The Instigator
jsalomonenhs
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
cfossanhs
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Affirmative Action

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 438 times Debate No: 39286
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

jsalomonenhs

Con

Affirmative action is an attack on American identity, according to Paul Connors in his book "Affirmative Action" in the "At Issue" book series. "It is such an emollient phrase, so redolent of cheeriness (savor the word 'affirmative') and practicality ('action'). What it really means is 'discrimination on the basis of sex, skin color, or some other item in the contemporary lexicon of victimology.' But you can almost forget that while the pleasing phrase 'affirmative action' echoes in your recollection" (Connors 86). The basis of affirmative action is to "make up" for the unlawful discrimination and sgregation that America once implemented. But isn't it just as racist to not give a white person a job they are qualified for and instead give it to a less qualified black person to somehow make up for the wrong-doings of slave owners? We cannot change our past, we must continue to work away from our racist ways and move forward toward equality, but affitmative action is not the way to do it.
cfossanhs

Pro

Affirmative action gives minorities a better chance against white kids who were raised in better situations. Messerli says, "Minority students, generally speaking, start out at a disadvantage in their college or job application process. They usually come from lower income families and have less opportunity to go to private schools as white students. Some inner city youths must also live their childhoods in high crime, drug-infested areas" (Messerli). Students that were raised in better neighborhoods than minorities and go better schools and taught by better teachers. Kids brought up in neighborhoods with drugs and crime are most likely going to get involved in drugs and crime and not have as good as a chance to get in to school, affirmative action gives those kids a chance to still get into school even though there grades were not good enough because of the situation they were grown up in.
Debate Round No. 1
jsalomonenhs

Con

jsalomonenhs forfeited this round.
cfossanhs

Pro

cfossanhs forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
jsalomonenhs

Con

jsalomonenhs forfeited this round.
cfossanhs

Pro

cfossanhs forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
jsalomonenhs

Con

jsalomonenhs forfeited this round.
cfossanhs

Pro

cfossanhs forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
jsalomonenhs

Con

jsalomonenhs forfeited this round.
cfossanhs

Pro

cfossanhs forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Cantseeinthedark 3 years ago
Cantseeinthedark
Um you are going to continue debating yes?
Posted by BCOUTURENHS 3 years ago
BCOUTURENHS
Jack has better points. #teamjack
Posted by HMcGreenNHS 3 years ago
HMcGreenNHS
Pretty even debate thus far. #TeamCam
Posted by HMcGreenNHS 3 years ago
HMcGreenNHS
Pretty even debate thus far. #TeamCam
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Beverlee 3 years ago
Beverlee
jsalomonenhscfossanhsTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Offsetting conduct points for the FF's. Both sides used passages from sources as the main body of their arguments, Pro could have cited the actual Affirmative Action laws and regulations instead, but chose to describe the policy third-hand instead. I don't understand this decision. I'm not comfortable awarding points for anything in this debate. (Con so fundamentally mischaracterized Affirmative Action that rebuttals should have been a simple matter of describing the law.)