- Joined
- Mar 5, 2008
- Messages
- 112,990
- Reaction score
- 60,554
- Location
- Sarasota Fla
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
I would think it would be, yes.
Can you explain your reasoning? In the situation, white student enrollment would be unaffected. I am not saying ai disagree with you, just pointing out the argument.
Can you explain your reasoning? In the situation, white student enrollment would be unaffected. I am not saying ai disagree with you, just pointing out the argument.
Can you explain your reasoning? In the situation, white student enrollment would be unaffected. I am not saying ai disagree with you, just pointing out the argument.
By discriminating for one group of people, we inherently discriminate against the other. Legislatively, affirmative discrimination is no better than negative discrimination.
Respectfully, HTTP
Since you didn't want to address the hypothetical, why don't you do that instead of making your first post an attack post?Too bad the hypothetical has nothing to do with "discriminating for one group", as white students are being admitted--in fact more whites will be admitted overall.
Too bad the hypothetical has nothing to do with legislation, or affirmative discrimination (I guess you mean action)...
You want to address the hypothetical or just make up your own questions and then answer them?
The question, which essentially holds the answer for your question, is this.
What is the purpose of opening up additional enrollment specifically for minorities?
For the sake of diversity!
What kind of diversity do you mean, my friend? Superficial diversity? Or the kind where not everyone in the room is a racial minority, votes Democrat, thinks Karl Marx was a genius, and writes editorials for the New York Times? :lol:For the sake of diversity!
I understand this. But I don't believe it is as important as providing education to those who have proven themselves to have a higher chance of sucess. That is, if you are a college that is selective based upon Merit.Bottom line folks: The philosophy of many Universities is that diversity benefits the entire student body as a mix of people from different cultural backgrounds and ethnicities enhances the learning environment.
Ahh the mantra of the race baiter.Bigots and xenophobes will disagree.
Upper black/hispanic middle class kids have an advantage over urban kids when it comes to gpa and SAT.Bottom line #2 folks: Upper white middle class kids have an advantage over urban kids when it come to gpa and SAT.
Is this worth discriminating against a group of students to obtain, while giving another group of students an advantage not based upon merit?
What kind of diversity do you mean, my friend? Superficial diversity? Or the kind where not everyone in the room is a racial minority, votes Democrat, thinks Karl Marx was a genius, and writes editorials for the New York Times? :lol:
Too bad the hypothetical has nothing to do with "discriminating for one group", as white students are being admitted--in fact more whites will be admitted overall.
Too bad the hypothetical has nothing to do with legislation, or affirmative discrimination (I guess you mean action)...
You want to address the hypothetical or just make up your own questions and then answer them?
Racial discrimination is still racial discrimination, so it should be illegal.This is a hypothetical, though it may very well be something some schools do. Please read the situation and respond accordingly.
A college decides to increase it's overall enrollment by 100 students, but those 100 students would be selected only from minorities. All other enrollment would be decided based on the same process as in the past, with the 100 students being the best of the minority students who would not normally get accepted at the school due to grades or test scores or whatever.
Would white students and potential white students have a legitimate grievance that this is unfair to them?
Its unquestionably discrimination. As has been said, if you raise the enrollement by 100 you're either:
1) saying you had capacity for another 100 kids
or
2) saying you don't have capacity but are doing it anyways, thus over extending the schools resources which is a detriment to all the other students
You are choosing those 100 based not on merit, not on race, but on the LACK of merit and race. I say this because you're stating that you're 100 are required to have lower GPA's and SAT scores than would normally be allowed at the school.
There is absolutely zero question that this is racial discrimination. You're enhancing enrollment by 100 and slotting it only for minorities. The very nature of disallowing certain people because of their race is the very nature of discrimination.
What it comes down to is that some people like discrimination, and think there's a place for it as long as its "good" discrimination and "helps" people while the ones that are being harmed can be ignored because while the individual may not be any better off in their own life as a minority that gets in instead, that individual is from a race that is better off so he just needs to suck it up.
There can be no question this is discrimination based on race, as the very criteria is requiring it to be so. It just depends if you're like Hazlnut or not, if you think discrimination is okay as long as its hurting groups you think can stand to be hurt and helping those you think need help.
A kind of follow up question: If we changed it from minority students to low income students, would it be unfair to middle class/upper class students?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?