Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Affirmative Action

1dustpelt
Posts: 1,970
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:00:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
What are your ideas? I personally think that Race-based Affirmative Action is racist and unnecessary, but Economic-status-based Affirmative Action is necessary.

Seriously, what is the point of race-based affirmative action? Does you race affect you intellegence or something?

I can understand economic status-based affirmative action because you will have less chances and opportunity if you're poor.

But race-based affirmative action is stupid.
Wall of LOL
"Infanticide is justified as long as the infants are below two" ~ RoyalPaladin
"Promoting female superiority is the only way to establish equality." ~ RoyalPaladin
"Jury trials should be banned. They're nothing more than opportunities for racists to destroy lives." ~ RoyalPaladin after the Zimmerman Trial.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:07:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
So instead of dividing this country based on race, we should divide it based on their economic class?

Here is an idea, how about we try to unify the nation, instead of driving a wedge between different groups.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:09:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Isn't the original core of affirmative action the removal of disadvantages as compared to giving advantages?

I completely agree that nobody should be disadvantaged for reasons of race/religion/etc... but making up for that by giving advantages out for those same reasons is just as prejudiced/biased/racist.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:10:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.

Cool it with your Ayn Rand mumbo jumbo, if you are a white male you deserve lesser opportunities than your counterpart of minority status. And don't you dare have the audacity to complain, you are a white American male.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:24:46 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.

This.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
cbrhawk1
Posts: 588
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 11:38:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
There is no excuse for affirmative action: Bottom line.

There are always better alternatives than forcing a company's hand on something that isn't necessary.
"All science is 'wrong.'" ~ drafterman
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:06:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:10:50 AM, lewis20 wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.

Cool it with your Ayn Rand mumbo jumbo, if you are a white male you deserve lesser opportunities than your counterpart of minority status. And don't you dare have the audacity to complain, you are a white American male.

LOL

Justify this.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:08:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:10:50 AM, lewis20 wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.

Cool it with your Ayn Rand mumbo jumbo, if you are a white male you deserve lesser opportunities than your counterpart of minority status. And don't you dare have the audacity to complain, you are a white American male.

There is no way that you are a libertarian.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
tulle
Posts: 4,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:09:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:07:40 AM, DanT wrote:
So instead of dividing this country based on race, we should divide it based on their economic class?

Here is an idea, how about we try to unify the nation, instead of driving a wedge between different groups.

So it would be affirmative action based on economic status driving a wedge between different groups and not economic status itself?
yang.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:17:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:00:17 AM, 1dustpelt wrote:
What are your ideas? I personally think that Race-based Affirmative Action is racist and unnecessary, but Economic-status-based Affirmative Action is necessary.

Seriously, what is the point of race-based affirmative action?

Because people are racists.

I want to understand why you think that "economic-status-based" affirmative action makes any sense in a capitalist economy.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:18:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

You're right. Thus, one should take affirmative action to combat it.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:18:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.

What, exactly, does it say about that person?
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:19:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:20:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:08:21 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:10:50 AM, lewis20 wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.

Cool it with your Ayn Rand mumbo jumbo, if you are a white male you deserve lesser opportunities than your counterpart of minority status. And don't you dare have the audacity to complain, you are a white American male.

There is no way that you are a libertarian.

He was trolling
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
LibertyCampbell
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:22:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:17:09 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:00:17 AM, 1dustpelt wrote:
What are your ideas? I personally think that Race-based Affirmative Action is racist and unnecessary, but Economic-status-based Affirmative Action is necessary.

Seriously, what is the point of race-based affirmative action?

Because people are racists.

I want to understand why you think that "economic-status-based" affirmative action makes any sense in a capitalist economy.

If people are naturally racist, then I see no problem with allowing them to live out a natural order. If all whites are programmed to hate blacks, then let the linching begin.

