Supreme Court Upholds Discrimination

[beer]

Originally posted by: jpbushido99

Originally posted by: Elemental007

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis
I don't think people understand that affirmative action type programs are to create equal opportunity for minorities that wouldn't otherwise exist in this nation.

Only if your black or hispanic. Nevermind if you are asian/indian/european, many of whom are my friends and none of which get ANY assistance based upon their race.

Hey man I know your angry about this I would be too if I was Asian and so forth. The problem with affirmative action is much deeper than you think. Blacks have had discrimination issues that have destroyed communities, and created in some instances atmospheres were education is more of a crutch than a leg up. Unfortunately there is a dichotomy of ideologies within and out side of Black communities that prevent many Blacks/Hispanics from being all that they can be. Please before comparing groups do research on American History and what has caused this problem. Even to this day there are many Black communities were people are raised to be individuals like sport stars and so forth in poor Black communities rather than a homogenous net community focused on the betterment of their lives. There is so much that America covers up, but I happen to know people who live in these communities and deal with the problems of racism, and poor education and family problems, and on and on. And even when these people get to college they are constantly dealing with people underestimating them, and treating them like they don?t belong, or they didn?t deserve to be there.

So how does perpetuating admissions based on race help remove that stereotype? I would have much more confidence in people if admissions were based upon their merits alone.

The problem with these race-based admissions is that it does nothing to help these applicants be more qualified. They're STILL going to struggle if they were less academically qualified than someone whose place they stole on the basis of race....and race alone. Which is exactly what U of M undergrad was doing and which the supreme court did not rule decisively against. Like someone said earlier in this thread, this is still a phenomonally weak ruling. Instead of giving 20 out of 100 points to someone based upon their race, you can give 12 or 15 out of 100 and it would withstand the 'rigor' of the court ruling.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Elemental007
DeadParrotSketch -

So how does admission preferences based SOLELY on race help creativity in a computer science class?

Are you implying anglos are not as creative as blacks/hispanics? How about other races that affirmative action does not 'assist,' namely indian, international, and asian students?

Your point is valid but has absolutely nothing to do with race-based admissions.

It does to the extent that relying on test scores, including SAT, are race-based, to the extent that we can be honest about the fact that we haven't reached the point yet where there is no race-factor in terms of where people live and the jobs and incomes of families. Because those are all factors in SAT scores.

So to the extent that my proposal is to use other criteria than test scores, the affect would be less discriminatory towards certain racial groups.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch

Originally posted by: Elemental007
DeadParrotSketch -

So how does admission preferences based SOLELY on race help creativity in a computer science class?

Are you implying anglos are not as creative as blacks/hispanics? How about other races that affirmative action does not 'assist,' namely indian, international, and asian students?

Your point is valid but has absolutely nothing to do with race-based admissions.

It does to the extent that relying on test scores, including SAT, are race-based, to the extent that we can be honest about the fact that we haven't reached the point yet where there is no race-factor in terms of where people live and the jobs and incomes of families. Because those are all factors in SAT scores.

So to the extent that my proposal is to use other criteria than test scores, the affect would be less discriminatory towards certain racial groups.

Every lawsuit and study that attempts to argue that the SAT is race-based is full of holes. The validity of the arugement for said lawsuits rests on the assumption that historically urban regions are generally less wealthy than suburban schools and thus rely on less effective teaching and test preparation methods. The fault in this assumption is that it is, once again, based upon economic factors, and not racial ones.

