• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are White People an oppressed minority?

Are White People an oppressed minority in America?

  • Total voters
    49
  • Poll closed .
Goldenboy219 said:
This is a ridiculus argument....
Click to expand...

in other words you don't have the intellectual honesty/integrity to answer it. got it, thanks.

Therefore, preferential treatment does not impact a truly able person’s ability to go to a good school, and does not give them a competitive disadvantage.
Click to expand...

the converse could also be argued. a "truely able" minority has no need of preferential treatment. so why the difference in standards?
 
OscarB63 said:
in other words you don't have the intellectual honesty/integrity to answer it. got it, thanks.
Click to expand...

You set up a bull**** scenario based strictly on SAT/GPA. If that was how colleges select applicants, then yes, you are correct, it does give non-minorities with great SAT/GPA credentials a disadvantage in getting accepted by your first choice college.

However, this is not reality, and therefore your argument is entirely useless.

the converse could also be argued. a "truely able" minority has no need of preferential treatment. so why the difference in standards?
Click to expand...

I take it you did not bother reading the quality research study; otherwise such a lame comment would never have been made.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
You set up a bull**** scenario based strictly on SAT/GPA. If that was how colleges select applicants, then yes, you are correct, it does give non-minorities with great SAT/GPA credentials a disadvantage in getting accepted by your first choice college.

However, this is not reality, and therefore your argument is entirely useless.
Click to expand...

I didn't set up any kind of scenario. I asked a simple question which you refuse to answer. SAT/GPA credential have nothing to do with it.

so, once again.

All other factors being equal, does or does not giving one person preferential treatment based solely on race give that person an advantage?
 
OscarB63 said:
I didn't set up any kind of scenario. I asked a simple question which you refuse to answer. SAT/GPA credential have nothing to do with it.so, once again.

All other factors being equal, does or does not giving one person preferential treatment based solely on race give that person an advantage?
Click to expand...

Wow....

OscarB63 said:
assume two kids apply to the same college. one white, one minority they both have the same SAT/ACT/whatever scores. but because the entrance requirement for minorities is lower, the minority kid gets accepted and the white kid gets turned away.

can you honestly tell me that isn't an advantage?
Click to expand...

I have already answered, although you cannot accpet it. What you are failing to consider is that minority students are already at a disadvantage, as my source indicates.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Wow....



I have already answered, although you cannot accpet it. What you are failing to consider is that minority students are already at a disadvantage, as my source indicates.
Click to expand...

No, what I am failing to accept is your presumption that minority students are at a disadvantage because of racism.

and you haven't answered anything. you have done a nice song and dance but no answer.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
I have already answered, although you cannot accpet it. What you are failing to consider is that minority students are already at a disadvantage, as my source indicates.
Click to expand...
If there's one thing that's been demonstrated is that throwing more money at schools do not make them better nor does it increase learning. You're source didn't provide a definitive - other than saying urban schools depending on the metropolitian area, may have less funding than other comparable schools. But the question you're not answering is still there ---

Answering something that wasn't asked isn't an answer.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
This is a ridiculus argument....

GPA and SAT tests do not make a particular candidate more appealing to a school; there are other factors involved. That is why it is impossible for you to include the ceteris paribus label to the example, because nobody is completely similar. Personal interviews and essays are equally, if not more, important than high school grades, and they will differ between students who come from different socioeconomic backgrounds.
Click to expand...

This isn't really true. The vast majority of schools do not conduct personal interviews, and essays mean very little compared to grades, test scores and other factors.

If you want to see the impact of race on acceptances, look at the system that was (on paper) struck down in Gratz v. Bollinger. UMich used a fairly strict number system where students were assigned points based on various factors. If the student scored >100 out of 150, they were generally admitted, 89-99 was generally held and admitted, <75 was rejected, etc.

In that system, a perfect SAT score was worth 12 points. Being a member of an underrepresented minority was worth 20 points, as was being poor or playing D1 sports. Being a legacy was worth 4 points and "outstanding essays" were worth 3 points.
 
RightinNYC said:
This isn't really true. The vast majority of schools do not conduct personal interviews, and essays mean very little compared to grades, test scores and other factors.