If they aren't naturally racist, then social stigmas will dissolve over time, and there won't be a need for affirmative action anyways, unless you want immediate relief. (unless the government gets in the way).
"[Society] has no vested interest in continuing to exist." -RP
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:23:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.

What, exactly, does it say about that person?

That he's pretty much the sh1t - or at least strongly implies that he has a strong commitment to doing well.
LibertyCampbell
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:24:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.

What, exactly, does it say about that person?

That he can succeed on his own merit, and doesn't need affirmative action to help him anyways :P
"[Society] has no vested interest in continuing to exist." -RP
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:29:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:18:17 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

You're right. Thus, one should take affirmative action to combat it.

*facepalm*
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:30:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:23:02 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.

What, exactly, does it say about that person?

That he's pretty much the sh1t - or at least strongly implies that he has a strong commitment to doing well.

That is, perhaps, one way of looking at it.

On the other hand, there's the fact that the majority of them don't have a concept of normative success. They chase dreams that doesn't align with any sort of academic performance. Indeed, for many of them, despite their appearance, this is all they know.

Then, there are others who have had those values fostered in them from an early age. Parents -- one or both -- made the sacrifices necessary to ensure that the child received tutoring when necessary, received the proper education, completed their homework, etc. I mean, this is something that we would automatically expect, sure, but you have to admit that the majority of these parents are in circumstances that just don't make that sort of involvement practical or possible. And, well, no everyone is a saint -- in fact, most people aren't.

Then, of course, there's the sort of resources available to children despite their values. The degree of crime, access to drugs, general safety, teacher involvement, quality of education, access to school supplies, and the validity of the curriculum all play a role.

Once you're past this quagmire of issues and hindrances, you still have financial problems that may arise when they pursue post-secondary education. I know some don't realize how silver their spoon is when they say "Community College is only a couple thousand," when many of these people don't have a couple of hundred to spare -- and, even if they did, that doesn't mean they can afford it repeatedly for half a decade.

Of course, there's a personal problems that arise amidst all this that make all all-the-harder.

Then, you can apply racism to the mix, and the fact that, as much as people would like to pretend as though it was eons ago, it was only a few generations ago that these people were trapped in their own country or were slaves within this society.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:31:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:29:31 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:18:17 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

You're right. Thus, one should take affirmative action to combat it.

*facepalm*

I wonder how much hypertension you've experienced from reading my responses to your idiotic posts.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:32:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:24:20 PM, LibertyCampbell wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.

What, exactly, does it say about that person?

That he can succeed on his own merit, and doesn't need affirmative action to help him anyways :P

Then that person would be the smallest minority in this country. I'm willing to bet that such a person doesn't exist.
LibertyCampbell
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:38:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:30:52 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:23:02 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:18:59 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:19:08 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I would support a class-based system over a race-based one. I'm for scrapping race-based preferences altogether. It speaks volumes for someone who's able to rise above a poor public school system and environment and succeed - much more so than a wealthy person with the same test scores who had many more advantages.

What, exactly, does it say about that person?

That he's pretty much the sh1t - or at least strongly implies that he has a strong commitment to doing well.

That is, perhaps, one way of looking at it.

On the other hand, there's the fact that the majority of them don't have a concept of normative success. They chase dreams that doesn't align with any sort of academic performance. Indeed, for many of them, despite their appearance, this is all they know.

Then why educate them? If drug addicts are content with their lives, or just too ignorant to know that their live could be made better (subjectively speaking), then why do we have to help them at all? There is no definitive "better life", only what the majority holds to be good (wealth, prosperity)

Then, there are others who have had those values fostered in them from an early age. Parents -- one or both -- made the sacrifices necessary to ensure that the child received tutoring when necessary, received the proper education, completed their homework, etc. I mean, this is something that we would automatically expect, sure, but you have to admit that the majority of these parents are in circumstances that just don't make that sort of involvement practical or possible. And, well, no everyone is a saint -- in fact, most people aren't.

Point being? If people who organize themselves into family units succeed and their children succeed, then we should promote that sort of lifestyle. By helping children who come from single mothers of fathers, even though it isn't their fault who raised them, you are subsidizing a less effective lifestyle.

Then, of course, there's the sort of resources available to children despite their values. The degree of crime, access to drugs, general safety, teacher involvement, quality of education, access to school supplies, and the validity of the curriculum all play a role.

See point above, I think this is just clarifying your above point.

Once you're past this quagmire of issues and hindrances, you still have financial problems that may arise when they pursue post-secondary education. I know some don't realize how silver their spoon is when they say "Community College is only a couple thousand," when many of these people don't have a couple of hundred to spare -- and, even if they did, that doesn't mean they can afford it repeatedly for half a decade.

Then let them spend their lives accumulating wealth to send their children to school.

Of course, there's a personal problems that arise amidst all this that make all all-the-harder.

Then, you can apply racism to the mix, and the fact that, as much as people would like to pretend as though it was eons ago, it was only a few generations ago that these people were trapped in their own country or were slaves within this society.

And within another few generations it will practically be non-existent in mainstream society.
"[Society] has no vested interest in continuing to exist." -RP
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:46:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:31:32 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:29:31 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:18:17 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

You're right. Thus, one should take affirmative action to combat it.

*facepalm*

I wonder how much hypertension you've experienced from reading my responses to your idiotic posts.

I've actually wondered how people can be as retarded as you.

Regardless, I take your posts with a sense of a joking context, otherwise I would lose all hope in the human race.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 12:48:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:38:13 PM, LibertyCampbell wrote:

Then why educate them?

Because, many more of them would apply themselves to society in a way that is much more constructive.

If drug addicts are content with their lives, or just too ignorant to know that their live could be made better (subjectively speaking), then why do we have to help them at all?

Well, we don't. We profit off of them through pharmaceuticals. How is this relevant to what I said at all? Are you alleging that all minorities are drug addicts? How about this -- all whites are drug addicts, too, and it was "white" society that introduced the majority of mainstream drugs to global society.

I'm sure you don't like to hear that (although, by nationalistic distinctions, it's completely true), and the fact is, that's because you feel the sting of idiotic, irrelevant, arbitrary generalizations. So, although you may be completely straightedge and consider all drugs detestable, you're now indirectly responsible for most addiction throughout the world. Ridiculous, right?

So, you should stop it.

There is no definitive "better life", only what the majority holds to be good (wealth, prosperity)

What a preposterous, privileged thing to say. There is certainly access to better healthcare, better food, better living in general. Better attentiveness by the city.

Point being? If people who organize themselves into family units succeed and their children succeed, then we should promote that sort of lifestyle. By helping children who come from single mothers of fathers, even though it isn't their fault who raised them, you are subsidizing a less effective lifestyle.

No, you're not. You're subsidizing this society. Are you saying that people who come from single parents are worth less to this society than those who come from two-parent homes? You realize that the latter is a minority, right?

I mean... you're clearly a kid. I can't even take you seriously.

Hopefully, you'll educate yourself or something and open your eyes.
LibertyCampbell
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 1:14:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:48:21 PM, Ren wrote:
At 5/19/2012 12:38:13 PM, LibertyCampbell wrote:

Then why educate them?

Because, many more of them would apply themselves to society in a way that is much more constructive.

If this were the case then why wouldn't someone help them to make a profit? This is far from demonstrative; someone has to plow the fields and screw on the caps of toothpaste tubes.

If drug addicts are content with their lives, or just too ignorant to know that their live could be made better (subjectively speaking), then why do we have to help them at all?

Well, we don't. We profit off of them through pharmaceuticals. How is this relevant to what I said at all? Are you alleging that all minorities are drug addicts? How about this -- all whites are drug addicts, too, and it was "white" society that introduced the majority of mainstream drugs to global society.

No, I'm not alleging minorites with drug addicts. I'm alleging people who don't know any better with others who don't know any better.

I'm sure you don't like to hear that (although, by nationalistic distinctions, it's completely true), and the fact is, that's because you feel the sting of idiotic, irrelevant, arbitrary generalizations. So, although you may be completely straightedge and consider all drugs detestable, you're now indirectly responsible for most addiction throughout the world. Ridiculous, right?

I'm for legalization. This is ad hominem of some kind, I'm sure.

So, you should stop it.

Stop what?

There is no definitive "better life", only what the majority holds to be good (wealth, prosperity)

What a preposterous, privileged thing to say. There is certainly access to better healthcare, better food, better living in general. Better attentiveness by the city.

You just ignored my point. There is no better, only different is what I said. You haven't shown otherwise.

Point being? If people who organize themselves into family units succeed and their children succeed, then we should promote that sort of lifestyle. By helping children who come from single mothers of fathers, even though it isn't their fault who raised them, you are subsidizing a less effective lifestyle.

No, you're not. You're subsidizing this society. Are you saying that people who come from single parents are worth less to this society than those who come from two-parent homes? You realize that the latter is a minority, right?

Not in the same sense that blacks or homosexuals are a minority. And even if they are in the same sense, so what? If some group of people are inherently less capable than another (in this case children raised in single parent homes), why should we bother with them at all? I mean, if it's better to have kids being raised in stable families than orphanages, why should we make orphan life any less terrible if they can never be fully equal?

Society evolves along the lines of the people. For the past 60 years the government has helped people in need, regardless of how they got into their situation. I'm merely suggesting that by doing this you are subsidizing alternative ways of life, those that are not as beneficial to society.

I mean... you're clearly a kid. I can't even take you seriously.

Hopefully, you'll educate yourself or something and open your eyes.

Those last two remarks were uncalled for. I'm just trying to see where you are coming from, no need for personal attacks.
"[Society] has no vested interest in continuing to exist." -RP
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 1:27:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 12:08:21 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:10:50 AM, lewis20 wrote:
At 5/19/2012 11:03:10 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Giving anybody, regardless of race or economic status, an advantage in anything is either racism or class warfare.

Everything ought to be decided by merit, not by the petty hearts of bureaucrats.

Cool it with your Ayn Rand mumbo jumbo, if you are a white male you deserve lesser opportunities than your counterpart of minority status. And don't you dare have the audacity to complain, you are a white American male.

There is no way that you are a libertarian.

He's joking bro.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 2:39:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 1:14:38 PM, LibertyCampbell wrote:

If this were the case then why wouldn't someone help them to make a profit? This is far from demonstrative; someone has to plow the fields and screw on the caps of toothpaste tubes.

No, someone doesn't. For the most part, machines do.

You sound like slave owner. The industrial revolution completely dismantles your premise.

I'm not trying to disrespect you. However, it's frustrating to discuss a subject with someone who has no knowledge about it, and opinions about it that you find offensive.

Nothing good can come of that.
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/19/2012 2:45:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/19/2012 11:00:17 AM, 1dustpelt wrote:
What are your ideas? I personally think that Race-based Affirmative Action is racist and unnecessary, but Economic-status-based Affirmative Action is necessary.

Seriously, what is the point of race-based affirmative action? Does you race affect you intellegence or something?

I can understand economic status-based affirmative action because you will have less chances and opportunity if you're poor.

But race-based affirmative action is stupid.

Our country was founded on equal opportunity (yes we had slavery, lets get past that please, it has been fixed). Meaning, everyone has an equal opportunity to get a job, an education, etc. To have racial quotas is racist, because you're taking preference over every other race. If a business said they wanted so many white people, and declined the position to blacks, hispanics, indians, etc, they would be deemed racist. How is it any different to have racial quotas for black people? No I'm not racist, anyone who believes in affirmative action, as far as race goes, is racist. If you believe otherwise, you better have a good explanation.
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain