Major case on race-based college admissions is going to Supreme Court next month !

[Luce]

On topic, let's hear the odds on Clarence Thomas selling his people out again.

I put the odds at 100%.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Yes, we already know you don't like this solution. So what's your solution?

What is your solution for discrimination aginst Asians and Caucasions?

 

[Cardinal]

What is your solution for discrimination aginst Asians and Caucasions?

What are the percentages of equal opportunity?

 

[ttwtt78640]

What are the percentages required under equal opportunity?

There should be none. The idea that there should be as many black folks in any given position as there are in the general population makes no sense. The NBA or NFL has far more black players than exist in the general population, yet there is no call for a quota of Asian, Hispanic or white players to remedy such obvious (apparent?) ‘racial’ discrimination.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

What are the percentages of equal opportunity?

The equal opportunity laws make no reference to percentages. Doing so would likely violate the same laws.

So now what is your solution for discrimination aginst Asians and Caucasians that Affermative Action brings?

 

[Cardinal]

The equal opportunity laws make no reference to percentages. Doing so would likely violate the same laws.

So now what is your solution for discrimination aginst Asians and Caucasians?

So how would they know what number of black people to take over caucasians?

 

[mrjurrs]

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College
Oral argument scheduled: October 11, 2022

Issue at hand: Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions

This is due to a clear bias against Asian and White Americans who are often denied admissions to make room for less academically deserving Black and Latino students. Harvard is clearly violating the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian American applicants by "engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives."

Looking Ahead: Upcoming U.S. Supreme Court Cases Employers Need to Know - Jackson Lewis

The U.S. Supreme Court decisions that were issued in June 2022 had a significant impact on employers, and employers are now looking at implementing policies and practices in response to the decisions. The Court’s decisions in Dobbs v.

www.jacksonlewis.com

Leftists don't want people to be judged on their character, knowledge, or skills.
They want people to be judged by their race/gender/sexual orientation.
If we truly let the chips fall where they may, most Ivy League schools would be 99% Asian American and White.

R's want equal treatment after centuries of reaping the benefits of others labors.

#f*ing sad

 

[Phys251]

The equal opportunity laws make no reference to percentages. Doing so would likely violate the same laws.

So now what is your solution for discrimination aginst Asians and Caucasians?

Prove that such discrimination exists.

 

[ttwtt78640]

And how do you prove that? In case you didn't know, racists are only rarely wearing KKK hats now, and usually don't announce racism as a motive for discriminating against minorities.

The same way you prove any specific allegation.

 

[j brown's body]

The problem isn't discrimination. Discrimination is tool that can be used for good or evil. The problem is segregation. Segregation is inherently unequal. We want to get rid of segregation. If discrimination help eliminate segregation, it should be acceptable.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College
Oral argument scheduled: October 11, 2022

Issue at hand: Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions

This is due to a clear bias against Asian and White Americans who are often denied admissions to make room for less academically deserving Black and Latino students. Harvard is clearly violating the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian American applicants by "engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives."

Looking Ahead: Upcoming U.S. Supreme Court Cases Employers Need to Know - Jackson Lewis

The U.S. Supreme Court decisions that were issued in June 2022 had a significant impact on employers, and employers are now looking at implementing policies and practices in response to the decisions. The Court’s decisions in Dobbs v.

www.jacksonlewis.com

Leftists don't want people to be judged on their character, knowledge, or skills.

This is a lie often told by the right. The right then sees no issue with the KKK or racist militia groups.

They want people to be judged by their race/gender/sexual orientation.

This is another lie.

The left has fought for years to prevent right-wing theocratic states from discriminating against people based on gender, sexual orientation, and race. The right has spent centuries discriminating against people based on race and gender. In the current sense, they discriminate based on sexual orientation and then have a hissy fit when they are told they cannot refuse to do business with people based on their personal religious bigotry.

If we truly let the chips fall where they may, most Ivy League schools would be 99% Asian American and White.

Not true in today's world.

 

[Cardinal]

The same way you prove any specific allegation.

Okay, so the person discriminating against the black person doesn't wear a KKK hat and doesn't cite "I don't like black people" as a reason. What then?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Okay, so the person discriminating against the black person doesn't wear a KKK hat and doesn't cite "I don't like black people" as a reason. What then?

Prove that a less qualified non-black person was selected based on their race.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Prove that such discrimination exists.

It does exist. Where it affects Caucasians it is often referred to as "reverse" discrimination.

Denying it doesn't change anything.

 

[Rickeroo]

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College
Oral argument scheduled: October 11, 2022

Issue at hand: Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Grutter v. Bollinger and hold that institutions of higher education cannot use race as a factor in admissions

This is due to a clear bias against Asian and White Americans who are often denied admissions to make room for less academically deserving Black and Latino students. Harvard is clearly violating the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by penalizing Asian American applicants by "engaging in racial balancing, overemphasizing race and rejecting workable race-neutral alternatives."

Looking Ahead: Upcoming U.S. Supreme Court Cases Employers Need to Know - Jackson Lewis

The U.S. Supreme Court decisions that were issued in June 2022 had a significant impact on employers, and employers are now looking at implementing policies and practices in response to the decisions. The Court’s decisions in Dobbs v.

www.jacksonlewis.com

Leftists don't want people to be judged on their character, knowledge, or skills.
They want people to be judged by their race/gender/sexual orientation.
If we truly let the chips fall where they may, most Ivy League schools would be 99% Asian American and White.

In our current system, merit takes precedence. Race-based admissions have been legal for 19 years, and the result has been essentially nothing. For a Black to get admitted based on race, it means that their underlying academics aren't strong enough to get them into that school. They are more likely to drop out or perform poorly.

The most feasible solution (working within current social thinking) would be to have segregated and less rigorous college classes for minorities. You could also alter the standards: There would be an Asian/White Business degree and a Black Business degree, with one being worth more than the other in the marketplace of merit. Another option, in keeping with the spirit of race-based non-academic admission, we could pretend the standards are the same, but spot Blacks a few points on math tests, etc. That way on paper, Blacks would equal Asians.

Employers would be aware of the actual merits and mental capabilities of graduates regardless of any cheesy political manipulation, so it's likely that they would need to be forced into hiring less qualified candidates based on race.

 

[Cardinal]

Prove that a less qualified non-black person was selected based on their race.

What if they're equal?

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Prove that such discrimination exists.

Affirmative Action policy proves this already. Caucasians and particularly minority Asians are penalized in many college applications.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Prove that such discrimination exists.

That’s rather easy to do if admission policy is race based.

 

[TheParser]

If we truly let the chips fall where they may, most Ivy League schools would be 99% Asian American and White.

1. After the Roe decision, the Court may be afraid to "let the chips fall where they may."

2. Probably a lot of Americans feel that non-Caucasians should be given affirmative action when it comes to college entrance.

3. I assume the decision will be announced after the November elections.

4. Some people consider Asians as "Honorary Caucasians," so in that case Asians could not claim that they are being discriminated against.

BOTTOM LINE:

This is 2022.

Law or no law, a quota of African American and Hispanic students will be attending those top universities.

Merit has nothing to do with it.

 

[Phys251]

Affirmative Action policy proves this already. Caucasians and particularly minority Asians are penalized in many college applications.

That's a claim, not a proof. Prove your original claim or retract it.

 

[ttwtt78640]

What if they're equal?

You tell me. If there are two ‘equally qualified’ applicants then it was 50/50 that either would be selected. If there were 10 ‘equally qualified’ applicants (and only one was black) then it was 10/90 that the black applicant would be selected.

 

[Cardinal]

You tell me.

The point is you can't tell. If you have two equally qualified candidates and the person discriminates against the black person, you can't tell that racism was the motive.

If there are two ‘equally qualified’ applicants then it was 50/50 that either would be selected.

Unless racism put its finger on the scale (which you can't know).

If there were 10 ‘equally qualified’ applicants (and only one was black) then it was 10/90 that the black applicant would be selected.

And that's discriminatory against the black applicant?

 

[Linuxcooldude]

That's a claim, not a proof. Prove your original claim or retract it.

Affirmative Action policy is 100% proof. As noted by another poster, AA is race based, which is discrimination.

 

[Phys251]

Affirmative Action policy is 100% proof. As noted by another poster, AA is race based, which is discrimination.

You're begging the question as to whether affirmative action is discrimination. You still haven't offered proof and are instead just flailing.

 

[Cardinal]

Affirmative Action policy is 100% proof. As noted by another poster, AA is race based, which is discrimination.

So what has that resulted in, numbers wise?