The Instigator
stephenm
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
debate11
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Resolved: Affirmative Action to Promote Equal Opportunity in the United States is Justified.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
stephenm
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,051 times Debate No: 11217
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

stephenm

Con

Any one can challenge me. Let the debate begin!
debate11

Pro

I thank my oppenent for this round.

"If you don't like affirmative action, what is your plan to guarantee a level playing field of opportunity?" Because I agree with the words of Maynard Jackson I am in support of the resolution
Resolved: Affirmative action to promote equal opportunity in the United States is justified.
Definitions
American Webster's Dictionary

Affirmative Action- A policy or program providing advantages for people of a minority group who are seen to have traditionally been discriminated against, with the aim of creating a more egalitarian society through preferential access to education, employment, health care, social welfare, etc

Opportunity- a good position, chance, or prospect, as for advancement or success.

Justify - show to be right by providing justification or proof; "vindicate a claim"

This debate should be centered on the capability for humans to compete on educational, equal level. To promote equality in the United States, we must have affirmative action because for minorities, disabled, and challenged people we can't discriminate against any race, gender, or age or ethinicity. I'm not saying that we should focus on racism but why affirmative action is justified.

Contention 1- AFFIRMATIVE ACTION HELPS LEVEL THE EDUCATIONAL PLAYING FIELD Daily Illini ,"Keep Affirmative Action About Race," UNIVERSITY WIRE, April 1, 2008,npg.
To quote professor Dyson, "to understand affirmative action one must look at the historical context....since race was used as a demerit in the past, it is only just and logical to use it as a merit in the present." The purpose of affirmative action is to level the playing field. Since blacks were historically discriminated against because of the color of their skin, they should be given a preference today to make things equal.

One example is that many schools give credit for legacies. If your mother or father attended a university in the past, you are given preference. Blacks, who have historically been unable to go to college, are at a disadvantage. Affirmative action helps correct that scenario as well. In order for someone to have equal opportunities we must have affirmative action for their educational experiences to be met and leveled out with everyone else.
The direct clash in the round is that we need to equalize and give them an opportunity to every citizen in the United States.

SPA- It is against the constitution to reject equal opportunity. Therefore we need affirmative action.
In the United States Constitution Amendment 15, Section 1 The rights of the citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the US or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

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 Senate 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.

Contention 2- DIVERSITY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS NOT IMMORAL -- IS JUSTIFIED ON MULTIPLE GROUNDS James P. Sterba, Professor, Philosophy, University of Notre Dame, AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND RACIAL PREFERENCE: A DEBATE, Oxford University Press, 2003, p.308-309.
Cohen also goes on to identify all diversity affirmative action with the pursuit of racial proportionality and to condemn it on those grounds. But this hardly does justice to diversity affirmative action. Racial proportionality has its applications in the context of remedial affirmative action. By contrast, diversity affirmative action is a nonremedial form of affirmative action; it claims to be justified on the basis of the future benefits that diversity provides, not as a remedy for past discrimination. Diversity affirmative action aims to achieve a critical mass of underrepresented minority students in order to attain the benefits of racial diversity in various academic settings. That critical mass is determined not by the percentage of underrepresented minority students graduating from the relevant high school populations, as would have to be the case if racial proportionality were the goal. Rather, the number of students admitted is designed to be "sufficient to enable under-represented minority students to contribute to classroom dialogue without feeling isolated."
In conclusion, affirmative action is justified because equal opportunity is important in every person's life. Due to the context of what is morally right for citizens in the United states we should be civilized and treat every citizen with respect under or own jurisdictions. .
Debate Round No. 1
stephenm

Con

stephenm forfeited this round.
debate11

Pro

my opponent concedes
and loses thanks for the debate
haha
Debate Round No. 2
stephenm

Con

stephenm forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
stephenm

Con

Sorry that I missed my debate turn, I have been overloaded with academia work these past weeks and, currently, should be focusing my attention on my education rather than an enjoyable debate. I apologize, and thank my opponent for a great constructive!

To state that, in specification, "blacks" or African Americans should be supplied additional merit or preference for success as they have been previously "demerited" is to ignore the "now". Equal opportunity, as you explained clearly by defining "opportunity", is "a good position, chance, or prospect, as for advancement or success." The turn "opportunity" into "equal opportunity is to simply hold this to be true in regards to any race, disabled society, or challenged society. To supply supposed "blacks" an advantage is to turn "affirmative action" into action that holds African Americans in its preference. This, obviously, supplies Asians, Whites, Oceanics, and Latinos an obvious disablement and disadvantage as far as their ability to succeed goes. By supplying one minority an advantage, you henceforth supply every other minority and majority a disadvantage and therefore promote "unequal opportunity". The present ("Affirmative ACTION"), not the past, should be held as the looking glass for our discussion and to bring up past disadvantages or unequal opportunities is to continue former disputes between ancestors with their children today.

Another important point that my opponent made was the point of legacies. Although he/she pointed out that many schools do have legacies, he or she did not cite any sources to prove this to be true. I would appreciate any sources if possible. Another important point to make is that numerous amounts of great educational institutes have either developed in the past 70-so years or ignore the idea of favoring the children of graduates over minorities.

My opponent then went to point out that "we need affirmative action", but did not prove that it was "justified", as part of the debate topic. Furthermore, my opponent went on to point out that "everyone" should have the right to vote as amended in the constitution, however, everyone is supplied the right to vote definitively and affirmative action to justify this is unnecessary in this day and age.

In his or her next contention, my opponent made several grammatic errors as I struggled to follow along. However, he made a second reference to the constitution and how it pertains to the deprivation of privileges in accordance with race, religion, etc. Again, this point did not pertain to the set debate topic.

Thanks.
debate11

Pro

Thanks for repelling your arguement. Since we only have 1 round left we will use the next round as a final voting topic or main focus. My opponent doesn't provide any points on his side of the arguement. So we must be voting on who proves affirmative action is justified under "equal opportunity".

My opponent first point states that present affirmative action is more important than the past. Well I would say that from the 1960's, during the Civil Rights Act, we used affirmative action too move the minority forward and to equal their oppourtunity. The reason why affirmative is justified is because we have used it in the past and we must use it now.

Providing every other minority is false because when educating someone for life skills we have to equalize every oppurtunity in order for it too be justified. Justification in stance is what is just and equal in todays society. Today no one person is fair or treated equally because we discriminate whether by gender, race, or ethnicity.

So affirmative action is justified because we must provide an equal opp. to every single person in the US. The constution arguement is justified and relative to the topic because if your denying someone the right too vote, under our const. we must provide an equal opp. to that person.

DIVERSITY IMPROVES EDUCATION OUTCOMES
NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and American Civil Liberties Union, Amicus Brief in Grutter v.
Bollinger et al., Supreme Court Case No. 02-241, 2002, http://www.aclu.org..., accessed
2-4-10.
Indeed, studies show that meaningful cross-racial interaction in institutions of higher learning has significant social
and educational benefits. The more racially diverse a student body, the more likely that students will socialize across
racial lines and talk about racial matters. These interactions have a positive impact on student retention, overall
college satisfaction, and intellectual and social self-confidence among all students.* Faculty have also reported that
racial and ethnic diversity in the classroom helps students broaden the sharing of experiences, raise new issues and
perspectives, confront stereotypes relevant to social and political issues, and gain exposure to perspectives with
which they disagree or do not understand.

We stand as a nation of one. Not multiple groups.
thanks
Debate Round No. 4
stephenm

Con

Sounds good. So far, I have defeated every one of my opponents points, despite not introducing a single point of my own. Affirmative action to promote equal opportunity simply is not justified because there is no return on the financial, moral, and time investment and loss. To promote equal opportunity amongst all minorities and majorities simply isn't possible in a state like America. To majorities, this simply isn't fair! Why should the wealthiest end up paying for the poorest!? Obviously, I can see them wanting to help them out, but to be forced by the United States Government and the Internal Revenue Service to pay anywhere from 20 to 50 percent of their income for poor people that, in most cases, steal, thieve and cause havoc through America's beautiful cities, such as New York and African American immigrants. Another example of this treacherous minority activity is religiously. Millions of mosques around the nation are flooding the land and bringing major problems to cities and towns of this great republic. In the majority of towns flooded by Islamic mosques, Christianity accounts for over 50% of the population, according to CNN.com.

Through these examples, one can obviously see why this opportunity is not taken up, and all this work that majorities put into supporting minorities is literally useless and has no large effect on the strength of this nation. Over in Detroit, where blacks have demanded higher pay for their (supposedly strenuous) work of handing a door to a machine in the car production lines, has led automakers like Ford and GM downhill rapidly. Currently, in fact, the United States government owns a majority stake in that business.

Resolved: CON : Affirmative action to promote equal opportunity in the United States is juustified.

I again thank my opponent for his patience and wonderful points and opinions!
debate11

Pro

debate11 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by stephenm 6 years ago
stephenm
Hey debate11

Don't know if you say, but I just posted my first constructive. Like I said, I am extremely sorry for the delay, but hope we can continue this debate and get to the voting process. Thanks, Steve.
Posted by debate11 6 years ago
debate11
or just post your sources under your contentions......
that works too..
Posted by debatergreat 6 years ago
debatergreat
U guyz (debate11) should cite all your sources at the end...otherwise ur speech is just full of claims but no warrants...which means there are no impacts...
cite all sources exactly (with the exact url) so that your opponent can rebutt to that article...
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
lol he said "ritard" haha i caught that too

@Kinesis: hi-5
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Kinesis
lol @ spelling irony.
Posted by debate11 6 years ago
debate11
To sky ac25
this is the public forum topic you ritard....
dont post stupid comments...
Posted by twsurber 6 years ago
twsurber
Change it to 3 rounds and I will accept. I won't even talk about the Bible or the gift of salvation :o)
Posted by Sky_ace25 6 years ago
Sky_ace25
Also, I'm a little bit biased against you since A. Your a very new member and B. Your first debate is regarding the LD resolution.

Very Fishy.
Posted by Sky_ace25 6 years ago
Sky_ace25
I agree it's the resolution topic, but I still believe your a case snatcher.

"I was just hoping I could get ahead and get some research ideas by using this site and seeing what people have to say."

Where have I heard that one before...
Posted by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
Does the resolution refer to the current use of affirmative action or affirmative action in general?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by stephenm 6 years ago
stephenm
stephenmdebate11Tied
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