Care to explain?
Well gee Vroom, thanks for stopping by and making the thread really cool
Neither of you however have been able to expound on this silly car/windshield theory. I assume that gender and race equality across the board make him really sad, and that’s just too bad.
Affirmative action sucks, and I’m proud to be from a state that recognizes that fact.
He’s saying it should be fixed, and not thrown away, as throwing it away is just a way of not dealing with the problem.
I, for one, never liked the idea of affirmative action. However, in many states, racism and sexism are alive and well, and good people are being denied jobs because of their race or gender.
It’s a very delicate issue. I, for one, believe it begins with re-education. We need to begin to educate the views of the ignorant, so that the whole race/sex thing won’t come into question. As we don’t live in a utopia, and much less mandatory version of affirmative action would get my vote.
As in, no strict “quota” per se. But if a race/sex were to drop in employment for many, many years (as in almost all applicants are turned away), the government could step in and set a small quota, just to try to turn things around.
Obviously, this idea needs a bit of work - -;;
True. I think it should only be used to allow qualified minority applicants preferential treatment to make up for past and present racism. But if someone’s not qualified to be somewhere, they shouldn’t be because of race or sex or whatever.
For example, I’m at a top law school, and the minoriites as a population score 10 points lower on the LSAT. This should not be. It’s not good for anyone, and many struggle greatly once they’re here.
I would not have a problem with qualified minorities in the same GPA and LSAT range as everyone else being given preferential treatment because they are still at a real disadvantage on an indiviual level and as a group. But if not making concessions and only letting qualified applicants means only a small handful get in, so be it.