The Instigator
DathanDebate
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Haydon
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Should religion/race specific scholarships be banned?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/16/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,489 times Debate No: 44067
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

DathanDebate

Pro

It's not fair to others that people of a certain race or religion are automatically given the advantage in getting into college. Sure, there's nothing wrong with giving disabled people a little boost that they need, but being a certain race or religion shouldn't make someone more qualified for a scholarship. It should be based on skill, intelligence, or accomplishment, not color of skin or religious beliefs.
Haydon

Con

It is fair to others that people of a certain race or religion are given an advantage in getting into college, as long as the money that exchanges is from a private source as opposed to public funding. One could also argue that being of a certain race should or could be considered a disability, but that probably isn't appropriate to this debate. However, you've said that scholarships should be awarded on other forms of merit, thus still discriminating but using different criteria.
Using America as an example, the white community tends to be 'more well-off" than the black community in terms of wealth and education, thus, due to their education and privileged background they are often more intelligent, therein they'd attain much more scholarships than African-Americans.
Why is it that you claim that it is unfair for scholarships to be given due to race and religion, yet skill, intelligence and accomplishment are so very linked to the former? Statistics show that religious people are generally of lesser intellect than unbelievers, thus would you discriminate against the religious when giving scholarships?
Regardless, it is entirely fair to others that scholarships are given out for a myriad of reasons, only if the scholarships are privately funded. For example, would you say that it is fair that you cannot get a monetary scholarship associated with Harvard if you attend Notre Dame? They are discriminating on skill, intelligence, accomplishment and perhaps the simple geographical nature of such a scholarship, is that also wrong using your logic?
If a scholarship is of private equity, those who determine the scholarship should have complete discretion in their determination of a recipient. They can choose the criteria and what merit they consider important, including race and religion.
Debate Round No. 1
DathanDebate

Pro

Yes, you are correct that private schools should be able to do that. It is my fault that I did not specify that I was talking about private universities. And though background can be a large part of opportunities for education, that doesn't mean that they should be automatically raised to the level of those who worked hard to get where they are, and may be denied a college education because they lost their scholarship due only to the other person going for said scholarship is a minority. Not everyone has to go to college, and if you are of a low intelligence and have insufficient skills, a scholarship should not be given based on race or religion, as without the base education, the higher education of college won't be received properly, except in some rare cases. Those scholarships should be given to those who will get the most out of it. There are many intelligent people that can't afford to go to college, and only have a chance to afford it with a scholarship. But those students often lose their scholarships based solely on the fact that the other applicants were of a minority. Therefore, the best practice would be to ban private schools from having religion and race specific scholarships, and have the scholarship screening not have gender, race, or religion included in the information given to those who determine that scholarship's recipient.
Haydon

Con

Well, I largely contended the topic on the grounds that the scholarships were private, but I still believe that my case is very strong. I do agree that it is perhaps wrong to discriminate on the basis of gender, race and religion, yet I do believe that institutions, in which you've stated are private (the ones which should be banned) reserve the right to discriminate based on their own criteria. To repeat myself, it may be 'wrong' in the sense that more deserving candidates are considered ineligible for certain reasons, yet it shouldn't be made illegal by any means, after all, what is 'deserving' can only be determined by those who make the scholarship.

Perhaps you should imagine certain scenarios. For example, if in a school district there were hardly any African American teachers, yet a large portion of the student population was comprised of black children, a local tertiary institution could consider it appropriate to offer an African American a scholarship for a teaching course, as the demand is there because they could act as a good role model etc... So why not assist in the supply by enticing through a scholarship?

A lot of your argument is based on 'fairness', but who said that the world had to be fair? I'm sure a meritorious person could find another, more appropriate scholarship, or perhaps a cheaper university (I'm Australian, so the tax payer pays for my education, and then I repay it once I'm employed). Maybe the prospective student could work for some time, or look for an industry scholarship to educate them. There are plenty of options, and it would be ludicrous to stop universities from giving out discriminatory scholarships for certain things, but not others, as they reserve the right to make the decision.

You can argue that it is unfair and wrong, and in many ways it is, but in other ways it could be unfair to not discriminate in the ways that you have given. They should not be banned, if we ban all that is 'unfair', we must ban sport, ban the capitalist economy and free market trading, we must also waive this debate, as perhaps it is unfair that I am arguing at 3:44 am Sydney time.
Debate Round No. 2
DathanDebate

Pro

Ok, I see now. I see your point of view, and agree in a country where a scholarship is not vital to attending college, that such scholarships would be fine. I kind of feel like we didn't understand what the other party was saying, and I see why you think the way you do. But I still think that in a situation where the scholarship may determine whether or not the student can attend college should still have neutrality in race, gender, and religion when choosing the recipient of a scholarship.
Haydon

Con

I think I still disagree with you, just because someone can't afford to go to college doesn't mean that they deserve a scholarship, even if they are smart, have achieved a lot, etc. In a country that is as right wing as America, one must accept that the responsibility to go into things like college are largely on the person themselves. If an institution chooses to give out scholarships for race, gender, etc, that is their business, and nobody has the right to 'ban' it.
It is like saying that you don't enjoy bbq flavoured chips, therefore the manufacturer should be banned from producing them. It is their product, it is their choice, and if the consumer (or student) doesn't like it they have the choice to go elsewhere. The world doesn't owe anybody anything, nor should it.
Debate Round No. 3
DathanDebate

Pro

DathanDebate forfeited this round.
Haydon

Con

Haydon forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
DathanDebate

Pro

DathanDebate forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Haydon 3 years ago
Haydon
It is too late for me, I'll be on to respond within the next 20 hours.
Goodnight all, and if you are American, have fun with your net neutrality...
I'm praying to Cthulhu that it doesn't happen here.
Posted by Haydon 3 years ago
Haydon
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Largely due to religious people having a different way of thinking... They rely more on intuition and blind faith, rather than a desire to have proof.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

http://www.christianitytoday.com...

Also, look at the average IQ of nations...
Most of the top nations aren't deeply religious, and it works in scale I suppose. A lot of the African nations, whom partake in many 'traditional' religious acts, largely stupid and completely unsound, have a very low IQ. Then jump to America, which is more or less in the middle, they have a decent education system but are often religious. Then move up to nations like Hong Kong , Korea and Japan, which are largely non religious, besides some Buddhism which is far more believable than Islam, Christianity and Judaism besides Samsara, and Buddhism is more followed as a way of life than a faith.

There was also a study, that I cannot source at the moment which found that atheists test much higher in religious exams than the believers themselves... Coincidence, I think not!
Posted by AliveBobcat246 3 years ago
AliveBobcat246
SOSA Babyyyyy. GBE Babyyy. O-Block. BANG BANG 300

White Power 666 Hail Santa
Posted by guendoleona 3 years ago
guendoleona
Interesting debate. Con, would you mind referencing the statistics you've found that show religious people to be less intelligent than non religious people?
No votes have been placed for this debate.