03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @chaney3You can look it up. The reasons why affirmative action was adopted as the policy in various national and cultural contexts have all been explicitly laid out. My opinion has no bearing on why the policy was adopted.
Can you give your opinion of why affirmative action was made policy?
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @fmfOpinions are why we debate.
You can look it up. The reasons why affirmative action was adopted as the policy in various national and cultural contexts have all been explicitly laid out. My opinion has no bearing on why the policy was adopted.
Do black people, for example, view themselves as inferior? Are they really that happy to know they got a job because of a 'quota', and not because they were qualified.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @fmfI feel profound doubts about the law being used to compel any private sector actors to enter into transactions they don't want to enter into. I think if they are in receipt of public funding or government support or subsidy, I think they can be expected and required to not discriminate. I think it is reasonable that public sector education facility can have as one of its objectives the production of educated (potential) leaders from all parts of society and not just the dominant ethnic group. But I have some misgivings about the nuts and bolts of how 'affirmative action' is implemented.
When is and isn't "intentional race-based discrimination" morally sound?
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @chaney3The justification for the policy is something you can look up. I have never drawn up and implemented such a policy. So if you want to know "why" the policy was instituted - which is what you asked - you should look into the reasons the institutions and governments gave.
Opinions are why we debate.
Originally posted by @chaney3Which "black people"?
Do black people, for example, view themselves as inferior? Are they really that happy to know they got a job because of a 'quota', and not because they were qualified.
I don't see it as my place to speak on behalf of some generic demographic that you refer to as "black people".
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @fmfIf a black person gets a job over a white person because of a 'quota', rather than qualifications, then is that morally sound?
Which "black people"?
I don't see it as my place to speak on behalf of some generic demographic that you refer to as "black people".
The answer lies in 2 things:
Why affirmative action exists.
The self perception of a race, and if they truly view themselves as inferior.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @chaney3For whatever reason there is a desparity in IQ between different racial groups in the US.
If a black person gets a job over a white person because of a 'quota', rather than qualifications, then is that morally sound?
The answer lies in 2 things:
Why affirmative action exists.
The self perception of a race, and if they truly view themselves as inferior.
These IQ differences have a direct correlation to college entrance exam scores.
Originally posted by @chaney3Not necessarily. But it'd be a grey area. The objective behind the "quota" might be in pursuit of a morally sound outcome. I think, if the white person you mention was thereafter unable to find employment and was unable to survive economically, then one could possibly argue that she was treated in a morally unsound way. But if she just picked herself up and got a job somewhere else, then it would be rather moot. The same could be said for a person discriminated against for not being "white".
If a black person gets a job over a white person because of a 'quota', rather than qualifications, then is that morally sound?
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @eladarThis question I put to you on page 1 still hasn't been answered:
For whatever reason there is a desparity in IQ between different racial groups in the US.
These IQ differences have a direct correlation to college entrance exam scores.
\
Is it, in your view, morally sound to engage in intentional race-based discrimination?
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @fmfI do not believe that being a racist wiil be an automatic ticket to hell.
This question I put to you on page 1 still hasn't been answered:
\
Is it, in your view, morally sound to engage in intentional race-based discrimination?
But I answered your question about my personal belief on this issue in my first post.
03 Aug 17
Originally posted by @fmfThe term 'morally sound' may be over the top.
Not necessarily. But it'd be a grey area. The objective behind the "quota" might be in pursuit of a morally sound outcome. I think, if the white person you mention was thereafter unable to find employment and was unable to survive economically, then one could possibly argue that she was treated in a morally unsound way. But if she just picked herself up and got ...[text shortened]... be rather moot. The same could be said for a person discriminated against for not being "white".
I don't think it's 'right' for the government to force employers to hire someone 'just because'.
And why exactly would black people favor this action. I still think they should all turn to the government and say "thanks, but no thanks". It would speak volumes on how they view themselves.
Originally posted by @eladarI am not really interested in your superstitions and your notion of "sin" on this topic. Feel free to expound upon them, but stuff about supernatural phenomena and supernatural beings doesn't address my question in a way that interests me. For example, whether you think you yourself are or aren't going to "hell" would be neither here nor there.
I do not believe that being a racist wiil be an automatic ticket to hell.