The Instigator
Datodd39
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
Korashk
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

Affirmative action to promote equal opportunity in the United States is justifed.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,517 times Debate No: 11297
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (10)

 

Datodd39

Pro

I'd like to thank my opponents for accepting this debate.

Affirmative Case

My Partner and I affirm the Resolution: "Affirmative action to promote equal opportunity in the United States is justified."

We'd first like to define the following all from Dictionary.com.

Affirmative Action: A policy or a program that seeks to redress past discrimination through active measures to ensure equal opportunity, as in education and employment

Promote: To contribute to the progress or growth of; further.

Equal Opportunity: Policies and practices in employment and other areas that do not discriminate against persons on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, mental or physical handicap, or national origin.

Justified: To demonstrate or prove to be just, right, or valid

More than forty years ago, President Lyndon B. Johnson described affirmative action as a vital tool in the struggle to provide all Americans with equal opportunity. "This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights," Johnson asserted. "We seek…not just equality as a right and theory, but equality as a fact and as a result." Recognizing that years of segregation and state-sponsored second-class citizenship had barred women and people of color from many of the opportunities others took for granted, Johnson, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and other civil rights leaders of the time knew it was the government's responsibility to act affirmatively to correct these mistakes. Their vision and the programs that sprang from it opened doors to opportunity for countless minorities and women who had theretofore been excluded, allowing them a fair chance to compete and ultimately to succeed.
We have come a long way since the Civil Rights Movement, and many Americans feel that the time for affirmative action is over. Opportunities for women and people of color have expanded, and many believe that the unequal conditions that once justified affirmative action no longer exist. Sadly, this is false. Many Americana continue to experience race and gender barriers in education, contracting and employment. Existing laws help prevent outright discrimination on the basis of race and gender, but they alone are not enough to create equal opportunities for all Americans.

Contention 1: AFF ACTION CONTINUES TO PROMOTE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

Reginald T. Shuford Sr. Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation Spring 2009

Americans value greatly the notion that we are a country where people are treated fairly regardless of skin color, family connections, or wealth. Affirmative action promotes equality of opportunity for everyone and provides a fair chance to achieve one's full potential and to strive for the American Dream. It breaks down barriers-including good ole boy networks and glass ceilings- that have long blocked the pathways of opportunity primarily for people of color and women. Affirmative action policies help to make level a notoriously and historically uneven playing field. When obstacles are removed from the paths of women and minorities-providing greater access to more Americans-it allows families, communities, and our society as a whole to benefit.

Contention 2: Affirmative Action Has Increased Opportunities for Many to Realize Their Dream through Education and Employment

Perry- Rohrbach, United Methodist; Color Still Holds People Back; The Progressive Populist; May 15, 2004; Gale Group Databases

In the four decades since Johnson's time, affirmative action has increased opportunities for many people to realize that dream through education and employment. While legalized discrimination died decades ago, racism still lives on. We can see it in the growth of Klan groups, Neo-Nazi groups and hate crimes. The affirmative action programs have stood as a continuing attempt to defeat discrimination among those who have not yet understood that racism is not part of The American Dream.

•The 14th Amendment, Section 1 states "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Thus by having discriminating people, we must have affirmative action for justification of being equal. We must use affirmative action as a vital tool in assuring that everyone has an equal protection of the laws. Affirmative action will outlaw businesses, and educational facilities from discrimination which allows an equal protection of laws creating a justified structure.

My partner and I support affirmative action as a vital tool in the struggle to provide all Americans with equal opportunity, to promote diversity in academic and professional settings, and to give each other and everyone a fair chance to compete for the American Dream. Thank you and please vote PRO!!!
Korashk

Con

I thank my opponent for creating this debate and hope that it is a good one. I accept my opponent's definitions except for affirmative action and will begin with my definitions and rebuttals.

Definition:

Discrimination - a sociological term referring to the treatment taken toward or against a person of a certain group that is taken in consideration based on class or category.
I use the Wikipedia definition of discrimination as I believe that it outlines the practice best, http://en.wikipedia.org...

Affirmative Action - an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

~~~~~~~
Rebuttals
~~~~~~~

///Contention 1: AFF ACTION CONTINUES TO PROMOTE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY///

This is a direct portion of this document here [1], not a real argument. Until my opponent supports this contention with an actual argument the voters should consider it invalid. I am not in a debate with Reginald T. Shuford, I am in a debate with Datodd39.
~

///In the four decades since Johnson's time, affirmative action has increased opportunities for many people to realize that dream through education and employment...///

This is another direct quote, not an argument [2].
~

~~~~~~~~~
My Argument
~~~~~~~~~

In the resolution my opponent claims that affirmative action promotes equal opportunity. This statement is in direct conflict with my opponent's definition of equal opportunity which is why I do not accept my opponent's definition of affirmative action. You see, affirmative action is in and of itself discrimination, instead of encouraging people to look past race, gender, creed, ect. it forces us to take these factors into account. It is a logical fallacy to try and end discrimination with discrimination.

The resolution is negated.

[1] Pages 23-24 of the PDF file, or pages 525-526 of the actual document, http://law.campbell.edu...
[2] Tenth paragraph, http://www.populist.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Datodd39

Pro

I agree with your difinitions and if you look at mine and you're difinition for affirmative action you'll see they're the same. Discrimination covers race, gender, and other aspects of injustice. My difinition is not limited to race.

You fail to notice that this is a public forum topic. Those quotes are evidence which is sited properly. That's the techinique used in a public forum debate whioch we seem to be doing now.

The problem with going con is that all debaters fail to mention another means to put an end to discriminaion; that's where they fail. Affirmative action has been used in the passed a countless number of times and congress has passed approximately 47 bills that have improved the lives of many people who'd have been or have been discriminated against because of the orgin, race, gender, and etc. So if you don't agree with affirmative action than please tell me another means to handle discrimination. One that has been as affected as affirmative action.

I'll leave you with that to ponder on and you can get back to me but in the mean time i have an actual debate for this topic today; one that'll hopefully be more challenging and an opponent that will know more about this topic.
Korashk

Con

I thank my opponent for his timely response.

~~~~~~~
Rebuttals
~~~~~~~

///I agree with your difinitions and if you look at mine and you're difinition for affirmative action you'll see they're the same. Discrimination covers race, gender, and other aspects of injustice. My difinition is not limited to race.///
My definition of affirmative action is not limited to race either, yours was just more specific as to those advantaged by it. A minority group can refer to many things, be they ideological groups or racial groups. They are also different in that it does not reference the phrase 'equal opportunity.' I have shown that phrase to be in direct contradiction to affirmative action.
~

///You fail to notice that this is a public forum topic. Those quotes are evidence which is sited properly. That's the techinique used in a public forum debate whioch we seem to be doing now.///
Alright, I will accept these quotes as arguments by my opponent, but they are still just quotes made by individuals, they do not cite any evidence to substantiate their claims. Until such evidence is provided that Affirmative action promotes equal opportunity that arguments holds no weight.
~

///Contention 2 Revisited///
I stand by the position that increasing the opportunities of minorities has no bearing on the resolution of this debate. If a higher power dictated that an organization needed to have so many of each minority represented no matter what their circumstances this does not promote equal opportunity. This practice would allow for the least qualified member of one group to be more qualified than the most qualified than another but those of lesser qualifications get to reap the benefits of the organization just as well.
~

///The problem with going con is that all debaters fail to mention another means to put an end to discriminaion; that's where they fail.///
It is not Con's job to provide a solution to discrimination, in this particular debate it is my responsibility to show that affirmative action does not promote equal opportunity by refuting your attempts to affirm that it does and providing counterargument(s).
~

Since my argument went unrefuted I will add to it that the resolution of this debate does not reference ending discrimination, it references promoting equal opportunity which affirmative action does not do.
Debate Round No. 2
Datodd39

Pro

Part 4: The Justification for Affirmative Action
THE CONTINUING NEED
TO COMBAT DISCRIMINATION
AND PROMOTE INCLUSION
Affirmative action was established as part of society's efforts to address continuing problems of discrimination; the empirical evidence presented in the preceding chapter indicates that it has had some positive impact on remedying the effects of discrimination. Whether such discrimination lingers today is a central element of an analysis of affirmative action. The conclusion is clear: discrimination and exclusion remain all too common.
4.1. Evidence of Continuing Discrimination
There has been undeniable progress in many areas. Nevertheless, the evidence is overwhelming that the problems affirmative action seeks to address -- widespread discrimination and exclusion and their ripple effects -- continue to exist.
•Minorities and women remain economically disadvantaged: the black unemployment rate remains over twice the white unemployment rate; 97 percent of senior managers in Fortune 1000 corporations are white males; (28) in 1992, 33.3 percent of blacks and 29.3 percent of Hispanics lived in poverty, compared to 11.6 percent of whites. (29) In 1993, Hispanic men were half as likely as white men to be managers or professionals; (30) only 0.4 percent of senior management positions in Fortune 1000 industrial and Fortune 500 service industries are Hispanic. (31)
•Last year alone, the Federal government received over 90,000 complaints of employment discrimination. Moreover 64,423 complaints were filed with state and local Fair Employment Practices Commissions, bringing the total last year to over 154,000. Thousands of other individuals filed complaints alleging racially

Economic Status
Apart from the remediation of and bullwark against discrimination, a second justification offered for continuing affirmative action in education, employment and contracting is the need to repair the mechanisms for including all Americans in the economic mainstream. There is ample evidence to conclude that the problems to which affirmative action was initially addressed remain serious, both for members of disadvantaged groups and for America as a whole.
•A recent study by the Glass Ceiling Commission, a body established under President Bush and legislatively sponsored by Senator Dole, (37) recently reported that:
- White males continue to hold 97 percent of senior management positions in Fortune 1000 industrial and Fortune 500 service industries. Only 0.6 percent of senior management are African American, 0.3 percent are Asian and 0.4 percent are Hispanic.
- African Americans hold only 2.5 percent of top jobs in the private sector and African American men with professional degrees earn only 79 percent of the amount earned by their white counterparts. Comparably situated African American women earn only 60 percent of the amount earned by white males.
- Women hold 3 to 5 percent of senior level management positions -- there are only two women CEOs in Fortune 1000 companies.
- The fears and prejudices of lower-rung white male executives were listed as a principal barrier to the advancement of women and minorities. The report also found that, across the board, men advance more rapidly than women.

•The unemployment rate for African Americans was more than twice that of whites in 1994. The median income for black males working full-time, full year in 1992 was 30 percent less than white males. Hispanics fared only modestly better in each category. In 1993, black and Hispanic men were half as likely as white men to be managers or professionals. (38)
•In 1992, over 50 percent of African American children under 6 and 44 percent of Hispanic children lived under the poverty level, while only 14.4 percent of white children did so. The overall poverty rates were 33.3 percent for African Americans, 29.3 percent for Hispanics and 11.6 percent for whites.
•Black employment remains fragile -- in an economic downturn, black unemployment leads the downward spiral. For example, in the 1981-82 recession, black employment dropped by 9.1 percent while white employment fell by 1.6 percent. Hispanic unemployment is also much more cyclical than unemployment for white Americans. (39) Hispanic family income remains much lower, and increases at a slower rate, than white family income. (40)
•Unequal access to education plays an important role in creating and perpetuating economic disparities. In 1993, less than 3 percent of college graduates were unemployed; but whereas 22.6 percent of whites had college degrees, only 12.2 percent of African Americans and 9.0 percent of Hispanics did.
•The 1990 census reflected that 2.4 percent of the nation's businesses are owned by blacks. Almost 85 percent of those black owned businesses have no employees. (41)
•Even within educational categories, the economic status of minorities and women fall short. The average woman with a masters degree earns the same amount as the average man with an associate degree. (42) While college educated black women have reached earnings parity with college educated white women, college educated black men earn 76 percent of the earnings of their white male counterparts. (43) Hispanic women earn less than 65 percent of the income earned by white men with the same educational level. Hispanic men earn 81 percent of the wages earned by white men at the same educational level. The average income for Hispanic women with college degrees is less than the average for white men with high school degrees. (44)
A study of the graduating classes of the University of Michigan Law School from 1972-1975 revealed significant wage differentials between men and women lawyers after 15 years of practice. While women earned 93.5 percent of male salaries during the first year after school, that number dropped to 61 percent after 15 years of practice. Controlling for grades, hours of work, family responsibilities, labor market experience, and choice of careers (large firms versus small firms, academia, public interest, etc.), men are left with an unexplained 13 percent earnings advantage over women.

-My partner asked for evidence so here it is. I have plenty more from where that came from and more. If you've read this you can see the numbers of discrimination are great and true. You can also see that with affirmative action those numbers of discrimination have improved. I ask you to please vote pro for affirmative action. It's helped in the past and is still continuing to help in the present day. Congress has signed over forty bills for affirmative action approving it and the supreme court in many cases has used affirmative action as a postive means. I thank my partner for this debate.
Korashk

Con

All except for the last paragraph is a direct quote from this source [3].

None of this evidence supports the position that affirmative action promotes equal opportunity, only that it increases educational end employment opportunities for minority groups, which is true but it does this through reverse discrimination. It does not end discrimination. Since my opponent refuted none of my arguments and provided none that support the resolution I conclude the debate and urge a Con vote.

[3] http://clinton2.nara.gov...
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
Sorry, it was Pro who introduced new arguments in the final round. That's not a conduct violation IMHO, but they are ignored.
Posted by Datodd39 7 years ago
Datodd39
Well i didn't know i was allowed to vote so please excuse my points because i believe that to be cheating.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Affirmative action is racial (or other) discrimination claimed to be justified by past discrimination. In California, the famous case was the state adding 200 points to the SAT scores of university applicants having a Spanish surname. The proved to be a great benefit to applicants from South America, Whose scores were overall at the average before they received the 200 points. A voter initiative subsequently struck down affirmative action in admissions.

Pro incorrectly claimed that affirmative action was the same as anti-discrimination laws. Not so, it requires and applies racial discrimination.

Con argued well enough to win, but would have made a better case by citing clearly unfair discrimination done as affirmative action. I don't see anything wrong with copying arguments into a ddo debate; they should be refuted anyway. Con introduced new evidence in the last round, which is not good form.
Posted by mongoose 7 years ago
mongoose
"the empirical evidence presented in the preceding chapter indicates..."

What chapter?

Oh...
Posted by TheCalmOne 7 years ago
TheCalmOne
Tough one.
Posted by Datodd39 7 years ago
Datodd39
As the con you're right, it is not your responsibility to find another means to help fight discrimination. I will get you evidence to prove that affirmative action has helped ans is still continuing to help fight any form of discrimination. i will do it tonight.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 7 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
And your case advances nothing to the contrary (neither does your comment. One can fight fire with fire, but one is still using fire)
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I-am-a-panda
Affirmative action takes rights away from a certain race. Seems like discrimination to me.
Posted by Datodd39 7 years ago
Datodd39
Affirmative action is not discrimination. if you read my case than you'd realize it's not. what other means are there to help with discrimination?
Posted by I-am-a-panda 7 years ago
I-am-a-panda
"Thus by having discriminating people, we must have affirmative action for justification of being equal." -- Affirmative action IS discrimination
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by SukiWater 7 years ago
SukiWater
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Vote Placed by AbandonAngel89 7 years ago
AbandonAngel89
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Vote Placed by brockghering 7 years ago
brockghering
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Datodd39 7 years ago
Datodd39
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Laughman4 7 years ago
Laughman4
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Datodd39KorashkTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by redbrave70 7 years ago
redbrave70
Datodd39KorashkTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by TheCalmOne 7 years ago
TheCalmOne
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Vote Placed by Xie-Xijivuli 7 years ago
Xie-Xijivuli
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
Datodd39KorashkTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06