Total Posts:383|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Affirmative Action

gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"? I just want to get a larger consensus. Thanks.
MikeLoviN
Posts: 746
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 6:54:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Affirmative action is just as racist as the practices that it seeks to combat. Some people don't mind, based on a mindset similar to "its ok to be intolerant of intolerance". I say it's complete bullsh!t.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 6:54:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
A lot of people here are anti-AA.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:00:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"?

No. How would it?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
MikeLoviN
Posts: 746
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:05:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 7:00:07 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"?

No. How would it?

By mandating selection criteria that are irrelevant to a job and that by definition only a single subset of candidates are physically able to fulfill?? That seems like flat out discrimination to me.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:07:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 7:05:21 PM, MikeLoviN wrote:
At 12/16/2010 7:00:07 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"?

No. How would it?

By mandating selection criteria that are irrelevant to a job

That happens all the time. It's just less noticeable because it isn't something as sensitive or as noticeable as race.

and that by definition only a single subset of candidates are physically able to fulfill?? That seems like flat out discrimination to me.

Not inherently evil.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:09:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 7:05:21 PM, MikeLoviN wrote:
At 12/16/2010 7:00:07 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"?

No. How would it?

By mandating selection criteria that are irrelevant to a job and that by definition only a single subset of candidates are physically able to fulfill?? That seems like flat out discrimination to me.

And all discrimination is bad?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:11:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I read some of your debate. I'm anti affirmative action, however your opponent made some better points then you did. I didn't finish reading it and I'm hungry and can't think straight.I have an exam tomorrow, but I could give you some feedback. I'm not the best debater myself though.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:14:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Affirmative Action merely reinforces the very outlook it's trying to undermine. It's utter crap.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2010 7:34:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 7:09:04 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 7:05:21 PM, MikeLoviN wrote:
At 12/16/2010 7:00:07 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"?

No. How would it?

By mandating selection criteria that are irrelevant to a job and that by definition only a single subset of candidates are physically able to fulfill?? That seems like flat out discrimination to me.

And all discrimination is bad?

Depends on the discrimination, I guess. Intelligence, valuable skills, work ethic, reliability, no. Race, gender, yes. Nobody has specified AA to racial discrimination yet, though.
Tidin
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 4:55:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Affirmative action's stated goal is the equality of minority groups, and is actually counterproductive in that goal. Its end game is that one day, there will be no "groups" that will be discriminated against because people won't be put into groups at all. However, by treating someone differently, whether positive or negative, because they belong to a group only reinforces the mindset of that group being somehow different than other groups. And to exacerbate the problem, by treating them preferentially over the majority group, it only fosters resentment for the minority group by the majority group. To put it simply, affirmative action ensures that its stated goal will never come to pass, because it in and of itself is a primary agent in counteracting that goal.

<END THREAD HERE>
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 6:41:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 4:55:03 AM, Tidin wrote:
Affirmative action's stated goal is the equality of minority groups, and is actually counterproductive in that goal. Its end game is that one day, there will be no "groups" that will be discriminated against because people won't be put into groups at all. However, by treating someone differently, whether positive or negative, because they belong to a group only reinforces the mindset of that group being somehow different than other groups. And to exacerbate the problem, by treating them preferentially over the majority group, it only fosters resentment for the minority group by the majority group. To put it simply, affirmative action ensures that its stated goal will never come to pass, because it in and of itself is a primary agent in counteracting that goal.


<END THREAD HERE>

=};P (this is me with my hat on)
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 8:32:16 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/16/2010 7:09:04 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 7:05:21 PM, MikeLoviN wrote:
At 12/16/2010 7:00:07 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/16/2010 6:47:48 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
I recently got pummeled in a debate on AA. I truly believe it has no place in the U.S., as it clearly gives some an advantage when applying to college, or a job. Doesn't that negate, "All men are created equal"?

No. How would it?

By mandating selection criteria that are irrelevant to a job and that by definition only a single subset of candidates are physically able to fulfill?? That seems like flat out discrimination to me.

And all discrimination is bad?

In this case, I believe yes.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 8:34:40 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 4:55:03 AM, Tidin wrote:
Affirmative action's stated goal is the equality of minority groups, and is actually counterproductive in that goal. Its end game is that one day, there will be no "groups" that will be discriminated against because people won't be put into groups at all. However, by treating someone differently, whether positive or negative, because they belong to a group only reinforces the mindset of that group being somehow different than other groups. And to exacerbate the problem, by treating them preferentially over the majority group, it only fosters resentment for the minority group by the majority group. To put it simply, affirmative action ensures that its stated goal will never come to pass, because it in and of itself is a primary agent in counteracting that goal.


<END THREAD HERE>

I mentioned this in my debate, but to no avail.
TheAtheistAllegiance
Posts: 1,251
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:23:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
People who find affirmative action negative are clearly racist, given they're assuming that "black" Americans are immutably less qualified for any given position than someone from a differing demographic.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:42:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Considering how they "arose" in the first place to become such a prominent facet of this society that this discussion even exists in the first place, I think it goes without saying that they don't need a "handicap." Rather, racists that attempt to limit their social advancement should be moderated and that's what affirmative action moderates, under the assumption that it is certainly possible to find a minimum number of qualified "black" Americans to assume positions within an organization.

Furthermore, it prevents stagnant human resources in our workforce. In essence, racism has effectively become bad for the economy, which has spurred affirmative action.

As soon as affirmative action is no longer needed, it won't matter anymore and no one would care whether it exists.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.
Sieben
Posts: 2,736
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:45:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
How will we know when we don't need affirmative action? When everyone is exactly equal?

But, so the argument goes, if we dropped affirmative action we would come back to inequality. Therefore never abandon affirmative action.
Things that are so interesting:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:49:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.

Wtf? Our president was not employed and certainly doesn't work for a corporation, so that statement makes no sense whatsoever.

When there is no inequality, affirmative action will become a moot point. The prerequisites established by affirmative action are difficult to fulfill and will be exceeded in every regard once there is no inequality. Moreover, affirmative action applies to every company that does not regard itself as demographically specific, including those that are owned or run by "minorities." Those that are demographically specific are irrelevant; the innate limitations they impose on their organization applies proportional limitations on their ROI.

Microeconomics 101.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:50:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:49:27 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.

Wtf? Our president was not employed and certainly doesn't work for a corporation, so that statement makes no sense whatsoever.

When there is no inequality, affirmative action will become a moot point. The prerequisites established by affirmative action aren't difficult to fulfill and will be exceeded in every regard once there is no inequality. Moreover, affirmative action applies to every company that does not regard itself as demographically specific, including those that are owned or run by "minorities." Those that are demographically specific are irrelevant; the innate limitations they impose on their organization applies proportional limitations on their ROI.

Microeconomics 101.

Fixed.
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:50:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:23:13 PM, Ren wrote:
People who find affirmative action negative are clearly racist, given they're assuming that "black" Americans are immutably less qualified for any given position than someone from a differing demographic.

uh no, actually people who advocate affirmative action seem to be the ones that are racist, given that they assume black individuals couldn't gain a legitimate position unless they were purposely favored. as someone above said, the goal of affirmative action is to make it so that race doesn't matter and that all groups are treated the same... but affirmative action actually does the opposite by favoring one group over another.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:52:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:49:27 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.

Wtf? Our president was not employed and certainly doesn't work for a corporation, so that statement makes no sense whatsoever.

When there is no inequality, affirmative action will become a moot point. The prerequisites established by affirmative action are difficult to fulfill and will be exceeded in every regard once there is no inequality. Moreover, affirmative action applies to every company that does not regard itself as demographically specific, including those that are owned or run by "minorities." Those that are demographically specific are irrelevant; the innate limitations they impose on their organization applies proportional limitations on their ROI.

Microeconomics 101.

Affirmative Action=inequality
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:53:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:50:51 PM, belle wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:23:13 PM, Ren wrote:
People who find affirmative action negative are clearly racist, given they're assuming that "black" Americans are immutably less qualified for any given position than someone from a differing demographic.

uh no, actually people who advocate affirmative action seem to be the ones that are racist, given that they assume black individuals couldn't gain a legitimate position unless they were purposely favored. as someone above said, the goal of affirmative action is to make it so that race doesn't matter and that all groups are treated the same... but affirmative action actually does the opposite by favoring one group over another.

False.

Affirmative action imposes prerequisites, it does not impose predilection.

It is certainly possible to fulfill the requirements of affirmative action, accommodating all demographics, and still have an ethnic majority within an organization.

Next.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:54:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:52:13 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:49:27 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.

Wtf? Our president was not employed and certainly doesn't work for a corporation, so that statement makes no sense whatsoever.

When there is no inequality, affirmative action will become a moot point. The prerequisites established by affirmative action are difficult to fulfill and will be exceeded in every regard once there is no inequality. Moreover, affirmative action applies to every company that does not regard itself as demographically specific, including those that are owned or run by "minorities." Those that are demographically specific are irrelevant; the innate limitations they impose on their organization applies proportional limitations on their ROI.

Microeconomics 101.

Affirmative Action=inequality

Oh, that wasn't ad hominem at all >awesomeface<.
gavin.ogden
Posts: 1,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:54:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:49:27 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.

Wtf? Our president was not employed and certainly doesn't work for a corporation, so that statement makes no sense whatsoever.

When there is no inequality, affirmative action will become a moot point. The prerequisites established by affirmative action are difficult to fulfill and will be exceeded in every regard once there is no inequality. Moreover, affirmative action applies to every company that does not regard itself as demographically specific, including those that are owned or run by "minorities." Those that are demographically specific are irrelevant; the innate limitations they impose on their organization applies proportional limitations on their ROI.

Microeconomics 101.

My point is, the supposed reason for AA is that miorities are at a disadvantage when it comes to being accepted in schools, and when being considered for employment. If the majority of the country decided on a minority to run the whole thing, I think it is safe to say the disadvantages have been thoroughly mitigated.
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:58:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Sort of off-topic:

So, the Young Americans for Liberty at my school are planning an "affirmative-action bake sale." It's like regular bake sale, except prices are halved for minorities (except Asians) and women. Do any of the pro-AA people think this is racist, and, if so, how is it racist while AA isn't?
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2010 12:58:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 12/17/2010 12:54:45 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:49:27 PM, Ren wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:45:01 PM, gavin.ogden wrote:
At 12/17/2010 12:19:05 PM, TheAtheistAllegiance wrote:
AA is designed to correct the wrongs of the past. Due to slavery and segregation, minorities are significantly behind on the economic and societal ladders. By providing increased opportunity in secondary education and the workforce, these inequalities can be smoothed out, which is justified when considering how they arose in the first place.

Wrong. How do you explain the fact that we have a minority president? The only inequality left is AA.

Wtf? Our president was not employed and certainly doesn't work for a corporation, so that statement makes no sense whatsoever.

When there is no inequality, affirmative action will become a moot point. The prerequisites established by affirmative action are difficult to fulfill and will be exceeded in every regard once there is no inequality. Moreover, affirmative action applies to every company that does not regard itself as demographically specific, including those that are owned or run by "minorities." Those that are demographically specific are irrelevant; the innate limitations they impose on their organization applies proportional limitations on their ROI.

Microeconomics 101.

My point is, the supposed reason for AA is that miorities are at a disadvantage when it comes to being accepted in schools, and when being considered for employment. If the majority of the country decided on a minority to run the whole thing, I think it is safe to say the disadvantages have been thoroughly mitigated.

So, you feel that the majority of the nation endorsed George W. Bush?

You know what? On second thought, I'm not even going to approach that. Your claim exhibited such a gross misconception of politics, it's not even worth arguing.

See what I said above. Once we have equality, AA will be a moot point.

Minorities are at a disadvantage because of the predispositions of those making the decisions, not because of their qualifications.