Explain.
2007-08-01 14:11:29 · 17 answers · asked by Appono Astos 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Against.
I believe in true racial equality. And that the only way to do that is to take race entirely out of the equation.
2007-08-01 14:14:45 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 9⤊ 0⤋
If you notice, the political party that supports affirmative action for everyone else.
Decided not to apply affirmative action to thier parties primaries.
Are they saying that minorties have not been discriminated against in the poltical arena in the past ?
So why shouldn't minority political candiates, not get an extra 10% of the deligates at the conventions ?
Or is it a case, of affirative action is good for everyone else, but its not right to apply it to us?
2007-08-01 21:33:13 · answer #2 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
there was a time and place for affirmative action those times are behind us now the only purpose of affirmative action is to treat one group better then the other and to give opurtunities to someone because of race instead of skills and abilities
2007-08-01 21:21:58 · answer #3 · answered by tgatecrasher2003 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In 1998 President Bill Clinton gave a speech to the graduating class at Portland State University. When he said "whites would soon be a minority" spontaneous applause erupted. Think about that.
2007-08-01 21:33:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
against. People should be seen based on their abilities and talents, not on their colour.
It shocks me that across the country there are kids who take a 90-minute long bus ride to school in another town or county because a school in their own town has to fill a certain colour quota.
2007-08-01 21:27:11 · answer #5 · answered by Lily Iris 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Against. Neither race nor gender have anything to do with whether a person is qualified for a job or a college degree.
2007-08-01 21:35:50 · answer #6 · answered by Eukodol 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Its not that bad.
I just check the box that says african american or hispanic.
I always get jobs, and tons of financial aid money for disadvantaged backround....
The companies don't really care who gets the job, they just know they have to hire a certain number of minorities every year.
Oh, and by the way honey, tax dollars do not pay for civil lawsuits...
2007-08-02 15:02:01 · answer #7 · answered by js1n 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Against.
It's reverse discrimination!
2007-08-01 21:14:36 · answer #8 · answered by Glen B 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Against. Race should not be an issue. It is reverse discrimination.
2007-08-01 21:19:29 · answer #9 · answered by trf6x6 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Without it there would be no blacks/minorities working or in schools at all, but with it creates "preference/opportunities" based on race. I think the act is progressively equalizer which mean that it has an expiration date when it reaches balance. That expiration date was not stipulated when it was created. I still don't think is due to expire but i do think it will be soon.
I'm not surprised that most people against it are majority. It's like everything if you start loosing ground you change the rules.
2007-08-01 21:31:18 · answer #10 · answered by Jose R 6 · 0⤊ 5⤋