 

[josphII]

looks like bonus points for race is only the tip of the iceberg. i cant believe that any of these are allowed at a public institution. from cnn.com:

ADMISSIONS CRITERIA
At the University of Michigan, minority undergraduate applicants to the College of Literature, Science and the Arts receive a 20-point bonus on the basis of race out of a 150-point system, which takes into consideration other criteria, including academics. Scholarship athletes, for example, get 20 points. Race is covered in a category called "other factors." The point system includes:


Geography
10 points - Michigan resident
6 points - Underrepresented Michigan county
2 points - Underrepresented state

Alumni
4 points - "Legacy" (parents, step-parents)
1 point - Other (grandparents, siblings, spouses)

Essay
1 point - Outstanding essay (since 1999, 3 points)

Personal achievement
1 point - State
3 points - Regional
5 points - National

Leadership and service
1 point - State
3 points - Regional
5 points - National

Miscellaneous
20 points - Socio-economic disadvantage
20 points - Underrepresented racial-ethnic minority identification or education
5 points - Men in nursing
20 points - Scholarship athlete
20 points - Provost's discretion


Maximum of 40 points and only one option is assigned in the alumni, personal achievement, leadership & service, and miscellaneous categories.

Source: Center for Individual Rights

 

[Xenon14]

It may be "immoral" but if I don't want to hire you b/c you're black, it's my business. The underlying point is, that a good business man will hire the person that will bring him the most money, not to provide equal services and distributed his money to the community equally. If he wants to... fine go ahead. If he wants to hire all homosexuals, that's his business. If he wants to hire someone less qualified than me b/c she has a nice rack that's also his business. People often confuse a person's RIGHT to do something with his Ethical behavior. The bottom line that I can distribute my money how I see fit, regardless of whether or not it is the must prudent or moral way to distribute it.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
So a black person raised in a nice neighborhood with a white collar parent making 6 figures and attending private colleges gets a head up

over a white guy that grew up in a trailer park in BFE Louisiana while never knowing a father and having a mother that's only occupation was breeding and passing around STD's gets rejected because he is not black enough


Could someone explain to me how this is not racist behavior?

That is essnetially a hypothetical situation that doesn't accurately describe what happens in the real world. In the real world the black person you are describing would most likely not have any problem getting into a college of his choice, because based on your description he would not be dealing with the inadequate education system of a more typical black person's life.

And the white guy in the trailer park would probably qualify for admittance based on economic hardship. The tragedy is that many poor people aren't aware that there are ways up and out of those situations. They assume they wouldn't get the chance and they don't go and look for it.

 

[Chadder007]

It looks like the only way to truely equal it out with Race, money, status.....is to just go ahead and make our society Communistic. And that seems to be what they want to do.. 🙁

 

[spidey07]

20 points - Socio-economic disadvantage
20 points - Underrepresented racial-ethnic minority identification or education
5 points - Men in nursing
20 points - Scholarship athlete
20 points - Provost's discretion

OMG! Its even worse than I thought. If you're black, poor and can play basketball your golden!!!!

Talk about perpetuating a stereotype.

 

[jpbushido99]

So how does perpetuating admissions based on race help remove that stereotype? I would have much more confidence in people if admissions were based upon their merits alone.[/quote]


Well it doesn't and that?s the problem with these types of programs, but there are others such as legacies, and donations that make up a much larger percentage of unqualified applicants. I go to Umass Amherst, and Blacks and Hispanics make up about 2 - 3% of the overall student population. I am sure of those 2-3%, 50% are athletes, and others maybe in because of affirmative action or the many other programs available such as bands, academics etc.. . But I don't know that do I, no one knows for sure if they were there because of grades or other programs. I guess that?s the problem with the stereotype also, people assume. Blacks / Hispanics make up such a small percentage of the population that why would it matter if some got in because of their economic hardship, or less than acceptable grades -- I mean there are 20,000 students here, 2-3% is an awful small number. There is no real easy answer for solving problems that have been perpetuated for decades and the people who continue to complain but offer no real true help.

 

[jpbushido99]

That is essnetially a hypothetical situation that doesn't accurately describe what happens in the real world. In the real world the black person you are describing would most likely not have any problem getting into a college of his choice, because based on your description he would not be dealing with the inadequate education system of a more typical black person's life.

And the white guy in the trailer park would probably qualify for admittance based on economic hardship. The tragedy is that many poor people aren't aware that there are ways up and out of those situations. They assume they wouldn't get the chance and they don't go and look for it.[/quote]

This is true, and the exception and not the rule.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Elemental007
First of all, that has nothing to do with your priot assertion. I want to hear your response to my last post. I even bolded your name so you wouldn't miss it.

And your point in your last post doens't make sense, either. Are you saying that a hispanic should be in charge of building the next highway overpass because his skin is a different color than a anglo civil engineer who he graduated with?

It's not participation that bothers me; it's grossly underqualified people who don't understand basic math concepts that sit next to me in my classes whose admission to the university was soely based upon what school district they came from (Texas Top 10% Law = rebadged affirmative action). They're obviously not meant to be engineers, their grade point sucks, but yet, because of their race, they're going to graduate and end up being an engineer. If a teacher fails them like they should be, they have to defend themselves from racial accusations. Makes me sick.

As I read this post I don't know if you are asking me or someone else, and which posts you're refering too. I'm quoting it so if you were talking to me I didn't want to ignore you, I'm just not sure who and what post you want a response too. Too many posts coming in a short time is confusing . 🙂

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
So a black person raised in a nice neighborhood with a white collar parent making 6 figures and attending private colleges gets a head up

over a white guy that grew up in a trailer park in BFE Louisiana while never knowing a father and having a mother that's only occupation was breeding and passing around STD's gets rejected because he is not black enough


Could someone explain to me how this is not racist behavior?

it is racist behavior BUT it good racist behavior! White's have controlled the world! we have NEVER been slaves!

We ruined the black race! Yes WE! Even though many people came from different countries after slavery ended that does NOT matter you are white!

it is ok to give blacks/Hispanic people a pass into school. In a few years we will have to change the grading scale so blacks/Hispanics have a special scale. Such as E is little lower then average then F. But to get an F you need to score less then 10% of the class points.

then we needs jobs that let them get away with the lower results.

With college admissions the start we are on the way to equality between the races

 

[MegaloManiaK]

The majority opinion in the law-school case said the policy preserves the concept of affirmative action for minorities who might otherwise be underrepresented on top campuses.

Ok, the idea of keeping minorities from being "underrepresented" at an undergrad school is totally valid. People come from different backgrounds and its very true that not everyone has the same opportunity in public school and other pre-high school area's. But the question here is can you say the same about their law-school? I could be wrong, but i thought you went to a regular undergrad school with a major in pre-law and then when you graduated applied to law school. Then the argument about text X being invalid and not a good measure of college performance is invalid. These people have been in college, and their GPA IS a reflection of college performance. Why should anything other than academic performance be used?

The law school ruling follows the path the court set a generation ago, when it outlawed quotas but still left room for schools to improve the odds for minority applicants.

I really don't see how this could be considered OK. I thought the whole point was to avoid making decisions on race?

So discrimination against minorities exist, i believe it 100%. But i fail to see how a selective system based on race can resolve and issue that is at its heart - people being selective based on race.

--Also it was said above that the point of college is the experience, not passing calc 1. I say the whole point of college is to pass calc 1 and learn it. If you want some sort of community experience move to a suburb, and make the rest of us who are actually working hard to pass those classes happy. I meet too many people who are WASTING thousands of dollars for some sort of life experience they could have in any large group of people. If you don't have direction then you do not belong here. Get a job, work for awhile, read some books, when you know where you're going go to college. I wasted a year on an English degree because I wanted "the experience" and now all i have to show for it is an 8k loan, and allot of bad grades. It is too much money to pay just to come out on the other side another well rounded graduate working at CompUSA with a useless communications degree.

hate me if you will, but id like to strangle my advisors over it, it was NOT a worth-while learning experience.

--Race as a consideration for undergraduates helps keep a balance. On the other hand performance after you make it here HAS TO BE IMPORTANT. I remember going to financial aid to argue about my loans one day and listening to a minority arguing because his government Pell grant was revoked because he failed more than 50% of his classes.

 

[Lucky]

Ok, the idea of keeping minorities from being "underrepresented" at an undergrad school is totally valid. People come from different backgrounds and its very true that not everyone has the same opportunity in public school and other pre-high school area's. But the question here is can you say the same about their law-school? I could be wrong, but i thought you went to a regular undergrad school with a major in pre-law and then when you graduated applied to law school. Then the argument about text X being invalid and not a good measure of college performance is invalid. These people have been in college, and their GPA IS a reflection of college performance. Why should anything other than academic performance be used?

FYI, you dont have to have a "pre-law" undergrad major to get into law school. Buddy of mine with a journalism degree just got accepted for next year in law school.

 

[Tom]

"I say the whole point of college is to pass calc 1 and learn it."

Then you see universities as the functional equivalent of taking a class in VCR repair ? There isn't anything wrong with technical training but the point of a university is to bring people together to learn, and through that advance the state of mankind.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"I say the whole point of college is to pass calc 1 and learn it."

Then you see universities as the functional equivalent of taking a class in VCR repair ? There isn't anything wrong with technical training but the point of a university is to bring people together to learn, and through that advance the state of mankind.

really? i thought the point of a university was to learn things such as calc1. Damn them! i spent $300 takeing calc 1! and all i had to was advance the state of mankind. bummer.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"I say the whole point of college is to pass calc 1 and learn it."

Then you see universities as the functional equivalent of taking a class in VCR repair ? There isn't anything wrong with technical training but the point of a university is to bring people together to learn, and through that advance the state of mankind.

that is the most worthless arguement I have ever heard. EVAR.

The point of engineering school is to become a good engineer. You cannot be a good engineer without knowing math. Period.
The point of a physics major is so you can advance the field of physics. You cannot advance the field of physics if you cannot pass the E&M part of Introductory Physics.
The point of being a doctor is so you can do what a doctor does - move towards curing illnesses. But if you had a hard time in Bio 303...how are you going to be a doctor?

 

[Tom]

"These people have been in college, and their GPA IS a reflection of college performance. Why should anything other than academic performance be used?"

With regards to the law school question, suppose you have a 1000 people, all extremely qualified, but you can only admit 100.

Why is it best to admit the 100 with the highest grades ? Are grades really a measure of someone's ability to understand and practice law ? Did all the professors that gave the grades that led to the GPAs use exactly the same standards ? Remember we are talking about a 1000 highly qualified people here, to me it seems like using just GPA is a silly way to discriminate amongst highly qualified candidates. Even picking 100 of them at random seems superior to me.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"These people have been in college, and their GPA IS a reflection of college performance. Why should anything other than academic performance be used?"

With regards to the law school question, suppose you have a 1000 people, all extremely qualified, but you can only admit 100.

Why is it best to admit the 100 with the highest grades ? Are grades really a measure of someone's ability to understand and practice law ? Did all the professors that gave the grades that led to the GPAs use exactly the same standards ? Remember we are talking about a 1000 highly qualified people here, to me it seems like using just GPA is a silly way to discriminate amongst highly qualified candidates. Even picking 100 of them at random seems superior to me.

Which is why they have the LSAT.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch

Originally posted by: Nitemare
So a black person raised in a nice neighborhood with a white collar parent making 6 figures and attending private colleges gets a head up

over a white guy that grew up in a trailer park in BFE Louisiana while never knowing a father and having a mother that's only occupation was breeding and passing around STD's gets rejected because he is not black enough


Could someone explain to me how this is not racist behavior?

That is essnetially a hypothetical situation that doesn't accurately describe what happens in the real world. In the real world the black person you are describing would most likely not have any problem getting into a college of his choice, because based on your description he would not be dealing with the inadequate education system of a more typical black person's life.

And the white guy in the trailer park would probably qualify for admittance based on economic hardship. The tragedy is that many poor people aren't aware that there are ways up and out of those situations. They assume they wouldn't get the chance and they don't go and look for it.

The black guy in this situation has had a more privileged life than most people including most whites. He gets bonuses and advantages based on the color of his skin. He gets privileged treatment because of his skin. How is this different from a toned down reverse Jim Crow law?

Wouldn't a black guy that grew up in the trailer park qualify for admittance based on economic hardship as well?

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Elemental007

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"I say the whole point of college is to pass calc 1 and learn it."

Then you see universities as the functional equivalent of taking a class in VCR repair ? There isn't anything wrong with technical training but the point of a university is to bring people together to learn, and through that advance the state of mankind.

that is the most worthless arguement I have ever heard. EVAR.

The point of engineering school is to become a good engineer. You cannot be a good engineer without knowing math. Period.
The point of a physics major is so you can advance the field of physics. You cannot advance the field of physics if you cannot pass the E&M part of Introductory Physics.
The point of being a doctor is so you can do what a doctor does - move towards curing illnesses. But if you had a hard time in Bio 303...how are you going to be a doctor?

I did not say that passing calc wasn't a necessary step towards getting a degree in some fields. I don't disagree with you about the other points you list above.

But you could get straight A's in all of the classes in the engineering curriculum and still be the worst engineer in the history of mankind. Not to mention have no concept of the world that you would supposedly be designing things for.

That's why a diverse university community is so important, along with a widely varied curriculum. As an engineer you might get information just as useful as calculus from taking a course in pyscology, or jazz dancing, if it improves your ability to think and exposes you to things you didn't know. That is the difference between a university and technical training.

 

[MegaloManiaK]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"I say the whole point of college is to pass calc 1 and learn it."

Then you see universities as the functional equivalent of taking a class in VCR repair ? There isn't anything wrong with technical training but the point of a university is to bring people together to learn, and through that advance the state of mankind.

College is not the same thing as computer certifications or VCR repair. Emphasis on curriculum and productivity is not VCR repair. People complain all the time about having to learn calc and physics to be an engineer. In my opinion, and once again this is my opinion, college is a chance to learn fundamentally a profession, in the process you learn how to adapt and really "learn to learn" so that one day when you have to process new information you wont need to go back to class for it. The best part of college is it covers the theory behind the profession. Nobody stays the same after they leave college, the person you are here is not going to be the person you are 10-20-30 years from now. Life is a growing process and people are always changing. As far as advancing the state of mankind, I don't really know what you mean by that, but as far as i can tell advancements come about by hard work and dedication, not some utopian sense of the community.

If college is not about learning a profession, then why do you declare a major, and why does a company care what degree you earned? Once upon a time college was a place for cultural advancement. Today the world is a lot smaller place. You don't have to travel to a university to meet an Asian person, to read about India, etc etc. Mankind today is tied together through many forms of communications that provide cultural integration that once did not exist. Also travel is less expensive and more accessible.

 

[Tom]

"Which is why they have the LSAT."

If the LSAT is so great, why even have law schools ? Just take the 9 highest scores on the LSAT and put them on the Supreme Court. Then work your way down through the legal system filling slots based on the LSAT.

 

[beer]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"Which is why they have the LSAT."

If the LSAT is so great, why even have law schools ? Just take the 9 highest scores on the LSAT and put them on the Supreme Court. Then work your way down through the legal system filling slots based on the LSAT.

No, the LSAT is not the end-all of admissions, but it is the best resonable approximation thus far.

Besides, not all lawyers are trial lawyers. Not all lawyers do the exact same thing. It guages how well you were prepared for law school given the material that is most relevant to the prerequisites needed to do well in law school.

 

[friedpie]

The thing that kills me is that these minorities with sub-standard qualifications for big schools like UMich and Cal Berkeley can go to lesser schools, but they want the prestige of going to a high profile school. Let them go to the schools they qualify for.

Like TM37 pointed out, these kids fail at an alarming rate. You can't take a 1000 SAT kid and put him in with 1300+ SAT kids and expect him or her to compete.