• 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!

Supreme Court punts on affirmative action case

ReformCollege said:
Race shouldn't play a factor into which kids with a crappy SAT score and average GPA students get into the program though.
Click to expand...

So what should be the factor? Student A is white and has a crappy SAT score and average GPA. Student B is black and has the exact same academics (probably rare, but let's just say they do). Everything is 100% the same except for race. You only have one spot. Who do you pick, and what's the deciding factor?

I haven't seen all the evidence in the case, but you're assuming that black students got in who were far worse academically because of their race. What evidence do you have of that?
 
Napoleon said:
Why isn't a first-come-first-serve basis fair?
Click to expand...

Favors those who live closer to campus and therefore their application arrives sooner in the mail if they are both mailed at the same time.
 
nota bene said:
You aren't seriously suggesting that the university's archives are inaccurate, are you? If you are, I'd appreciate your directing me to a more reliable source.

In the meantime, here'a photo, and I count 23 three heads right there (notice the hair styles--clearly not "military"): Black Awareness Committee
Click to expand...
And can you tell me with surety which campus that pic was taken at?

All I can say is that I was there, at the main campus for four years, and regardless of that photo, which actually may well be the 25 I saw in my years there... I know what I experienced and saw. And it was not really an integrated college as a whole, only in the areas mentioned. If that was the awareness committee, it wouldn't surprise me at all if those were essentially all the non-uniformed blacks at the college, probably even included the jocks.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Sure there is. A teenager can teach themselves things, too, you know. You can also test that. Just because calculus, physics, etc. may not be a part of his state's or county's curricula, doesn't mean the student shouldn't be tested on it, perhaps the student taught his- or herself calculus, physics, etc. ;shrug:
Click to expand...

Not to mention, if the kid is unprepared for the program, little changes by forcing him through the admittance process.

We are talking band-aid solutions here
 
rocket88 said:
I wouldn't say that necessarily. If your looking at an A- student who was in a couple of clubs versus a B student who was President of a couple of clubs and on a sports team, I'd take the B student over the A-.
Click to expand...

I might too. I'd certainly look closely at somebody who's working a 20+-hour job plus attending classes. He or she might have a lower GPA but is demonstrating a work ethic and ability to manage time maturely.
 
Summerwind said:
And can you tell me with surety which campus that pic was taken at?

All I can say is that I was there, at the main campus for four years, and regardless of that photo, which actually may well be the 25 I saw in my years there... I know what I experienced and saw. And it was not really an integrated college as a whole, only in the areas mentioned. If that was the awareness committee, it wouldn't surprise me at all if those were essentially all the non-uniformed blacks at the college, probably even included the jocks.
Click to expand...

I'll respond by PM.
 
ReformCollege said:
Race shouldn't play a factor into which kids with a crappy SAT score and average GPA students get into the program though.
Click to expand...

Neither should the state you're from and yet, it does. Go figure.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Sure there is. A teenager can teach themselves things, too, you know. You can also test that. Just because calculus, physics, etc. may not be a part of his state's or county's curricula, doesn't mean the student shouldn't be tested on it, perhaps the student taught his- or herself calculus, physics, etc. ;shrug:
Click to expand...

The point of standardized testing is self evident, if the standard is subjective, it's not really a standard now is it?
 
Fisher said:
That would be a disaster. I think that 1+1=? has the same correct answer everywhere, but national testing doesn't have much utility outside the world of math........
Click to expand...

Sure it does. Science has standards. So do English and History. Even art courses have a standard that must be met in order to pass them.
 
Hatuey said:
Sure it does. Science has standards. So do English and History. Even art courses have a standard that must be met in order to pass them.
Click to expand...

All of the others are arbitrary compared to math. Just because Washington DC decrees that everybody should know that estimates are that only 107 Billion or so humans in total have ever existed does not mean that has relevance to anybody or utility to anyone.
 
rocket88 said:
Favors those who live closer to campus and therefore their application arrives sooner in the mail if they are both mailed at the same time.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that constitutes geographic favoring on the part of the University. In fact, they already do this as there are student population ceilings. Processing applications in the order in which they come in is far more "fair" than racial considerations.
 
Hatuey said:
Neither should the state you're from and yet, it does. Go figure.
Click to expand...

Ideally, it shouldn't, but that's sort of to be expected. States want students who graduate their colleges to stay in state to increase that state's tax revenue. Considering they are, after all, subsidizing their tuition with tax revenue. Race, on the other hand, doesn't really offer any such benefit and creates a two tiered system of who got in based on their merit vs. who got in because of affirmative action. Everyone has a homefield advantage to some colleges. Not everyone has an advantage due to their race, and some are put at an inherent disadvantage through no fault of their own.
 
Fisher said:
All of the others are arbitrary compared to math. Just because Washington DC decrees that everybody should know that estimates are that only 107 Billion or so humans in total have ever existed does not mean that has relevance to anybody or utility to anyone.
Click to expand...

This post shows a complete ignorance of what the standards in history courses actually are. History has standards for development as well as methodology for teaching. It's not an arbitrarily graded course anymore than mathematics is. If you want to claim there are bad teachers that grade it arbitrarily, like say those who uses Texas schoolbooks, you could - however, it's not an arbitrary course. You can't claim the history of the world started 6000 years ago. You can't have anachronistic essays. You can't even so much as use the work of others without using strict guidelines. It's not the trivia based course you make it out to be. It's a lot more complicated than that.
 
ReformCollege said:
Ideally, it shouldn't, but that's sort of to be expected.
Click to expand...

