Published: Saturday, June 29 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Generally, I agree. Using discrimination to fight discrimination is tricky. It
should be seldom used and carefully tailored. It is especially problematic in
hiring situations unless you are trying to solve a deep and ingrained problem of
past discrimination. In any such solution, we need to understand that we can
only achieve rough equality. The percentages do not need to match exactly the
general population.Higher education is one place where I feel some
amount of discriminatory fix can be useful. So many kids come from very
disadvantaged homes or schools but have the talent. To assume they can come in
with the same resume as upper class white kid from the suburbs would be
ludicrous.Some movement on this issue has been toward looking at the
disadvantage rather than the race. I think that is wise. There are clearly
kids of all races who are advantaged and others who are disadvantaged. For a
university to have a program to reach out to the less advantaged (in a society
where education bestows so much advantage) can be the best long-term help toward
social mobility.Also, a strong educational start helps eliminate any
"need" for bias in the hiring process.
The supreme court kicked the decision back to the lower court, but instructed
them to apply a judicial standard known as "strict scrutiny". As a
practical matter, no law ever survives strict scrutiny. The court just killed
affirmative action without admitting that they did.
Racism is wrong. End racism. End affirmative action Dr king is with
"A color-blind society that eschews official or even voluntary segregation
is inherently preferable to the alternative."The editorial board
needs to think before they write this stuff. Justice Thomas didn't say
anything about segregation. He said that forcing artificial diversity is wrong,
and there's no justification for it. Nobody said anything about
segregation - voluntary or otherwise.
A university trying to keep it's demographics the same as the general
population is not racism. It works in favor of white kids going to historically
black colleges that have under represented Caucasian numbers. Look it up.It would work in a white person's favor if you really want a job at
a company where white's are under represented.
"The difficulty, however, is to channel these good impulses into a policy
that doesn't perpetuate the underlying problem."----------------Especially when, as "Affirmative" Action
does so blatantly, when the policy **institutionalizes** the very racism/sexism
it ostensibly seeks to reduce or eradicate! That is not only a
"difficult" policy, it is a hypocritical and counter productive one.
"The Way to Stop Discrimination on the Basis of Race Is To Stop
Discriminating on the Basis of Race". Chief Justice John Roberts
switcharoo,If it's critical that a University keep it's
demographics the same as the general population... how about the basketball
team? Or the football team?Ever watched the NCAA tournament or
bowl games? Did the demographics on the field match the same demographics as
the general population? So... are these schools "Racist"?Fact is... the coaches AREN'T "Racist". And neither is a
non-racially biased admissions policy.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments