was that he had goten that many death threats in the time span from the day he was elected to the day he was sworn in. Thusly, discrediting your notion that it was about his policies/leadership skills. It is old news, really.
DumbFarmBoy, #1.74- Nice post! Interesting and well posited confluences to a crescendo, (oxymoron), of conflagration. (I'm playing with some "c"-words from the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language this morning)
"we cannot make each other equal, via diversity". Agreed. Neither can we make each other "unequal", via diversity. [Neither should we even be looking] to make ANYONE either "equal" or "unequal", via diversity. We should, though, be looking to make whatever "finite" system that seeks to make itself applicable to the diversity of Societal factors, equal; at the basis, the foundation of the system, itself, and not to the diversity of any one single Person, per se. I think that in this case, "Equal" is mistakenly being viewed as a 50/50 proposition, instead of "comprehensively". (and, again, it's not about "factoring" People, it's about "factoring" the System; in this case, the "finate" number of slots that make up a key and central component of the System, as a whole).
Why not reserve 10% of "finite" slots for those within the top 10% and open the other 90% to other Societal Diversities that are not of the 10% and begin from there? Also in all of this, "unfair competition" for EQUAL OPPORTUNITY is immediately created, off the bat, when the State says and actually imposes that Higher Education is really only about and for academically the top 10%. You don't need "higher education" if you're not already in the top 10%?
Sarah-3043284, #1.72- COOL BEANS! TOTALLY EXCELLENT-EXCELLENT-EXCELLENT!!!! post. Thanks so much for "just sayin'", so it was there to be read! I've always enjoyed reading MANY-MANY-MANY of your posts on MANY other threads that I've seen and run into you on.
I think it's really good that this topic is here, now; and I also think that it epitomizes "absurdities" as the new "wrongly-imposed-on-Society" Status Quo, in myriad ways. Nuff "off-topic" of my compliment to you.
@Mystery Rhee
I am not sure I understand your argument. [ But I think this is what UT's policy is. 10% of the high scores (regardless of skin type) are accepted and the remaining slots are filled by a process of various factors to include skin color (ethnicity)] Are you talking 100% of the society (all of America?) or 100% of a single institution? (My argument was for a single institution, knowing that there are several thousand such institutions in which there is a wide range in diversity; Faith Based (Catholic, Wesleyan, Methodist, Baptist, etc) Private (Baker, Phoenix, South Western, UTI, etc) Pulbic, all state Universities.
BTW, Did you know that the NAACP does NOT accept scholarship applications from non-colored (white) applicants? (or at least it didn't a few months ago, (Applicant must be African-American or Latino)(but they are also a private organization, and can do what they want)
So, if one of these school has 20,000 openings, why would skin color be assessed as a qualifying measure in any of them? (Unless it is an all [one] color school) Why would sex? (Unless it is an all male or female school) And why can't we have all [one] sex or color schools? Hey if I don't like whitey, or the chinks (slang for all Orientals) why do I have to go to school with them smart ass know it alls? but I digress.
Why shouldn't the only qualifying factor be that the highest scoring 20,000 applicants, regardless of any other factor, are accepted? How else would you discriminate?
If I understand you correctly, the top 10% are academically selected and the rest are based on subjective, racist, sexist, bigoted criteria to accommodate some arbitrary notion of fairness judged and assessed by some arbitrary panel of chauvinists ( :undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged)
I understand that these Academics are trying to expose the students to other cultures and traditions by diversification. It is a misguided adventure. (When I was in college, one of my acquaintances was from China, nice guy, but he ate with sticks, not bad if your in a jungle and have nothing else, but we have access to knives, spoons and forks) The best thing is to educate the students in education, not liberal ideology. (If we get to know each other, we will "love each other") Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
What works is respect. If you pull you own weight, do you own work, feed you own kids, then you EARN my respect and there is nothing I won't do for you. (And I really don't give a good God Damn what color your skin is, or what language you speak) If you ask the government to fight your fight "Uncle Sam, he picking on me make him stop". (reference the Civil Rights Laws) then I have a problem with you. (ASK NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY (taxpayers) CAN DO FOR YOU...)
And just exactly when (while I am on the subject) did we forfeit our rights to be @!$%#s? But this goes towards my argument of what values do you use to discriminate?
If I owned a construction company and it was required to for an employee to repeatedly lift an 85 lb. sheet of plywood and carry a certain distance and install it, would I A). Hire a small petite female because she has a cute butt. or B) A large male, with large arms and a bad attitude. I'll go with B. {However, my failure to hire either the female or the black male, in deference to the Mexican male, has now opened me up to a discrimination lawsuit, and am being sued for not providing a job for all of them, being some sort of Rich White Guy...;-)
Now let's say I am a photographer making a calender, option A or B...?
Both of these situations require discrimination. And it is the attributes that pertain to the situation that determine the type of discrimination. (Let's use a White actor/actress to play the role in a Sickle Cell Awareness or hair relaxer commercial...something about a turd in the punch bowl?)
One of the things that seems to be overlooked in today's Academia is the need to prepare these kids for real world experiences. They seem more focused on Political Correctness agendas.
But that's only my opinion, What the hell do I know, I am just a dumb farm boy. i.e. a white male.
Racism is racism. This IS racism, and based on color, which is illegal in the U.S.
People who use race for monetary, educational, social, or political gains are practicing racism.
MLK was promoting a color blind society, trying to correct it by compensating for it actually promotes a color conscious society.
Agreed DB.