Wait, state based discrimination is okay but race based isn't because what? State based discrimination has had a lesser effect than race based discrimination at the same school that named one of its dorms after a KKK member? Nah. Save the Libertarian bull**** for somebody who cares about it.
 
Hatuey said:
Wait, state based discrimination is okay but race based isn't because what? State based discrimination has had a lesser effect than race based discrimination at the same school that named one of its dorms after a KKK member? Nah. Save the Libertarian bull**** for somebody who cares about it.
Click to expand...

Everyone lives in a state with state universities. Not everyone is a member of a protected race that is benefited by affirmative action.
 
Hatuey said:
This post shows a complete ignorance of what the standards in history courses actually are. History has standards for development as well as methodology for teaching. It's not an arbitrarily graded course anymore than mathematics is. If you want to claim there are bad teachers that grade it arbitrarily, like say those who uses Texas schoolbooks, you could - however, it's not an arbitrary course. You can't claim the history of the world started 6000 years ago. You can't have anachronistic essays. You can't even so much as use the work of others without using strict guidelines. It's not the trivia based course you make it out to be. It's a lot more complicated than that.
Click to expand...

Even trivia can have standards. :roll:
 
rocket88 said:
I wouldn't say that necessarily. If your looking at an A- student who was in a couple of clubs versus a B student who was President of a couple of clubs and on a sports team, I'd take the B student over the A-.
Click to expand...

We'll agree to disagree, then.

Dr. Chuckles said:
Not to mention, if the kid is unprepared for the program, little changes by forcing him through the admittance process.

We are talking band-aid solutions here
Click to expand...

I guess. Not 100% clear how this addresses my post.

Hatuey said:
The point of standardized testing is self evident, if the standard is subjective, it's not really a standard now is it?
Click to expand...

It's subjective to a point. Not like New York's standards are the equivalent of a 1st grade education in another state. :shrug:
 
rocket88 said:
There's not exactly a glut of cheap housing in rural areas. Other than that it's a great solution, why don't they just move? :roll:
Click to expand...

so we make a full circle back to my original argument. Its a economic issue and not an issue of race. A poor white kid has the same disadvantages as a poor black kid
 
Deuce said:
You're guessing. It's a competitive school and that's not a good SAT score. "Shoe in" my ass. But you can play hypothetical race cards all you want if it makes you feel better.

Ginsburg's comment wasn't regarding the student. It was regarding the systems in place.
Click to expand...

By UT's own figures her SAT scores were above the 25 percentile of students that matriculated. Her grade point average indicates nearly straight A's. I don't know where this nonsense about her not being competitive comes from except from lying UT lawyers. It's BS and you all know it.

Let's consider why SCOTUS sent the case back to the lower court. The issue was whether or not it was proper to consider race at all in this case. SCOTUS determined that UT had not established that consideration of race was necessary. And so race obviously was an issue germane to this student's admission! If it had been established that consideration of race was irrelevant then whether or not it was proper to consider race would be moot. But it's not moot, it was the whole issue the Court's decision hinged on. The Court tacitly rejected UT's argument that her record rendered her inadmissible regardless of race, and here you are trying to use the argument the Court rejected.
 
trfjr said:
so nothing is keeping them from living in rural areas correct?

Im asking all these questions to try to fond out how is discriminating by location is also discriminating by race when you can change your location

there are many programs that benefit inner city and not rural areas are they also discriminating by race
Click to expand...

There are affirmative action laws that benefit whites. The 10 percent law does. There are also affirmative action laws that benefit others. So whites are not discriminated agsinst.

Rural whites benefit a whole lot.
 
trfjr said:
so we make a full circle back to my original argument. Its a economic issue and not an issue of race. A poor white kid has the same disadvantages as a poor black kid
Click to expand...

Correct and the white kid has the same advantage of Affirmative Action.
 
LowDown said:
By UT's own figures her SAT scores were above the 25 percentile of students that matriculated. Her grade point average indicates nearly straight A's. I don't know where this nonsense about her not being competitive comes from except from lying UT lawyers. It's BS and you all know it.

Let's consider why SCOTUS sent the case back to the lower court. The issue was whether or not it was proper to consider race at all in this case. SCOTUS determined that UT had not established that consideration of race was necessary. And so race obviously was an issue germane to this student's admission! If it had been established that consideration of race was irrelevant then whether or not it was proper to consider race would be moot. But it's not moot, it was the whole issue the Court's decision hinged on. The Court tacitly rejected UT's argument that her record rendered her inadmissible regardless of race, and here you are trying to use the argument the Court rejected.
Click to expand...

I am rejecting your premise that her being black would have been a "shoe in." You are reading much beyond that, apparently. It is possible she would have got in being black. It's also possible that she wouldn't have been. Her SAT score is mediocre. At her level, the variability is going to come from extra curricular activities, entry essays (if UT does those), recommendations, etc. And you know what? Plenty of black kids with those scores didn't get in either.

It would be really awesome if race weren't a factor at all, like in magical fairy land. But we don't live there, we live in the real world where two identical resumes with the names Jim and Jamal on them leave Jim as vastly more likely to be called for an interview.
 
Last edited:
captainawesome said:
Correct and the white kid has the same advantage of Affirmative Action.
Click to expand...

no they don't because affirmative action is about race not economic status. its about racial diversity not economic status diversity
 
Deuce said:
Her SAT score is mediocre.
Click to expand...

With her SAT score she beat over ~30% of the students who matriculated at UT. So, WHY didn't she get in? EH? WHY?

You and I both know why.
 
trfjr said:
no they don't because affirmative action is about race not economic status. its about racial diversity not economic status diversity
Click to expand...

Meh same thing. One benefits whites one not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom