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

[Linuxcooldude]

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

Anything race based is not equal opportunity, which is not suppose to be based on race. Which effectively makes it discrimination.

 

[Cardinal]

Anything race based is not equal opportunity, which is not suppose to be based on race.

So what are those numbers then? What has affirmative action resulted in across our universities? Do you know? Do you even want to know?

 

[Linuxcooldude]

So what has that resulted in, numbers wise?

What does numbers have to do with discrimination. Either a policy discriminates or it doesn't.

 

[j brown's body]

What does numbers have to do with discrimination. Either a policy discriminates or it doesn't.

If eliminating discrimination causes segregation it has defeated its own purpose.

 

[Cardinal]

What does numbers have to do with discrimination. Either a policy discriminates or it doesn't.

Because that will tell you what the impact of that discrimination is. If a policy is giving preferential treatment to black people, then we could expect to see that in the enrollment numbers. And if there's nothing in the enrollment numbers to reflect such discrimination, then it means the problem of affirmative action as you see it is nothing more than a boogeyman.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

So what are those numbers then? What has affirmative action resulted in across our universities? Do you know? Do you even want to know?

The numbers are moot. Affirmative Action policy discriminates no matter what the number.

 

[Cardinal]

The numbers are moot. Affirmative Action policy discriminates no matter what the number.

I've noticed that every fact that refutes your position is moot, irrelevant, or "not your problem."

 

[Phys251]

Anything race based is not equal opportunity, which is not suppose to be based on race. Which effectively makes it discrimination.

Keep flailing and offering no proof.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

I've noticed that every fact that refutes your position is moot, irrelevant, or "not your problem."

So a policy that discriminates aginst blacks are fine, as long as the numbers don't show it?

 

[Cardinal]

So a policy that discriminates aginst blacks are fine, as long as the numbers don't show it?

If the numbers don't show it, then your "discrimination" is a boogeyman.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

If the numbers don't show it, then your "discrimination" is a boogeyman.

So your perfectly fine with a policy that gives Asian and Caucasians added points for getting into college over blacks as long as the numbers don't show it?

 

[Queen Margo]

I've never said I'm Black.
I'm of South and Central Asian blood.
But stop deflecting and address the topic.
This matters because Asians are being discriminated against by woke leftists in admissions boards.

Yes, and I don't think there are enough Asians in Football. Forget about who plays well and let's get this race thing on a level playing field!!

 

[ttwtt78640]

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.

Exactly, thus allegations of racial discrimination require more case specific evidence.

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

Yep, but lack of evidence proves nothing.

And that's discriminatory against the black applicant?

Nope, that is simply noting when being one of 10 ‘equally qualified’ applicants (for a single position) the chances of being selected are slim.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Yes, and I don't think there are enough Asians in Football. Forget about who plays well and let's get this race thing on a level playing field!!

Add basketball to that list too.

 

[Cardinal]

So your perfectly fine with a policy that gives Asian and Caucasians added points for getting into college over blacks as long as the numbers don't show it?

Deflection. You know that the numbers don't support your belief that black people receive preferential treatment, which is why you're ducking around it.

If facts scuttle your position, then you have a bad position.

 

[Cardinal]

Exactly, thus allegations of racial discrimination require more case specific evidence.


Yep, but lack of evidence proves nothing.



Nope, that is simply noting when being one of 10 ‘equally qualified’ applicants (for a single position) the chances of being selected are slim.

All you're doing is proving my point, which is that there isn't a superior alternative to affirmative action for mitigating discrimination.

 

[aociswundumho]

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

I put the odds at 100%.

"his people" because all black people look alike, act alike, and think alike.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Deflection. You know that the numbers don't support your belief that black people receive preferential treatment, which is why you're ducking around it.

If facts scuttle your position, then you have a bad position.

Its not a deflection, because its based on your "numbers" defence. If you can't answer my question honestly, their is no way to support your numbers theory.

And actually, they do get preferential treatment, if all other things considered equal.

 

[Questerr]

 

[Channe79]

All you're doing is proving my point, which is that there isn't a superior alternative to affirmative action for mitigating discrimination.

If there isn't an alternative motive, how did this case even make it to the Supreme Court ?
It's clear that Ivy League schools turn down qualified Asians, Whites, and Jews in order to make room for Blacks and Latinos who aren't academically on par.

 

[dmpi]

It's common sense. You can't fight discrimination with yet more discrimination. Blacks and Mexicans needs to encourage their kids to study as hard as their Asian counterpart. A level playing field will always produce winners and losers. It's your obligation to head to head with others and out compete them.

 

[Fishking]

It's the same old argument in a newer, shinier package. If a certain number of black people must be accepted, then that's discrimination against white people. Conservatives leapt on this because it puts a more "legitimate" spin on an old and stupid argument.

No...that's not the argument. That's a strawman. The actual argument is that if you're basing your enrollment not on meritocracy, but on race, then it's systemic discrimination and illegal.

 

[Fishking]

Your argument is legitimate because you say you're black.

Tell me you know you're comments are going to be full of shit without saying your comments are going to be full of shit.

 

[ttwtt78640]

All you're doing is proving my point, which is that there isn't a superior alternative to affirmative action for mitigating discrimination.

The idea that we need ‘good’ racial (gender or ethnic) discrimination until some magical percentage is achieved is both ridiculous and unconstitutional.

Stating that there are ‘too many’ (more?) qualified non-black folks thus we need to allow less qualified black folks to be given preference is a loser. Folks would freak out if the NBA or NFL tried to limit black players to no more than 15% of a team’s roster (out of racial ’fairness’).

 

[Fishking]

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.

Yes...the previous ruling was a blatant violation of the Constitution and the laws on the books. There is literally zero question on that. All the judges that previously ruled that the policy was OK should be fired, time now, for messing up such an easy case.