Martin Luther King had a Dream. WE have a nightmare.
This is a case of race being a factor in a decision. A factor. The goal of a bias here is to ensure diversity in the student body and to attempt to provide greater participation and opportunity for minority members (both for a college education and for inclusion in society) to address marked and very harmful exclusions, impoverishments, and limitations of past "policy." This is not racism - which is based on blind hatred and not on sober judgement of what's good for society.
I guess everyone who is screaming "racism!" also believe that a minority student will receive preferential treatment on grades? On assignments? On meal preferences? Hominy grits at every mea!!! The UT policy is sound. It should be validated by the Court.
Jersey Bob,
They are treating people differently solely based on the color of their skin. That's the definition of racism.
Jersey Bob
What you wrote was a crock. When A person is MORE Quilified for a position then another, but the the lesser quilified gets the positon because of their color... That My friend is discrimination No matter how you look at it.
Despite what some caucasians say, discrimination still exists. Despite what some non-caucasians say, not all of it is directed toward non-caucasians.
I would like to know (and of course we'll never know) the entire school record of this woman and the ones she says didn't have as high of an academic standing. SAT Scores, or whatever comparative tests were used, etc. Also, were all of these kids aiming to go to the same campus of the school?
The playing field should be level, especially for State schools, and I agree that race shouldn't even be on the applications. Or the students name, and anything else that would possibly differentiate them from another student.
I agree, racism is racism. However, as an African-American I also understand that people in a position of power have the ability to deny you opportunity if they do not want you to be associated with you. This means that some employers and schools will look at your personality, achievements, academic history, and yes, RACE, when considering you.
Just look back at the days when schools were first being integrated. People were strongly against allowing Blacks into white schools and it had nothing to do with the academia. It was pure racial prejudice.
On the other hand, I would never be proud of myself if I knew I knew that the only reason I received something was because of my race. I would still want to be able to back up my success with actual achievement rather than relying on handouts.
Honestly I think grating acceptance to the top 10% from each district is a good idea to skirt the affirmative action line. It is not directly focused on race or ethnicity, but most people are aware that race and ethnicity is a factor in district lines.
As an attorney and a citizen of the US, I'm not a fan of John Roberts, I think is judicial decisions for the most part are ill-conceived with two exceptions. One of those exceptions is the quote they used in this article: "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." That is truly the only way to stop. The writer of this article also failed to mention that while Justice O'Connor did pen the Michigan decision, in a previous affirmative action decision she stated that affirmative action should not continue for more than 20 years, that was over 20 years ago. Equality means equal, regardless of race.
What I find so troubling about Affirmative action cases is the utter failure to correct the current levels of discrimination in all areas. Take for example, the demographics of the head coaches in the Southeastern Conference. They are all white. Look at the admissions to law schools and the demographics of professors who write the LSAT, lets look at the 90% percentile of admissions that are basically reserved for white applicants with the 10 percentile that is reserved for the underrepresented races in the legal system. The system always has a jail cell open for minorities but not a guarantee seat in the classroom. If a student cannot gain admissions in the 90th percentile of the class based upon their merit, then why attack the other 10 percentile. If affirmation action is unconstitutional in college admissions, then I believe that I will hire me an attorney to legally challenge the "legacy admissions" in Colleges and Universities.
Do you have any proof that anyone other than the best-qualified candidate was hired?
What percentage of minority applicants were admitted compared to the percentage of white applicants?
Nice platitude. Nobody should be guaranteed a seat in a classroom, other than by qualification.
I will support you in that endeavor.
Waynero,
When you have to use examples from over a half century ago to make a point, you dont have a point.
Mr Burns, if you think there are not people or institutions that are as racist as they were over half a century ago, you are ignorant.
Racism in USA may not be as blatant as it was decades ago, but it is still very much present. I used that example because it is one of the most known examples. There are more recent examples like the swimming pool that was closed down after a scandal involving Caucasian members of the pool club complaining to the owner about Black pool club members.
Racism, prejudice, and segregation are not gone, and each is sent and received from all sides.
Affirmative Action = what happened in Dayton Ohio
(where a Dem politician was just indited on 145 counts of money laundering)
But I digress, Affirmative action in Ohio lead to the UNION fire department
having to lower the requirements for Black Firemen to get promoted..
What is the new Affirmative Action test score requirement??? errr FAILING
Yep if your black in Ohio & you want a UNION promotion...No Prob. A
ll you have to do is take the test
You do not have to actually PASS the test... I wish I was a Black UNION Dem :(
If we really want to stop judging people we need to get rid of the race question on the census, tax forms, job applications and college applications. I don't see that happening any time soon. There are still a lot of people who do want to judge others by the color of their skin even though it is wrong.
The questions related to a persons race are required by law. They are used by employers and colleges to demonstrate that, in fact, they are NOT discriminating in their decisions.
I'm not aware of any race questions on tax forms.
I would agree that if we stop focusing on the color of a person's skin, the color of the person's skin becomes irrelevant.
As much as I would want there to be no discrimination, the reality is that there are still a large number of people who will not, under any circumstances, have anything to do with anyone who is not white. That is why the questions of race are relevant. If you don't know what a person is doing about the race of the people he/she interacts with, you don't know that they are discriminating.
I agree with justice kennedy's vision inthat there should be no such thing as "African"-american, or "Gay" american or ANY OTHER KIND OF "" AMERICAN! I AM NOT A NORWIEGAN-AMERICAN! I AM AN AMERICAN THATS IT, THATS ALL, AND THERE SHOULDNT BE ANY OTHER TYPE OF AMERICAN!
Until we can all unite under the common flag of america and be just americans then we will always have some form of segregation in this country. You cannot say I am a "______" American but dont treat me like a "______" American. You cannot declare to everyone you meet that you are of a certain heritage and then expect everyone to forget that heritage when relating to you.
Lets all just be AMERICANS and unite towards the betterment of our country. I think its been proven that the way we are doing things now just isnt working! Its time to try something new!
From reading this article, and not reall knowing more than what was said, I too have to agree. What happened 300-400 years ago is the past, History... and people need to start looking at America as a country built of several races and all equal. But I find that there seems to be more and more reverse racism growing in this country and personally I am tired of hearing it period. We all bleed the same, put our pants on the same, and we all have the same equal liberties and rights. Wake up America! get over it and move on!
Really? I see the effects of it here in central Florida every single day. I estimate it will take at least another 3 to 4 generations before racism has been tamped down enough that we have no need for positive counter discriminatory practices.
Admission based on merit are fine as long as the playing field is level. The problem of course is that as much as the US wants to think of itself as having made great strides against racism (and in some ways it has) the reality is that the playing field is still very tilted.
It wasn't 300-400 years ago! Good Lord!
LOL I was going to let that point slide.
Agreed. I'm also getting very tired of hearing the whole "we owe your for slavery" propaganda.
1, If you want to be realistic about this, if not for slavery, "you" (most African-Americans) would not be here because your ancestors would not have met in order to reproduce, and your specfic DNA would not have been created. That is in no way, shape, or form a condonement of slavery or racism, but it is an inconvient truth to that argument. As ugly as it was, slavery is responsible for the very existence of almost all non-immigrant African Americans in this country.
2, African-Americans, blacks, people-of-color (or whatever group name you would like to use) were not the only ill-treated group in that time frame. Granted, that they probably had it the worst, but let's not forget that the Irish and Italian immigrants (for example) were not exactly warmly welcomed in the mid-1800's either. Through hard work and perseverance, those stereotypes were (largely) put to rest. I will concede that there is not the obvious visual difference to contend with, but the logic is still sound. If you heard an Irish person claim to be owed a debt because his ancestor was hit in the face with a rock while disembarking a ship from Ellis Island, you would probably scoff at him/her (granted, not entirely the same thing, but not entirely different either).
The best way to overcome racism is to not consider it. Everytime someone cries "racism", or the fact that a victim was of a different ethnic group than the perpetrator makes it a more serious offense and "hate crime" (murder is murder, if it's not self-defense does the reason really matter?), more and more attention is brought to it. If you hear an ethnic slur, just shrug and move on. If you make a big deal about it, the intention of it's use was validated. If it has no affect, it will eventually lose all meaning and go-away (ie. again think of Italian/Irish slurs).
The purpose of Affirmative Action (at least in today's world) is to level the playing field of people coming from different socio-economic backgrounds; the logic being that if you come from more money, you have an advantage in a better education and are expected to be appear more qualified. Therefore, if someone from the ghetto is comparable in grades and accomplishments to someone from an affluent area, it is very likely that they are more INTELLIGENT (meaning ability to learn and comprehend), even though they are less KNOWLEDGABLE (meaning what they actually know already).
If the reason for this admission denial was based on a gauge of INTELLIGENCE as I just described, and coincidentally the admitted people were all black, so be it. If it was just because they were black, that is wrong. Affirmative Action without bias towards race makes sense (only factors in advantages/disadvantages of applicants), but let's remember that there's white kids who live in the ghetto too (albeit maybe not as many).
Being enslaved has a profound negative affect on a culture.
I mean look at the British. They were enslaved by the Romans for almost 200 years.
It was so shaming, degrading and humiliating to have your people raped, pillaged, tortured and murdered, that they never recovered from it. Never became an economic power. Never had the most powerful navy in military history, never had any great minds come from England....I mean...the horror of it all!
Matty...."African-Americans...probably had it the worst,..."
Are you aware that Northern Africans made more slaves of southern Europeans than vice versa? So much so that if you were to determine race based on certain blood alleles, southern Europeans would be considered more closely related to northern Africans than they are to northern Europeans.
MattyG-NJ
You cannot equate the prejudices shown Ellis Island immigrants and slavery of the Blacks for 150 years. For one thing, the Italians and Irish came here of their own volition, they were coming here seeking freedom and a second chance, not at all the experience of Black Africans imported against their will into a persistent and cruel bondage.
Secondly, racism against Blacks has been institutionalized. It has been made part of the legal and social fabric of the country and that is what the "positive discriminatory" practices of Affirmative Action in question are attempting to mitigate.
Your attempt to cast the situation solely in terms of educational or intellectual merit is facile insofar as it dismisses or neglects the larger context of institutionalized prejudices which Affirmative Action was adopted to solve in the first place. While much has been gained in the way of Whites and Blacks "getting along" socially compared to 50 years ago and even with the Civil Rights Act having become a legal reality, the institutional racism is still very prevalent...the criminal justice system is a perfect example.
hs321,
Not even close.
Your bigotry slip is showing, dear.
Excerpt from "Seductive Beliefs" by Thomas Sowell:
What could be more emotionally satisfying than seeing others who have done better in the world as the villains responsible for your not having done as well? It is the ideal political explanation, from the standpoint of mass appeal, whether or not it makes any sense otherwise.
