100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Men don't drop anchor babies, Illegal Alien mothers do | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Sun 05/23/10 03:07 AM
|
|
I respect your right to have an opinion.. but I think one should try to INFORM themself before coming to a conclusion Affirmative Action is not A LAW. Affirmative Action refers to a NUMBER of laws and regulations aimed towards opening up opportunities to all(initially created to offset the exclusion of groups like minorities, women, and the handicapped). There are places and instances where AA is overstated and needs to be revised. But everything labeled AA is not inherently discriminatory in any sense, on the contrary, it is mostly measures to COMBAT previous and existing discrimination. thats not my opinion either, you can actually look up the laws, and regulations, as well as how they are worded. this is my opinion though,,,,those who oppose AA because of incidents of misuse are not much different than those who oppose law enforcement because of incidents where they or others were misused, or those who oppose government because theydon't agree with some political policies, or like wanting to throw out the whole constitution because of a section that made some people worth less than others ...its a knee jerk and overdramatic reaction If there are things that need fixing,,fix those things, instead of bagging the whole effort,,, Affirmative action gives special points to minorities that can take a job or scholarship away from someone who is actually more qualified as happened at a Target I worked at in the early 90's. please, show me the policy or law,,,,these claims always bother me because I wonder about a company that shares co applicants information/qualifications with each other. Particularly Target, which I imagine has sales, cashier, stock, and management positions. I dont know of any of those positions(besides management)which require a special skill set and most management positions I know of dont go on a 'point' system. But Target and Walmart have both jumped off on their own little world before,, so Im not saying its impossible. Just that it would be weird for such a large company to risk civil action by disclosing to an applicant that they actually hired someone else who wasnt as qualified. I have never personally heard of an employment policy under the Affirmative action guidelines that gave 'points'...... MsHarmony....just a point of reference for you. Look up the University of Michigan and the Supreme Court decision that said their " points " system for minorities was unconstitutional. The lawsuit was brought because the University of Michigan was basing admissions on a points system that gave minorities more " points " just for being minorities. Now...had they NOT been doing that, and going strictly by the grades, many of those minority students would not have been admitted. But, of course, had they not been granting more points to minorities, then the University would have gotten into deep water with the Government. Because the Government determined that there should be a certain " percentage " of minorities. Explain to me, please, how the University could have POSSIBLY done the " right " thing. thank you for providing a more specific source,, as I said, I have not heard of 'points' in hiring(excepting civil or federal jobs), especially management positions,,but I am familiar with the Michigan University debacle I agree, that points systems(whatever they are based on) sometimes assist students in admissions who would have had a tough time otherwise( I think thats kind of the point though) Our former president is case in point, do you think he would have attended Yale university if not for the Affirmative ACtion of the school to give preferential treatment to members of some families over others? These types of things are nothing new, it is just relatively new that minorities should be included in these types of 'non merit' benefits but as to the michigan case specifically and my feelings on it: although the court ruled against it, my personal opinion was that they did the honorable thing in granting those points. I am not at all sure the government had any mandate for them to do so, but it is quite possible for the sake of diversity that they implemented the point system to balance the already preferential system in place for other students this was the point system(not including the points for minority status) 20 points for being low income(not to be combined with the twenty for minority status) 16 points to upper peninsula residents (mostly white) 4 points for being child of alumni 10 points for going to the 'right' high schools 8 points for AP students(where AP courses were rarely offered in black populated schools) 12 points for SAT scores the disparate quality of education which stems from things like poverty and the correlation of poverty to race in THAT particular environment, made many of those extra points being offered (up to 54) not nearly as accessible to minority students I understand though, that because race has a protected status which social status does not(although the two are often highly correlated), only those points based upon race were deemed unconstitutional the points awarding status in the community, neighborhood, and family connections,,,still stand |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
willing2
on
Sun 05/23/10 05:40 AM
|
|
I respect your right to have an opinion.. but I think one should try to INFORM themself before coming to a conclusion Affirmative Action is not A LAW. Affirmative Action refers to a NUMBER of laws and regulations aimed towards opening up opportunities to all(initially created to offset the exclusion of groups like minorities, women, and the handicapped). There are places and instances where AA is overstated and needs to be revised. But everything labeled AA is not inherently discriminatory in any sense, on the contrary, it is mostly measures to COMBAT previous and existing discrimination. thats not my opinion either, you can actually look up the laws, and regulations, as well as how they are worded. this is my opinion though,,,,those who oppose AA because of incidents of misuse are not much different than those who oppose law enforcement because of incidents where they or others were misused, or those who oppose government because theydon't agree with some political policies, or like wanting to throw out the whole constitution because of a section that made some people worth less than others ...its a knee jerk and overdramatic reaction If there are things that need fixing,,fix those things, instead of bagging the whole effort,,, Affirmative action gives special points to minorities that can take a job or scholarship away from someone who is actually more qualified as happened at a Target I worked at in the early 90's. please, show me the policy or law,,,,these claims always bother me because I wonder about a company that shares co applicants information/qualifications with each other. Particularly Target, which I imagine has sales, cashier, stock, and management positions. I dont know of any of those positions(besides management)which require a special skill set and most management positions I know of dont go on a 'point' system. But Target and Walmart have both jumped off on their own little world before,, so Im not saying its impossible. Just that it would be weird for such a large company to risk civil action by disclosing to an applicant that they actually hired someone else who wasnt as qualified. I have never personally heard of an employment policy under the Affirmative action guidelines that gave 'points'...... MsHarmony....just a point of reference for you. Look up the University of Michigan and the Supreme Court decision that said their " points " system for minorities was unconstitutional. The lawsuit was brought because the University of Michigan was basing admissions on a points system that gave minorities more " points " just for being minorities. Now...had they NOT been doing that, and going strictly by the grades, many of those minority students would not have been admitted. But, of course, had they not been granting more points to minorities, then the University would have gotten into deep water with the Government. Because the Government determined that there should be a certain " percentage " of minorities. Explain to me, please, how the University could have POSSIBLY done the " right " thing. thank you for providing a more specific source,, as I said, I have not heard of 'points' in hiring(excepting civil or federal jobs), especially management positions,,but I am familiar with the Michigan University debacle I agree, that points systems(whatever they are based on) sometimes assist students in admissions who would have had a tough time otherwise( I think thats kind of the point though) Our former president is case in point, do you think he would have attended Yale university if not for the Affirmative ACtion of the school to give preferential treatment to members of some families over others? These types of things are nothing new, it is just relatively new that minorities should be included in these types of 'non merit' benefits but as to the michigan case specifically and my feelings on it: although the court ruled against it, my personal opinion was that they did the honorable thing in granting those points. I am not at all sure the government had any mandate for them to do so, but it is quite possible for the sake of diversity that they implemented the point system to balance the already preferential system in place for other students this was the point system(not including the points for minority status) 20 points for being low income(not to be combined with the twenty for minority status) 16 points to upper peninsula residents (mostly white) 4 points for being child of alumni 10 points for going to the 'right' high schools 8 points for AP students(where AP courses were rarely offered in black populated schools) 12 points for SAT scores the disparate quality of education which stems from things like poverty and the correlation of poverty to race in THAT particular environment, made many of those extra points being offered (up to 54) not nearly as accessible to minority students I understand though, that because race has a protected status which social status does not(although the two are often highly correlated), only those points based upon race were deemed unconstitutional the points awarding status in the community, neighborhood, and family connections,,,still stand Points are discrimination. They do not award to the most qualified person the educational spot. They give the minority educational welfare. If I may interject a point here. The topic is illegals and their anchor curtain climbers. There is an open topic on the aa welfare program. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't forget, We're racists!
That is worth a small laugh! |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Kings_Knight
on
Sun 05/23/10 02:23 PM
|
|
Don't forget, We're racists!
That is worth a small laugh! Dang ... you noticed that, too ... ? When should we start plannin' to be all guilt-ridden 'n stuff ... ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can leave that alone, being as I didnt call anyone racist,,, but I did respond to the innacurate post that AA is racist against whites.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You folks are aware most countries in the world do not honor anchor babies from any nation! You know it's kinda pointless tryin' to talk reality here, right ... ? Especially with the couple of trolls who are in here posting mindless hate without unbiased facts to prove what they say. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You folks are aware most countries in the world do not honor anchor babies from any nation! You know it's kinda pointless tryin' to talk reality here, right ... ? Especially with the couple of trolls who are in here posting mindless hate without unbiased facts to prove what they say. Does it take one to know one? Cause I haven't ever seen one on here yet. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You folks are aware most countries in the world do not honor anchor babies from any nation! You know it's kinda pointless tryin' to talk reality here, right ... ? Especially with the couple of trolls who are in here posting mindless hate without unbiased facts to prove what they say. Does it take one to know one? Cause I haven't ever seen one on here yet. Just look in the mirror. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You folks are aware most countries in the world do not honor anchor babies from any nation! You know it's kinda pointless tryin' to talk reality here, right ... ? Especially with the couple of trolls who are in here posting mindless hate without unbiased facts to prove what they say. Does it take one to know one? Cause I haven't ever seen one on here yet. Just look in the mirror. That is what happens when you look in the mirror, you see trolls? Well I suggest you get your mirrors checked. I don't have that problem in mine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You folks are aware most countries in the world do not honor anchor babies from any nation! You know it's kinda pointless tryin' to talk reality here, right ... ? Especially with the couple of trolls who are in here posting mindless hate without unbiased facts to prove what they say. Does it take one to know one? Cause I haven't ever seen one on here yet. Just look in the mirror. That is what happens when you look in the mirror, you see trolls? Well I suggest you get your mirrors checked. I don't have that problem in mine. No, I see a guy who has accomplished more in 31 years then you have in 40+ years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yikes! the Indians are restless!
Lpdon, do not get pulled down that path of negativity. That path leads to the ways of Liberals. I prefer to think of some people as wearing the best rose colored glasses money can buy. The rest of us have seen the light. Hopefully enough have to shake things up in congress a little this time! And you are actually in the trenches! 
No sense in casting disparaging allusions unto those we know as not speaking with good logic or sense. Someone has to run into the minefield don't they? Better them than the rest of us??? Darwin's theory at work maybe??? 
|
|
|
|
|
