Are you for or against Affirmative Action?

Butterbar Bob

I am against it because it perpetuates the division of people along racial lines.

Racial problems will never go away, will never have the chance to go away, as long as government maintains a legal distinction between the races.

Get the government and all its institutions out of the race business, and let the people work it out. I will always have more faith in the people than in the government.

SA Writer

I am against discrimination in any of its manifestations. Affirmative action does not become desirable just because it chooses a different group to discriminate against.

Skypilot49

I am definitely against Affirmative Action. Merit all the way.

Susie D

Against - it's a racist policy that both punishes a person for the color of their skin and puts people in a position for failure if they are not qualified for a job but are placed there simply because of their appearance.

Linda L

I am against it. Affirmative action works both ways. It tells a company that they have to have at least so many minority employees but that company only hires that amount and that's it. Then there's the question in your mind: "Was I hired just because they had to have a black person or because of my qualifications?" I wouldn't feel comfortable working like that. Also just getting the job shouldn't be good enough. They might hire you because they have to but then keep you there so they don't have to hire anyone else in the minority and you never get promoted. It's not ideal. They really should just take out the question about race from applications.

blnbyrose

As a white American, I have never gotten preferential treatment nor have I ever recieved anything from the govt. So no, it is wrong.

rhsaunders

Against. There may have been some justification for it thirty years ago; there is none now. It is time, and past time, to treat people on the basis of their qualifications, and nothing else.

B.C.*

I am on the fence about that. Their are still some employers who will not hire an individual simply because of their skin color, BUT affirmative action is indeed racist. We all have some maturing to do if we want to see affirmative action come to an end.

Ben H

I don't agree with it. I don't see how affirmative action squares with "equal protection under the law".

vincent g

Against, of course. It is another silly Liberal invention.

Magnum PI MP

Against. It is racist.

Ryan R

i think that it was helpful when it was created, but not anymore. now days everyone has the same education, and the same chances to succeed in life.

wheresthevowels

I understand why it was instituted but it has outgrown its usefulness and is actually discrimatory. I think everyone deserves an equal chance but not an unequial chance. This country was not based on that principle.

jpppppp

Just like everything in politics, it needs to be revisited and reanalyzed to verify that its original intentions are still the focus. I think that it needs some reform in the very near future!

teacherhelper

AGAINST! Let the best person (i.e. the most qualified) get the position. This ensures we have the best where needed.

Gottlos

No.
It's racism.

Go Blue

against because race shouldn't matter in a decision

opposed to getting rid of it because it is still a justifiable cause, and as a previous poster said, if we have to ask, it's not time yet

biscuitperifrank

Good concept, but never works fairly

Against it

Perdendosi

But what is affirmative action? That term is too amorphous now. The Supreme Court has recognized that a quota system is INAPPROPRIATE and unconstitutional, but other forms of "preference" may not be.
Here's an example. Standardized tests, while getting better, are still racially biased, as they use names and scenarios from "white" society rather than those that a minority will more likely asssociate with. So, let's say that African American LSAT scores are 3 points lower, on average, than white LSAT scores, even adusted for similar academic progress in undergrad school. African American kid scores 2 points lower than what is normally considered the floor for admission to a law school. Is it all right to be flexible on the admissions policy and at least consider this student, even though her scores may be a fraction lower than the normal floor, to correct for the proven bias in the LSAT? I don't think that's unfair at all.
The second type of "affirmative action" that needs to be considered is a consideration of diversity generally. Is it in a school (or workplace, or whatever)'s best interest to have a work force or school populace that's from all sorts of different backgrounds -- economic, social, racial, religious? To hear different peoples' perspectives (especially in an educational setting) and, perhaps to allow groups who have traditionally not been able to penetrate the "glass ceiling" of some professions (women in science, certain minorities in business, e.g.)? I think that's totally appropriate, both morally and constitutionally. Now, where you draw the line is difficult -- because saying "we need 10% african american" is wrong. Is "putting a finger on the scale" when two applicants are otherwise basically equal wrong? The Supreme Court didn't seem to think so when deciding the University of Michigan case two years ago. I don't think it is, either, considering the other "finger on scale" factors, such as second languages, work experience, etc.

Finally, there IS still racial desparity in this country, although it is slowly fading away to simple economic disparity (and the country should get used to the idea that "black" isn't a synonym for "poor"). Racial, ethnic, and religious diversity is an important educational and workplace goal and should be encouraged, carefully. If that's "affirmative action," then that's fine by me.

â™£Î”CrÃ¼xÎ”â™£

I am against the way it is now. I think it is in desperate need of reform.

It's ment to dispell people from hiring on race and such - yet it encourages reverse predudice

*Selina*

I am against it. It is wrong to give preferential treatment to certain people based on their race or gender.

Mother

There was a time and place when affirmative action was necessary. Now how ever I feel that it is being used for discriminating against the majority. I have seen affirmative action used to keep certain people out of positions of importance because of the color of their skin. A person needs the chance to get and keep a job to be based on their abilities and not the color of their skin.

The Grit

Neither.

I think it is a necessary evil, but I wouldn't want to be hired for my skin color over my merits. I've been there, and it made me feel worse. Then again, I was the only minority working in the place, so apparently, having a dark-skinned receptionist made them look "diverse."

Whatever. I still got paid.

Goldenrae9

For. If we need to ask, then there is a still a need.

BTW, the largest recipient of Affirmative Action are WHITE women.

green

I'm for it.
I think we need to help coloreds compete with other races in the job market.

trish_tcrp

I am FOR affirmative action. Racism is not dead and the lasting effects of slavery and segregation still have an effect on our society. Affirmative action is meant to level the playing field, which of course, it should be. However, there probably are much more effective ways to do this, such as providing better education, improving poor neighborhoods, providing effective job training, and financial training.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: