They found themselves confronted with a practical dilemma that Congress had never envisaged and thus never addressed when it wrote the Civil Rights Act.
Because male privilege persists, gender preferences really do make selections fairer. The American Negro has the great advantage of having never believed that collection of myths to which white Americans cling: This is no time to turn back.
All people are equal under the laws of the United States of America and should be treated accordingly. People given a position purely because of affirmative action often are not qualified, and the idea that all people of that race must be "stupid" is perpetuated. Racial and ethnic diversity on campus are vital to securing a capable workforce; it is essential that [students] be educated in an environment where they are exposed to diverse people, ideas, perspectives, and interactions 65 Leading American Businesses1, 2; emphasis added.
Some of the arguments against affirmative action include: So concluded Justice Powell.
Still, the debate continues on how we as an American society can truly embrace diversity. Some among the professoriate exploded in a fury of opposition to the new rules, while others responded with an equally vehement defense of them.
Affirmative action assures that members of all ethnic groups are present. The purpose of affirmative action is to provide equal opportunity to historically underrepresented populations. If racial and gender preferences for jobs or college admissions were supposed to neutralize unfair competitive advantages, they needed to be calibrated to fit the variety of backgrounds aspirants brought to any competition for these goods.
Even so, contended Powell, the Court, has never approved a classification that aids persons perceived as members of relatively victimized groups at the expense of other innocent individuals in the absence of judicial, legislative, or administrative findings of constitutional or statutory violations Bakke, at AA is allowed ONLY as a remedy to proven discrimination in any job family, and must - by law - be temporary and narrowly focused.
But the issue at hand is racial diversity. However, suppose this self-monitoring and revising fell short.
People with the same skin color are not necessarily the same in opinion or even culture. This is not an attribute that is relevant to the academic mission of a college. Finally, those who would eradicate affirmative action because it "stigmatizes" minorities have two flaws in their argument.
Stigma is the product of racist attitudes that still persist today. As a result, killing affirmative action would do little, probably nothing, to ameliorate the stigmatization of minorities. Affirmative action is primarily lauded because of its hypothetical ability to level the playing field for traditionally marginalized groups while also making up for past injustices.
Others favor affirmative action because it promotes diversity, integration and equal access to resources. Finally, those who would eradicate affirmative action because it "stigmatizes" minorities have two flaws in their argument. Stigma is the product of racist attitudes that still persist today.
As a result, killing affirmative action would do little, probably nothing, to ameliorate the stigmatization of minorities. Since affirmative action is an ethical issue, the real question is whether or not affirmative action increases fairness in the admissions process.
Additionally, the question is raised on what role diversity plays in both the academic mission of a university and in the quality of life on campus.
Affirmative action is when a minority is given extra 'points' or such just for being a minority.
Basically, any member of a minority group is given the advantage just for bei ng a minority. Affirmative action fans, get ready to meet your new favorite talking point. America's top colleges have always been pretty pasty white places.
But you might have been under the impression that.An argument in favor of affirmative action