The Instigator
Mingodalia
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Amphia
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

When Liberals say minorities they don't mean Asians

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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: 3/16/2018 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 742 times Debate No: 110857
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)

 

Mingodalia

Pro

When Liberals talk about minority rights they mean blacks and Hispanics/Latinos. They do not mean Asians.
Amphia

Con

I would say that when some people say minorities they are only thinking of Hispanics/Latinos but not most.
Debate Round No. 1
Mingodalia

Pro

In recent years, many studies have uncovered overwhelming evidence that Ivy Leagues Universities and other selective schools have been engaged in systematic and continuous discrimination against Asian-Americans in the college admissions process.

he dominant narrative promoted by SJWs almost always divides everyone into 2 camps, black and white, and makes no allowance for individualism, to say nothing of ignoring the fastest growing race in the nation, which is Asians.

The Asian American Coalition for Education cited the following:

--Detailed Evidence and Specific Laws Violated--

In its federal lawsuit against Harvard, Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. has provided detailed evidence which proves that Harvard has (1) intentionally discriminated against Asian-Americans; (2) employed racial rebalancing, a de facto racial quota; (3) used race to an extent well beyond its being merely a "plus" factor in admission decisions.

In particular, Harvard"s Holistic Evaluation Approach disproportionately penalizes Asian-American applicants by using stereotypes and racial biases during the admission process. Harvard"s admissions officers often unreasonably perceive Asian-Americans" academic strengths as weaknesses. In addition, they unjustifiably give Asian-American students low scores in non-academic criteria.

Specific laws violated: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Fourteenth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution.

http://asianamericanforeducation.org...

In a story by "The Federalist", the headline reads:

"Race-Based Admissions Have Asian Students Hiding Their Ethnicity To Avoid Discrimination"

http://thefederalist.com...

It even happened to Jeff Sessions"s granddaughter at his confirmation hearing on January 10. When MTV News writer Ira Madison III saw an Asian-American girl, the child of John Walk and Ruth Sessions Walk, sitting in her grandfather"s lap, his first thought was to write, "Sessions, sir, kindly return this Asian baby to the Toys "R" Us you stole her from."

In a story recollecting the Loving vs Virginia Supreme Court case, sadly the headline read:

"Please Don't Ever Call Me Or My Family 'Basically White'"

http://time.com...

https://www.nationalreview.com...
Amphia

Con

While I totally agree that racism against Asians is real, that has little to do with your topic. The topic is whether Asians are included in the narrative of equality. Not whether there is racism against them.

There is racism in the college process for Asian Americans, it is harder for them to get into elite colleges--but that isn't the topic. I think when most liberals say minorities, they mean all people of color.
Debate Round No. 2
Mingodalia

Pro

Con:
While I totally agree that racism against Asians is real, that has little to do with your topic. The topic is whether Asians are included in the narrative of equality. Not whether there is racism against them.

There is racism in the college process for Asian Americans, it is harder for them to get into elite colleges--but that isn't the topic. I think when most liberals say minorities, they mean all people of color.

------

1)Con admits racism against Asians by Liberal colleges is real.

2)Con says that by "minorities" Liberals "probably mean people of color".

This proves my point that Liberals don't see Asians as minorities, which was the topic of the debate.

And this is rather sad seeing that Liberals even refer to gays and women as minorities, neither of which is necessarily "of color" and in most cases are not.
Amphia

Con

Pro is just mixing up everything here. Their topic clearly says "When liberals say minorities they don't mean Asians". Thus the topic should be about whether Liberals include Asians in their narrative. The topic is NOT ABOUT whether racism against Asians is real or not.

"1)Con admits racism against Asians by Liberal colleges is real."
This has nothing to do with the topic of the debate. Don't try and act like me admitting this means ANYTHING.

"2)Con says that by "minorities" Liberals "probably mean people of color"."
You misquoted my sentence. This is what I actually said: "when most liberals say minorities, they mean all people of color."
I never said "probably" which implies I am not sure of my answer. I am.

"This proves my point that Liberals don't see Asians as minorities, which was the topic of the debate."
NO IT DOESN'T. Me saying that Asians face racism doesn't prove your pint on the topic at all. Your 2nd round argument was about racism in the college system which is about Asians not liberals as the topic states. Your topic is talking about what Liberals define as minorities, not whether there is racism against them. I have already stated that most Liberals include all people of color as minorities. You haven't adequately refuted this which means you're the one who dropped my argument, not the other way around.

"And this is rather sad seeing that Liberals even refer to gays and women as minorities, neither of which is necessarily "of color" and in most cases are not."

I don't get what that is supposed to mean. A minority does NOT have to be of color. Gay people are a minority, women are not a minority so I don't know why anyone would say that but women definitely suffer sexism. You don't have to be of color to face discrimination.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Amphia 3 years ago
Amphia
Sigh, I never got a chance haha.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Wizofoz// Mod action: Removed<

6 points to Con (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: The topic said "minorities' Not disadvantaged minorities. Nothing cited showed anybody doesn't think Asians make up less than 50% of the US population.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter does not explain conduct or sources. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter appears to be providing arguments for the Con side of the debate. The voter is required to assess points made in the debate, not add to them.
************************************************************************
Posted by Amphia 3 years ago
Amphia
@whiteflame

If the instigator doesn't answer the question, they concede which means I win. How is that not a valid voter?
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: avan6// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments), 2 points to Con (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't answer the question. Probably just created the question to rant.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn"t explain sources. (2) The voter is required to specifically assess arguments presented by both sides. That requires more than just stating that Pro failed to engage with the question.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: avan6// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments), 2 points to Con (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't answer the question. Probably just created the question to rant.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn"t explain sources. (2) The voter is required to specifically assess arguments presented by both sides. That requires more than just stating that Pro failed to engage with the question.
************************************************************************
Posted by Mingodalia 3 years ago
Mingodalia
What's an "ant group"? Fire ants?
Posted by Wizofoz 3 years ago
Wizofoz
Ant group that represents less than 50% if a population is a minority.

The Probably means "Disadvantaged minority", but this is not what was posited.

The premise of the debate is obviously false.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.