If you want to see the impact of race on acceptances, look at the system that was (on paper) struck down in Gratz v. Bollinger. UMich used a fairly strict number system where students were assigned points based on various factors. If the student scored >100 out of 150, they were generally admitted, 89-99 was generally held and admitted, <75 was rejected, etc.

In that system, a perfect SAT score was worth 12 points. Being a member of an underrepresented minority was worth 20 points, as was being poor or playing D1 sports. Being a legacy was worth 4 points and "outstanding essays" were worth 3 points.
Click to expand...

seems like an "advantage" to me.
 
OscarB63 said:
No, what I am failing to accept is your presumption that minority students are at a disadvantage because of racism.

and you haven't answered anything. you have done a nice song and dance but no answer.
Click to expand...

Did you read anything in the research study?

You set up a bull**** scenario that does not pertain to reality. In "make-believe" land, where college acceptance is based on grades/test scores, then yes, non-minority students are at a disadvantage when trying to get into the school of choice.

However, this is not how it happens here in reality, and therefore your argument is entirely useless.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Wow....



I have already answered, although you cannot accpet it. What you are failing to consider is that minority students are already at a disadvantage, as my source indicates.
Click to expand...

The minority kids you go to prep schools are disadvantaged- How? what makes people so annoyed with the special status some get is the intellectual dishonesty that some have to use to try and justify it.

Try this. Have the SAME kid apply to an Ivy League school. On one application he marks the white box on another the monority box. Does one application have a greater chance of acceptance?
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Did you read anything in the research study?

You set up a bull**** scenario that does not pertain to reality. In "make-believe" land, where college acceptance is based on grades/test scores, then yes, non-minority students are at a disadvantage when trying to get into the school of choice.

However, this is not how it happens here in reality, and therefore your argument is entirely useless.
Click to expand...

have you ever applied to a college? every college/university I have ever heard of requires students to take some kind of standardized test (ACT, SAT, etc) for admission, if you don't score above a certain level YOU ARE NOT ADMITTED. if you are truely so ignorant that you think college acceptance isn't based on grades then there is no further point in even talking to you. good-bye
 
washunut said:
Try this. Have the SAME kid apply to an Ivy League school. On one application he marks the white box on another the monority box. Does one application have a greater chance of acceptance?
Click to expand...

If everything else is equal, then yes...the minority will have a greater chance of acceptance because those liberal Ivy league schools love to showcase their "diversity"
 
OscarB63 said:
have you ever applied to a college? every college/university I have ever heard of requires students to take some kind of standardized test (ACT, SAT, etc) for admission, if you don't score above a certain level YOU ARE NOT ADMITTED. if you are truely so ignorant that you think college acceptance isn't based on grades then there is no further point in even talking to you. good-bye
Click to expand...
To be fair they make exceptions so as to add to diversity. I was accepted to a university and i was not anywhere near the ACT/SAT level they normally ADMITTED to.
 
RightinNYC said:
This isn't really true. The vast majority of schools do not conduct personal interviews, and essays mean very little compared to grades, test scores and other factors.

If you want to see the impact of race on acceptances, look at the system that was (on paper) struck down in Gratz v. Bollinger. UMich used a fairly strict number system where students were assigned points based on various factors. If the student scored >100 out of 150, they were generally admitted, 89-99 was generally held and admitted, <75 was rejected, etc.

In that system, a perfect SAT score was worth 12 points. Being a member of an underrepresented minority was worth 20 points, as was being poor or playing D1 sports. Being a legacy was worth 4 points and "outstanding essays" were worth 3 points.
Click to expand...

So in that case, being a Innuit applying to UMich, coming from a family making $12K a year who plays NCAA Division 1 baseball with an SAT of Critical Reading: 400, Mathematics: 505 and Writing: 400 would have a greater chance of being accepted than a caucasian male, no legacy standing, perfect SAT, chess club member going for an Physics degree. Or better yet, a poor white caucasian with the exact same SAT and Division 1 standings would still get passed over - simply because he was white. Sounds like discrimination to me.
 
RightinNYC said:
This isn't really true. The vast majority of schools do not conduct personal interviews, and essays mean very little compared to grades, test scores and other factors.
Click to expand...

In acceptance competitive schools, essays and interviews are the norm.

If you want to see the impact of race on acceptances, look at the system that was (on paper) struck down in Gratz v. Bollinger. UMich used a fairly strict number system where students were assigned points based on various factors. If the student scored >100 out of 150, they were generally admitted, 89-99 was generally held and admitted, <75 was rejected, etc.

In that system, a perfect SAT score was worth 12 points. Being a member of an underrepresented minority was worth 20 points, as was being poor or playing D1 sports. Being a legacy was worth 4 points and "outstanding essays" were worth 3 points.
Click to expand...

I agree that the point system was flawed, as your article states, the law school "admitted virtually every minimally qualified underrepresented minority applicant."
 
Gray_Fox_86 said:
To be fair they make exceptions so as to add to diversity. I was accepted to a university and i was not anywhere near the ACT/SAT level they normally ADMITTED to.
Click to expand...


which is my point. If you are a minority, you have an ADVANTAGE (listening GB?) when applying to schools because many times they will lower the requirements to let you in for the sake of diversity.

It happens at predominately minority schools as well. My brother (white guy) got his master's degree from Alabama A&M (traditionally black college) paid for with a "minority scholarship"

because he was a white guy attending a black college he had an ADVANTAGE due to his race.
 
OscarB63 said:
have you ever applied to a college? every college/university I have ever heard of requires students to take some kind of standardized test (ACT, SAT, etc) for admission, if you don't score above a certain level YOU ARE NOT ADMITTED. if you are truely so ignorant that you think college acceptance isn't based on grades then there is no further point in even talking to you. good-bye
Click to expand...

That isn't true. SATs mean very little when it comes to college applications now. It is more focused on grades and what you as a person can bring to the school.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
I agree that the point system was flawed, as your article states, the law school "admitted virtually every minimally qualified underrepresented minority applicant."
Click to expand...

and you don't think that gave them an advantage over non-minority applicants?
 
soccerboy22 said:
That isn't true. SATs mean very little when it comes to college applications now. It is more focused on grades and what you as a person can bring to the school.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on the school. because both of my older kids started college within the last 5 years and every college they applied to had a minimum ACT or SAT score for admission.

Many years ago when I applied to (and FWIW was accepted to) MIT, they had a minimum ACT score for admission.
 
OscarB63 said:
have you ever applied to a college? every college/university I have ever heard of requires students to take some kind of standardized test (ACT, SAT, etc) for admission, if you don't score above a certain level YOU ARE NOT ADMITTED. if you are truely so ignorant that you think college acceptance isn't based on grades then there is no further point in even talking to you. good-bye
Click to expand...

To be fair, placement test scores tell much more about a particular student than their high school life. In my personal experience, i had a lower GPA but a high ACT score and tested into calc II. But none of that really mattered as i had an athletic scholarship (track).
 
OscarB63 said:
and you don't think that gave them an advantage over non-minority applicants?
Click to expand...

If the goal was to get into that particular school, then yes. But i have little doubt that these applicants would have had little trouble getting into another school, hence maintaining their competitive advantage!
 
Goldenboy219 said:
If the goal was to get into that particular school, then yes. But i have little doubt that these applicants would have had little trouble getting into another school, hence maintaining their competitive advantage!
Click to expand...

and so then, without this preferential treatment would the "minimally qualified" minorities been accepted into this school? probably not. ergo, due to the preferential treatment given, the "minimally qualified" applicants race was an advantage.
 
OscarB63 said:
and so then, without this preferential treatment would the "minimally qualified" minorities been accepted into this school? probably not. ergo, due to the preferential treatment given, the "minimally qualified" applicants race was an advantage.
Click to expand...

And if you bothered to read the paper i posted, you can see why there is such a need to help those who are disadvantaged. Without AA (which is flawed IMHO), minority acceptance would fall 10%. In the most competitive schools, grades/scores/placement is very much similar among those applicants with a chance of being accepted.
 
The main point being. A truely qualified applicant will be accepted/hired/promoted regardless of race. If you are "minimally qualified" you stand a better chance at getting hired/admitted/promoted if you are a minority due to affirmative action policies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom