Discuss your viewpoints #2~!

[Guest EricMM]

And thus the big massive can of worms.

 

Eh people start putting down your opinions first.

 

My stance is, there are places where it is needed, and places where it is NOT.

 

And how does it reflect the opposite, which is racial profiling?

 

Is it good to remove some of the rich white males from Americas leaders to provide a better spectrum, or do you actually think that rich white males are truly the best leaders of america ?

[Guest MrRant]

I believe this... there WAS a time and place for affirmative action. I believe now that people should go it on their credeintals (sp).

 

From a business owner standpoint... if I OWN my business I should have the right to hire only 34DD blond women than I can... or if I only want white midgets with mullets I should be able too.

[Guest J*ingus]

I can see how some people would be in favor of affirmative action, being that like 80% of Congressman and corporate CEOs are white males, but it's not the perfect solution that some make it out to be. I think that it's a good idea on paper, which breaks down when put into practice. Basing quotas on race rather than ability ends up pretty badly.

 

As for racial profiling, depends. It's pretty well known that minorities get unfairly harassed by the cops a LOT more than white people. On the other hand, conducting a thorough search of an old Jewish grandma at an airport terminal to make sure that she isn't carrying a bomb is most likely a waste of time.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

Once upon a time, when racism really was everywhere, affirmative action was necessary to balance things out. You needed to force universities and businesses to take minorities, because otherwise they wouldn't.

 

Now, affirmative action is just reverse racism that gives minorities an advantage over whites simply because they're minorites. Universities want to appear to be diverse, so they accept less qualified rich suburbanite blacks over more qualified rich suburbanite whites, simply because of race. Businesses hire less qualified minorites so that they won't get sued for "discrimination". I'm totally against all of that.

 

Keeping an eye on businesses/universities to make sure they don't discriminate is fine, but giving any race/sex an advantage over another is not.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Funny story: In my never-ending quest for a full-time job, I interviewed at the United Way and F&W Publishing. Each place made me fill out an authoritive action card stating my race, age, gender, etc. This was to show that they were an equal opportunity employer or something...

 

and then in each interview I was asked if I would have a problem working in an all-female department. Needless to say I didn't get either job...

 

which is why I now carry a tape recorder in one pouch of my briefcase whenever I interview.

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

Affirmative Action was never needed. The gov. just needed to enforce the pre-existing anti-discrimination laws. And I would argue that so-called racial profiling is not the opposite of Affirmative Action. It's just intelligent, efficient policing.

[Guest ant_7000]

Once upon a time, when racism really was everywhere, affirmative action was necessary to balance things out. You needed to force universities and businesses to take minorities, because otherwise they wouldn't.

 

Now, affirmative action is just reverse racism that gives minorities an advantage over whites simply because they're minorites. Universities want to appear to be diverse, so they accept less qualified rich suburbanite blacks over more qualified rich suburbanite whites, simply because of race. Businesses hire less qualified minorites so that they won't get sued for "discrimination". I'm totally against all of that.

 

Keeping an eye on businesses/universities to make sure they don't discriminate is fine, but giving any race/sex an advantage over another is not.

So your saying racism doesn't exist everywhere? and Your saying of Rich Black suburbanites are less qualified? If they're rich I would bet they would recieve a pretty good quality education as rich white kids would, so I don't get what your saying. As Affirmative Action im for it because im a minority and if it didn't exist most minorities THAT ARE QUALIFIED wouldn't get their foot in the door in some companies and colleges because over race and etc. Hey, Dubya Bush benefitted from affirmantive action, he got into Yale and he was C student in high school and he benefitted from Bush Sr. money and alumni stauts because if his dad didn't have money theres no way he could've got into a Ivy league school.

[Guest Shaved Bear]

Affirmative action is one of the biggest wrongs against non-minorities in years. Many people that are qualified for jobs, many times more qualifid than the minorities, do not recieve rightful promotions or hirings. This is said, because it shows as a society how we have become more concerned with being politically correct rather than being as efficient as possible at our workplaces. As a white male who just went through the process of applying for colleges I just witnessed this at its most blatant. For example, I held a 92 avg in my school and scored a 1300 on my SAT yet I did not get into NYU, but a Puerto Rican with a high 70s average and a 900 on his SATs gets into NYU AND recieved a scholarship

Affirmative action distorts thwe concept of what is right in our society, as companies should be concerned with filling their companies with the most qualified people, rather than going for a "diverse" workplace

[Guest Some Guy]

Ant, I think he mwant when racism was far more prevelant, the amount of racism from whites to blacks has decreased remarkably over the last 30 years.

 

Shaved Bear, AA is not only a wrong against non-minorities, it also does them a disservice. The gov't is basically saying that even though you aren't necesarily the best candidate for the job we'll hire you because of your skin color, but we'll tell you you were the best anyway. How is that fair to anyone? It's not.

 

I understand why JFK and LBJ thought it was a good idea, but it doesn't work for anyone. Affirmative access is a good idea, you ensure that everyone has the right to interview without presuring the employer to hire a non-white.

 

Racial profiling makes sense. Statistically we can figure out who commits the most crime in the country. It's not 80 year old white women, it's 18-34 year old black men, we also know that terorists are most likey to be 18-34 year old Arabs, that's fact not an insult. If you can prevent criminal actions or catch criminals by "harrassing" the people who are most likely to commit crimes, then what's the problem?

 

I say this and people reply by saying, "well you would think that if you were black." But I really would, if there were a huge increase in crime rates among young white guys, then I would be in favor of it still, even though it would more likely affect me.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

<<<So your saying racism doesn't exist everywhere?>>>

 

I imagine there are probably individuals everywhere that are racist. However, I don't think think racism preventing people from having equal opportunities is very prevalent anymore. It exists in places and should be addressed where it exists, but it's not everywhere.

 

<<<Your saying of Rich Black suburbanites are less qualified? If they're rich I would bet they would recieve a pretty good quality education as rich white kids would, so I don't get what your saying.>>>

 

You're totally misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that rich black suburbanites have the exact same lifestyle and education as rich white suburbanties. They're not disadvantaged in any way. Therefore, when it comes to college admissions, they shouldn't get an advantage. The more qualified student should be accepted, regardless of race. If you support affirmative action, you're saying that the black kid should be taken over an equally qualified white kid, just because they're black. That's what I disagree with. Admissions should be race blind.

 

<<<As Affirmative Action im for it because im a minority and if it didn't exist most minorities THAT ARE QUALIFIED wouldn't get their foot in the door in some companies and colleges because over race and etc.>>>

 

No, affirmative action gives an *advantage* to minorities. I'm all for equal opportunity, but the whole point of affirmative action is that standards are lower for minorities in order to get more minorities into the workplace/college. No race should have an advantage over any other. Race quotas and lower standards for minorities are both bad.

 

<<<Hey, Dubya Bush benefitted from affirmantive action, he got into Yale and he was C student in high school and he benefitted from Bush Sr. money and alumni stauts because if his dad didn't have money theres no way he could've got into a Ivy league school.>>>

 

Eh that's not exactly affirmative action, but I'm against that too. Anything that unbalances the playing field and judges people on anything but ability is bad in my book.

[Guest RetroRob215]

I'm sick of Affirmative Action. On the next job application I fill out I really want to fill in the "Alaskan" bubble, that way there might be a slight chance of me actually scoring a job.

 

As for racial profiling, I think it should be enforced to a certain extent. There is no excuse to strip search a white 80-year old woman. But I also don't think every Arab that boards a plane should be taken aside and searched more than any other person. In the end I just wish airline security used common sense, which will probably never happen.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

"I'm sick of Affirmative Action. On the next job application I fill out I really want to fill in the "Alaskan" bubble, that way there might be a slight chance of me actually scoring a job."

 

Whenever I get one of those through the mail, I always check different stuff. I figure since I'll never get a job from one of those places I'll just make them happy they're rejecting a diverse group.

 

I was a Pacific Islander once, a Mexican another time, an Asian and I believe the Eskimo one too.

[Guest DrTom]

I'm all for the equality of opportunity, which is guaranteed by law, but not the equality of results, as affirmative action and similar programs try to bring about. If you give everyone the same opportunities, and make sure the laws that protect that are enforced, then the most qualified candidate will get the job, regardless of race or any other factor.

 

Racial profiling is not the opposite of affirmative action. Profiling is a valuable tool in law enforcement that has been given a black eye because the press delights in reporting any instances of its abuse.

[Guest EricMM]

I think that Affirmative Action was put into place because many minorities were not getting an education on par with more affluent white students. Thusly, their SAT scores COULDN'T be as high as the white students' scores. Thus, they shouldn't have to be. Because if minorities were not allowed into colleges on their current grades, they would not get the money necessary to improve their situation.

 

I think thats what the thoery was. And it helps a College to be more "Multicultural~!" on all thier brochures, so they will allow Native Americans more leeway than Whites because they have many many many whites to pick from but not so many Native Americans so they will take what they can get especially state schools. Because they all want that "MULTICULTURAL EXPERIANCE~!" on their bruchures with the smiling asian and the lauging black person, and the grinning guy in a wheel chair, and the mugging blind hispanic person etc. It just looks better I suppose.

 

Mugging: v. To make exaggerated facial expressions, especially for humorous effect

[Guest Intimacy Goblin]

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I believe that you should get a job based on whether or not you are qualified in SKILL for that particular job. With affirmative action, it's like telling the NBA to accept players with no arms and legs beacause they need more quadrapalegics on the teams. I'm sorry, but if you don't have the skills, you don't get the job.

[Guest DrEvil]

Now, affirmative action is just reverse racism that gives minorities an advantage over whites simply because they're minorites.

Just a pet peeve of mine, but there is no such thing as reverse racism or reverse discrimination. It's either racism or not racism, you either discriminate or you do not discriminate. There is nothing in the definition or racism that says it is whites vs. another race, thus making reverse racism a correct term. Racism is defined at dictionary.com as The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. If you have such a belief, it is a racist belief, regardless of your race and the target race.

 

 

I've actually been a victim of affirmative action. I applied for a management position with a large bank. They mailed me a questionare asking if I considered myself a minority, disabled, etc. which I answered honestly, I never got another response. About 6 months later, I re-applied, when the same questionare came I checked that I was a minority, disabled, etc. One week later I was called in for an interview, the guy was a little shocked to see a healthy, able bodied white guy walk in so he asks me what I was talking about on the questionare. I told him that I'm the only me I know of in existence, you can't be much more of a minority than that, and I couldn't catch up to that 90 mph fastball, so that disability really killed my baseball career. I went on to explain how I was completely ignored when I gave more realistically correct answers, I wanted to see what would happen when I gave the obvious target answers that were technically correct. So the guy got a laugh out of this and decided to continue on with the interview where he was very impressed with my credentials and my personality. At the end of the interview he gave me two answers, one for the record of "Thank you, we'll get back to you", and one which he explicitly said was off the record and would be denied of "I really like you, you're exactly what we need, but unfortunately I've got these minority hiring requirements to fill right now". I thanked him for his honesty, but really wasn't very surprised.

 

 

I am totally against affirmative action. Number one because it is based on the assumption that all employers are racists, and therefore will only hire those of one race. Number two because it is legislated discrimination, there is a perception of discrimination in hiring practices, so what is the government's answer? to bring in a law that forces discrimination that is opposite of the perceived discrimination. I remember when the former government here brought in such legislation, it was truly disheartening to see ads legally stating "whites need not apply". I also remember a news conference when the current government scrapped the legislation. An Indian woman read a prepared statement, her accent and english were so poor that it was barely identifiable as the english language, and made it virtually impossible to figure out what she was saying. The only distinguishable part I made out was "this law take away my opptunty get job". What job would that be - receptionist, customer service rep, some other position where communication is essential. It's not racist or discriminatory to hire someone and not hire someone based on skills, even if that means that the entire workforce consists of white males.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Here's a question for the minorities on the board.

 

If you knew you where being hired because the company had to hire a minority would you take the job, and prove you deserved it, or not take it because you're insulted.

[Guest NoCalMike]

<<<<Here's a question for the minorities on the board.

 

If you knew you where being hired because the company had to hire a minority would you take the job, and prove you deserved it, or not take it because you're insulted>>>>

 

Well, would you ask a bunch of white people the same thing. If they knew they were hired because their employer is a racist and he only wants to hire white people. Would you feel disgusted and turn down the job?

 

I think Affirmitive action works if done right, which it isn't right now. I think it was originally implanted in order to be a form of checks & balances on employers, unfortunately employers have seemed to have been lazy these past few years and just go after quotas.

 

My question is, if you go to an inner city school that gets little to NO money each year to spend on education, as a student, how the hell do you go to college? There has to be some way. I think Affirmitive Action was created for the OPPURTUNITY that was never present before. Remember these are kids wanting to go to college. Would you feel better if they weren't accepted to any college, had to stay in a poor neighborhood where there was a good chance they could get into drugs & crime/gangs?

[Guest KoR Fungus]

<<<I think that Affirmative Action was put into place because many minorities were not getting an education on par with more affluent white students. Thusly, their SAT scores COULDN'T be as high as the white students' scores. Thus, they shouldn't have to be. Because if minorities were not allowed into colleges on their current grades, they would not get the money necessary to improve their situation.>>>

 

<<<My question is, if you go to an inner city school that gets little to NO money each year to spend on education, as a student, how the hell do you go to college? There has to be some way. I think Affirmitive Action was created for the OPPURTUNITY that was never present before. Remember these are kids wanting to go to college. Would you feel better if they weren't accepted to any college, had to stay in a poor neighborhood where there was a good chance they could get into drugs & crime/gangs?>>>

 

Good points. I don't mind colleges considering kids' situations for admissions, ie letting someone in as a wildcard if they managed to overcome a broken home and crappy neighborhood and still succeed.

 

BUT that has NOTHING to do with race. There are broken white families and crappy white neighborhoods, and there are successful black families and successful black neighborhoods. If colleges want to consider situations, then consider situations. Don't just assume that all whites are privledged and all blacks need help. There is no reason that an affluent black student should have any advantage over an affluent white student.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

"BUT that has NOTHING to do with race. There are broken white families and crappy white neighborhoods, and there are successful black families and successful black neighborhoods. If colleges want to consider situations, then consider situations. Don't just assume that all whites are privledged and all blacks need help. There is no reason that an affluent black student should have any advantage over an affluent white student."

 

That's an excellent point. But you seldom hear about middle class to upper class black families because the media seems determined to only mention the ones in poverty.

[Guest EricMM]

Well isn't there a larger percentage of minorities below the poverty line than the percentage of whites? Therefore aren't they more likely to help poor people by helping minorities?

 

Whatever I should just change my name to DevilsAdvocate...

 

I fucking agree that anyone whos job is to communicate with customers etc. should fucking speak fluent understandable english. Its very hard to work around people in the pizza delivery buisness who can't speak english. I asked for the SHAKER with the SPICES that they used to serve with the Thin Crust pizzas that you can still get if you ask for it. He didn't know what a shaker was. Sigh. I mean it's not all the person who can't speak well's fault. There are ways to teach perfect english. My friend bought a book a few weeks ago. It was created to help people from other places speak fluent english. How to pronounce hard to pronounce sounds and how to use everyday english and how to understand it as well. We sat there and discussed some of that stuff all afternoon. Yes yes she WAS a she, but it was actually pretty interesting. Point is, Poppa John should take the time/money to train people to speak well, to keep more business. Or hire people who can.

[Guest KoR Fungus]

<<<Well isn't there a larger percentage of minorities below the poverty line than the percentage of whites? Therefore aren't they more likely to help poor people by helping minorities?>>>

 

Eh that doesn't matter. If you want to help poor people, than have people list their income on their college application and write an essay on how deprived their life was. Actually, that's pretty artificial too, but at least you're trying.

 

Your way, you're justifying helping out black suburbanites with the excuse of "oh, we were TRYING to help the poor!". Try telling that to the poor white kid rejected in favor of the rich black kid because of affirmative action.

[Guest Midnight Express83]

AA is a good thing. Because it tries to level the entry level playing fields. Big Business and Colleges used to not accept any blacks. Then they went for those who were perfect. It has gotten better over the years but racism is still a big deal in this country. Even if people don't want to think it is. It is only LAST YEAR that MLK day was made a holiday in New Milford, CT. Yes, CONNECTICUT. The Klan AND Jesse Jackson were there. So I don't want to hear that it isn't around.

 

Racial Profiling is the biggest bullshit ever. Because not all terrorist are arab. Ahem....IRA? The biggest percent of criminals in this country are WHITES. Simply because there are more whites than blacks. Its true. Quick example: Name how many blacks live in states like ND and SD? Yet crimes happen there too. I know racial profiling is bullshit because I was in a car pulled over because we were black. They said we were speeding. We were going 20 in a 25 mile per hour zone. But it was late night and black. THAT is racial profiling.

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

Because not all terrorist are arab. Ahem....IRA?

How many times has the IRA flown planes into US landmarks or expressed even a remote interest in attacking America?

[Guest Some Guy]

AA is a good thing. Because it tries to level the entry level playing fields. Big Business and Colleges used to not accept any blacks. Then they went for those who were perfect. It has gotten better over the years but racism is still a big deal in this country. Even if people don't want to think it is. It is only LAST YEAR that MLK day was made a holiday in New Milford, CT. Yes, CONNECTICUT. The Klan AND Jesse Jackson were there. So I don't want to hear that it isn't around.

 

Racial Profiling is the biggest bullshit ever. Because not all terrorist are arab. Ahem....IRA? The biggest percent of criminals in this country are WHITES. Simply because there are more whites than blacks. Its true. Quick example: Name how many blacks live in states like ND and SD? Yet crimes happen there too. I know racial profiling is bullshit because I was in a car pulled over because we were black. They said we were speeding. We were going 20 in a 25 mile per hour zone. But it was late night and black. THAT is racial profiling.

Why does MLK even deserve a day? An adulter and a cheater deserves a holiday? I don't think so. That is NOT a racist statemetn, I don't think that Clinton or JFK should get one either, based on those same grounds.

 

Not celebrating MLK day doesn't necesarilly mean racism, it could mean not falling victim to political correctness. New Hamphire which I would call a racist state, just started to recognize it a few years ago.

 

When was the last time the IRA attacked America? They don't so your point is moot.

 

 

Black people commit over 40% of teh violent crime in the country, while being less than 13% of the population. That is the reason.

 

I'm sorry that you were pulled over for being black, but teh facts are there. As i sadi before I would accept it if the stats went the other way as well and I was the one getting pulled over. It sucks but it is an effective way to prevent crime.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

White men between 20 and 40 commit almost all serial and mass murders. Every criminal profile ever written reflects this. There's been no parallel outrage at that fact. 98% of all violent criminals are male. Searches for suspects after the murder of a woman reflect this. There's been no parallel outrage at that fact either. Profiling is unfair? Racist? Sexist? No, it's one of the most important and effective tools a law enforcement officer has. It is realistic. It helps prevent future crimes and it brings the perpetrators of past crimes to justice. Get over it.

[Guest Midnight Express83]

So its ok for people to just be followed and pulled over because of skin color? How is that effective work? That is just filling qutas which isn't effective work its wrong. If they want to get criminals, why not profile suspects of people who fit a crime. NOT just because someone is black. I know this because I read the paper and have a friend with a scanner. We know what crimes are done and what race to look for.

 

Now Terrorist issue. I wasn't saying the IRA are after the US. But I am saying they are a known terrorist group. But checking everyone who is remotely arabic is just stupid. Because NOT all are terrorist, infact all these big bad terrorist did TWO major acts EVER to the US. And it was the SAME small group of people who did it. Hell, the KLAN has done more terrorist acts to this country than any one else. We should profile all with the rebel flags hanging or painted it on their cars. Because they could be terroist too.

[Guest Spicy McHaggis]

That is just filling quotas which isn't effective work its wrong.

That's EXACTLY what Affirmative Action does.

[Guest ant_7000]

There's a misconception when it comes to AA, In a perfect world AA wouldn't be an issue, but since we don't live in a perfect society AA is a good thing it levels the playing field. True, I don't want to be a "token black" but at the same time if im QUALIFIED for a job I shouldn't pass over because of my color of my skin. So lets not act like racism doesn't exist. I got story to tell in Illinois (where im from) There's white guy who's president of the IL Fireman association/commitee and he's racist he was one of the guys on the Infamous fireman tape saying racial slurs, and he protest against AA in BLACKFACE and now he's president do you think he's going promote a Hardworking QUALIFED BLACK or a MINORITY Firefighter in a high position? HELL NAW and type of shit like that makes me for AA.

[Guest DrTom]

"I know racial profiling is bullshit because I was in a car pulled over because we were black. They said we were speeding."

 

Let's call that what it is. That isn't racial profiling, it's *racism*. It's in the media's best interests to label it as racial profiling and cultivate everyone's outrage about it, but the fact remains that "driving while black" is plain racism. Profiling is a very effective tool in law enforcement. And yes, I've been a "victim" of it, and it didn't bother me in the least.

 

"We know what crimes are done and what race to look for."

 

I'm sure the police are thrilled that you're doing their job for them.

 

"I wasn't saying the IRA are after the US. But I am saying they are a known terrorist group."

 

Yes they are. But until they become a threat to the US, there's really no point in us going after them, is there?

 

"all these big bad terrorist did TWO major acts EVER to the US..."

 

Wrong. Here's the list.

 

1. The first WTC bombing, 1993.

2. US Embassy bombing in Kenya, 1998.

3. US Embassy bombing in Tanzania, 1998.

4. USS Cole attacked, 2000

5. The second WTC attack, 2001

6. Pentagon attacked, 2001

7. Fourth plane crashed in rural PA, 2001

 

That's seven attacks in eight years. Yes, I think there's a pattern here that we need to concern ourselves with. All the terrorists who have been involved in those attacks fit a certain profile: Arab males between 18 and 45. So if we know what terrorists look like, why can't we look for them? If the profile weren't based on race, I don't think there would be nearly so much controversy about it.

 

"Hell, the KLAN has done more terrorist acts to this country than any one else."

 

You keep right on thinking that. When the fricking Klan attacked us on different continents, and on the high seas, and caused thousands of deaths and injuries, then you might have an argument. The Klan is a fucking joke these days.

 

"We should profile all with the rebel flags hanging or painted it on their cars. Because they could be terroist too."

 

I hate it when perfectly reasonable arguments are extrapolated to ignorant and farcical degrees.