Comments about ‘Utah Legislature: Lawmaker proposes ending affirmative action in higher education’

follow the native money and tell my children that who subsidize yours about affirmative as the only affirmation in utah districts lie in providing opportunity they would not have with out those funds period!

'...forbidding universities and colleges from discriminating or providing preference based on race or sex.' - 1st line in article.

Oh my...! Since when is working to level the playing field discrimination?

You want an example? We just elected our first president!

So, guess what color the others were?

Affirmative Action was unconstitutional the day it was dreamed up. I can not believe it wasn't shoved all the way to the Supreme Court the first time someone realized that they were denied a scholarship because of their race. . . ie. being white. If one wants to be seen as "equal", then level the playing field, don't make it more uneven by essentially making yourself "special."

I applaud the Utah State Legislature for putting a capstone on this archaic and wrong practice.

'We just elected our first president!'


1st black president.

BYU even uses race and gender for their MBA program. I recently found out upon applying to BYU for graduate school. If I was a woman or black I would have gotten in. But because I am white and male, I was not admitted. This comes from their own mouth.

"Oh my...! Since when is working to level the playing field discrimination?"

I'm pretty sure the playing field is more than level, and has even become un-level for white people. White people are the most persecuted race in America, especially if you are white and male.

Is this in state schools only or private universities also?

It's my opinion that state schools should not discriminate based on race (affirmative action IS discrimination) but that private schools should be able to admit whoever they please. If they (private schools) want to implement affirmative action that is none of the government's business.

'...denied a scholarship because of their race. . . ie. being white.'

If you have proof of this claim, give it to the local Utah congressmen/women. If not, well, then you made it up, didn't you?

'White people are the most persecuted race in America, especially if you are white and male.' - 3:13

Just because you have to work to get somewhere now dosen't mean you are persecuted.

My example? Has anyone put you into slavery or given you a job someone else makes more $$ in?

It's about time!!!

Affirmitive action has run it's course and although there may be situations where it still needs to be applied. Overall everyone has the same shot, unless you're white because of this policy. It will be nice when everyone is free!!

You show me one person, or even one person twice (thrice?) removed from slavery. You can't, and that is because the playing field is even. It is even so un-even in favor of minorities now that there are more programs for non-whites and white at any university in the nation. More financial scholarships are given to minorities than whites. Nothing is based on merit anymore, just what color your skin happens to be, or who you like to sleep with. What a joke!

Now, let's talk about "slavery".

To Pagan -

Same question to you - has anyone put you in slavery?

How is it discrimination to completely ignore race, gender, or sexual orientation when making a decision? It seems to me that is the exact opposite of discrimination.

What does Affirmative Action take into account? Race and gender. Sounds like discrimination to me.

A state of 90+ percent whiteness would one think that everything is a level playing field now. Exactly how many white people are being denied their "right" to a state subsidized education? What a red herring pander to the extreme right crowd piece of legislative dribble this is. Whites in Utah are under attack, better round the wagons boys.....

'More financial scholarships are given to minorities than whites. Nothing is based on merit anymore...' - 3:44

That is because typically majority of 'whites' have parents who will pay for them to go to college. Every try while your on foodstamps? Not so fun.

Your idea of 'merit' is who is white...and 'non-whites'. You said as much yourself.

Can't even admit that there are more people in the world, can you?

'Same question to you - has anyone put you in slavery?' - 3:47

Joe, I am truly sorry you cannot think of your own questions. Perhaps if you tried harder. Regardless, with a name like 'Joe' I doubt you or any of your ancestors were part of the slave trade?

Or could I be wrong?

Of the two, which were you? The slave or the slave trader in your family?

And don't even try to bring my history into it. I'm from Hawaii.

I both agree and disagree with you.

First, as others have pointed out on this board, Afirmative Action has run its course. With some exceptions, colleges will be happy to admit anyone now days who can qualify. Continuing AA is discriminating against the very thing you are trying to prevent.

Second, without something like AA having been put into place, the current atmosphere would not be what it is. Without forcing many colleges, businesses, whatever, to hire/accept minorities or women, they would still be discriminating today. So no, it was not useless when first adopted. If you don't believe this, look at football. The NFL has a minority interview policy, and it has helped get a handful of minority candidates head coaching jobs they never would have even been interviewed for. In college football, there are something like 5-6 minority coaches in the country, out of 300+ colleges. No policy to at least interview = discrimination by the good-ole white boys.

"Same question to you - has anyone put you in slavery? "


Also responding to Pagan--lots of people make more money than me working in the same job. Does that mean I need "affirmative action"?



If universities lower the admission standards for members of ethnic minorities, do they lower the course standards as well? Think about it. If your SAT, ACT, and GPA are too low for a top school, but you get in on affirmative action, what happens after admission? Chances are you are put in classes you are academically unprepared for. You flunk out, leave college, and have a boatload of debt.

Why should we assume that a candidate who did below average in high school is going to somehow turn into an elite student when a good school lowers the bar for them?

It is about time we ended this reverse discrimination called "affirmative action." I (a white male with a very high GPA, MCAT, leadership, and research credentials), was rejected from medical school at the U, while minorities I worked with, studied with, and knew closely were accepted with much lower scores, GPA's, and other qualifications than me. I even recall a ridiculous essay prompting from the U's application that asked about my "diversity." I have since scored in the 99th percentile on my national board exams, and have a 4.0 in medical school as well, and there are many other stories just like mine. Indeed, merit has little to do with scholarships and higher education because of the unconstitutional legislation known as "affirmative action."

"Regardless, with a name like 'Joe' I doubt you or any of your ancestors were part of the slave trade?"

That's a racist comment, Pagan. Because "Joe" is perceived by you to be a "white" name, his ancestors are automatically slave traders?

Because, Pagan, you seem to be saying that:

(1) ALL "Joes" are "white"

(2) all "white" people had ancestors that were slave traders,

(3)and all people who had an ancestor in the slave trade carry permanent sin in every generation that follows them forever.

"Second, without something like AA having been put into place, the current atmosphere would not be what it is."

That is speculation. It's also just another way of saying that the end justifies the means. I don't see the point of fighting discrimination with government-mandated discrimination.


"Without forcing many colleges, businesses, whatever, to hire/accept minorities or women"


That is not affirmative action. Forcing institutions to accept qualified women and minorities is fine with me. It's the right thing to do. The problem is when you accept an underrepresented minority applicant with a 3.2 for a slot and reject a "white" applicant with 3.7 because you have a racial quota to fill.

That's completely different from making it illegal to refuse to hire people on racial, gender, or other grounds.