Supreme Court kills affirmative action in university admissions

#151
#151
BowlBrother85 said:
From the standpoint of people who firmly believe that they will be placed at a disadvantage without legal provisions in place which pro-actively counter racial discrimination.
Click to expand...

There’s already laws in place to prevent racial discrimination. This prevents racial discrimination of those that aren’t minorities or check a quota box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, sonofUT62 and W.TN.Orange Blood
#152
#152
luthervol said:
Not like any of those.....they're all pretty stupid.

I'll give you guys the best analogy I can think of at the momment.

View it as a big relay race.
The team in white jumped the gun and started the race before any of the other teams had even taken their positions on the track.
The race could not be stopped and restarted.
It was decided that the fairest thing was to stop the team in white for a period that came close to matching their head start.
The guy running the second leg for the team in white had the batton and could be heard screaming, "this isn't fair, I did nothing wrong, it was our first leg."
Meanwhile, there was great debate and no agreement over when the race should fully resume for the team in white.
Click to expand...
lol. clearly you missed who the SC ruled in favor of.

The group pushing this was a bunch of ASIAN students. not the evil whites your racist mind immediately went to.

I also want to know what version of history has white people starting first? Everything I have seen said we evolved last.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, SpaceCoastVol, VOLS INC. and 2 others
#153
#153
BowlBrother85 said:
From the standpoint of people who firmly believe that they will be placed at a disadvantage without provisions in place which pro-actively counter racial discrimination.
Click to expand...

God yes. There’s nowhere in America that you’ll find people more likely to be racist than the virtue signalers amongst the administration at American universities. Gotta make sure that we have those laws in place to keep those folks from discriminating.
 
#154
#154
sonofUT62 said:
By something special he’s generally considered to have meant finally providing the equality they had been denied for 200 years. Not the condescending pandering of giving someone something strictly based off the color of their skin.
Click to expand...
LOL....Generally - NO!

Giving them what they are constitutionally guaranteed isn't giving them something special.
 
#155
#155
luthervol said:
Not like any of those.....they're all pretty stupid.

I'll give you guys the best analogy I can think of at the momment.

View it as a big relay race.
The team in white jumped the gun and started the race before any of the other teams had even taken their positions on the track.
The race could not be stopped and restarted.
It was decided that the fairest thing was to stop the team in white for a period that came close to matching their head start.
The guy running the second leg for the team in white had the batton and could be heard screaming, "this isn't fair, I did nothing wrong, it was our first leg."
Meanwhile, there was great debate and no agreement over when the race should fully resume for the team in white.
Click to expand...

You get your analogies where you get your numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and VOLS INC.
#158
#158
C-south said:
There’s already laws in place to prevent racial discrimination. This prevents racial discrimination of those that aren’t minorities or check a quota box.
Click to expand...
No. No @C-south

There need to be mechanisms in place to pro-actively combat the racism that is definitely going to occur.

See. Every white person is a born racist. And every white person is privileged and will rise to a position of power because they are white. They will use that power to hold down minorities.

The only exception are white people that support the democrat party. That’s how this works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, W.TN.Orange Blood and C-south
#159
#159
85SugarVol said:
I’m not really following you on the comp you’re making with gerrymandering cases.

But are you saying that if Harvard comes up with a supposedly benign process that doesn’t explicitly use race, but results in clearly disproportionate outcomes for Asian Americans, they couldn’t claim impact?
Click to expand...
No. It would not be explicitly race conscious. But using Chattanooga schools as an example: if you were to say you’re giving an admissions boost to high achieving students from Howard HS because it traditionally has failed to maximize the potential and opportunities of its students so someone who scores a 32 on the ACT from Howard could arguably be equivalent to a 36 from Signal Mountain in Chattanooga or Thomas Jefferson in Virginia, then you achieve the same net diversity through a nominally race neutral process and one that (IMO) essentially squares with the rationale that they used in the redistricting case.

Ivy League colleges already do this. You ever read Hillbilly Elligy? IIRC, JD Vance got a boost on his Yale Law admissions because he came from a ****** (mostly white) part of the country with bad schools. Ohio State probably gave him one too.

In the election context, the Court has recently disfavored the disparate impact arguments so as long as you’re not overtly saying “Asian, -3” (harvard) or “Black, +3” (UNC) and are instead saying “lack of opportunity due to historical factors +6” then what does the court do with that? I don’t think it’s a slam dunk but I think you can make an argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sonofUT62 and 85SugarVol
#160
#160
luthervol said:
Not like any of those.....they're all pretty stupid.

I'll give you guys the best analogy I can think of at the momment.

View it as a big relay race.
The team in white jumped the gun and started the race before any of the other teams had even taken their positions on the track.
The race could not be stopped and restarted.
It was decided that the fairest thing was to stop the team in white for a period that came close to matching their head start.
The guy running the second leg for the team in white had the batton and could be heard screaming, "this isn't fair, I did nothing wrong, it was our first leg."
Meanwhile, there was great debate and no agreement over when the race should fully resume for the team in white.
Click to expand...
I have a question. Somewhat tangential.

When did this relay race begin? When did the white team jump?
 
#163
#163
luthervol said:
LOL....Generally - NO!

Giving them what they are constitutionally guaranteed isn't giving them something special.
Click to expand...

So he SPECIFICALLY stated he prayed that his children wouldn’t be judged by the color of their skin. And he AMBIGUOUSLY said that the government should give people something special and you put that in the old Luther logic machine and came up with affirmative action??
 
#167
#167
C-south said:
There’s already laws in place to prevent racial discrimination. This prevents racial discrimination of those that aren’t minorities or check a quota box.
Click to expand...
There are very few protections against systemic racial discrimination. There are so many legitimate reasons to reject a student applicant, that unless discrimination is exposed on an audio recording or expressly endorsed in an e-mail ... racial discrimination can be very hard to prove. This was a real problem that black college applicants encountered in the 1960's.

Some of you act like racial discrimination has never been a problem for black college applicants. Why do you think we needed HBC's? This forum should be called Archie Bunker's Place.
 
#168
#168
RockyTop85 said:
No. It would not be explicitly race conscious. But using Chattanooga schools as an example: if you were to say you’re giving an admissions boost to high achieving students from Howard HS because it traditionally has failed to maximize the potential and opportunities of its students so someone who scores a 32 on the ACT from Howard could arguably be equivalent to a 36 from Signal Mountain in Chattanooga or Thomas Jefferson in Virginia, then you achieve the same net diversity through a nominally race neutral process and one that (IMO) essentially squares with the rationale that they used in the redistricting case.

Ivy League colleges already do this. You ever read Hillbilly Elligy? IIRC, JD Vance got a boost on his Yale Law admissions because he came from a ****** (mostly white) part of the country with bad schools. Ohio State probably gave him one too.

In the election context, the Court has recently disfavored the disparate impact arguments so as long as you’re not overtly saying “Asian, -3” (harvard) or “Black, +3” (UNC) and are instead saying “lack of opportunity due to historical factors +6” then what does the court do with that? I don’t think it’s a slam dunk but I think you can make an argument.
Click to expand...
I understand now. I wasn’t picking up what you were saying with regard to the Courts current view of the impact argument. Thanks.

I would bet they’ll still make some noise if they can demonstrate an actual Asian, -6.
 
#170
#170
BowlBrother85 said:
There are very few protections against systemic racial discrimination. There are so many legitimate reasons to reject a student applicant, that unless discrimination is exposed on an audio recording or expressly endorsed in an e-mail ... racial discrimination can be very hard to prove. This was a real problem that black college applicants encountered in the 1960's.

Some of you act like racial discrimination has never been a problem for black college applicants. Why do you think we needed HBC's? This forum should be called Archie Bunker's Place.
Click to expand...

We don’t need HBC’s. Most operate at a loss. Systematic racism….🤣😂
 
#171
#171
BowlBrother85 said:
There are very few protections against systemic racial discrimination. There are so many legitimate reasons to reject a student applicant, that unless discrimination is exposed on an audio recording or expressly endorsed in an e-mail ... racial discrimination can be very hard to prove. This was a real problem that black college applicants encountered in the 1960's.

Some of you act like racial discrimination has never been a problem for black college applicants. Why do you think we needed HBC's? This forum should be called Archie Bunker's Place.
Click to expand...

More like a run away home for people who don’t know what to do with their white guilt.
 
#174
#174
C-south said:
We don’t need HBC’s. Most operate at a loss. Systematic racism….🤣😂
Click to expand...
Like I said ... this is Archie Bunker's Place. Old and out-of-touch ... and some of you only like black people when they are keeping their mouths shut and helping your favorite sport's teams win games.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top