That has been the politically preferred explanation for economic differences between the Malay majority and the more prosperous Chinese minority in Malaysia, or between the Gentile majority and the Jewish minority in various countries in Europe between the two World Wars.
At various other times and places, it has been the preferred explanation for the economic differences between the Sinhalese and the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka, the Africans and the Lebanese in Sierra Leone, the Czechs and the Germans in Bohemia and numerous other groups in countries around the world.
The idea that the rich have gotten rich by making the poor poor has been an ideological theme that has played well in Third World countries, to explain why they lag so far behind the West.
....
Because the Western culture has been ascendant in the world in recent centuries, the image of rich white people and poor non-white people has made a deep impression, whether in theories of racial superiority-- which were big among "progressives" in the early 20th century-- or in theories of exploitation among "progressives" later on.
In a wider view of history, however, it becomes clear that, for centuries before the European ascendancy, Europe lagged far behind China in many achievements. Since neither of them changed much genetically between those times and the later rise of Europe, it is hard to reconcile this role reversal with racial theories.
....
It is hard to reconcile "exploitation" theories with the facts. While there have been conquered peoples made poorer by their conquerors, especially by Spanish conquerors in the Western Hemisphere, in general most poor countries were poor for reasons that existed before the conquerors arrived. Some Third World countries are poorer today than they were when they were ruled by Western countries, generations ago.
I understand your point. On the other hand, look at what happens when you lose your slaves. What have the Egyptians done since the Jews stopped building pyramids? How have the Germans been doing since they lost the unter-menschen in their mines and factories in 1945?
It's called sarcasm and/or irony. Get to know it. Make it your friend.
No bigotry Culheath...just lessons from history. I try not to cherry-pick and only use parts of history that support my views, but instead look at the big picture. Humans have made slaves of each other going back to the beginnings of civilization. We made slaves of other races, other cultures and sometimes even our own people, like is being done in Africa today.
You think white on black racism was bad? Just wait till these people take over:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM9uH4XgOmI
Let's say the U adopts a policy of admissions based on academics only, so nobody with lower grades will ever get admitted over someone with higher grades. Oh, but wait--are all A's equal? Probably not, depends on subjects, schools, teachers--so that's not altogether objective as a criterion. Ok, how about ACT/SAT scores? Using myself as an example: 1420 combined SAT (based on 1600 limit in early 70's). Highest GED scores ever seen where I attended grad school (mathematics). But although I am very good at some things, I am less good at others. A lot of entrepreneurial types, for instance, would score lower than me--I might ace them out on the mathematics of finance but they would ace me out in, say, developing marketing strategies. High math aptitude, for me, does not translate into a gift for recognizing metaphor in poetry (I tend to take things literally). Plus, is it fair to compare the SAT score of a kid who works at McD every night after school to help pay the rent and goes to school in a dangerous neighborhood vs the SAT score of a suburban princess (or prince) whose parents shell out for SAT prep classes? These factors might not overcome large score differences, but could certainly affect smaller differences. School activities? Again, the kid who does have to work long hours is at a disadvantage compared to the kid who does not. Or the kid who has to babysit while single mom works second or third shift. The kid whose family can afford the ever-increasing school fees vs. the kid whose family can't. What about the kid who was removed from an abusive home and landed in the foster system, moving from school to school, and beat the odds against graduating at all (as low as 20% for older foster kids). Or the kid living in a homeless shelter who still manages to graduate?
Seems to me part of what college is about is, no, not getting the ticket to belong to the "in crowd" for life but learning that whatever your childhood world was (good or bad) it was a tiny slice of the world itself. Learning that there are far more obstacles AND far more opportunities that you could have imagined. Or do we want to fund public post-secondary institutions that strive to maintain a status quo?
Culheath,
Why is it we dont hear the Japanese complaining all the time about racism, when they had their homes taken, and were thrown in jail under a hundred years ago, just for being Japanese? Those institutional racisms that you speak of are long gone. Trying to make excusses for this shows you to be a bigot. But you can continue in your racism if you desire.
Culheath -
I know it's hard for you to understand this, but the more that you try to legislate against racism, the more racism you will create. You can't legislate an idea or belief, however you can create a belief or idea through legislation. It's a simple cause-effect relationship.
For example, many people are getting tired of this legislated political correctness, and that creates resentment and contempt. That resentment and contempt eventually gets directed at the perceived beneficiary of the legislation, and that leads to racism. However, without that very legislation, those same people would have nothing to feel resentful towards, and there would be no/minimal negative racial feelings.
I would therefore agree that we do have institutionalized racism in this country, but I think it's actually a paradoxical result of intended counter-racism.
Mr. Burns -
(Completely understanding that your question was rhetorical, I would like to answer it in order to expand upon your point).
The reason is because, in large part, the Japanese do not allow themselves an excuse for failure. Successful people find ways to overcome obstacles, they don't dwell on historical misfortunes as insurmountable barriers. Japan has probably suffered more radiation trauma then any other geographical area in the past 50 years (excluding Chernobyl), between 2 nuclear bombs and the typhoon disaster, yet they remain a high class world power.
SRMcMahon -
VERY WELL SAID SIR (or Ma'am). You more eloquently stated what I was trying to get at. It's not just about the grades and activities, but the level of accomplishment based on the context of a student's environment (not their race in and of itself). To your point, a 3.5 gpa with a strong presence in a sport by a kid who grew up in a white house on Mayberry St. with a stay at home mom and well-to-do father (Norman Rockwell- esque) is probably less of an accomplishment than a 3.0 gpa with an instrument by a kid who grew up in the ghetto with a single mom, 2 baby siblings, and needed to work nights in order to help pay the rent.
Hey Cul, I would ask how's it going but, unfortunately, it still seems like the same old crap from some of the same crappers....and a few new ones. Not commenting here today seeing as how racism doesn't exist here in Amerikkka any longer. Plus, these gems......."Those institutional racisms that you speak of are long gone and they don't dwell on historical misfortunes as insurmountable barriers they don't dwell on historical misfortunes as insurmountable barriers" were enough for me. Just wanted to say hi, be well, 4 weeks to go!
Hey Sandie,
It's actually going well fr me.
Those comments you referenced are absurd of course. How anyone could possibly believe that institutionalized racism is long gone has obviously never looked at our judicial system as it is today.
Please let the old Civil Rights "pass on" so we can stop hearing how they are still be discriminated by all others!!! MOVE ON - to such things as the 75% illegitimate rate among Blacks and the soaring rates for Latinos and Whites - - maybe some self-control need to be taught by these leaders if THEY have any!!!
This is indeed a good question for the Supreme Court. I predict that they will strike down the law.
That said, how does a nation atone for economically and socially holding down a segment of the population for over 150 years after having freed them from slavery by its own hands? And, once the racial barriers fall, by what criterion do colleges admit students of different skin color when test scores are equal?
I suggest admittance not by color of skin, but by their families economic standing--the poorer student first--and the person making the decision would necessarily do so by "blind" admittance, i.e., no race section on the potential student's application.
How about the same criteria they use between people of the same race with equal test scores?
Hobbes',
So you are advocating punishing success? Isn't discrimination, regardless if the critera is color or economic standing, still discrimination?
Scub, I love the way you righties argue against social justice and empathy through RNC taking points. You don't think colleges admit legacy students? That isn't discrimination? I stand by my suggestion as a means of achieving some measure of social justice--the well off, who use far more of the commons, reaching back to help those less fortunate.
I love the way idiots of all political persuasions embrace their fallacies. Wouldn't it be better to end all bad acts rather than use one bad act as the justification for another?
@hobbes... sometimes those who are less fortunate are that way because they know things will be handed to them based on race or social standing, forget that they need to work for it like everyone else and earn that position by hard work.
Yeah, we should disarm the police so they can't repeat the violence of a shooter they are trying to stop.
@just me
I think you meant those that are less fortunate as well as those who feel entitled by wealth/birth. Both exist, and I agree that things should be earned, not just assumed.
As I said, I love the way idiots of all stripes embrace their fallacies. You are guilty of the fallacy of over-generalization when you find a similarity between two groups of people (ie. they are armed), and deduce from that that they are similar in everything else, and thusly deserve to be treated in exactly the same manner.
Hobbes - Please read my above comment. I think you are a little bit to eager to satisfy the sense of entitelment that is plaguing this country. With that said, I entirely agree that if on paper, 2 college applicants are exactly the same (or very close), preferential treatment should be given to the one who had to overcome more adversity to get to that point, because that is showing strength of individual character. If it's just by race, then the children of an affluent black businessman from Dallas would have an unfair advantage over those of a poor oil rig worker from Odessa, even though their scores on paper are the same, wouldn't you agree?
For the record to your above statement, I am about as right wing as they come, so to overgeneralize the stance of people who lean a specific way is unnecessary and incorrect. The RNC and DNC talking points are both designed to maximize impact with followers, and they are both equally misguided in different ways. I think that most "righties" believe that everyone should have to work for and earn what they have. Some people are luckier than others, such is life, but in my humble opinion a rich kid who coasts through life on daddy's coat-tails and a poor kid who coasts through life on welfare and government hand-outs, neither one really trying to work to better themselves, are both EQUALLY WORTHLESS to society.
How come poor people are always on welfare as you say. I grew up on a dead end dirt road in alabama and now i have a home and 60 acres paid for. i nor my family have never received any gov't assistance as you so asserted that all poor people just can't wait on a welfare check. I worked in grocery stores as a child what i have a problem with is when i see someone using WIC and then go get into their new caddilac escalade.
Culheath...that really wasn't a good analogy. You're a bright guy. Come on, you can do better than that.
MattyG-NJ, I agree with your first paragraph.
Concerning your second argument, everyone is not born with the same attributes/mental capacities any more than the in same environment. I am suggesting that what is the usual case with most "righties" I've encountered, is that they follow the view of Romney that all low achievers and those on government assistance are freeloaders (with Romney, it's 47% of Americans, including wounded veterans, the sick and the elderly). I will give him this much--he likely didn't give that statement much thought. However, I believe he certainly does know just how untruthful he is, and that he swings positions to whichever way the political wind is blowing at the moment, and his sole desire is to side with Wall Street at the expense of the worker. He is the quintessential Sophist. Riding on a wave of fear, he makes the emotionally prone believe he will improve their station, while his actions show that he will continue the policies that got us into the deep recession that started because of, and while, all the Cheney/Bush Reaganomics policies (redistribution upward) were still in place.
Yes, there are freeloaders, on Wall Street as well as on Skid Row. Supply Side Economics has redistributed the wealth from the lower classes to the wealthy, and it brought us a deep recession--depression for many. Those who lost their good paying jobs to China are not freeloaders, nor are the sick and nor are the elderly (I am one of the elderly, recently retired).
hs321,
You give Culheath WAY too much credit.
Hobbes - I'm not sure that I understand your point. I'm not debating presidential candidates with you, that would be an exercise in futility, and this is discussion is not about Romney vs Obama; it is about the place of race as a determing factor in college admission. I care about your opinion of Romeny like you care about my opinion of Obama, but I do care when you make a general statement that implies that people who lean to the right intentionally look to further themselves to the detriment of those less fortunate.
I would agree that those who work and put forth effort to the best of their ability and still need some assistance to get back on their feet are not freeloaders. I have great admiration for those who "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" so to speak, and do what they need to do to make their way in the world, rather than turn to gangs and thuggery. My issue, and the issue of most "righties" that I know, is in seeing people just looking for a handout, not people who collect unemployment whilst in the pursuit of a new job, or people who collect social security to supplement their pension. Handouts come in different forms, some foster parents take in additional kids in order to bring in enough money that they don't have to work (and some foster parents provide loving households, only an example), some people claim disability for injuries that no longer affect them, some people sit around doing drugs while begging for change or spending daddy's allowance.
I want to see people live within their means while doing what they are able. I have a neighbor who is slow, and recently retired on disability after doing whatever work she could for the better part of 30 years and then looking for a job for over 2. Now she uses her time to volunteer at the local senior center. She drives a modest car, and lives within a reasonable budget. I would never dream of faulting her for that or calling her a freeloader, and most "righties" that I know wouldn't either. The issue comes in with those who collect the same disability while trying to drive a lexus and watching tv all day.
MattyG-NJ, I understand the nature of the subject. However, one cannot escape the overall theme of the nature of the category in which one places himself. While all conservatives are not raciest, I would argue that it appears to me that most racists are conservatives. I didn't mean to paint all conservatives with the same brush. However, it is quite clear to me that if one supports "conservative" candidates such as Romney, one is accepting the "conservative" view of Reaganomics, which hurts the middle class and the poor the most, while further enriching the already wealthy. Conservatives today own that policy, and yes, it greatly affects the poverty class, which is predominantly black (percentage wise) because of overt past and covert present discrimination.
". . . some foster parents take in additional kids in order to bring in enough money that they don't have to work."
Foster parents who have taken in several kids don't work? Have you ever kept a house with several kids living in it? Cooked for them? I keep house because my wife works and we have no kids living at home, and it's a full time job. It's really given me an appreciation for what my wife went through when I was working and doing less at home. I get your point, however. Likely there are some who want to collect the money and not take care of the kids. In these cases, it seems to me that Social Services would eventually sniff them out.
A big point I am trying to make is that the right is forever whipping poor folks who play the system while ignoring Wall Street, which plays the system for Billion$ per dollar more than those relatively few on the bottom.
Bottom line, it looks like we agree on much, just not on the degree. Apparently, you think the malingerers/system players at the bottom are the major problem. Nah, it's deregulated Wall Street. If I had to choose, I'd go after Wall Street rather than the poor. And personally, I'd love to police both, and hit Wall Street every bit as hard as law breakers on the bottom.
Did they offer a reason for not admitting her? Something's missing from this story.
I'm in agreement that there seems to be information missing from this story.
Maybe they didn't admit it because they perceived a history of whining and blaming others for her own problems.
Surely you aren't suggesting that they reserve that admission tactic for minorities.
Colleges typically don't address why you didn't get accepted. You send off your application, and you get an acceptance packet, or a rejection letter. I'm sure that during this process, the criteria that the university was using will be investigated thoroughly.
Yes, it is racism. Yet another sad degradation of society where race is considered before grades or achievements. I hope the court considers this factor in their decision.
But how do you know for sure? How do you know why they rejected her application?
When I was applying for school, I was accepted into several highly regarded universities even though my GPA wasn't amazing nor did I participate much outside of school.
I was accepted based on my essay and SAT scores.
I'm white, but AA was in place and I'm sure I was admitted over other seemingly better qualified applicants with different skin tone or sex parts.
A race case and Texas , What a surprise lolololololololol
If she had better scores than other applicants who were admitted and they were of a different race how did the admissions office justify that? We have to stop practicing racism to achieve a color blind society.
Nana
This is done all of the time. It is done in both state and federal hiring process, contract awards, and thousands of other. Until we have a law that takes race, sex, religion, age, and other group identifiers out of the equation, it will continue.
This happens all the time. Most colleges are afraid someone will scream racism so they go with the flow. What surprises me is that it is going to the Supremes.
Nana I will be very happy when basic genetics in taught in high school. Because genetics has proven that
"race" is no more improtant than eye color ect..... Not to mention that "race" is a created word by europeans as a justification of enslaving the navie americans and africans. Because according to them they were less evoled than europeans and should only serve as workers( slaves)
When Big Brother said minorities had to be given preference. I understand it was hard to get black recruits. The normal criteria for recruits was ignored. Felons were considered and one black was hired that never qualified with a revolver..... they gave him special consideration and a non-street job. With women , the height requirement was discarded.
Not sure that anyone who does NOT finish in the top 10% of their High School class can be looked upon as achieving anything TanManTexas. Not everyone is given the same social graces as everyone else. Ever visit a project housing development? I'm white and I favor allowing for race to be used as a minor determining factor in admission. Afterall, we are not talking about future Einstein's here, just average students. She can go to another university, I don't think UT would ever admit her now anyway. She just sounds like a rich bitch who wants her way. I may be wrong, but I doubt it. I also think something is missing from this story. Most colleges today require an essay about why you would like to go to that university and your aspirations for the future and your career path. I would like to read her essay.
I barely paid attention in high school. Was too busy having fun. I squeaked out only a 1.8 GPA.
With all that said, a few years later, I cleaned up my act and got two degrees while in the military. I hold degrees in business and engineering. I am now the VP of a small business that grosses close to 50 million a year.
High school is a time of discovery. Learning about yourself and about life in general.
Your post is full of bias and assumptions. You only see things one way. Based off your logic, I should have remained uneducated.
Why? You have already assumed she is a spoiled rich girl. I hardly doubt anything will change your way of thinking. That's is who you are and how you look at everything. Nothing will change that. Accept the fact that you prefer to assume things about people.
Don't be scared, because you get it, and knowing is half the battle.The school was probably caught discriminating against minorities before,and she was just a sacrificial lamb,so the school could go on the record also denying admittance to whites,which they have to do to keep things relatively diverse,she probably had weak majors and was no great prize for the school and instead of just applying to another school like everybody else, shes crying about reverse racism,which makes her appear even more pathetic.
When I graduated from high school in Texas, I had a 4.0 GPA. I was NOT in the top 10%. My GPA was 96.4. So, for you to assume that she was just an average student is not a fair assumption on your part. The article nor our local news has reported what her GPA was. The problem with Texas' 10% rule is that it doesn't take in account the variances in the different schools etc. The issue in front of the court is not the 10% in itself as much as it is the other 90%. Should someone with a 96.4 GPA who is not in the 10% be excluded so that someone of a different race be included? There is not enough information for you to draw the conclusions you have come to. Personally, I don't know why anyone would want to go to UT as it is ridiculously over crowded. I was happy when my own children chose not to apply there...and we live in Austin!
NYMike, I have to agree with some of help's points... Generally poor people don't automatically think lawyer over something like this. Only those who can afford a lawyer will think of one. Race is just one of many factors. Although I believe that the ones who decide shouldn't know or see the applicant.
I graduated as valedictorian and went on to college... High School is a time to grow up. It is a time of opportunity and learning how the world really works. If my grades had not been extremely good I knew my parents would have made sure that the only thing I thought about was school. I grew up on a farm so really all I did was work on the farm and in school. I have seen kids who parties all the time in this day and age. Most of them were more worried about clothes and being in the "in crowd" than their studies. Sometimes you get judged by you actions, since they speak louder than words.
Mike, I comment you for your hard work and I thank you for your post. If it wasn't for people like you (in the Armed Forces) people like me wouldn't be allowed on here. We wouldn't have freedom. Sir, thank you for your hard work, I hope you have a great week!
So rich smart white bitches deserve less opportunities than poor dumb black bitches? Smacks of serious racism.
What you have all described is the issue. While the school can achieve a diverse population by utilizing subjective criteria, the school chose to maintain its policy of requiring that 10% of the school population be made up of black students who would not otherwise qualify for admission. A diverse student population allows all students to obtain a better education by giving them a wide variety of viewpoints, thus it is good for the school.
Diversity is not necessarily achieved simply by having people of a different race. As some people have said, there are many black guys who are very white. Within the black community they have been disparaged in the past as being "Oreos, black on the outside, white inside." Do you obtain diversity by including poor performing upper middle class black students at the expense of well performing pure middle class white students ?
">The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."
Coming from a Chief Justice, this comment confirms the inadequacy of the Supreme Court and the ignorance of John Roberts. No wonder this country is a political Mess!
You wish to continue racial discrimination? How ignorant is that.
"true equality will not come when all things (human rights, education, jobs, opportunities, etc.) are equally proportionate according to race, religion, gender, or political or sexual orientation. True equality will only come when everyone stops counting!"--madmarinedad, and you can quote me on that!
My wife is Hispanic, I am white, I told both my kids to "check" Hispanic
when they apply for collage next year.
Tell them to just check "other" .
luv4life, tell them to spell college right. Just joking, probably a typo.
Just make sure the spell the word college right when applying.
I don't think so. Hard to type an A instead of an E with a finger slip.
There is no shame in using spell check. I use it for every post I make to be sure.
I always look for Euro-American, but I can never seem to find it.
Northern European Islander American here.
As long as people continue to check ANY box related to race, sex, etc there will be discrimination. When the census forms come out I refuse to complete the forms and they threaten me with a fine for failure to complete. I ask who to send the check to and they back down. As long as the U.S. continues to collect data such as race, religion, colour, sex, sex preference, ethnicity, financial status, etc. there will be discrimination. They don't need such information if there truly is equality.
The point is that the information is needed to achieve equality. It's not like equality already exists.
smart move. if their is any minority heritage at all u should check it. alot of people have a little indian in them too.
Mary...well, I was born in America, therefore I consider myself a native American. My most immediate non-native American ancestors were from Europe and as all humans originated in Africa, my ancestors are from there as well.
So I consider myself an Afro-Euro-Native American. No, really I consider myself a human.
But don't let the aliens know when they get here, I really don't want to be associated with humans.
Now we're on the same page.
That information is needed only for equality as it relates to the percentages of blacks/whites/male/female/etc applying/enrolled as compared to the population. What has demographics got to do with institutions of higher learning? If there are not enough applicants for a specific "minority" (sex/race/religion/etc) do they leave the vacancy in place? What happens if a large number of one determinant disenrolls do they compensate by bringing in more students of that "minority" to rebalance the population and in doing so create an imbalance in the freshman class?
Affirmative Action needs to be done away with, its time has come and gone, it is a dinosaur that does more damage than good, it is right in-line with unions. Once an 'idea' that was once used to do good, becomes a tool to take away from others, it is time to say good riddance.
I could be wrong though, ill ask Liz Warren if it is still a good tool.
@ trudat,
LOL. Wait for her in front of the Erie Pub and refuse to stop performing Indian war chants until see answers you.
Yes, it's still racism when it happens to white folk too.
It will never end as long as things like Affirmative Action, NAACP and "Demographics" are simply used to enforce discrimination.
Race should never be a factor in admissions to any college. It always favors the blacks. We all know how the Obama run S.C. will rule on this one.
Just like Obama promising to give more federal funding specifically to blacks for college than any other race. That one degree was as raciest as it gets against all other races. That statement was pushed under the rug so fast and buried so deep, not one news agency reported on that again.
Yet the blacks still think they are "owed" more privileges than the rest of the races.
They have the mentality that they and they alone suffered more than any other race. They did not suffer even the worst of the worst. The Native Americans suffered the worst of the worst.
They want to get into any college, then work for the grades like the rest of the races have to do. It is not because they don't have equal access to any college, they don't want to put in the same work as anyone else. Why should they. They are black and so should get more for less.
If not go to the black college that does NOT admit any other race. Yes why don't we ever, ever hear about that Southern black College that does not have to abide by the law and let in all races.
You are totally wrong with your statement saying that historical black colleges/universities do not admit any other race. I went to a black college in Oklahoma called Langston University. Although, it was majority black we still had other races that attended. There were whites, latinos, and American indians that attended. And guess what, those students got in for the same reason, to have some sort of diversity. I was good friends with some of them and they were there on minority scholarships. But I wasn't mad at them. I didn't get any special priveledges because I was black. I didn't get finacial aid. My parents worked hard and paid for my college tuition. As far as the rest of your ignorant statement goes, it's not even worth addressing and getting mad about.
Everyone should be given the same chance to go to schools.Mabe advanced courses would need higher scores to show an ability to deal with the subject.I dont see why skin color should change your qualifying for anything in this day and age.
This is for lack of a better term reverse racism. Another interesting view is when people are asked about affirmative action as applied to university athletic depts. No way in hell they are going to do that.
Racially biased admissions in favor of lower performing students has nothing to with the fact that the United States is losing ground academically?
In 1976 my brother took the examination to become a state policeman in PA. He scored 93% and was passed over by minorities who had scored considerably less, some in the low 70%. He simply applied and was accepted in a suburban municipality where his abilities were appreciated. He served 30 years and retired, but still has a very bad taste in his mouth with regard to 'quotas,' as it were. Yes, it is racial discrimination in reverse, not only at this university, but by our federal government.
This is the problem with quotas and affirmative action plans. We need to set guidelines that all can aspire to and let the chips fall where they may.
IF WE ARE ALL CREATED EQUALLY, HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS AND SUCH, THAN TREAT US EQUALLY. Social Justice is just a form of racism against white people and its time to end that CRAP NOW....
White people were treated as "special" under the law for hundreds of years. (Not fun to have it reversed, ist?)
To the victor goes the spoils
Why can't they have a 100% rule. Only the most academically qualified people are admitted...
This will never happen. People are conditioned to think to be successful you have to go to college. Colleges let everyone in (does not matter your educational achievements)because the more students they have the more funding they get.
Obviously, minorities are not as smart as white people or we wouldn't have these rules in the first place. If you are offended by that statement, don't be mad at me. Direct your anger at the institutions who practice them.
I agree, I would actually be embarrassed if we had to have laws that forced rules to make certain people equal. What does that say about people as a culture.
Yukon:
For more than a few hundred years in America, the New World and now the U.S. not only were there laws and rules to make only one group of people equal but they were made "more equal" than other. They call them white people. So,...how's your embarrassment level now?
@Lion:
I kinda agree with you but only agree that half the white people are smart because it's the white women who either secretly or, often openly, want and seek out a black man to have and it's growing that way more and more very rapidly. So, the smart half of white people are smart enough to want to discard the white man and get a black man.
I think I see what you are saying, Jean. You are saying that that laws, written or unwritten, that benefit white people are just and appropriate.
jeanvalijean u only get the black man for a season or two then you are the smart one walking alone with a baby carriage. i agree its more and more women but its from the liberal demographic mostly. and alot of them have these peculiar dumb looks
Lion post #23 Thats the irony in all of this...Its the DEMOCRATS who
exploit the poor & the black....The message to Black Americans from BO DEMS =
"sorry you poor little stupid poor black person..you'll never get ahead.
Hence you'll have to rely on us LILY WHITE LIMO LIBS
to provide you with crumbs & call it "caring"
"Sorry poor little stupid black person...
without us WHITE LIBERALS you are incapable of designing your own life"
This must be why some blacks, call other blacks Uncle Tom? Affirmative action is doing wonders in Detroit lmao.
This is fundamentally un-American to preferentially treat one candidate over another for anything more than merit. It was wrong when there was discrimination in such things and it is wrong now in this case. The time is past due and we should not continue to allow reverse discriminate to right a wrong for perpetuity.
As long as there are review boards,there will be favoritism.
Sports makes money for colleges. The military has it also. More so in promotions. That's how we got
Allen West the rep from Florida. A total looser in the Army,and the only black Republican with
with a redneck following. He lost his mind years ago.
Two items:
1. Not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character. What would MLK think of this?
2. Liberal Women vs Race... Which of these cherished liberal/progressive groups will win? ("liberal women" does not refer to Abigail Fisher--just to the issue in general)
love #2