People Opposed To Racial Preferences

[IM2]

Myth: Under affirmative action, minorities and women receive preferences.
Reality: Affirmative action does not require preferences, nor do women and minorities assume that they will be given preference. Race, gender, and national origin are factors that can be considered when hiring or accepting qualified applicants. Hiring qualified women and minorities is similar to the preferences given to veterans in hiring and to children of alumni in college admissions. There are also other preferences used in selecting qualified candidates. For example, when private colleges and universities value geographic diversity on their campuses, an out-of-state student may be admitted before an in-state student. Some colleges and universities consider athletic abilities and/or evidence of leadership skills in addition to academic qualifications.

Myth: Affirmative action leads to discrimination against white men.
Reality: Evidence demonstrates that discrimination against white men is rare. For example, of the 91,000 employment discrimination cases before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, approximately 3% percent are discrimination cases against white men. Further, a study conducted by Rutgers University and commissioned by the U.S. Department of Labor (1995) found that discrimination against white men is not a significant problem in employment and that a "high proportion" of claims brought by white men are "without merit."
Affirmative action provides the employer with the largest pool of qualified applicants from which to choose.

Myth: Unqualified individuals are being hired and promoted for the sake of diversity/affirmative action.
Reality: Only affirmative action plans that do not compromise valid job or educational qualifications are lawful. Plans must be flexible, realistic, reviewable, and fair. The Supreme Court has found that there are at least two permissible bases for voluntary affirmative action by employers under Title VII: (1) to remedy a clear and convincing history of past discrimination by the employer or union, and (2) to cure a manifest imbalance in the employer's work force. Thus, affirmative action programs are intended to hire the most qualified individuals, while at the same time achieving equality of opportunity for all.

Affirmative Action: Myths versus Reality - Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion | Binghamton University

A concise article describing several key misunderstandings of affirmative action.

www.binghamton.edu

 

[IM2]

Any University that still uses Affirmative Action (or similar policies) in it's admission decisions.
No one is claiming that these let, in your words, "dumb black people in".
The problem is admitting LESS QUALIFIED people in over MORE QUALIFIED people simply because of their race, ethnicity, gender or any other trait you want to use.
THAT is discrimination (or reverse discrimination if you prefer).

Apparently you don't know what Affirmative action is.

 

[Paul Essien]

Ralph Norton
We were talking about University admissions, not hiring.

Right because it's not a problem that companies hire white criminals over the blk ppl that are clean....yeah that's not a problem right ?

JoeB131
You think that ALL admissions officers are "white supremacists"?

This is why black and whites talk past each other. To white racism is personal thing. To black it's that to. but to blks racism is mainly systematic.

So when black and whites argue about racism we're not arguing about the same thing. You're here asking whether this or that adminission officer is a white supremacist where as black people argue that thwe whole structire of education is white supremacist

Ralph Norton
Less or more qualified can be determined for starters by GPA and test scores.

That's not true and even if you still think it is true then name the university that's lowering the bar (GPA and Test scores) to allow all the dumb black ppl in ?

I'll wait.....................

And even worse I'd be hear all day if I was to list all admissions scandals whites have on their record.

You have affluent white and non black individuals, including television actors, corporate executives and bankers bribed and frauded their way to get admission for their children into America's most prestigious universities ? And that's just tip of the iceberg. Imagine how many were weren't caught and got away with it ?
.
College admissions is nothing but game.

They can and do say anything to black students "your application was late" “it got lost” "We don’t like your essay"............. ANYTHING.

.We are taking no one's spots trust me.

You have a legacy and being a legacy only works if you have a trust fund and your parents have been donating a good % of their annual salary to the school or your dad holds political office or your parents are fortune 500 CEOs, COOs, CFOs or CAOs.

Anyone else, it's still a crap shot.

They are letting dumb-ass white students in there all day because of their fathers or uncles. Most blacks applying could run circles around them academically but they would never ever be admitted.

Blaming the handful of black people that get in is ridiculous. More Black Americans are becoming doctors and we do that even though white supremacists make sure that predominantly Black school districts are under-funded, under-staffed with inexperienced teachers, denied books, microscopes and other lab equipment, and put hazardous waste near black schools, cut art and music classes, sports teams and sometimes hot meals in a cafeteria.

We achieves in spite of the bullshit white supremacists put in our way and non-blacks hate to see a black person who is superior to them in anything and become bitter and jealous.

 

[daveman]

Look white boy, your asses have been getting preferences since the country was started. Do something about your cognitive dissonance.

Democrats say you're not good enough or smart enough to succeed on your own without their help.

And you agree with them.

Pathetic.

 

[IM2]

Democrats say you're not good enough or smart enough to succeed on your own without their help.

And you agree with them.

Pathetic.

The constitution says whites aren't good enough to succeed on your own without government help. And you agree with that.

Pathetic.

 

[daveman]

The constitution says whites aren't good enough to succeed on your own without government help. And you agree with that.

Pathetic.

Except it doesn't, and I don't.

I bet you thought you scored a devastating point, too.

Oh, well.

 

[IM2]

Except it doesn't, and I don't.

I bet you thought you scored a devastating point, too.

Oh, well.

But it does, starting with the 3/5ths compromise. Then you had Dred Scott, the Civil Rights Cases, Various land giveaways, Morrill Acts, Plessy, Redlining, Restrictive covenants in housing and employment. I can go on and on. You're an idiot who ran your mouth to the wrong person son.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The constitution says whites aren't good enough to succeed on your own without government help. And you agree with that.

Pathetic.

Uhh exactly where does it say that?

 

[AZrailwhale]

But it does, starting with the 3/5ths compromise. Then you had Dred Scott, the Civil Rights Cases, Various land giveaways, Morrill Acts, Plessy, Redlining, Restrictive covenants in housing and employment. I can go on and on. You're an idiot who ran your mouth to the wrong person son.

None of those are in the Constirurion. And most of them were overturned by the courts eventually.

 

[IM2]

Uhh exactly where does it say that?

Don't play stupid. The constitution was created to give whites preference and you know it. Just face it. Because it get real tiring to read the bullshit coming from those like you. The constitution says that whites need help from the government and that no one but whites could get help from the government.

 

[IM2]

None of those are in the Constirurion. And most of them were overturned by the courts eventually.

Sorry, but the constitution allowed these things to be legal and for whites only. No land grant university has closed, so stop denying things that are documented to be. Just face reality and man up.

 

[Montrovant]

None of those are in the Constirurion. And most of them were overturned by the courts eventually.

The 3/5 compromise is in Article 1, Section 2.

 

[mga138]

I agree we need to start judging people on merit, no skin color. We can start by abolishing race-based admissions programs that admit blacks with much worse scores and grades than higher-achieving whites and blacks.

You don’t get rid of racism by codifying it against other races.

They won't do that because they know that Blacks--on average--are not equal to other races of people. If we have a society based on merit, then Blacks will be far worse-off than they are today.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan who wrote a speech for President LBJ where he explained to a black audience the idea behind this executive order: for Affirmative Action “We seek not just . . . equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact and equality as a result.”

Yet, Recordings of Moynihan’s conversations with Richard Nixon show that he had a realistic understanding of racial differences in intelligence, and they both knew that “equality as a result” was impossible. However, he and Nixon pursued egalitarian policies, and agreed that “we must never tell anybody "The truth about race.) Nixion said (on tape) that Every President Knows (blacks are not equally capable) but every President must pretend not to know.

 

[mga138]

Lisa558
I never said dumb black people. I said that they are admitting lesser qualifying blacks in over others who are more qualified.

You're saying the same thing.

What you do and many on USMB do, is present their point of view right up UNTIL it's clearly a racist statement.

You makes these statements that lead up to an obvious conclusion (that black folks are inherently dumber than whites and Asians) but short of saying whites and Asians are better, b4 you stop and wink at other white supremacists.

You aren't going to say whites are better or blacks are dumber but you won't mind others who'll say it for you. YES - You haven't literally said "blacks are dumb" but you imply it n have no problem with others saying it

The 3/5 compromise is in Article 1, Section 2.

Do you understand what the 3/5 compromise is?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Don't play stupid. The constitution was created to give whites preference and you know it. Just face it. Because it get real tiring to read the bullshit coming from those like you. The constitution says that whites need help from the government and that no one but whites could get help from the government.

You are being a racist idiot as usual. The Constitution is color blind. It says nothing about preference for ANY racial, political or religious group. It happens that in 1787 the USA was largely white with blacks being a larger percentage of the population than they are today. 17% as opposed to 13% today. In raw numbers there were 700,000 blacks living in American then. You can make up imaginary "facts" all you want, but no group was singled out in the Constitution at all. Many states had no blacks in them at all. Since you like to point out things from the past. Remember it was WHITES that banned the importation of slaves. It was WHITES who banned the expansion of slavery outside the deep south into the new states and territories before the ACW. It was WHITES that passed the 13th 14th and 15th Amendments freeing slaves, granting them the right to vote and to guarantee them and their descendants the right to be American citizens. Finally, somewhere north of 500,000 WHITES were killed or maimed fighting to free your ancestors; that's not counting the 200,000 or so WHITES who died from disease during the war in the Union Army.

Yes, slavery was bad, but even in 1787 most WHITES opposed it. The fathers of our country had a choice in 1776 and again in 1787, they could have no country at all, or a country where nearly half of the states contained slaves. They did the best they could under the circumstances. Would you have preferred they left the South outside the United States so you would be a slave today, or at best a third-class resident of the Confederacy?

By today's standards, even the most liberal of the founding mothers and fathers were deeply racist; honestly believing that all non-Whites were absolutely and without question inferior to Whites in every respect. Even though you refuse to see it, that's not the opinion of the vast majority of Whites today and the opinion of almost all the people you accuse of being racists here every day.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The 3/5 compromise is in Article 1, Section 2.

Here is the text: "

• Clause 3 Apportionment of Seats in the House
• Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three." You can see by the red section, the three fifths compromise was not racial it was based upon slave or free status. At the time there were White slaves and Native American slaves as well. You might also notice that James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay slipped past the Southerners the language that slaves were "persons", not property. In case you are ignorant of the background of the three fifths compromise, the Southerners wanted slaves counted in the census to increase their already high power base in the House of Representatives, the Northerners didn't want slaves counted at all. Counting slaves in the census allowed the southerners to control the Congress until the mid eighteen fifties.

 

[mga138]

By today's standards, even the most liberal of the founding mothers and fathers were deeply racist; honestly believing that all non-Whites were absolutely and without question inferior to Whites in every respect.

I agree with most of this, but I do not agree with your statement above. That is just senseless capitulation to the Left, and to compare them to people today, who are deeply racist against Whites (whether they are white themselves or not, is a mistake).

 

[daveman]

But it does, starting with the 3/5ths compromise. Then you had Dred Scott, the Civil Rights Cases, Various land giveaways, Morrill Acts, Plessy, Redlining, Restrictive covenants in housing and employment. I can go on and on. You're an idiot who ran your mouth to the wrong person son.

Your "angry black man" schtick may work on weak white leftists, but it doesn't work on me.

White Democrats insist you're a victim, and you can't possibly succeed on your own without their help.

You agree with them.

Pathetic.

 

[daveman]

Don't play stupid. The constitution was created to give whites preference and you know it. Just face it. Because it get real tiring to read the bullshit coming from those like you. The constitution says that whites need help from the government and that no one but whites could get help from the government.

Ahhh, I see the problem. You're illiterate.

Take some classes, learn to read, and read the Constitution for yourself. It doesn't say what you've been told it says.

You've been lied to.

 

[IM2]

Your "angry black man" schtick may work on weak white leftists, but it doesn't work on me.

White Democrats insist you're a victim, and you can't possibly succeed on your own without their help.

You agree with them.

Pathetic.

Your denial of the documented history of white government dependence won't work with me.

Democrats in the past and Republicans today tell you that you are a victim.

You agree with them.

Pathetic.